Fess up, how many members do you have on "Ignore"?

[columbus]

Iam going to free all prisoners in my ignore list

Does that include me?
Tom

 

[Servant_of_the_One1]

Does that include me?
Tom

You were close to annoying, but failed to annoy me .

Anyways no more ignore list.

 

[columbus]

You were close to annoying, but failed to annoy me .

Anyways no more ignore list.

So I can now be more honest about Islam?
Tom

 

[Mequa]

I hadn't put people on ignore for disagreeing me, saying stupid crap about me, or even for rule violations against me. I had put people on ignore because of various triggering rhetoric displayed regarding sexual assault. Not really any fault of their own for having such opinions and sharing them. But for my own mental health so that I don't read it while skimming through threads and finding myself having to go through coping behaviors that take up part of my day.

Different people have different triggers. What tends to trigger me more than anything is when a woman feels entitled to be repeatedly mean-spirited to me, and then others ridicule my emotions as a man when I go away feeling hurt from such an encounter.

I have put people on ignore in the past. It's been a while, but I'd like to say there have been 3 people over the years. And one of them was banned for stalking me (thank you A_E for taking care of business several years ago when that happened).

As a male, it's commonly my experience that if someone stalks me online, it's taken a lot less seriously than if a woman is stalked. I'm expected to have a Teflon-like thick skin and just handle my own business without relying on anyone to defend me, and am particularly seen as weak, pathetic or a "*****" if it's a mean-spirited woman who is bothering me or who gets under my skin. My perspective on being harassed is often dismissed out of hand, I am told to shut up, and the emotions I express are ridiculed.

While if the genders are reversed and it's a man bothering a woman, or even if a woman merely claims to being harassed by a man, the expectations are completely different. This is sexist. It's based on the view of "benevolent" sexism that women are (or have a right to be) weak delicate flowers and men are (or should be) tough. If a man doesn't live up to the "tough" ideal he is seen as defective, while no such expectations are placed on the woman. This has nothing to do with gender equality and in fact is completely antagonistic to it.

I am particularly irked by sexist pseudo-feminists who are all for this traditionalist male gender role when they perceive it as aligning with women's interests, such as the desire for a catty, mean-spirited female piece of work (who sees herself as her **** not stinking, and attracts "friends" who also see her that way, as a wonderful perfect angel), who just wants to get away with being mean-spirited and showing no consideration to the emotions of a man she happens to personally dislike, and wants to shift all the blame onto the man for her own obnoxious behaviour, while refusing to engage in reasonable discourse. Men who subscribe to such a way of thinking are often worse, they see such a mean-spirited woman as an angel and when she bullies and harasses a man, share her contempt for him and his emotions, see him as just having it coming to him, see him as hating women, and then attack, shame, humiliate and ridicule the man for being too "thin-skinned". If he dares to retaliate after being goaded he is seen as a monster, and the female bully as an innocent victim, which just enables this kind of passive-aggressive game-playing wherein such is often the desired outcome by the aggressor.

This is just bigoted sexism, pure and simple. The modus operandi of such people seems to be to project their own sexism and bigotry onto those they don't like or who happen to disagree with them. Of course, such types would just dismiss my perspective here from my own lived experience as complete b/s, want me to shut up, see me as "whining", dismiss how I feel, and consider me to be the bigot and sexist, often going behind my back to smear my reputation to this effect to all who would buy into it, accusing me of hating women or being defective or whatever other character assassination games happen to fly. Such gives them a gleeful feeling of power from their game-playing having the desired effect and their getting away with it, which they feel entitled to.

Again, I've experienced all of this sort of thing first-hand by people on the Internet. I can just imagine the rage on their reading this and feeling called out, or that someone is on to their antics and sneaky machinations used to obtain power over others. Their impulse would be to destroy, silence, and in short sniff out any vulnerabilities and insecurities in their detractor in order to bully, needle, shame, harass and humiliate them into submission, in a display of pure Machiavellianism, while hypocritically projecting all their own flaws and sneaky mean-spiritedness and games onto their detractor. Of course, to them it's the detractor who is seen as the fascist, not them, who flatter themselves by seeing themselves as an enlightened liberal freethinker. I've seen it. My eyes are open. One can not underestimate the sheer extent of nastiness many people resort to on the Internet, coupled with their own militant lack of self-awareness, in addition to just how unsympathetic, disrespectful and condemning others can be towards anyone on the receiving end of this sort of thing.

 

[gnomon]

I hacked into RF software.
(The master password is "Giggety".)
I discovered that no one has you on ignore.
I speculate that this is because while you rail & rant, it isn't ever abusive towards us.
You're actually pretty high ranking on the politeness index.
Disappointed?

Anyway, I don't need the <ignore> function. I end up ignoring some posters simply
because I've no interest in reading their posts. This system works really well.

Now I'm paranoid.

 

[psychoslice]

I have non what so ever on ignore, people can say whatever they want to me.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Can I put myself on ignore?

 

[gnomon]

Ignoring yourself is incredibly easy. It's how I lived my whole life.

Don't drink that ****! I drink it.

Don't smoke that ****! I smoke it.

So easy.

Don't freebase that ****.........so easy.

Yet.....what isn't easy......that I just read......was Mequa's response before mine.

Anyone want to tackle that....

Not me.....for ****'s sake to think I'm a bit paranoid about a simple loving relationship upon business partners this ****.........posted here.....is anyone willing to address....what the hell?

Seriously......I'm attempting to call out some seriously disturbing content........and.........not even I knowing how to address this content. Am I the only one who feels like I am reading a post by someone who is about to go out and snuff someone? Seriously.

 

[gnomon]

Different people have different triggers. What tends to trigger me more than anything is when a woman feels entitled to be repeatedly mean-spirited to me, and then others ridicule my emotions as a man when I go away feeling hurt from such an encounter.


As a male, it's commonly my experience that if someone stalks me online, it's taken a lot less seriously than if a woman is stalked. I'm expected to have a Teflon-like thick skin and just handle my own business without relying on anyone to defend me, and am particularly seen as weak, pathetic or a "*****" if it's a mean-spirited woman who is bothering me or who gets under my skin. My perspective on being harassed is often dismissed out of hand, I am told to shut up, and the emotions I express are ridiculed.

While if the genders are reversed and it's a man bothering a woman, or even if a woman merely claims to being harassed by a man, the expectations are completely different. This is sexist. It's based on the view of "benevolent" sexism that women are (or have a right to be) weak delicate flowers and men are (or should be) tough. If a man doesn't live up to the "tough" ideal he is seen as defective, while no such expectations are placed on the woman. This has nothing to do with gender equality and in fact is completely antagonistic to it.

I am particularly irked by sexist pseudo-feminists who are all for this traditionalist male gender role when they perceive it as aligning with women's interests, such as the desire for a catty, mean-spirited female piece of work (who sees herself as her **** not stinking, and attracts "friends" who also see her that way, as a wonderful perfect angel), who just wants to get away with being mean-spirited and showing no consideration to the emotions of a man she happens to personally dislike, and wants to shift all the blame onto the man for her own obnoxious behaviour, while refusing to engage in reasonable discourse. Men who subscribe to such a way of thinking are often worse, they see such a mean-spirited woman as an angel and when she bullies and harasses a man, share her contempt for him and his emotions, see him as just having it coming to him, see him as hating women, and then attack, shame, humiliate and ridicule the man for being too "thin-skinned". If he dares to retaliate after being goaded he is seen as a monster, and the female bully as an innocent victim, which just enables this kind of passive-aggressive game-playing wherein such is often the desired outcome by the aggressor.

This is just bigoted sexism, pure and simple. The modus operandi of such people seems to be to project their own sexism and bigotry onto those they don't like or who happen to disagree with them. Of course, such types would just dismiss my perspective here from my own lived experience as complete b/s, want me to shut up, see me as "whining", dismiss how I feel, and consider me to be the bigot and sexist, often going behind my back to smear my reputation to this effect to all who would buy into it, accusing me of hating women or being defective or whatever other character assassination games happen to fly. Such gives them a gleeful feeling of power from their game-playing having the desired effect and their getting away with it, which they feel entitled to.

Again, I've experienced all of this sort of thing first-hand by people on the Internet. I can just imagine the rage on their reading this and feeling called out, or that someone is on to their antics and sneaky machinations used to obtain power over others. Their impulse would be to destroy, silence, and in short sniff out any vulnerabilities and insecurities in their detractor in order to bully, needle, shame, harass and humiliate them into submission, in a display of pure Machiavellianism, while hypocritically projecting all their own flaws and sneaky mean-spiritedness and games onto their detractor. Of course, to them it's the detractor who is seen as the fascist, not them, who flatter themselves by seeing themselves as an enlightened liberal freethinker. I've seen it. My eyes are open. One can not underestimate the sheer extent of nastiness many people resort to on the Internet, coupled with their own militant lack of self-awareness, in addition to just how unsympathetic, disrespectful and condemning others can be towards anyone on the receiving end of this sort of thing.

Okay........

I'm just going to come out and ****ing say it......

This post is disturbing as ****.........

I mean disturbing as I see this particular poster violating a female human being disturbing as ****..........

And for those of you who know me from chat.........you have a paranoid schizophrenic calling out a truly disturbing post......get it.

I'm not trying to be engaged in a debate but if there is any time I've read something by someone who deserves attention.......it is this..........

The OP is about putting people on ignore and here we have a rant about a male offering up key indicators of psychological indicators of truly disturbing behaviors in regards to females.......

Yeah.....I'm the local drunk and that I am......but please someone else read this guys statements and either reveal to me he is a Poe or else recognize the truly disturbing nature of his posts.

And as far as the person I'm responding to.......nobody gives a damn about your "internet experience" because no matter how we fool ourselves being linked into an internet culture the mass of humanity is not involved in that and those who are involved in that are considered out of touch....

So please clarify your statements..........

I mean......I get that if you are trying to attempt to state that gender is not a barrier towards suffering in the means you are discussing.......but the OP is about who you have on ignore........and your response is .......even by my own drunken standards, simply ask around this forum, way over the ****ing top........

Got it.

 

[Mequa]

Ignoring yourself is incredibly easy. It's how I lived my whole life.

Don't drink that ****! I drink it.

Don't smoke that ****! I smoke it.

So easy.

Don't freebase that ****.........so easy.

Am I the only one who feels like I am reading a post by someone who is about to go out and snuff someone? Seriously.

What have you been drinking, smoking and "freebasing", exactly?

If you do suffer from paranoid schizophrenia and are on meds too, may I suggest that's perhaps not the best combination?

 

[psychoslice]

Can I put myself on ignore?

You can, but then I would miss you.

 

[Smart_Guy]

You can, but then I would miss you.

Wait, I would miss myself!

I mean, I won't be able to see my own posts while others can

 

[gnomon]

What have you been drinking, smoking and "freebasing", exactly?

If you do suffer from paranoid schizophrenia and are on meds too, may I suggest that's perhaps not the best combination?

Yeah, I'm sorry.

I'll just state it.

I find you posts to be nothing more than disturbing garbage.

The verbiage you offered up in regards to the OP is enough alone to tell me that ....... I have no interest in your arguments. Especially in regards to females.

Yet.......I won't ignore you.

Go figure.

But it is the verbiage alone that tells me everything I need to .........

Plus I have some certain suggestions for you as well.

 

[Ouroboros]

Can I put myself on ignore?

Yes. It's called a "power-off" button.

 

[Willamena]

The ignore function itself is functionally more annoying than the people, so none.

 

[savagewind]

I think I do not like being on ignore.

 

[Deidre]

And why?

I have three.

One because they always filled their posts with pretentious rhetoric.

One because they could never stay on topic.

One because they were simply incoherent.​

I have two people on ignore.

 

[JFish123]

I have none. Why would I? The only reason I'd have anyone on ignore is if they were like stalking me. Other than that, why not communicate to get your point across? Sometimes I feel ignoring people who want to debate you is a bit cowardly. Which is why I have no one on ignore.

 

[Curious George]

In response to the op, none.

But as FH said, I would really like to know who has me on ignore. Is that against the rules for someone to divulge that I am or was on their ignore list, if I don't mind such information being public?


Anyhow, if I am not on your ignore list and never was, go ahead and press the like button.

If I was on your ignore list quote my post and use an adjective to describe the type of behavior for which you "hypothetically" might ignore someone, who "hypothetically" may or may not have been me.

And if you do have me on ignore, and subsequently cannot read this- I probably deserved it, so cheers.

 

[FTNZ]

I think, if someone has you on ignore, you can't access their profile page.