You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Expected behavior
Games with the excluded tag should not show up.
Screenshots
Desktop:
OS: Windows, Linux
Browser: Firefox
Version: 130.0.1
Additional context
This feature was introduced in https://itch.io/t/160014/can-i-use-exclusion-filters; without it, a large proportion of any results page is irrelevant to me, making browsing extremely unpleasant.
Long before this regression, many users have been requesting basic improvements to the exclusion feature for many years (#475, #738, #739, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8), and have been so vehemently ignored by the dev team that they have begun suspecting ulterior motives on behalf of itch (1, 2).
Acknowledging that you are a small team managing a big website, even if this issue is not fixed right away, I (and evidently many other members of the community) would really appreciate any scrap of communication on the apparent priority inversion of this feature.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Describe the bug
Appending
?exclude=tg.visual-novel
to a link has no effect anymore.To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:
Expected behavior
Games with the excluded tag should not show up.
Screenshots
Desktop:
Additional context
This feature was introduced in https://itch.io/t/160014/can-i-use-exclusion-filters; without it, a large proportion of any results page is irrelevant to me, making browsing extremely unpleasant.
Long before this regression, many users have been requesting basic improvements to the exclusion feature for many years (#475, #738, #739, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8), and have been so vehemently ignored by the dev team that they have begun suspecting ulterior motives on behalf of itch (1, 2).
Acknowledging that you are a small team managing a big website, even if this issue is not fixed right away, I (and evidently many other members of the community) would really appreciate any scrap of communication on the apparent priority inversion of this feature.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: