/kbin meta

5 readers

2 users here now

Magazine dedicated to discussions about the kbin itself. Provide feedback, ask questions, suggest improvements, and engage in conversations related to the platform organization, policies, features, and community dynamics. ---- * Roadmap 2023 * m/kbinDevlog * m/kbinDesign

founded 1 year ago

Is Blocking Ever Going To Block? (kbin.social)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

72 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It should be trivial to set a "blocked=true" marker and not show those posts.
If nothing else, it should possible to set a blocked tag not federate replies from blocked users to users that block them if an asshole set up their own server with blackjack and hookers.

I am aware how easy it is to open links in private tabs.
Have only been advocating making it that much more difficult to harass people.

I want a speed bump, not a bunker.

A way to get rid of people who care enough to be assholes but not enough to sign out of their accounts.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I'm sorry, but you don't know nearly as much as you think you do. This isn't like Reddit. What you are asking for is not technologically simple, it would be trivial to circumvent, and perhaps most importantly, it's philosophically incompatible with the very concept of public speech.

If you are incapable of or unwilling to accept that, there's no point in continuing to attempt to explain this to you. It's all been addressed, repeatedly.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, it actually hasn't.
Y'all just seem to think people have "a right" to harass others.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

No, it actually hasn't.

I skimmed the other threads and it has all been thoroughly covered.

Y'all just seem to think people have "a right" to harass others.

You just seem to think you have "a right" to control others.

Nobody that you've blocked can harass you in a way that your demand to mute their account would prevent, Karen. Watch me prove it right now.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Oh, ya skimmed huh?

Doesn't make you any less wrong.

There is no reason why the feature I have laid out couldn't be implemented, and I believe I have laid out plenty of justification of why it should.

Again, the person who wants to allow further harassment calling the person who wants to provide a means to stop it "a karen". You are a silly person.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This blocked=true would then require the server to have a massive if statement, that can't be (usefully) cahched cause its user and post specifc. Extra branching in the code is gonna have a less pretty output as is, but times that by both the number of users and number of posts that the entire instance is federated with?

Just gonna make the fediverse even less popular with higher server costs, and will for sure be abused by the DDoS'ers that are already plaugeing popular instances. All this would them be negated from the 2 seconds it takes on any lemmy app I've used, where you can just press browse as guest.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Can't reply as a guest though, can you?