I love it when I log in and have messages like this from people on my ignore.txt

[Sir BattyCrease]

lol RIP faggot

[Rab]

earth to staff, hello?

[Oct 19 22:18] Hellmouth: The only safe space is up yer tailpipe, you faggot
[Oct 20 08:54] skyforger: why would u use that word

[Rab]

staff? hello?

[Oct 20 10:50] skyforger: You have been reported in the community-driven faggot reporting program

[Sir BattyCrease]

ne1 got ne spare tissues for rab to wipe his eyes?

[qan]

As mentioned before, ?messages have never been blocked by ignore.txt, so they can hardly be said to be evading that filter. It'd be a good feature to allow you to block ?messages from those you've ignored using more of a server-based ignore rather than the client-based one that currently exists; currently the client receives messages from the server but then discards them if from an ignored user.

I think your desired response to these people acting like children would be to have them permanently banned from the game. But if we banned everyone who's ever said an unkind word we would not have a playerbase. It's a difficult line to walk. Bans of a shorter time occasionally have a corrective effect -- but not all that often. Generally these work on players who are being toxic to the community in general. For example, we have a disciplinary intervention program in which players are given very long silences until they learn not to do what is leading to the silences, and it's had some success.

[Rab]

Yes these must be permanently banned. It's a no-brainer.

skyforger
Sulla
Bowlcut
Hellmouth
tiger the crab

Because:
- they send ?messages to me daily or more, these messages are not legitimate and are intended as bullying, an easy test is the more hurt you are the more they do it.
- they are on my ignore.txt and they know it, so the evasion factor inspires them to do it even more. evading ignore.txt does result in bans in tw sometimes, so I don't know why you aren't applying that logic here.
- there's no way for me to walk away (e.g. leaving chats, using ignore.txt, nopubchat), other than quitting the game. this is why it becomes staff's responsibility, because they are the only ones who can stop this behaviour - effectively making the offender walk away rather than the victim.

It shouldn't require a new rule because they are breaking rules 2,4,13 at A1.

I strongly feel that staff doesn't understand how severe this behaviour impacts the recipient, so my next move will be to start leaving staff messages until they understand how it feels. If you won't make a rule to help me, maybe you'll make it to help yourself. If your name is on the staff page of tw.org, expect to start getting these soon.

[Sir BattyCrease]

i've only sent you two messages, one of which you didn't post here but i'm pretty sure i just said you were faggy anyway so it's nothing new. all of which was spurred by the way, because of this thread, not because of the fact you've got many of my aliases on ignore. i've hardly even spoken to you in pub except from that one time i kept calling you a faggot for lols and you got me silenced for an hour. for the most part you placed me on ignore.txt for conversations with other players which you delightfully said before doing it

i think it's clear for anyone to see that rab is just an only child and doesn't really have much banter in his life. he's a bit more sensitive than the rest of us to words on a screen from anonymous people on the internet.

how old are u rab? how is it you don't possess the ability to ignore idiots such as myself lol

p.s hope u get banned for harassing staff gg faget

[ronaldinho]

Better ban Rab than a bunch of players, imo

[Sir BattyCrease]

i think that's the most sensible option tbh.

rab might end up buying a trenchcoat and conduct his own irl trench wars shooting over here in the UK. i don't want my family to die rab for fucksakes pls think of the children u faggot

edit: sending pre-advice to local authorities to look into this situation

[Rab]

[Oct 21 02:22] Bowlcut: what do u prefer faguettes or baguettes

[MHz]

But if we banned everyone who's ever said an unkind word we would not have a playerbase.

This got me intrigued. I wonder if there has ever been a player to have never talked shit. I mean out of principle/good nature, not because they simply don't engage with the community at all. Other than maybe qan, I can't think of anyone?

[Rab]

Nah qan talks shit sometimes.
Most people are pretty chill and won't be mean unless provoked in some way. Even most of the game-related trashtalk is good natured.
It really is just the minority who go out of their way to annoy others. People often joke that my ignore.txt includes everyone, but it really doesn't, it's <1% of players, and they cause >90% of the problems. A lot of people are on that list just because they respond to trolls and I end up seeing a bunch of half-arguments, really it's only about 20% of the list that instigate it all.

[Voth]

If you stopped acting like an emokid publicly on forums, I think you wouldn't have people sending you ?messages to get you going into full emokid mode.

If you stopped reacting to the ?messages like an emokid publicly on forums, I think you wouldn't have people sending you ?messages to repeatedly get you into emokid mode on forums.

I don't care if you ?message me every day until the end of time with your emokid nonsense, I still won't become an emokid on forums about it.

-------------

There are a lot of problems in this community, and we actively work to address them. You not being able to handle some weaksauce trolling is not on the top of my priority list. Sorry.

I know this won't end your endless crybaby tirades, so carry on. Just didn't want you to think I was ignoring you.

[Rab]

Yeah it's annoying isn't it.

Just use ignore.txt.
Just don't read messages.
Just don't let it get to you.

[the_paul]

Just stop complaining about it and the people sending you ?messages will stop because there isn't any reaction. It's unbelievably simple. You crying your eyes out on these forums is entertainment for them. You are part of (a majority of?) the problem here.