Sociopath Community

The invisible function seems useless at this juncture—there's nothing to merit its use. I'm against it in general because if it looks like less people are active, people will be less inclined to use the site. Common sense.

The hiding posts option seems stylistic. Like TC said, you can just read the post anyways. I personally like people not being able to control their threads, because in my opinion that gives everything more "forced exposure." People not being able to tune things out, or otherwise dictate the narrative in their threads seems preferable to me. This is probably the type of issue that is best left up to a vote.

Seems like its a divided issue Cawk

Good said: 

Seems like its a divided issue Cawk

 Some guy who doesn't have kids in his 30s, lives with his parents and off their money convinced you not to add it?

I know, that was ice cold but it's the truth and the fastest way to bring you back on earth. It's not about number of votes when people of this nature make up the majority of user-base, it's about logic.

The site does also look more dead with most of the logged in users being in idle status all the time. Going by the retards' logic who argue the site would look dead with an invisible status therefore do not want it, all statuses but online would be removed if we listened to them.

Since you decided to add various statuses and keep them, those who argue the site would look dead with an invisible status should be dismissed from your view.

You added statuses, you should've added all of them, including the invisible one. Discord/Skype, etc. do not have it for no good reason.

Turncoat said: 

So you... 

---

1) Want a block function and invisibility function so that people can ignore you more easily. 

Block function has been here all along, we just didn't know about it.

You haven't answered an important question: What harm could I cause with a puppet army in invisible mode?

2) Don't want a hide posts function so that they can't ignore you as easily. 

---

I don't get it, do you want to be seen or don't you? The ones who wouldn't click to see what you're saying are liable to be the same people that'd be blocking you, right? 

Switching to invisible status is voluntary, and having your posts hidden by others is involuntary.

Cawk said: 

Turncoat said: 

So you... 

---

1) Want a block function and invisibility function so that people can ignore you more easily. 

Block function has been here all along, we just didn't know about it.

You haven't answered an important question: What harm could I cause with a puppet army in invisible mode?

I don't claim to know all the answers, it's just the first thing that comes to mind. 

2) Don't want a hide posts function so that they can't ignore you as easily. 

---

I don't get it, do you want to be seen or don't you? The ones who wouldn't click to see what you're saying are liable to be the same people that'd be blocking you, right? 

Switching to invisible status is voluntary, and having your posts hidden by others is involuntary.

Is it a big enough deal though? 

Some guy who doesn't have kids in his 30s, lives with his parents and off their money convinced you not to add it?

I know, that was ice cold but it's the truth and the fastest way to bring you back on earth. It's not about number of votes when people of this nature make up the majority of user-base, it's about logic.

Actually, that's called ad hominem. None of that has to do with forum policies, this is just a jab at life circumstances (inaccurate ones at that, I live off the government tyvm). 

Who in the modern age even judges someone by if they have kids or not by a certain age anyway? 

The site does also look more dead with most of the logged in users being in idle status all the time. Going by the retards' logic who argue the site would look dead with an invisible status therefore do not want it, all statuses but online would be removed if we listened to them.

It shows that they've been on at all within the last quarter-day, right? 

That means they can count on the increased likelihood of them responding somewhere within the next 24 hours, unlike a completely empty roster selling that it's empty and not worth the effort at all. 

You added statuses, you should've added all of them, including the invisible one. Discord/Skype, etc. do not have it for no good reason.

You still can't seem to explain why it's needed, or even why you personally want it. 

Does anyone else even want it? How much of a demand is there for it?

Cawk said: 

Good said: 

Seems like its a divided issue Cawk

 Some guy who doesn't have kids in his 30s, lives with his parents and off their money convinced you not to add it?

I know, that was ice cold but it's the truth and the fastest way to bring you back on earth. It's not about number of votes when people of this nature make up the majority of user-base, it's about logic.

The site does also look more dead with most of the logged in users being in idle status all the time. Going by the retards' logic who argue the site would look dead with an invisible status therefore do not want it, all statuses but online would be removed if we listened to them.

Since you decided to add various statuses and keep them, those who argue the site would look dead with an invisible status should be dismissed from your view.

You added statuses, you should've added all of them, including the invisible one. Discord/Skype, etc. do not have it for no good reason.

no i still think its good idea to add it, but i just said there are real other opinions

for this discussion i dont care who tryp is lol, he could be an owo faggot, but it would still be irrelevant to the convo at hand.

Good said:

for this discussion i dont care who tryp is lol, he could be an owo faggot, but it would still be irrelevant to the convo at hand.

I figured it was directed at me. Doesn't Tryp live with a different family member? 

Turncoat said: 

 

Good said:

for this discussion i dont care who tryp is lol, he could be an owo faggot, but it would still be irrelevant to the convo at hand.

I figured it was directed at me. Doesn't Tryp live with a different family member? 

 i have no idea, but i thought you are younger then 30

i vote no

Good said: 

Turncoat said: 

 

Good said:

for this discussion i dont care who tryp is lol, he could be an owo faggot, but it would still be irrelevant to the convo at hand.

I figured it was directed at me. Doesn't Tryp live with a different family member? 

 i have no idea, but i thought you are younger then 30

I turned 30 this year.