to omit certain members from being able to respond to my posts? Can't we find a way to limit one's constitutional rights since we are on the internet and all?

Pretty sure you can ignore certain members - perhaps this is more to your liking...

Not to my knowledge...but there is an ignore feature.

Will ignore work in the public setting or just on the private message section?

If you add a user to your ignore list, you will not see their posts. They will still be able to see and respond to your posts. Whe they post you will see their user name and a line noting they are on your ignore list so you won't see the post. I don't know how it works in private messages.

Wouldn't your tormentors just go sign-up with new user-ids and continue the onslaught?

hopefully it isn't me that is getting ignored

The unfortunate thing about ignore lists is that while you don't see the person's posts, you see responses to their posts which often quotes them, which is almost as bad.

david, don't worry about ILTB. He has made an artform of "terrorising" various forums with his ill-informed mantras, misinformation, personal attacks and arrogance.

IIRC, he works in the army. He's been caught out once or twice using his army address on other lists. It may account for his style (or lack of it -- and that is no relfection on other members of the armed forces).

My personal gripe with him is that he cannot accept that people who are trained cyclists (as in commuting, ordinary, utility riding as opposed to racing) are better than those who aren't trained, or are better faster compared with non-trained cyclists who build up their experience alone. His continued denigration of those who develop and deliver courses is annoying because it is based on his own ignorance, not fact.

He can be amusing, in his own way, a bit like the court jester -- laughable but progressively irritating. His "debating" style used to be OK, but he couldn't really match the elegance of others like John Forrester on various lists. His debating style has slipped somewhat, and now he relies more on personal attack. I find it remarkable that some of those attacks, as on the thread about work colleagues discussing weight, are the very things people think of him.

One thing that hasn't changed is that he refutes scientific and experiential argument without presenting a shred of alternative data to substantiate his own arguments. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is where ILTB lacks credibility.

Yes indeed. Worse in fact because it tempts you to un-ignore people you have already decided are worth ignoring.

I ignore people all the time; my boss, the guy in the cube next to me, my wife, my mom, etc... I guess it's a "feature" that's built into my brain.

Lots of ways to do that:
1. Do not open any thread. No threads - no posts you do not like.
2. Become a moderator and kick thoses bastards out.
3. Create your own forum and invite only people you like.
4. Pay forum owners to add a feature.
5. Change yourself. Some groups of people think there are to much hatred around them. In fact, nobody gives a **** what they are doing.

CTAC - are you on crack?

Rowan - are you and ILTB arch enemies? Wouldn't it be cool to make a movie about arch enemy bicyclists that started riding BMX in their youth and then split different ways...say commuter/roadie?

[2. Become a moderator and kick thoses bastards out.]

Or delete posts describing thin-skinned individuals who can dish it out but can't take it back.

Well done, Mods!

Rowan, it sounds like it was ILTB's old trick of running to the mods everytime someone calls him out about his "style". I've pointed this out on the mods forum in the past, but nobody seems interested in doing the research (i.e. reading a few of his posts) to inspect the problem for themselves.

David, if that is the member you have a problem with, it's best just to utilise the ignore feature, meaning you won't see any of their posts. Yes, they can reply to your posts, but if it is ILTB we're talking about, he has a history of owning himself pretty hard, and I suspect most of the people reading the posts will be able to see that for what it is.

hahaha I read this and just knew he was talking about ILTB

Don't be so sure, despite what a couple of other braying donkeys have posted. It could be what he really means is that he would like to receive only responses that confirm what he already believes, or perhaps will assure him that he holds the only right opinion on a subject, or perhaps would like to only receive answers/responses to his questions/postings that are in conformance with the Conventional Wisdom.

I am confised on this whole thing. I thought ILTB and Juvikyle from SS/FG were the same person. Am i wrong...?

I don't mind differing opinion or nonconformists. I just don't like d1cks.

Ha ha, I almost fell for this...

I am a d#ck. Maybe that is why ILTB no longer annoys me. That and his subtle sense of humor amuses me.
Life is too short to become annoyed at forum members.
Says the guy who gets annoyed from time to time.
<-hypocrite

If so my hat is off.

But then there are the cultist d1cks who have no sense of humor and believe it intolerable that the object of their affection (or the affection) be blasphemed by heretics.

My coworkers are looking at me funny after that laugh.
Time to clean off my monitor.

At least you didn't take that comment as an insult.

That's true, and I'm not so sure. I was just making humor at your reputation.