Jump to content

Ignore User Settings Discussion


Errol

Recommended Posts

  • Webmaster

Let's tackle the Ignore User Settings issue that has gone unaddressed.

 

Many of you have said that you are ignoring a user but you still see their posts. Until recently, I was under the impression that all you did was click the user's name and select ignore or something to that effect. Turns out, you have to select that user and ignore them using select criteria. There isn't a one-click "ignore" and you don't ever see their postings.

 

With that said, the setting to ignore a user has been on in the backend for several years, but it appears as though Invision may have made changes at some point in upgrades to how you ignore a user so that you have to ignore them individually based on "posts," "messages," "signature" and "mentions," which means that if you don't have them selected for each individual option they aren't truly ignored in the sense most thought the ignore feature meant.

 

If you aren't sure if you are properly ignoring a user, make sure to check your ignore setting by going to the ignore page: https://boards.soapoperanetwork.com/ignore/

 

When there, type in the person's name and check off the corresponding boxes. If you already have them selected for everything and they are still not being ignored, I'll then be able to get Invision to further investigate. Currently, I'm getting the message that everything is okay with the system in that regard.

 

Let me know your thoughts.

 

ADDENDUM: From my previous investigations into this, Invision doesn't have a solution or seems to be aware of a solution to this problem. However, I've seen numerous board owners complaining the feature isn't working as it should on their sites as well. 

 

 

Please register in order to view this content

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 24
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 9 months later...
  • Members

For some reason I am not seeing it. I had to click on the top right where the screen is white. Good thing the report feature popped up. Reported it.

Edited by Soapsuds
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 4 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Interesting. Makes me wonder how the day to day looked for Secret Storm at this point in the run. This seems very to deal with the psychological aspect, I guess the "inner storm", and the music is almost sinister. If this is from 1974 there's not much room for dates it could've been from as it ended on February 8th.  It's hard to tell from an edit featuring just one storyline, but if this was the day to day it might've been heavy for the casual viewers.
    • Well, they were both involved with Ray Gardner.  Then, the actress left, only to return as a somewhat broader interpretation of the character after Dottie was SORASed.  By that time, Opal had left in 1983.  So, while they serve the same story function, one could argue that Edna was the carbon copy.
    • Okay, now it's my turn to ask about the Thorntons, namely Edna. Did she and Opal have any scenes together? I ask because I was familiar with Opal first, so when I found out about Edna, my biased mind saw her as the first try for that type of character.
    • There is no dispute that Jill Farren Phelps had a successful career in daytime based on longevity, but that does not preclude discussion and dislike of her decisions at various shows. Sure there may have been some misogyny involved BITD(we don't know as I don't recall JFP ever mentioning that) but the head of CBS Daytime at that point was a woman and there were other women involved BTS. I think that so long as an EP could deliver, or at least talk a good game they would be respected.  
    • It surprises/disappoints me too that GL's ratings during '89-'93 don't reflect the quality of the show. But when I call it great soap, I'm not defining that by ratings either.  I'm probably in the minority, but I think Reilly takes something intangible with him when he goes. There's a sense of humor that just disappears in '93. 
    • Ok, I know nothing about Another World except their catchy intro song from long ago, but this makes me want to catch!  That crazy mother keeping her son's girlfriend or wife hostage, wow! 
    • And maybe Hotel could have been placed at 9pm Tues instead of Paper Dolls. Not that I thing it was a surefire thing but at least viewers were familiar with the show and it might have done better than PD. ABC's line up was pretty threadbare at that point. And with a big guest star to launch the season - Elizabeth Taylor- the numbers would have been there initially.
    • Any fan of RuPaul would dispute calling any of these examples “drag”. A costume?, A disguise?, A lame attempt at humor? -- yes -- Drag? -- nope
    • No asterisk. I meant that the circumstances during the first year were in her favor.
    • Maybe I am misunderstanding you? Are you suggesting that her success at GL should have an asterisk next to it because she was smart enough to exploit a weakness in the marketplace to gain ratings?  Note: Try not to take this personally—I’m not accusing anyone of being consciously misogynistic. I’m simply proposing that the origins of certain ideas about Ms. Phelps—such as claims that she was unprepared or a poor manager of her writing staff—may be rooted in misogyny. Perhaps, with the benefit of hindsight, it's worth reconsidering those opinions. At the very least, imagine being one of the few women in the room while a male network executive tries to decide what women want to watch during the day. That context has certainly led me to reassess many of my own long-held views.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy