Sandman
You wouldn't know logic if it ran you over. That's why you *REPEATEDLY* snipped out my explanations and logical reasoning regarding this topic that didn't fit your trolling agenda.

Tony Cooper
I'll make one more attempt to explain this to you, and then I'm through.

If a subject is addressed, and an aspect of that subject is not included, that aspect can be said to be "ignored".

It doesn't make any difference at all if the aspect was not covered by intent, by accident, by lack of knowledge of that aspect, or for any other reason.

You seem to be under the impression that there must be a deliberate act if something is ignored.

That's not the case. The use of "ignored", in this context, simply means omitted, not there, not covered.

All of those words or phrases *can*, but do not necessarily, require a deliberate action. Something can be omitted or left out deliberately or omitted by accident.

Your "logical reasons" do not apply to how the word is actually used and accepted by all native speakers of English. Your conclusion is completely contrary to established usage.

nospam ignored an aspect of online vs brick-and-mortar transactions.

Whether it was ignored deliberately, because he didn't consider it, because he wasn't aware of it, or for any other reason, the aspect was ignored in his post.

The above needs no substantiation. It's a way the word is used by those who understand how the word is used.

It makes no mind that you don't understand it. No amount of argumentative nonsense from you will change the fact that it is used, and used correctly, this way.