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.

  • FfaerieOxide@kbin.socialOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    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@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      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@kbin.socialOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        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@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          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@kbin.socialOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            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.

            • LanternEverywhere@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              They’re not eavesdropping, you’re shouting in a public space. You don’t get to control other people. If you want that type of control then you should be on your own personal page on social media. Because that is not how public forums have ever worked, nor is it how they’re supposed to work.

              • FfaerieOxide@kbin.socialOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                This isn’t a public square. This is a private website. This is not how we decide where our taxes go, nor is it backed by any government.

                If you were in public and a person started following you around as you had a conversation (even if that conversation was with everyone in the world except the bad actor) you could walk away and take the conversation with you.
                If the harasser kept following you, you could firmly ask them to leave you alone, then start creeping your hand toward whatever weapon you keep on your person.

                According to you, a person should not be able to post their Eid spread without every reply in the thread getting @ed Islamophobic venom?
                A person cannot ask for latke recipes without everyone who has one being @ed antisemitism?
                A woman cannot post a thread about a great picnic she just had with her wife without everyone replying “Nice cheese spread!” being bombarded with @s calling the women in the OP men?

                Do you see how your—in my view, flawed—position sures up dominate power structures and discourages identities which are marginalized (and tend to be the victims of harassment) from speaking?

                • Gordon_Freeman@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  This isn’t a public square. This is a private website. This is not how we decide where our taxes go, nor is it backed by any government.

                  It’s a private website, but it is a public space. Restaurants are privately owned, but legally are considered public spaces. It’s the same with social media

                  • FfaerieOxide@kbin.socialOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    So if you were having dinner in a restaurant with your special someone [just pretend you have one if you have to] and I simply don’t like you (and not because you were a nazi or a politician trying to strip me of healthcare—both categories of people should be ran out of public at every chance—I just didn’t like you) you would have no problem with me sitting down at your table and butting in to your conversation to say you were wrong about the truffle butter?

                    If you were having dinner and said how much you liked your steak well-done—in public mind you—you wouldn’t mind if I kept telling everyone around you that you’re a piece of shit who ruins cuts of meat?

                • LanternEverywhere@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I think you’re well-meaning but not understanding the topic. This is a public square, regardless of its private ownership. And you can stop hearing any of their harassment by hitting the block button, which is exactly it’s purpose. And if anyone is being abusive there’s a report button so the mods of the forum can ban them.

                  I also think we’re the only people still seeing this conversation now, and I think neither of us is gonna convince the other of anything. So I’ll just say i wish good things for you and maybe or paths will cross again some day. =)

                  • FfaerieOxide@kbin.socialOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I think you are misunderstanding what “public square” means, as well I question how familiar you are with the harassment marginalized identities tend to face, nor what improves the lived experiences of said people.

                    Website that allow actual blocking have always made for better user experience in my …experience

                    I do not wish specific good things for you, past the peace and prosperity I desire for all intelligent life.

                    The “Good day.” I am about the deliver does not contradict my above statement against wishing you specific good; it’s part and parcel the P&P mentioned just below there that everybody gets (as well an acknowledgement our conversation is over).

                    Good day.

            • Gordon_Freeman@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              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@kbin.socialOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                1 year ago

                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@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  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@kbin.socialOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    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.)

          • hypelightfly@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            If they can still reply to your posts/comments then no it’s not how blocking currently works. You can’t “walk away”.

    • Destragras@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Being unable to see your posts and comments wouldn’t do much as the user could just sign out of their account or use a private window and be able to see it again. Comments sections like this are publicly visible and indexable.

      While I would love for the block feature to work how you describe, it only really works when creating an account takes effort and the comments aren’t publically accessible. Blocked people not being able to reply to you would be a good start though.

      • FfaerieOxide@kbin.socialOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Being unable to see your posts and comments wouldn’t do much as the user could just sign out of their account or use a private window and be able to see it again.

        That’s the level of protection I am advocating for. I know people can views links in a new private account. They can’t reply that way.

        They can make a separate account but I can block that one too if it acts up.

        I’m suggesting a tiny speed bump to keep interactions good faith. Yes, dedicated trolls can do all sorts of things. I am advocating making it slightly inconvenient for less dedicated trolls to pester people.