>Peter,
>
>I disagree with your position. If I add you to my Junk email senders list you do not get a notification and all messages from you get rerouted into my junk mail folder which I may or may not read.

This comparison is a problematic one, for it is not in its entirety a similar situation. First, you DO have the opportunity to read your junk mail. Filtered mail is no longer available for you. Second, the junk mail facility is introduced to have a means to handle unsollicited mail from complete strangers/advertisers. This is not a site of strangers/advertisers.

>The twit filter is the same thing. If I get tired of reading garbage from someone who seems to be often posting garbage I should be able to twit filter them without making any comment as to why I choose to do this and without the need for me to reply to any inqueries from that person. If I miss information because I twitted someone that is my problem and not one else's.

One can always leave the comment box empty. And one can also choose to not reply to any inquiry, from the twit-filtered person or from an intermediary.

Note that my proposal is two-fold. The comment facility is one part. The other part is that Hans Gans should be able to SEE who have activated a twit-filter against Hans Gans. I agree that parties sending junk mail better not see that I refused their email, but as I tried to make clear the twit-filter should not be regarded as a junk filter. The UT has other means of dealing with junk.

>I think the twit filter the way it is works fine. It has worked fine for a number of years now. Those who choose to use the filter seem satisfied. I don't choose to use the twit filter at all. The only people complaining are those who have been twitted.

I wonder how many (how few) actually have used the filter. You haven't and I haven't. But I side with those complaining about the filter because I think it can occasionally be totally unjustified or based on a misunderstanding that they were twit-filtered. Or are you really suggesting that complaints of twit-filtered people are never justified?

The other reason why I started this thread is that the way the filter is in effect now can confuse the communication. If I reply to you, not knowing that you filtered me, no reaction will ever come, leaving me wondering why, because I know of no activated filter. And if I respond to someone else, and you respond also, later, to that person, it may well be that you respond based on a lack of information, because you were not able to read what I have written due to a filter that you had set on me. The communication is hampered in unexpected and unwanted ways.