Misc Why can't staff members be (ignored) ?

[aoikurayami]

Why can't staff members be set onto ones ignore list ?

*Puts Advocatus Diaboli hat on*

I mean: Is there a "logical" reason ?


Aside certain prompts that pertain violations and very important news (those might be relayed via TempBot if said staff member is "ignored"),
I see no reason why this should not be possible.


Further elaboration:
There is no reason a function that applies globally to the temp as whole should exempt certain individuals
even staff. (Aside Costello and shaun66 for obvious reasons, it's their castle)

Especially since blocking and ignoring are entirely different concepts
With Gbatemp -luckily- implementing the latter. Which merly conceals content.

Thoughts ?
(I'd prefer staff member responses.. I don't want this to turn i to a discussion with multiple participants
Getting multiple staff member replies would be nice.)

PS: Apparantly even the Editorial team is so "staff" that this exemption applies.

PPS: Asking out of ... curiosity..

 

[KirovAir]

It's also the castle of the staff members. If you enter a building, you listen to the people that work there. It's that simple. Staff members are ultimately chosen by Costello and shaun so by proxy you can not ignore them.

 

[Marc_LFD]

Staff members can post comments with important information that every user may need to know and by blocking you'd not be aware of it. Plus, their decisions are usually valid and integral.

This isn't Reddit.

 

[shaunj66]

Staff dictate the rules to keep the site running efficiently and are the voice of GBAtemp. If users could filter them out then where would that lead?

 

[Dark_Phoras]

Some staff members don't behave like staff members. They call vegans disgusting, say suicides are good for the thinning of the herd, engage in flaming, and argue in bad faith.

 

[aoikurayami]

Well.
I see that if it pertains sections and those must stay unignorable indeed.

But not over the entire forum ?
EOF, political, BooksMusic etc. Aside a staff reprimanding and locking I cannot see why it is not ok to be able to hide the other posts.

Shouldn't at least certain sections be "staff ignorable" in that manner like that ?

I do understand it for important things as I said.

Just not for everything. (Unless this distinction would be impossible to achieve on technical level)


One More thing:
Just a what if: If a Staff member were to "develop a certain affinity" towards "conversing with any member of their choosing" there is mostly nothing one can do except asking other staff for aid)
Some people like to deal with conflict by letting it pass. This would be impossible like this.

I do like the proxy argument.
But I will add that no one is a perfect judge of character. And this seems to be trust based entirely.
I love trust. But am not sure it always works...
(Still good job afaics.. I have been to forums with far faar worse staff. Temp stood the test of time imo..)

EDIT: I see this question was asked before https://gbatemp.net/threads/why-cant-i-ignore-staff-members.333253/

My folly.

Sorry @shaunj66
I'll see myself out.
Feel free to proceed with this thread as you please.
Lock if it turns sour.
I believe I don't have anything to add. I like your point.

 

[smilodon]

Staff posts are always objective, contrary to regular user posts which are always subjective.

 

[FAST6191]

Some staff members don't behave like staff members. They call vegans disgusting, say suicides are good for the thinning of the herd, engage in flaming, and argue in bad faith.

Calling vegans disgusting?
Is that some kind of murder, arson and jaywalking list?

 

[DinohScene]

Staff dictate the rules to keep the site running efficiently and are the voice of GBAtemp. If users could filter them out then where would that lead?

Literally this.
There's no need to discuss this any further.

 

[shaunj66]

Some staff members don't behave like staff members. They call vegans disgusting, say suicides are good for the thinning of the herd, engage in flaming, and argue in bad faith.

Please PM me with info if that really is the case .