The block functionality was added before we had the ability to exclude posts from listings. This meant that the only useful functionality we could give blocking, was to make it prevent blocked users from being able to reply to your comments, posts, and messages.
Now, you no longer see blocked users' posts in listings. You do still see blocked users comments, and there will be an update to change that. At that time, we'll remove the original blocking functionality, so users who you block can still reply to your posts and comments, but you will not see them.
I agree that the original implementation is shitty and wrong. I don't believe one user should have the ability to silence another, but I do believe a user should be able to ignore another.
What we SHOULD be able to do is become INVISIBLE to a person
If you have a problem with someone, like they harass you often on your posts (come to your post and fuck with you...like dicktick and this other guy do to me), you shoiuld be able to BLOCK THEM, and what that means is this:
They can no longer see ANY of YOUR posts, and therefore cannot comment on them. You become public to everyone BUT that person
Your comments on other people's posts should be INVISIBLE to them. ....they don't see them. Therefore cannot respond to them.
In other words, one should be able to Shadowban oneself PROVISIONALLY to SPECIFIC people.
And the person you're blocking. Who wants to see their shit - not just blocking 'responses' - I don't want to see the jerk in the first place. That's what it does everywhere else. Why is that so hard to comprehend?
Or what is blocking a user meant that your username would be randomly generated for any user on your block list? Let's say I'm having an issue with, at random I'll pick a name, "spez" and want to block him. I add him to the block list and whenever he sees a comment I post it appears as "random_name_27" and any replies and pms are just dumped.
Yes... And if enough shills come in here and ban certain people they can push their agenda and sow discord.
It's really simple... Blocking is something shills capitalize on quickly... We need to eliminate blocking so that we can debate and exchange ideas 100% so that shills lose all control and ideas win upon merit.
I definitely agree that a block SHOULD NOT prevent someone from commenting. That way anyone watching the convo can see your reply. The person who's being replied to shouldn't be forced to look at the reply though. I think the onlookers are usually more important anyway.
Yes. Block options are useful if you are spez... Or if you work at Twitter or Facebook... And your ideas suck and you can't win in debate. Free speech 100%. American values 100%. We need to clearly define American values and adhere to them.
Some people are extremely annoying shits. I'm not obligated to listen to them. I'm talking about a personal block. For the record, I've yet to block anyone. But I'm glad that I can if i want to.
Anyone capable of getting annoyed enough to block someone ON AN INTERNET CHAT BOARD is like the girl who cried when Trump got elected screaming at the sky.
I'm not advocating for anyone that is going to send a hundred vulgar messages and threats to one person...
That is not how free speech works. This is akin to the public square. We have seen what happens when tons of people do this on massive scales on reddit, twitter, facebook. No one should have the right to say who and who cannot speak. Free speech is free speech. We finally have a president who steps on toes and isn't afraid to offend people and guess what? People have stated they want to block his speech. That is dangerous. I am not saying I am the president... But I am an American. And as Americans we need to clearly define what our values are 100%.
I can't comment to anyone within the entire post of the person who blocked me. And this is about the exchange of ideas... Or the occasional insult and derogatory comment... BIG DEAL! Then people can just downvote whoever they agree/disagree with and everyone moves on. Nothing good comes out of permitting blocking/banning. That is a leftist tactic.
But the flip side is I don't have to listen to you express your right to free speech. I'm free to walk away at any point. Blocking a user is the digital method of walking away. Are you winning any arguments that way? Probably not. Is it sometimes cowardly. Sure. Is it also necessary to allow yourself freedom from crazy people who want to pm you nonsense, threats, and insults? Definitely.
Reddit isn't shit because you can block people, it's shit because of the totalitarian mod structure and the admin's hell-bent mission to shove propoganda down people throats. Being banned from discussion for having a different viewpoint makes it shitty. Somebody not wanting to hear your, subjectively, shitty diatribe doesn't prevent you from offering it. Not everyone wants to listen to everyone else, nor should they have to.
Why should a person be forced to listen to anyone else?
Oh yeah? Well maybe I am a dick that can handle someone on the internet calling me a dick and still sit here and converse with you like an adult because, although I may come off as a dick sometimes, I am not a huge pussy. And guess what? You are not blocked by me and are welcome to come on by and chat... Whether we agree on everything or not...
As long as we don't don't get overrun wirh delicate snowflake fee fees. I like nothingberg's idea. Makes the most sense for how to be left alone by intrusive irritating rude people looking for a fight you don't want.
The block functionality was added before we had the ability to exclude posts from listings. This meant that the only useful functionality we could give blocking, was to make it prevent blocked users from being able to reply to your comments, posts, and messages.
Now, you no longer see blocked users' posts in listings. You do still see blocked users comments, and there will be an update to change that. At that time, we'll remove the original blocking functionality, so users who you block can still reply to your posts and comments, but you will not see them.
I agree that the original implementation is shitty and wrong. I don't believe one user should have the ability to silence another, but I do believe a user should be able to ignore another.
It's wrongheaded
What we SHOULD be able to do is become INVISIBLE to a person
If you have a problem with someone, like they harass you often on your posts (come to your post and fuck with you...like dicktick and this other guy do to me), you shoiuld be able to BLOCK THEM, and what that means is this:
They can no longer see ANY of YOUR posts, and therefore cannot comment on them. You become public to everyone BUT that person
Your comments on other people's posts should be INVISIBLE to them. ....they don't see them. Therefore cannot respond to them.
In other words, one should be able to Shadowban oneself PROVISIONALLY to SPECIFIC people.
We need to do exactly what the founding fathers had in mind... You're thinking too much. Free speech 100%.
And the person you're blocking. Who wants to see their shit - not just blocking 'responses' - I don't want to see the jerk in the first place. That's what it does everywhere else. Why is that so hard to comprehend?
Or what is blocking a user meant that your username would be randomly generated for any user on your block list? Let's say I'm having an issue with, at random I'll pick a name, "spez" and want to block him. I add him to the block list and whenever he sees a comment I post it appears as "random_name_27" and any replies and pms are just dumped.
Yes... And if enough shills come in here and ban certain people they can push their agenda and sow discord.
It's really simple... Blocking is something shills capitalize on quickly... We need to eliminate blocking so that we can debate and exchange ideas 100% so that shills lose all control and ideas win upon merit.
I definitely agree that a block SHOULD NOT prevent someone from commenting. That way anyone watching the convo can see your reply. The person who's being replied to shouldn't be forced to look at the reply though. I think the onlookers are usually more important anyway.
A block option can be useful, but if someone is blocked by someone else, the blocked person shouldn't know it.
Yes. Block options are useful if you are spez... Or if you work at Twitter or Facebook... And your ideas suck and you can't win in debate. Free speech 100%. American values 100%. We need to clearly define American values and adhere to them.
Some people are extremely annoying shits. I'm not obligated to listen to them. I'm talking about a personal block. For the record, I've yet to block anyone. But I'm glad that I can if i want to.
Anyone capable of getting annoyed enough to block someone ON AN INTERNET CHAT BOARD is like the girl who cried when Trump got elected screaming at the sky.
I'm not advocating for anyone that is going to send a hundred vulgar messages and threats to one person...
I couldn't comment to any user, not just the blocker, on an entire post from the person who blocked me who made it to the front page today...
I don't know...
That is not how free speech works. This is akin to the public square. We have seen what happens when tons of people do this on massive scales on reddit, twitter, facebook. No one should have the right to say who and who cannot speak. Free speech is free speech. We finally have a president who steps on toes and isn't afraid to offend people and guess what? People have stated they want to block his speech. That is dangerous. I am not saying I am the president... But I am an American. And as Americans we need to clearly define what our values are 100%.
You aren't blocked from speaking in the public square. You're just not allowed to force someone to stand next to you in the square.
I can't comment to anyone within the entire post of the person who blocked me. And this is about the exchange of ideas... Or the occasional insult and derogatory comment... BIG DEAL! Then people can just downvote whoever they agree/disagree with and everyone moves on. Nothing good comes out of permitting blocking/banning. That is a leftist tactic.
But the flip side is I don't have to listen to you express your right to free speech. I'm free to walk away at any point. Blocking a user is the digital method of walking away. Are you winning any arguments that way? Probably not. Is it sometimes cowardly. Sure. Is it also necessary to allow yourself freedom from crazy people who want to pm you nonsense, threats, and insults? Definitely.
Blocking is not walking away. Look at what a great website Reddit is.
Reddit isn't shit because you can block people, it's shit because of the totalitarian mod structure and the admin's hell-bent mission to shove propoganda down people throats. Being banned from discussion for having a different viewpoint makes it shitty. Somebody not wanting to hear your, subjectively, shitty diatribe doesn't prevent you from offering it. Not everyone wants to listen to everyone else, nor should they have to.
Why should a person be forced to listen to anyone else?
Maybe you're just a dick?
Oh yeah? Well maybe I am a dick that can handle someone on the internet calling me a dick and still sit here and converse with you like an adult because, although I may come off as a dick sometimes, I am not a huge pussy. And guess what? You are not blocked by me and are welcome to come on by and chat... Whether we agree on everything or not...
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEee
You're projecting. I'm chill.
i'm blocking you
That's a funny explanation...
As long as we don't don't get overrun wirh delicate snowflake fee fees. I like nothingberg's idea. Makes the most sense for how to be left alone by intrusive irritating rude people looking for a fight you don't want.
Promises made promises kept? Pepe? Trump 2020? Or is it Q and her age? I bet she's actually really cool.
That doesn't address the issue. I am not going to take someone else's post and I don't always 100% agree on posts... Is that a problem?