First of all, don't lose your shit because I'm not saying let's do this on 4chan.
I'm just wondering what kind of effect you guys think this would have on people.
But the idea is, what if we had an "ignore"button on every post, but only the poster himself could see how many people clicked ignore on their post, nobody else.
Because nobody can see any ignores it wouldn't really be a downvote.
Basically I was just thinking about why people might feel tempted to respond to people rather than just ignore, and my conclusion is that ignoring a post looks the same as just not responding to a good post. Both happen, so people feel tempted to respond to bad posts just to let them know.
But with something like an ignore button, it would basically just be like a private hint to that poster that you disagree but don't feel like shitting up the thread with a pointless debate.
I think more people would just use that and actually start ignoring things instead of always starting trouble. What do you guys think? Is it a dumb idea?
>>370267
>only the poster himself could see how many people clicked ignore on their post, nobody else.
People would post screenshots (some fake, of course).
>>370270
well yeah, nobody would believe it or even care in most cases.
That (You) screenshot trend died out pretty quickly because I don't think it ever really worked in the first place. Nobody believed anyone
>>370267
This would never work on /pol/ but outside of /pol/ it might work brilliantly.
>>370283
Sorry I don't use /pol/, why do you think it wouldn't work?
>>370285
Accusations of shilling and proxyfagging would run rampant.
>>370267
It would be an interesting experiment tbqh
>>370287
but the accusation post would seem to come from nowhere because no other users would even know he was getting ingores. If he just didn't say anything nobody else would even know.
he would actually do his own post more good by not even mentioning it
It would be like some guy making a comment and the room goes silent, and then yelling at everyone because he thinks they didn't like it. He would just look like a crazy person
>>370267
>Basically I was just thinking about why people might feel tempted to respond to people rather than just ignore, and my conclusion is that ignoring a post looks the same as just not responding to a good post. Both happen, so people feel tempted to respond to bad posts just to let them know.
It's because when you have a point of view, not responding to someone and getting the last word makes it seem like you've "lost".
As in, you didn't have anything to say to counter them in their argument, so you didn't respond to save face.
To many people, this is a huge ego drain. It feels like a personal insult to many if they want to stop responding to someone, but can't find an easy 'out' for the situation.
This is why threads about stupid political shit balloon up to 600+ posts before deletion/archival, while threads about actual on-topic discussion tend to be short lived or hover around with a few of the same users. There isn't the vitriol to respond as there is in charged shitposting topics.
That's the real core of the problem: People are taking words on the internet as personal failures. Which snowballs into complete shitposting.
I wish I had that old image of the two guys typing shit at each other in two panels about how "they're totally gonna make them mad by rusing them", except this one was edited to include a third panel where both of them were still arguing three hours later with such rage that they had blood pouring out of a vein in their heads.
Because at no point is it more true than today.
Question: Wouldn't trolls use this information to fine tune their techniques? Attempt to get the high score if you will?
>>370315
Yes, but who would care?
Furthermore, who would be left to notice?
>>370315
That's a good point I didn't think of that.
That's probably a question of emergent behavior that we can't really predict.
