If the low/high rate remains, then I'd rather it apply to only my votes and no one else's votes. If I rate it as low, then hide it from me regardless of other people rating it high. Let everyone else see it, but I've already marked it so keep it hidden for me. If I have marked it as high, then always show it for me. Currently that works with posts, but not with threads.
On the other hand, I don't really think along the lines of "ratings". I'm usually just thinking I don't want to see something again or I would like to mark something for later reference. Those aren't necessarily opposites, and it's about my personal interests and not someone else's interests. It'd be great if I could narrow a thread to only the posts that I marked (currently as "high"), much in the same way that is already possible for viewing all the posts made by GOG employees in a thread (that exclamation mark ! within a star).
Frankly, I believe web browser developers (Safari, Firefox, IE, etc.) should have already (it's 2017?!) incorporated at least a few different ways of doing that when viewing webpages in general, but they haven't. There oughta be some way of trimming and reshaping and relating parts of webpages when viewing them within a "web browser", and have that remembered for the next time they are viewed. At the moment web browsers are just basic html viewers that have been derailed into being like operating systems, i.e. useful only to a computer programmer that writes plug-ins for it (applications, extensions, etc.).
However, something like this for the forum probably needs to be done instead by the website developers because of the dynamic nature of its webpages. So I think depending of the web browser developers is pointless, and the website developers are our best hope.
I don't think of other forum members as censoring the posts and threads from me. I think of this as being how the forum software was programmed to use the low/high markings from other people instead of the individual who marked it. It seems to me that was probably done for the sake of appearances (t.i. not having spam already over the place), and for using automation. Perhaps it was also to shift the blame from any moderators to the community itself when a post disappears/stays, however it seems like that has partly failed because the GOG website maintainers have still shared the blame in many of the complaints.
I think there really oughta be at least some personalization involved, and without the need for a forum member to be a computer programmer to customize a dynamic forum (which is constantly having new pages added).
We've already got a friends list and a block list for each member, so I think it's just a matter of similarly using the marked posts and threads for each member. Obviously the marks are already saved, it's just a matter of using them for the individual who made the markings rather than imposing that member's markings on all other members.
That and also having an easy way to toggle blocking another member completely, but while also writing a note as to why for later reference, readable only by the member doing the blocking but not readable by others. Hmm, I think there would be two options: mark as spam or write a note.
When a member is blocked with the option "spam", that member's posts are no longer sent with the page for the member that personally blocked the other member. Everyone else still has to decide about that for themselves. What's nice about this is that takes care of all of the spam instantly without having to mark each and every post. On the other hand, neither a member nor the posts get deleted by a minority of the community participants, but instead only when a moderator deletes the account itself for the reason of being an account used for spam. (Likely other reasons for deleting an account wouldn't remove all posts, because of the need for continuity in threads.)
When marked with a note instead of spam, the posts are still part of the page that is sent but are "hidden" as they now, t.i. minimized to one line with only the member's name until clicked for full view. Additionally, their quotes should also be collapsed similarly. This helps maintain continuity of the thread by allowing a quick on/off toggle. The note would be available with that blocked member's info when hovering over that member's name next to the post or quote. However, the note would be truncated when it is long and then also as a link to load the rest of the note (but not as a link if it wasn't truncated). To clarify, I mean this is viewable only to the member who blocked the other member, not to everyone else, because it has to do with only that member's block list. Everyone else still makes their own decisions about each member, and the member who did the blocking has a note for reviewing when having a change of heart later.
In that way, members aren't blocked for everyone, and they aren't completely removed from the continuity of a thread. Spam accounts are still handled in the same way: accounts are removed/banned upon review, and all of their posts removed. (Or at least, that's what I assume has been happening to spam accounts…) Of course, on the backend for moderators there is an option to leave a note for an account about why it isn't officially recognized as a spam account. The word "spam" doesn't mean the same thing for everybody, no word does (multi-lingual linguistics anyone?), so a word really can't be the only factor for non-erroneous automation.
-----------
- tl;dr -
-----------
So, personal minimizing of individual posts and deemphasizing of whole threads, combined with the personal block list of each member. A member's markings and block list does not affect any other member's view. Cliques are no longer vigilantes. Bullying can be effectively handled by the bullied without continued confrontation and without applying justice.
