ThreadBoard ArchivesSite FeaturesActiveworlds SupportHistoric Archives |
Blocking... (Wishlist)
Blocking... // Wishlistc pJun 21, 2004, 4:15pm
When a person blocks you I think the program shouldn't allow you to receive
grams from that person...until they unblock. I find it so annoying when a person blocks you but keeps sending grams to you, and you end up with no chance to rebute, I think that's the worst feeling in the world, I know I could easily hit block all grams, but it should be a built in standard that if a person blocks telegrams from you, that they in turn should NOT be able to send them to you. ryanJun 22, 2004, 1:07am
I see a potential problem:
Telegram sent from Blocker to Victim. Blocker blocks telegrams. Victim can't reply. Blocker unblocks telegrams. Blocker sends another telegram. Blocker blocks telegrams before Victim can reply. Victim can't reply again and is still being abused with telegrams. So it'd be, unblock-telegram-reblock over and over. If this could be fixed, this would be a terrific idea. Maybe if someone blocks you, your counter-block remains in effect for a set amount of minutes after that someone unblocks? I hope that's not confusing, if it is, I'll be glad to reword it. Ryan [View Quote] c pJun 23, 2004, 12:42pm
hurmmm well that's some stuff to fix after heh, we need the system first, I
understand fully, but I think that if the counterblock mechanism is initiated then user A couldn't unblock that person for a set amount of time, like put at least 1 minute to it...or maybe do blocks per session, have an option for a temporary block? and when the users Both log off the block is inactivated?? [View Quote] count draculaJun 24, 2004, 2:01pm
Personally I think all this blocking and hiding is simply stupid.
Why in hell go to a chat just to hide ? I do like the AFK mode though, because that should indicate to a person who sends a gram that I am not able to answer it right away. D "c p" <chris101d at comcast.net> kirjoitti viestiss news:40d725d6$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com... > When a person blocks you I think the program shouldn't allow you to receive > grams from that person...until they unblock. I find it so annoying when a > person blocks you but keeps sending grams to you, and you end up with no > chance to rebute, I think that's the worst feeling in the world, I know I > could easily hit block all grams, but it should be a built in standard that > if a person blocks telegrams from you, that they in turn should NOT be able > to send them to you. > > kathryn delanuitJun 24, 2004, 2:27pm
CD, part of the beauty of online chat is that one is able to iggy those
who you don't want to hear from or who harass and annoy....I sometimes wish RL came with an iggy button hehee :) *mutes mother-in-law* *mutes whiny boss* *mutes annoying next door neighbor and their stupid rap music* hehehe. There's too much crap to have to deal with in RL, it's nice to not have to put up with it online....this is a place to relax...if someone is bothering you then *click*, and it's all peaceful again :) [View Quote] c pJun 25, 2004, 1:32am
in truth there isn't ONE person in aw I have ever blocked....I don't use the
feature, but I find it so darn annoying that a person can block me and then send ME grams...making it a one way transaction [View Quote] ferruccioJun 25, 2004, 5:44am
How about something like.. telegram requests. There could be a feature in
which the person sends you a telegram, and a "telegram request" is put in your telegram box. click on it and a pop up window says "so and so sent a telegram, accept it?" and if you click no, then it gets sent back to the sender with a reject notice. c pJun 25, 2004, 3:14pm
then you get spammed with request....or are you talking only when they block
you? and once you refuse it refuses them all? [View Quote] sweJun 28, 2004, 3:22pm
lol, naa, that would be silly. you're telegram request is when it says "you
have a telegram". and when you recieve it, you can choose to delete it without reading it anyway :) -SWE [View Quote] |