>Peter,
>
>You did state exactly how I feel, but the other party doesn't really have to care. Yes, I do feel very upset about the issue and I'm looking through my messages on different forums trying to figure the problem out. Yes, I would appreciate very much the knowing of the exact reasons and that's why I asked my friend to try to find it out. But on the other hand, the person may have perfect valid reasons for doing so.

It is obvious that your sensitivity here differs from e.g. Jim Nelson's (Re: Twit filter Thread #1174439 Message #1174811). Although, I recall the period when JimN could be really upset about what others here wrote about/to him. The upset showed off in the way he responded, with sharp, very sharp comments. Serving fine whines indeed.

His way of coping is legitimate, as I see it. But yours is equally legitimate. JimN is not abnormal here and neither are you. I understand both. You two are both in me. Sometimes I just don't care what others think of me, sometimes I really do care a lot. Especially those who I respect, e.g. for their knowledge or wisdom, are the ones whose opinion about me I care about. Being criticized by such a person can be really upsetting me. On the other hand, I am now 53 and have had some serious experiences in recent years that made me realize that the wish to being appreciated and loved by everyone is a trap that can only lead to frustration, loneliness and a feeling of general failure in life. Being understood and loved by some, for the right (self-chosen) reasons, is enough these days. And liking myself is also important. And some of those I respected, appeared to be bastards in important matters. As I said, I think I understand Jim's position. But your's too.

One more thing about JimN's position versus yours. He is an experienced debater, one who takes a stance at one extreme and who knows that this bears a risk of making enemies. You are not really a debater, that is, not one of his kind. You seek compromise and recognition. You are an alpha person with beta qualities. Rational arguments are important for you, but friendliness is also on your list. I think people like you are of value in the world of programmers, which is dominated by beta persons. BTW, I think that the most active members here are beta persons with alpha qualites.


>In all these things happening to me I see some repetetiave pattern. When I was young, I had two breakups with my boyfriends and never figured out the reasons.
>
>Quite recently I had an issue with a co-worker. I was wrong in what I've done and what I did I did partially out of anger. I then was very sorry about it and tried desperately to make things up again. It never worked and I was not forgiven.
>
>Personally I never was able to be angry on the other person for a long time and I'm always ready to apologize. But sometimes this is not really enough, especially if I make the same mistakes all over again...
>
>>Jim,
>>
>>>Peter,
>>>
>>>>>See What happened to the Thread Spy? Thread #846314 for a discussion of a similar feature once implemented here, then removed. That's my argument.
>>>>
>>>>I have read that thread and do not think it's a similar feature. I think a member here has the right to know which other members have banned him or her. So, at least the banned person should have access to that info. What I suggest is that a member can access a page where the members are listed who have banned him or her.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I see it as a very similar feature - public monitoring of board users' activities. As to banning - don't be ridiculous. No one has been banned from anything. Someone has made a decision that they no longer wish to see or read another's posts. Why should that be public knowledge?
>>
>>What do you mean, 'don't be ridiculous'?! Putting someone in the twit filter actually is interpreted by the twitted person as being banned. It is like your wife who now refuses to talk to you since that quarrel about being late from work again. This silence can upset people quite a bit. It is a way of communicating anger by not communicating. It makes people feel lonely and abandoned. It is a way of punishing.
>>
>>I do not believe in a so called rational decision to twit someone, comparable to the decision to not follow the threads in the dotnet section. I'm sure twitting (a new word here?) is an offensive, agressive act, born out of anger (right or wrong) or arrogance. If it's not out of anger, but indeed rather the rational act you're suggesting here, then it's a very impolite, unsocial action, in my eyes. This is a community here, remember.
>>
>>
>>
>>>>Moreover, I think that an accompanying, small comment would be nice. I mean, the checkbox that puts someone in the twit filter should let pop up an editbox for a small comment. In the case of Naomi, the comment would be informative to her about the reason why she was put in the twit filter.
>>>
>>>I was waiting for that shoe to drop.
>>>
>>>And what would Naomi do with that information? What would you do with it?
>>
>>What is Naomi doing now? Currently she's having doubts about what she might have written wrong. She's feeling lonely and ignored.