I think it make sense. Also, I just want to make sure flagamuffin's calls for a way to totally be rid of interacting with someone isn't marginalized. I agree with him that this could be an important function and a differentiator moving forward. That said, muting someone does guarantee that they will not see or comment on your posts -that's pretty huge IMO. Flag, any suggestions on how to ensure you don't have people replying to you after they've been muted? I would appear to be losing the discussion before it even begins, but here I go
-come on, you know us better than that by now. This will be an ongoing discussion and we will likely test out solutions and your voice is as strong as anyone's in that process.
See that just seems obvious to me. What else would it do? But then I believe desperately in extra-strong moderation. No, no. Discussions on site changes tend to be loosely democratic. I was already in the minority when I began posting. Which is why I suggested a small and dissatisfying compromise. Democracy! Thinking on it. Nothing I can come up with that circumvents mk's problem with my choices moderating someone else's post. Which is a big problem, of course. So. Thinking.That said, muting someone does guarantee that they will not see or comment on your posts -that's pretty huge IMO.
-come on, you know us better than that by now. This will be an ongoing discussion and we will likely test out solutions and your voice is as strong as anyone's in that process.
Flag, any suggestions on how to ensure you don't have people replying to you after they've been muted?