Is Blocking Ever Going To Block?

Currently users you block can still see your posts, reply to those posts, and trigger notifications when they do reply.

You can read the beginning of messages people you have blocked in your notifications tab, but have to unblock users to see the rest of what everyone else reading the replies to your post can see.

A "blocking" feature that is only inconvenient to the blocker is worse than no blocking feature at all, equivalent to trying to escape a fistfight by turning invisible but actually just closing your eyes.

LanternEverywhere,

Aside from you getting notifications when they reply, i think all the rest is how blocking works on all internet forums (as opposed to social media sites). Like if you block someone on Reddit i believe they can still see your posts, you just don't see theirs.

FfaerieOxide,
@FfaerieOxide@kbin.social avatar

That is incredibly unuseful as a way to curate how and who all can interact with you.

The way blocking seems to currently work is to the benefit of trolls & sealions.

It would be well improved as a feature were blocked accounts unable to see or reply to posts or profiles of accounts that have them blocked.

LanternEverywhere,

I disagree. On a public forum no one should be able to control what content i see and what content i don't see. If you're going around saying bullshit in a public forum, i should be able to see that, and i should be able to post a public reply refuting your bullshit. Otherwise people could post bullshit and block everyone from replying who would show that their post is bullshit. You shouldn't get to block people from rebutting your claims.

EDIT:

Though i could see the usefulness of an automatic tag on their comment saying "the OP has blocked this user, so OP doesn't see this post."

FfaerieOxide,
@FfaerieOxide@kbin.social avatar

I disagree in turn with you.

If someone is harassing me and not engaging in good faith, I should be able to disengage from them and hide myself from their view.

If I was talking to someone in a park and a third person joined the conversation that's fine. If that person starts being an annoying asshole, I should be able to walk away from the harassment while still maintaining my conversation. Accepting harassment is not a requirement to talk to people, and I should not have to accept harassment from whomever wants to fuck with me for the privilege of talking to people who aren't harassing me.

I also don't consider a site where people shitpost memes to be needing the same "public forum" protections of say a town hall meeting or a politician's official communications.

"Open air free-for-alls" as I am reading you seem to prefer tend also to drive out people with marginalized identities as they leave them open to harassment people from dominate groups members do not get subjected to for just existing.

Further, there is no moral or technical reason a person should not be able to send out a message to "Everyone in the world except for Tom when he is logged in—because fuck that guy."

Gordon_Freeman,
@Gordon_Freeman@kbin.social avatar

If that person starts being an annoying asshole, I should be able to walk away from the harassment while still maintaining my conversation

Except for the notification part, that is how blocking works currently.

If someone is harassing you, just block that person, you won't see any content created by that person, while you can maintain communication with the rest

FfaerieOxide,
@FfaerieOxide@kbin.social avatar

They shouldn't be able to eavesdrop on my conversation, nor take part in it.

I should be able to speak to Everybody But Tom if I so wish, and Tom should not be able to butt into the conversation.

Gordon_Freeman,
@Gordon_Freeman@kbin.social avatar

So you want to forbid people to speak to other people because you say so? That's really selfish, to say the least

If you want to maintain private conversations, use private messages. The rest is public

FfaerieOxide,
@FfaerieOxide@kbin.social avatar

Yes, I want to forbid people to speak to me or take part in my conversations because I say so.

I, selfishly, do not wish to be harassed or have my conversations derailed by bad actors.

If people are free to make their own threads and own claims, why do they need "the right" to butt into and derail mine?

If you want to maintain private conversations, use private messages. The rest is public

It doesn't have to be. There is no reason I should not be able to speak to "everyone accept for people I designate" (Tom).

Gordon_Freeman,
@Gordon_Freeman@kbin.social avatar

Yes, I want to forbid people to speak to me

Well, block that people. Currently blocking is working as intended (except for the already mentioned notifications that is either a bug or an overlook). You block them and they can speak to you. The End

FfaerieOxide,
@FfaerieOxide@kbin.social avatar

If they can still see what I post, then blocking is not working as optimally as it could.

(And since their replies—that they should not be able to make—still show up in my notifications, then it isn't even working the way you say it does.)

oldGregg,

Not true. You could respond to someone on reddit and they could not respond back. People abused this to get the last word in arguments

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • kbinMeta@kbin.social
  • meta
  • Macbeth
  • All magazines
    •