I'd always wish they'd institute this. Then people who didn't like, say, Broadway threads or soap threads or poop/toilet threads could just hide them after they first appeared, and wouldn't have to keep looking at them.
Would you like it if there were a Datalounge feature that would allow you to hide threads from your feed?
|by Anonymous||reply 26||08/19/2013|
I would like a feature that would me smack me upside the head when I write something stupid.
|by Anonymous||reply 1||08/16/2013|
[quote]I would like a feature that would me smack me
Sending you a smack for your stupid "would me smack me."
|by Anonymous||reply 2||08/16/2013|
No, my imagination seems to grow smaller and smaller each day. My fix of liberal pop-sci, pop-lib, pop-history has a limit.
Throw me things I wouldn't see and I'll play.
My worst days on the internet are when everyone agrees with my worldview. meh.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||08/16/2013|
I apologize r2. I should have writ "I would like a feature that would me smack me upside my melon haid with a brick when I write something stoopid"
|by Anonymous||reply 4||08/17/2013|
Well, we haven't had a footballers in love pt MCLLVXXM in a while...
|by Anonymous||reply 5||08/17/2013|
OP, there are many threads here that do not interest me. So you know what I do?
I don't read them.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||08/17/2013|
But r6, you are forced to endlessly scroll through them. The Thread Watcher is the positive of listing threads you want to watch. There aught to be a thread hider function.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||08/17/2013|
R6 - no, I was not forced to endlessly scroll through them. Two clicks on the mouse is all it takes to see whats on a whole page. You really cant be so lazy that doing that is too much work for you, right?
|by Anonymous||reply 8||08/17/2013|
[quote]Two clicks on the mouse is all it takes to see whats on a whole page.
How many threads to you have per page - 5?
It takes more the two clicks when you've got 50 threads per page.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||08/17/2013|
OP = Tubgirl
|by Anonymous||reply 10||08/17/2013|
R9 There are only 20 threads per page.
Put the crack pipe down and get some sleep.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||08/17/2013|
R11, it takes all of five seconds to change your page settings to view 600 threads on one page.
Get some sleep, hon.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||08/17/2013|
OP, threads about soaps and poop do not belong on DataLounge, period. I'd much rather see the return of a functional F&F button/link that automatically closes a thread after two or three posters report it, like DL had before the conversion to its current design.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||08/17/2013|
[quote]it takes all of five seconds to change your page settings to view 600 threads on one page.
And your point is....?
|by Anonymous||reply 14||08/17/2013|
Why don't you do what I do, skid the threads you are not interested in?
|by Anonymous||reply 15||08/17/2013|
R8, you have a reading comprehension problem.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||08/17/2013|
There used to be.
There was a showbiz/politics filter and a thread watcher that allowed you to sort a little. The politics one came in handy during election season.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||08/17/2013|
I have constantly told these embarrassing freepers that they should be hidden away. With a HIDE button I can finally make it happen.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||08/17/2013|
A million years ago when I first discovered Datalounge (ca. 1999) there were actually about a dozen different topical forums, with gossip being the most popular. If you didn't want to read about/discuss gay sex or politics or lesbian topics, for example, you just didn't go into those pages.
Then, like r17 points out, they narrowed the categories to either gossip or politics with a filter to turn either on/off. But the politics trolls continued to post everything in gossip, which got much more views so they got rid of the filter and went to the current system. I imagine if they went back to the original multi-forum system we'd see how few people are actually posting here.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||08/17/2013|
I'd rather have a 'SLAP THAT BITCH'S FACE' button that let's me target the author of any annoying Reply.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||08/17/2013|
I wish there was a Frau-B-Gone button.
|by Anonymous||reply 22||08/17/2013|
I agree. Sometimes I'm just not in the mood for a "This is exactly how this fucked up psycho murdered his kids"-thread and I would love to just be able to click it away in a second, instead of scrolling by it for as long as anyone comments.
It might lead to more participation too, if everyone's page is full of topics they find at least remotely interesting. Topics you have zero interest in work like spam: Of course you can scroll by, but it automatically takes some time and attention away from the interesting stuff - Everyone understands that, right?
|by Anonymous||reply 23||08/17/2013|
[quote]There are only 20 threads per page. Put the crack pipe down and get some sleep.
I can't believe the moron at r11 doesn't even know how to work the DL settings. Don't you just love it when some clueless idiot says something like "put the crack pipe down" and thinks he actually knows what he's talking about.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||08/17/2013|
[quote]But the politics trolls continued to post everything in gossip, which got much more views...
And if you complained, you got banned. They assumed you were a Pubbie if you complained about anti-Palin garbage added into EVERY gossip thread. Somehow, they figured it was okay to derail all gossip threads with attacks on Palin as if they actually needed to convince us not to vote for the bitch.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||08/19/2013|
R3 seems to think that reality and human connectedness are achieved by being confronted with dross, meanness and aggressive ignorance on the internet.
Dear one, the DL in your "open to everything" frame of mind is not about diversity of worldviews. It is about the tedium of repetitive hellviews.
|by Anonymous||reply 26||08/19/2013|