Mute forum participants

I don’t know if the forum software can do this, but if it can…

It would be very helpful to have the ability to mute forum participants who constantly make useless, annoying, mean, or whiny comments. I’m aware of the flag feature but many annoying comments don’t rise to the level of flagging, in my opinion.

(And if you find my comments annoying, please vote for this suggestion so you can get some relief :laughing:)


I’ll second your suggestion. I guess ultimately the forum admins can remove people but that then provokes a debate around freedom of speech etc…

You can mute and ignore users, click on their picture to access their user page:


Did somebody say something?

And there should be badges!

I think Paul was thinking more of muting them from everybody. As was I to be fair. Certain users on here provide little or no value and only seem to seek to be negative.

I’m content with the “ignore” option that Mike pointed out. I wasn’t aware of that. I have no problem with Zwift purging the worst offenders, but people who annoy me by riding their hobby horse of negativity on every forum visit don’t necessarily deserve a ban, or won’t necessarily earn it even if they deserve it. I just want to be able to say “enough from you mate”

As a side note if you do mute someone you might miss something valuable.


In ethics and the social sciences, value theory involves various approaches that examine how, why, and to what degree humans value things and whether the object or subject of valuing is a person, idea, object, or anything else. Within philosophy, it is also known as ethics or axiology.

Traditionally, philosophical investigations in value theory have sought to understand the concept of “the good”. Today, some work in value theory has trended more towards empirical sciences, recording what people do value and attempting to understand why they value it in the context of psychology, sociology, and economics.

In ecological economics, value theory is separated into two types: donor-type value and receiver-type value. Ecological economists tend to believe that ‘real wealth’ needs an accrual-determined value as a measure of what things were needed to make an item or generate a service (H. T. Odum, Environmental Accounting: Emergy and environmental decision-making, 1996).

In other fields, theories posit the importance of values as an analytical independent variable (including those put forward by Max Weber, Émile Durkheim, Talcott Parsons, and Jürgen Habermas). Classical examples of sociological traditions which deny or downplay the question of values are institutionalism, historical materialism (including Marxism), behaviorism, pragmatic-oriented theories, postmodern philosophy and various Objectivist-oriented theories. Are you still reading this? I hope so. It’s not about Zwift but by putting the word Zwift in the middle I hope to fool you into thinking it’s about Zwift.

At the general level, there is a difference between moral and natural goods. Moral goods are those that have to do with the conduct of persons, usually leading to praise or blame. Natural goods, on the other hand, have to do with objects, not persons. For example, the statement “Mary is a good person” uses ‘good’ very differently than in the statement “That is good food”.

Ethics is mainly focused on moral goods rather than natural goods, while economics has a concern in what is economically good for the society but not an individual person and is also interested in natural goods. However, both moral and natural goods are equally relevant to goodness and value theory, which is more general in scope.


Dave, sorry but I’m going to have to take off some points for a post that is too short and doesn’t go off on enough tangents. Also, at no point did you shoehorn in unrelated content that only serves to impress upon everyone else that you are wider read and a deeper thinker than the rest of us.
8/10: Could do better


Having started using the mute function recently, I was happy to find that we can still see when a muted user posts in a thread, but it takes up just one line. We still get to choose to open up each muted post, should we want to see if they are contributing anything on the topic being discussed.

So far, I’ve only muted one contributor, so know exactly who the post will be by. It might get complicated if muting multiple individuals, but I don’t plan to do that. (I know you don’t have the luxury of muting anyone!)


I concede you have a point Gerrie but would add:

“Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.”

I’m not going to spend 23hrs59mins58seconds per day in the hopes a stopped clock will drop something useful - I’d rather be Zwifting. :wink:


@Dave_ZPCMR D just got muted for that LONG post :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:…Not by me I would NEVER mute you Dave


There is a handful of perseverators and unpleasant people that I’m happy to live without. The list is not long. If I ever saw useful posts from someone, I’d be unlikely to mute them.


I don’t see the need to mute people, it’s easy enough to ignore or skip over posts that aren’t useful.

Plus if I muted them how would I leave a sarcastic comment afterwards?


0/10 Dave - Must try harder.

You failed to start by letting us know your have a very important job, attending important meetings and discussing complex issues. [Big up yourself - 20%]

You failed to explain to us that some things are very difficult to understand and often have to be read multiple times and only if you are clever enough will you understand them. [Belittle the readers - 20%]

There was no moan about being censored by the ‘woke’ in order to show your own failure to realize its just your own multiple long and wearisome posts that are making people have headaches and so not want to see any more. [Demonstrate lack of awareness - 20%]

And you didn’t waste at least three lengthy paragraphs on a personal tale about something that may or may not have happened on a dusty road as an allegory for something else all of which I still haven’t managed to understand after multiple attempts. [Incomprehensibility - 20%]

Finally, you haven’t repeat your post at least six time, changing the post each time to say exactly the same things but with increasing levels of bizarreness [Escalation - 20%].


Does zero exist as a number or is it a concept, like infinity?

Discuss in 50,000 words or less.