>>>>>>>and nobody at all being allowed to through no decision of their own.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I don't understand this part, also I mentioned the other case which was very similar to Kevin's case (I don't talk about the twit, I'm talking about a ban here).
>>>>>
>>>>>Naomi, let the subject freaking die. Get over it. Holy crap this is obnoxious. You wonder why people twit you??? It's because of stupid crap like this. GET OVER IT!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>>GET OVER IT!!!!!!!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>>I twit you because I don't want to hear from you. Kevin is banned so nobody can hear from him. Do you seriously not get the difference there, or do you just look for opportunities to whine?
>>>>>
>>>>>Get over it.
>>>>
>>>>If you twitted her why are you replying ?
>>>
>>>I read Alan's reply to her and saw the quoted text. I also get her message in my replies box, which I believe is not correct functionality.
>>
>>If you want to ignore her then just do it in your own head. Maybe the software should exclude you from any conversation of which the twitted person is part.
>
>You are absolutely correct - I should have ignored the quoted text that I saw rather than bring myself down to the level to where I acknowledged it.
>
>I never asked to be excluded from the conversations in which the twit is a part of. I just ask to not see their messages directly - whether in the general thread view or in my Reply inbox. I think that's a very reasonable request. I generally can deal with seeing the quoted text in replies to the twit - although I didn't deal with it this time.

I wold see it as a room full of people talking. One of the people I find annoying so I choose not to talk to them and avoid them. But if they are standing near me talking to someone else I have to put up with it or move.