Posted by alexandra_k on May 27, 2005, at 0:49:30
So...
If someone asks you not to post to them then you aren't supposed to reply to their post.
Does that just mean you aren't supposed to tick the 'adress to previous poster box', or does that mean you aren't supposed to reply to their post to start with, or does that mean you shouldn't quote from their post or what????????
I think it is unfair that when someone requests that another person not post to them then they retain all the power to post to the person whenever they like and the other person just has to - what? Put up with it without responding????
I know we are supposed to be allowed to respond to a post by someone who has requested you not post to them if they do post to you.
But what counts as posting to you?
Do they have to tick the 'reply to previous poster' box?
Do they have to quote you?
What counts as a reply?
What if they are clearly responding to the content?I don't like the Do not post to me rule.
I don't like that people use it to 'disengage'.
With respect to disengaging whats wrong with just ignoring them?
And it doesn't just disengage from particular issues or topics
It cuts them off completely
And I just think people would do better saying more about what they find annoying and asking them to stop.And then...
If they don't...
As a last resort strategy...
I understand why someone would use it.But I don't like it
I don't like it at all.If there is one situation I would be tempted to use the 'ignore function' would be to ignore posters who have requested that I not post to them.
In fact...
I would really like to be able to do this.
I'm sorry
this is all confused and frustrated
I think i might just need a babble break
poster:alexandra_k
thread:503496
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050517/msgs/503496.html