Does this software allow you to block people's posts?

redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1970
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Does this software allow you to block people's posts?

Can this be done on this forum?

I'm desperate to annihilate a certain RRS poster's rabid insanity from my world...

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
BobSpence wrote:The Israeli

BobSpence wrote:
The Israeli government insists on its right to create a Jewish state, not just an independent Israel.

You do realize there are Jews, B'hai, Christian, Druze, Muslims =and= Atheists in Israel, right?

You do realize that even during the First and Second Kingdoms, non-Jews lived freely in Israel, right?

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 16425
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
FurryCatHerder

FurryCatHerder wrote:

BobSpence wrote:
The Israeli government insists on its right to create a Jewish state, not just an independent Israel.

You do realize there are Jews, B'hai, Christian, Druze, Muslims =and= Atheists in Israel, right?

You do realize that even during the First and Second Kingdoms, non-Jews lived freely in Israel, right?

I am sure there are, which is far more reason not to have a "Jewish State". Being a majority Jew in that country does not entitle them to make claims about what the official religion of the country should be. That is called a theocracy. If you want a "Jewish state" then all you are advocating is a back of the bus attitude. If you value pluralism and secularism that is the last thing you should want.

Barbary Treaty(Treaty of Tripoli) Article 11, "As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense, founded on the Christian religion" Signed without dissent by both houses of congress June 10th 1797 by President John Adams.

If you don't want Palestine setting up a Muslim state, then don't do that yourself.

Freedom of religion depends on the government keeping its fucking nose out of the issue. I wish Palestine would get rid of their crescent moon off their flag and I wish Israel would get rid of their Jewish Star off their flag. Those are not pluralistic symbols, they are gang symbols.

You still live in a state, where if a non-violent peaceful Muslim who wants peace, has no chance getting elected to PM of Israel, even if their is nothing written in your constitution preventing a Muslim from trying. Our climate in America has had the same problem in considering non-Penticostal/Baptists. It wasn't until 1960s that a Catholic was elected, and it has taken even longer to elect Jews and our first Muslim in Keith Ellesson and our first open atheist in Pete Stark to our congress, DESPITE NO RELIGIOUS TEST which was in the constitution since the ink dried on it.

There are even some states still today, despite the supremacy clause in the Constitution that have state Constitutions that forbid atheists from holding public office, which would include dog catcher.

So saying that you yourself are open minded, does not mean your country values secularism. It values the western style open market, but it is trying it's best to become a theocracy.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13234
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Bush Is only the

Quote:
Bush

Is only the latest incarnation of American interference. Cleary you haven't the slightest idea what you're talking about. You're the perfect example of an asshat American who'd be getting his just deserts if killed by freedom fighters in the middle east, and I'm not wasting any more time on your willful ignorance and bigotry. You will learn the hard way.

Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13234
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Oh, one more

Oh, one more thing.

Quote:
Not everything this country does works. But that doesn't mean all the citizens here are bad because we all live under the same government.

America is a DEMOCRACY. Everyone above the age of 21 is a legitimate military target for any power who is threatened by America, because they are responsible for allowing their government to be the bully of the Earth since WW2.
It's not pleasant to acknowledge responsibility. But it's plain wrong to ignore it.
I won't be reading any response you make. It'd just piss me off.

Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Oh, one more

Vastet wrote:
Oh, one more thing.
Quote:
Not everything this country does works. But that doesn't mean all the citizens here are bad because we all live under the same government.
America is a DEMOCRACY. Everyone above the age of 21 is a legitimate military target for any power who is threatened by America, because they are responsible for allowing their government to be the bully of the Earth since WW2. It's not pleasant to acknowledge responsibility. But it's plain wrong to ignore it. I won't be reading any response you make. It'd just piss me off.

Voting age is 18 in the States.

HTH Smiling

FWIW, I do agree the US has become too militaristic since WWII.  Mostly we've been on the side of Big Business over The People in too many of our little military excursions.  Dole and Chiquita had more to do with why we didn't support Castro than the will of the Cuban people.  Dittos for refusing to support Ho Chi Minh (go read the Declaration of Independence he wrote in re the French).  Dittos for supporting the Shah of Iran, Saddam Hussein, the list goes on and on.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13234
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I wasn't completely sure the

I wasn't completely sure the voting age was 18, so I went with the age that you can drink in every state. Poor substitute, I know. > >

Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:I wasn't

Vastet wrote:
I wasn't completely sure the voting age was 18, so I went with the age that you can drink in every state. Poor substitute, I know. > >

Old enough to vote and get shot, not old enough to drink.

Something is seriously wrong.

Dad did tell me stories about visiting relatives in Southern Ontario and getting to drink before he was 21.  Hell, I think Canada is civilized the way parts of Europe are and there is no drinking age.  Or is that wrong?

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13234
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Every Province has it's own

Every Province has it's own laws. 16 is the average age for driving, though in Alberta you can start at 14 (farmers, afterall).
18 is the drinking age in Alberta and Quebec (irony, they hate each other), but it's 19 everywhere else.
Smoking laws parallel drinking laws.
Canada is kind of half American, half British, a quarter French, and a third everything else. I know it doesn't seem to add up right, but really it does.

Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
I understand about the

I understand about the culture -- Canada is more authentically multi-cultural than the States.  Everything gets Americanized to the point that different cultures aren't at all from their original culture.

When I was younger my plans were to "retire" to Ontario, and a couple of years back I had a job offer in Markham -- I later figured the offer was bogus and was extended only because they figured I wouldn't relocate to Markham.  A while later the same recruiter contacted me from a different company and I found out I was right -- the position had been cancelled, but rather than tell me that (I guess to conceal some pending layoffs or whatever), they offered me the job in Markham.

About the time Mom passed away I went looking for some of Dad's relatives.  I found a few in the Kitchener area and oddly enough one about 200 miles north of where I live now (Texas).  I called Dad and started telling him about the cousin I found and he knew nothing about them -- his Uncle Ralph was still living in Canada when Dad's family moved to the States, so he lost track.  I didn't ask when they came to the States, but Dad's family has had relatives on both sides of the border since the early 1700's.  One brother settled south of Lake Erie, in what became Ohio, the other north.  The northern (Canada side) brother is my great-something-great-grandfather.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13234
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
My family came over right

My family came over right after WW2. I haven't done any family tree study, for reasons it'd take awhile to explain. From what I can tell we've not been able to stay put for more than a few years anywhere.

If you have a good income, BC is a perfect place to retire. Ontario is rather crowded and dirty in comparison. And swampy. lol.
I lived in the Okanagan for four and some years, and it was sheer beauty. But a bit expensive.
Might be a bit much snow for you though. I remember times of the year we could only get home driving in reverse for 5 km (front wheel drive). Or walking if even reverse didn't get us moving.

Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:My family came

Vastet wrote:
My family came over right after WW2. I haven't done any family tree study, for reasons it'd take awhile to explain. From what I can tell we've not been able to stay put for more than a few years anywhere. If you have a good income, BC is a perfect place to retire. Ontario is rather crowded and dirty in comparison. And swampy. lol. I lived in the Okanagan for four and some years, and it was sheer beauty. But a bit expensive. Might be a bit much snow for you though. I remember times of the year we could only get home driving in reverse for 5 km (front wheel drive). Or walking if even reverse didn't get us moving.

I have no expectation that I'll retire, in the sense of not working.  And I like big cities -- Toronto is the bomb, as far as I'm concerned, though Vancouver would do as well.

I'm doing some work for a project in Northern Ontario, up near all those swamps Smiling, and would love it if I could convince the client to fly me up there.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13234
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Bring the bug spray. > >

Bring the bug spray. > >

Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Bring the bug

Vastet wrote:
Bring the bug spray. > >

I already know about those giant monsters!

I took my son to Ontario a few years back.  We were working our way up to Detroit, so we could cross over at Windsor.  We stopped at some rest area and I thought I was going to be skewered by giant flying monsters from HELL!

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13234
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Heh. You should see them in

Heh. You should see them in Edmonton. Not quite as problematic in the numbers department, but in the size department they are giants. Shocked

Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Kapkao
atheistSuperfan
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
re: "no Brian37 or I quit"

Quote:
If that means I go to another forum and spend my valuable time towards positive atheism, so be it.

When I get to this point, it's black and white for me, and that's where it's at for me.

Ask him why he comes off as rabid (as if he hasn't given his singular reason openly numerous times already), then block his shit out of your mind. It works for me most of the time with numerous usernames here, and IMO he hasn't been "rabid" enough to hijack a discussion in recent months. There are theists here, on the other hand, that have successfully made themselves unignorable and posted such content-free, obnoxious garbage that they succeeded in earning a free ban. It's also worth pointing out that I had to leave RRS before for a while to sort some garbage out of my head because of the psychiatric symptoms nasty med used to treat my lack of adrenal hormone production (Addison's.) In this time period I refer to (2009), it was a struggle to simply summon the mental energy just to author a post like the one I'm writing now. And believe me, I've had my fair share of "WTF?!" moments while reading something he has written as a reply to one of my posts. "Did he really mean what he just said? Was he smoking something at the time? Are his drugs ten times better than mine? Is he the long-lost nephew of Catherine McKinnon? Or maybe Courtney Love's cousin? Can he actually count how many fingers a person holds up in front of his face?...... is he really that angry in person?"

Ponder this: you both have a place (or niche) here, and you are both an asset to activism. To be completely honest, I would not welcome him to be RRS's publicity agent any moreso then I'd invite you to be someone's therapist. Public (or internet) speaking is not his talent... provoking discussion is. The trick is convincing him to hold some relevance in his replies to posts he responds to. Then (at least) I can communicate with him.

My guess is that you could take a break for a few months, come back, and if you still don't like what you see, leave for good. Bottom line, nobody can force or make either one of you convinced to stay.

Meanwhile, the rest of the thread will be read while listening to THIS.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 16425
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Kapkao wrote:Quote:If that

Kapkao wrote:

Quote:
If that means I go to another forum and spend my valuable time towards positive atheism, so be it.

When I get to this point, it's black and white for me, and that's where it's at for me.

Ask him why he comes off as rabid (as if he hasn't given his singular reason openly numerous times already), then block his shit out of your mind. It works for me most of the time with numerous usernames here, and IMO he hasn't been "rabid" enough to hijack a discussion in recent months. There are theists here, on the other hand, that have successfully made themselves unignorable and posted such content-free, obnoxious garbage that they succeeded in earning a free ban. It's also worth pointing out that I had to leave RRS before for a while to sort some garbage out of my head because of the psychiatric symptoms nasty med used to treat my lack of adrenal hormone production (Addison's.) In this time period I refer to (2009), it was a struggle to simply summon the mental energy just to author a post like the one I'm writing now. And believe me, I've had my fair share of "WTF?!" moments while reading something he has written as a reply to one of my posts. "Did he really mean what he just said? Was he smoking something at the time? Are his drugs ten times better than mine? Is he the long-lost nephew of Catherine McKinnon? Or maybe Courtney Love's cousin? Can he actually count how many fingers a person holds up in front of his face?...... is he really that angry in person?"

Ponder this: you both have a place (or niche) here, and you are both an asset to activism. To be completely honest, I would not welcome him to be RRS's publicity agent any moreso then I'd invite you to be someone's therapist. Public (or internet) speaking is not his talent... provoking discussion is. The trick is convincing him to hold some relevance in his replies to posts he responds to. Then (at least) I can communicate with him.

My guess is that you could take a break for a few months, come back, and if you still don't like what you see, leave for good. Bottom line, nobody can force or make either one of you convinced to stay.

I am not a good public speaker for the same reason I wouldn't be a good stage comic. I get severe stage fright. But giving a public speech would be no different than speaking on the radio, no one is actually physically reading your speech.

But as far as being "rabid"? Hardly. When Hitchens has equated God to a cosmic Kim Jong Ill in debates with theists who like him, I find my words tame sometimes. Penn just sold a book with cuss words on every single page and some of those cuss words were aimed at "faith". Penn has always thought that people at heart are good, even when we despise what they might claim on a given subject. I feel that way too.

Red has a good heart I think, in that he wants people to be "civil" to get their point across. But my tactic isn't for the people we already get along with nor is it solely to slap the claims of those I debate with here. It is just as much a display to all that believe that atheists will not sit back and simply take it. It is also a message to other atheists that they do not have to sit back and take it.

NOW, despite how much he might personally hate me, he is wrong in one aspect about me. There are people who upon hearing the word "atheist" despise your existence. These people are whom I am after. The "nasty" verbal brawls I have with theists here are simply verbal boxing. I also give them credit for knowing it is not personal, and for the most part they do not take it personally. When I have these "brawls" it is also sending the message to the real hateful bigots who just will hate your mere existence. I want them to know, more than anyone else, that no atheist can afford to put up with that, nor do I think they should.

What I objected to would be like someone who hates actual boxing, in real life, to step in the ring when both participants agreed to it. Caposkia knew long before Red showed up who I was and how I liked to debate. He accepted that and I give him credit for taking it for what it was and knowing it wasn't personal.

This really only amounted to a personality conflict. These things happen all the time on and off the web, in the work place, with friends of friends, and with even family. I hold absolutely no ill will to Red, but I do object to his absolutes "you must play nice all the time". It simply is not possible, not even in real life.

The best humans can ever do is to accept that people bitch and to not get physical because someone bitches

I hope he comes back too. But also there is a part of reality, that some people will never see eye to eye. I wish him the best.

He is however dead wrong if he thinks I want to kill theists or outlaw religion or don't love theists at all. I can and do love people  who make claims that make me say "I love you but damn that makes no fucking sense".

Not one atheist here can go through their entire life hating all theists. We all have people in our lives we love, but that does not mean our society should set up taboos just to avoid offending religion. Iran and Saudi Arabia set up taboos and even Red and I would not be welcome there.

As far as my word choice and my tactic, anyone who wants to assume that I hate theists will do so no matter what I tell them. I am under no obligation to coddle that insecurity. I am me and that is all I can be or want to be.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog


danatemporary
danatemporary's picture
Posts: 1951
Joined: 2011-01-12
User is offlineOffline
You'd need to be Tech Savvy with scripting knowledge demanded:

re:: Can you block individual Users from showing up in the active results ?

redneF wrote:

Can this be done on this forum?

I'm desperate to annihilate a certain RRS poster's rabid insanity from my world...

  This could be installed then ? Don't draw the wrong conclusion. I pretty much love and have learned to appreciate EVERYONE on the site. To paraphrase Will Rogers, I never met a User I didn't like. However, for even me, there are a few examples of people it would be best to not interact with, this to everyone's benefit! Sometimes Goodbye is a second chance, and  disengag(e -ing) with a couple of people is necessary sometimes. I noticed with the OP that Sapient replied to the 0P: "It could be installed but it's a drain on the server.  This reminds me though that I should start a thread asking people what features they want" So how do I have this enabled ? I downloaded 'Greasemonkey' a scripting app you can use on a forum. As an Add-On. To fine tune GreaseMonkey  to work, there are all kinds of adjustments, then you're far beyond Power-User level. I never took Java Scripting or likelier PHP Scripting for Dummies or in a Computer Science course (EVER). What are the other options left open (enabled) ? What options are there for this then ? It requires almost an entire 4/5 of the  screen, an exceptionally long script. Oh, do not get it right, then off to debug. Even with a tutorial with step by step instruction, you'd require an editor the GreaseMonkey app has to be 'Scripted'. In real life, is not user-friendly or in a few minutes you are done. Then you'd need a third party software to get it to work on this site. Blocking a User with GreaseMonkey is not an easy task, it would require help and assistance to pull off. My thought was to ask about having Sapient's suggestion  be having it turned on, with a case by case approach. Anybody can help out with pulling off this hat trick out there ?!??

   In this thread the impression was that GreaseMonkey is the answer; that was a presumption and not true unless you've had three years of Computer Science in Junior College/University (nothing below). This is way beyond Power User level to Block a User in this manner. Please (please) advise.

 

  I expect a reply, saves me having to email the Admin