Intimidating/ confrontational

[dot.hawkes]

I have been following a couple of threads on here this week that have been posted as a result of people's dissatisfaction with the responses from the editorial and or technical team on AB. I am not referring to those issues in the thread, they are separate issues, what i am suggesting is that people who respond to the concerns sometimes make short sharp sarcastic replies, that are of no help nor contribution, and are not meant lightheartedly, but in a cruel way, that is not just my opinion either, would it be possible to add either a further reason for reporting such replies, e.g. 'intimidating and confrontational', or a universal reason such as 'pointless reply' or would that be too vague?
(cue pointless replies)

[China Doll]

Could it not just go under 'other' dot?

[dot.hawkes]

Well that would cover it I guess, the ed would be able to read the reported reply and would probably guess why it had been reported I suppose, very clever CD

[China Doll]

I have me moments ;0)

[Gromit]

There are seven reasons at the moment and you are still not happy, you want it extending further.

I don't think there should be a facility to report Questions and Answers. If the Ed was doing the job properly, then the Ed should spot any infringement of the Site Rules. If people write nasty things then others can make their mind up about the poster. Getting it banned actually does the offender a favour.

[dot.hawkes]

Yes I agree with those points gromit, but China's ideas for the 'other' option is quite good. The ed surely cannot read every word posted on here, which is why the report options were introduced a short time after the site was set up.

[Gromit]

The catch-all 'Other' is already on the list.

Though China is infinitely wise, the suggestion of posting a complaint under other if it is not covered by the complaint options, does not seem to be a relevatory idea.

[dot.hawkes]

hi Gromit, yes I see that now, i hadn't ever noticed it at all! i think i must have sounded terribly thick in my replies then!!! In future if i see a pointless reply that irritates me i shall use that option !!! It makes sense.

[China Doll]

Is it just me that thought Gromit was being a bit tongue in cheek regarding me being 'infinitely wise'?

[Gromit]

Typo, meant

wide

[China Doll]

What!??!!!!!

You utter bar steward!!!

I'm going to be expecting bumper packets of brie and pickled onion for that too.....

And I've reported your answer under 'other' ;0P

[Gromit]

Sorry CD,

If you go to 'Report this answer', 'Abusive' is the one above 'Other'.

[weeal]

wow dot, your point has been proven in just page 1 on this post, i must admit i have been a wee bit sarcastic once or twice on threads, i think it depends on what the other person has said

[China Doll]

I was serious weeal!

Gromit... you'll get yours don't you worry, I won't be forgetting this one in hurry! ;0P

[dot.hawkes]

i must be missing something here what's up CD? I don't usually get on here in the day and so i can't always recognise the friendly banter from the criminally insane : ))

[Gromit]

dot.hawkes

I have been criminally insane, all for the sake of a cheap joke.

CD, will you ever forgive me?

[weeal]

oh CD I wasnt having a go at you lol, not at all

I meant cos there had been a comment to report already
eg. Gromit (who was possibly joking?)

[China Doll]

I'm quietly confident he was just being a wide a55!

Despite the fact that he is apparently criminaly insane Gromit is one of my favourite pixels. Or at least he used to be. ;0)

Gromit - Forgive you?! Huh... you'll have to make it up to me first.

[dot.hawkes]

tut I wasn't meaning anyone here was criminally insane, it was just a comparison to explain the wide variety of banter!!!!!!!!!!!

[China Doll]

No really... he's criminally insane.... ;0)