Tracy, the biggest mistake people here make is that I am personalizing it. Don't worry, I am never upset here on the UT. I search debate, not for the sake of arguments, but because this community deserves it.

>Yes, and the smile is missing on the UT. Still, you are personalizing a filter for Pete's sake :o) As for the filter, emotionalizing it is 'personalizing' an online function. This discussion has occurred many times over the years. To me, it is question of being out of balance. It is putting too much importance in an online forum. The reason for a filter could be any number of things. Most likely it has nothing to do with the person at all. It's a means of filtering messages. It should never be taken personally. I could be twitted by half the online participants or all of them. The internet and online communities are not going to accommodate the sensibilities of any one person. Personally, I also think putting such importance on a filter, or an online community, is evidence that too much importance is placed on an online community. If I open your door and enter your house and force you to stand there and listen to me, I wonder what the cops would say. You can't force anyone
>to read messages. You can't force anyone to read mail or email. I bounce all email messages from those I don't want to read. I throw away snail mail I don't want to read. Even if the messages were not filtered, there is no guarantee that anyone would read them. You cannot force anyone to read every message. It really only prevents private messages from reaching the intended recipient. Also, keep in mind that if the ability to filter messages is taken away, the poster probably will not have their messages read anyway because if a member is swamped with unwanted private messages, those who don't wish to read them may just leave the forum completely rather than deal with the annoyance. But perhaps that is your goal?
>
>I think it is better to keep it in perspective.