Post #13850 by Dope1 on the US Policy board

NEW FEATURE ANNOUNCEMENT

I'd like to explain the new Ban User button being released today. For background context, previously you were able to hide posts left by any user, just by clicking the frowny-face beside their name, which leaves all of their posts hidden to you. This feature was popular, but numerous readers have written to me suggesting that the hide feature did not go far enough.

I'm now upgrading the feature to single-handedly block users from posting entirely! Shrewd'm is getting shrewder.

HOW IT WORKS: All you have do is hit the usual unhappy face to the right of the author's name whilst reading any post, and they move to your ignore list. The part that is new is that when a user is in the ignore list of just 3 users, then BOOM! - the user is not just ignored, but banned from Shrewd'm - instantly and permanently.

They have no way to return, becuse I'd rather trust the judgement of the wonderful Shrewds here, than get involved myself.

Free speech has advantages, however there can, at times, be nothing better than simply making certain people vanish from Shrewd'm entirely, and instantly.

This feature is a keeper.

Thank you to everyone also for all of your other suggestions over the years, which has led to this wonderful community remaining civil. The new Ban User feature will help take Shrewd'm to another level. Shrewd on!

- Manlobbi

Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy ❤

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (247)

Prev | Next

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

No. of Recommendations: 2

The international law requires that when a refugee is already in your borders, you cannot return them back to the country where they face persecution. And you have to give them basic due process in order to make their claim that they will be persecuted if they go back home.

Okay, so we can close the border and dispo anyone already inside the country.

You have every right to refuse them entry. But if they're already in your country, you can't deport them without at least giving them a hearing.

Okay. So then 0 encounters per day at the border should be back on the table - no trigger.

Because that happens in a bunch of federal statutes - jurisdiction to challenge rulemaking and other matters gets funneled to the DC Circuit, because that's where all the federal agencies are. The same reason why whenever I sue a state agency here in Florida, I have to file in the district court that includes Tallahassee instead of down here in Miami.

Okay. So here's the other perspective: judges in Texas and Florida are likely more disposed towards enforcement.

Not everything is brand new to the world and deliberately crafted for some nefarious purpose

Other side's perspective time. Why do you think I would say that? Have the democrats been good actors on legislation in the past?

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

Print the post

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (247)

Prev | Next

Announcements

US Policy FAQ

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

A community forum supporting civilized, and highly helpful, self-educating investors that come together for shrewdness and merry spirits. These message boards closely follow the look and feel of the old message boards at boards.fool.com prior to the boards redirected to discussion.fool.com. Shrewd'm is not affiliated with the comprehensive and excellent investment website, The Motley Fool (TMF), in any way. The Shrewd commmunity here has owed, and continues to owe, gratitude to The Motley Fool for nurturing a culture of jovial irreverence towards Wall St, and that tradition will continue here.