If I block a user, shouldn’t their votes not apply?
I’m guessing the answer is “it’s too hard to make that work” but I figured I’d ask.
As I understand it, blocking someone means you don’t want to read what they say but doesn’t prevent them from interacting with you. It’s just that you won’t see it (easily). Instead of blocking it should be called ignoring. It’s a tool against annoyances, not against stalkers.
If it worked in a way they cannot interact with you, it could be abused, e.g. by mass-blocking a whatever-leaning instance users to prevent them from downvoting; or by blocking someone to prevent them from proving me wrong.
Instead of blocking it should be called ignoring. It’s a tool against annoyances, not against stalkers.
Ok…but it kind of seems like it SHOULD work that way. I feel like protecting users from stalkers is a high priority than any negative effects one might get from exploiting a political bias via upvotes/downvotes on a platform that downplays the importance of upvotes and downvotes.
I think stalking should merit direct involvement of the admins, because it’s more serious and also because needs more nuance than what a button has.
“Blocking” on Lemmy is actually “muting”, but the devs want to keep it labeled as “block”.
I would assume (I don’t know so don’t take this as fact) that blocks are one way. Your client is blocking read access of that users content. It can’t stop them from seeing what you post/comment.
Maybe someone more educated on the subject will clarify if that is correct
I like its current functionality. I disagreed with reddit getting rid of this behavior and moving to a system that lets people lock others out of a conversation.
I realize that I’m coming in a month late here, but you don’t have to implement Reddit’s horrible system, either.
I’d argue for something like: If you block somebody, then they’d be able to interact normally with your comments that existed up until the time of the block, assuming that they already participated in the thread. Meanwhile, you’d be more restricted, unable to respond to any of their comments at all. So, even if you respond to their comment and then block, because the comment was before the block, they’d be able to respond to it, but their response would be hidden from you, and you’d be unable to respond to it. Anything after the block would act both ways, keeping either user from interacting with the other, except to allow them to block/unblock each other.
There would be some weird ways around it, but I think it would stop the block-griefing behavior that’s rampant on Reddit. If they did use weird techniques to get around it, then admins would just have to ban their entire account.
IMO it’s a failing of what the function is supposed to do. Or at least what I think most of us want it to do.
