Thanks for the clarification on “ignore” – though I still stand on the principle if not on the detail. When human beings devise rules to regulate behavior there are almost always benefits, drawbacks, and unintended consequences – good and bad. “Ignore” is just such a rule. I should admit, too, that my viewing habits are so chaotic that fine-tuning my feed isn’t even a concern.

I was probably a little harsh to b_b. If so, I apologize.

With regard to the community idea – I’m not knocking what you have. There are some very interesting and likable people on here and I, too, care about them. It is just that the reality of online associations is that you can easily adopt quiet a low threshold of tolerance and get by with it. If a coworker says something really irritating – I can’t just mute him. Here, one can. This is a source of ongoing mild anxiety for me, as I take all sorts of positions that I know are liable to irritate people – not for the purpose of irritating them but because I believe the ideas are valid. If someone says “bad idea -- here’s why…” Bravo! A rational discourse is born! If they think “I don’t like this idea and don’t care to discuss it,” that’s ok too. At least they haven’t closed the door. If, on the other hand, they think “e.m.c. believes X so he’s an idiot I’m going to ignore,” yeah, that bothers me. We live in a world in which that happens all too often. Personally, I know many decent and worthwhile people who entertain what I think are some pretty weak ideas. They don’t merit my contempt because I think that they are wrong. On the other hand, I shouldn’t whine about the consequences of being me.

I like a phrase wasoxygen used once. “The Hubski ecosystem.” That feels more accurate to me personally. You are wedded to the “c” word and maybe I shouldn’t quibble about that either. Hubski is, after all, one of my favorite pieces of illusory space and I look forward to posting and commenting until they come and take me away.