Seriously what's that idea?
-
They shouldn't be able to do that!
I have no issue with this whatsoever. I block people so that I don't need to see their posts, not that they couldn't see mine. If you don't want others reading what you post online, then don't post online.
-
I didn’t say I do - the software developers of Lemmy did. If you don’t like it go back to Reddit where they do exactly what you are asking for.
I've never been on reddit, fucking crazy puritan.
and guess what: the developers of lemmy can change it if they want to.
but meanwhile here you are, insulting people for having differing opinions, and discussing why they have those reasons. huh, funny. -
there are so many threads.
its not but minorities its "based on this discussion I had about privacy and anti-harassment needs that minorities need".
harassment is bad. minorities are especially vulnerable to harassment.
reporting is good, but reporting is only one tool
the current "block" tool doesn't actually blocks, it mutes
that is confusing to users, who are surprised when they block a harasser that the harasser is still harassing them out of sight.
It'd be nice if, in addition to the report tool, and the mute tool, if there was a tool that could stop someone who is causing you mental anguish from doing so directly in your comments.
because people who are scared of the comments aren't going to post\we need more tools to combat harassment
a tool where you can stop someone from commenting on your content is a good self-service tool that is low-enough-impact that a mod doesn't need to be involved, because it doesn't affect the community itself.and at the very least, what OP is saying is reasonable. that is confusing AF, the person you've blocked isn't blocked from doing anything, the blocker is just hamstrung
wrote last edited by [email protected]Just telling us "but someone else told me it's bad" contributes nothing to the current conversation if you cannot tell us anything about that discussion.
Giving every user access to a type of power that is known to be abusable is not a good solution. As I said at the start, we've seen this with Reddit. We've seen why this is not the right way.
-
I have no issue with this whatsoever. I block people so that I don't need to see their posts, not that they couldn't see mine. If you don't want others reading what you post online, then don't post online.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Also, while other locations in the Fediverse might disable access to unauthenticated persons, comments and post in Lemmy are generally public in that way. So, a blocked user could simply logout (or visit from a different instance) to see the content.
Also, as a third-party I do want someone (e.g. a fact checker) to be able reply to a comment with more information, so that I can see it, even if the commenter doesn't want to see replies (from the "woke mob" or wikipedians, e.g.).
I understand some people think the reply thread under their comments is somehow "owned" and should be "controlled" by them, but I don't agree. I think this should also be true in most places on the Fediverse, tho it isn't (as I understand it) on Mastodon (and the like).
-
care to elaborate on that?
I have. Multiple times.
wrote last edited by [email protected]oh thats rich.
let me quote to you every reply you've given me so far in this thread. this will be a good laugh.They would be, though. That’s exactly what they’re saying could happen - you just wouldn’t be able to see it. In effect, what they described is exactly what you’re claiming to be a problem, except worse because it’s exclusively in control of the harasser.
how would preventing the harasser from commenting on my posts give the harasser more control than letting them comment on my post?
How? One new account that blocks the victim and it’s exactly what you’re arguing against, except now the user doesn’t get the choice to ignore it or fight back. It’s completely invisible to them.
With how it works here, it’s the victim’s choice to endure it or isolate themselves from it. Do you not see how that’s better?
You still haven't explained how control is being handed to the harasser. In fact, you said the victim is getting blocked, so I'm not clear who you even consider to be the victim here. And in fact, it doesn't need to be invisible to them.
You’re hinging on the wrong part. The only difference between the scenarios laid out is who has the choice. In the one you are arguing for, the choice is in the hands of the harasser.
again, you haven't explained how control is being handed to the harasser
I have. Multiple times.
no, you have not.
and that is every reply that I can find that you sent to me.
but meanwhile I actually went into detail about who would be able to do what, and what that would mean for both parties.
so... thats pretty embarrassing for you.
I know it can be difficult to keep things straight with so many threads going on, but have a bit of humility. -
They shouldn't be able to do that!
Because it would allow people to push narratives and not get called out if they block everyone against them.
Imagine a civil transphobe pushing some narrative that flies below the radar of whatever mods are moderating that comm. If they block all the trans users they cannot get called out on their stuff anymore.
I think there was some discourse on this on black mastodon?
-
The way Reddit does is abusive. I called out a guy for spamming, he blocked me, he's the one who creates TV discussion threads, I can't participate anymore.
Why not start your own TV discussion threads with blackjack and hookers?
-
Agreed. It’s a flaw in the system
it was kinda same with reddit too. people just get around it by using another account and just harrass you again, or they try to brigade you and report.
-
Easier job to do when you're actually getting reports.
- Reporting = this breaks the rules please moderate
- Blocking = Fuck them, even if they rechnicly abide by the rules I don't want them near me
- Muting = I don't want to see what this person does but don't want to hurt them beyond that
wrote last edited by [email protected]i do that to, with the 2nd bullet point, sometimes i block people to avoid arguements, even if one of the parties maybe in the wrong.(either you misspoke something or the other guy was misinterpreting) most of the time, i block because they dont argue in good faith.(i almost never report people)
-
They shouldn't be able to do that!
I wish we had time-limited blocks / mutes on Lemmy. I use them all the time on Mastodon to exit a conversation when I am getting to short. If it really matters, I can revisit after a fortnight of reflection.
-
The way Reddit does is abusive. I called out a guy for spamming, he blocked me, he's the one who creates TV discussion threads, I can't participate anymore.
they block evade by using another account to restart the conservation, or they get mad if you block them, then they try to mass report you.
-
My experience is, I see that there's a comment, I can't read it, I can't upvote or downvote it, and I couldn't report it, wonderful!
I thought you blocked the person so you wouldn't have to read what they wrote
-
I don't mind it, but if the devs change it I hope they don't take the Reddit route that prevents you from replying to any comment chain the user is in, especially with how small Lemmy is. Direct replies I can understand.
i had several instances on reddit, where the person commenting evaded a block by using a new account.
-
See, At least this is a reasonable argument. I don't agree with it, and think you are conflating the need for private spaces and the existence of public ones.
The root of our impasse is that you think every public place needs to have drastic tools to protect people in the hands of all users, regardless of what that does to a platform.
and that was nearly the exact argument that I had 2 years ago.
I think that public forums still need a reasonable ability to counter harassment at the individual level, and not every single thing needs to be sent up to a mod.
preventing a single user from interacting with another single user's content is almost the exact opposite of drastic, it is nearly the least impactful action you can take that is actually an action. it doesn't stop the blocked person from interacting with the rest of the community, or even necessarily seeing the blocker's content.sending things to mods can take a while, and mods may not actually be able to identify harassment with enough confidence to ban someone.
like if i say "you live at 221B Baker Street, London", we know that is Sherlock Holmes' address and I'm clearly not doxxing you, but what if the joke wasn't so obvious and I got reported? What if the insult was a dogwhistle that the mod didnt know about? dogwhistles, by their nature, are designed specifically to provide the kind of plausible deniability that would satisfy a mod.
give the victim a low impact tool that they can use to mitigate the harassment a bit. And to be clear, I don't consider "closing your eyes" to be a sufficient mitigation. -
They shouldn't be able to do that!
From a technical standpoint, doing it in another way requires your blocks to be public.
He and you are both publishing individual comments with metadata telling which thread and where in it that these entries go. The instance hosting the community simply pull all these entries together. To cut off that response then your instance must tell that hosting instance to detach that reply from the blocked user. Currently Lemmy doesn't support any such thing.
-
A thousand percent this.
Reddit's new system makes a ton of sense until you see it in action in a cat fight with the blocked user having to edit their previous comment to clarify they're now unable to respond to anything the other user is saying and everything turns into a mess.While I could totally agree neither method is perfect, it only takes one heated thread on Reddit to see why (IMO) this new method is much worse than the previous.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I'm not totally sure about the chronology, but I think that the "old->new" block change on Reddit may have been due to calls from Twitter users. Most of the people I saw back on Reddit complaining about the old behavior prior to the change were saying "on Twitter, blocked users can't respond".
On Reddit, the site is basically split up into a series of forums, subreddits. On the Threadiverse, same idea, but the term is communities. And that's the basic unit of moderation --- that is, people set up a set of rules for how what is permitted on a given community, and most restrictions arise from that. There are Reddit sitewide restrictions (and here, instancewide), but those don't usually play a huge role compared to the community-level things.
So, on Twitter --- and I've never made a Twitter account, and don't spend much time using it, but I believe I've got a reasonable handle on how it works --- there's no concept of a topic-specific forum. The entire site is user-centric. Comments don't live in forums talking about a topic; they only are associated with the text in them and with the parent comment. So if you're on Twitter, there has to be some level of content moderation unless you want to only have sitewide restrictions. On Twitter, having a user be able to act as "moderator" for responses makes a lot more sense than on Reddit, because Twitter lacks an analog to subreddit moderators.
So Twitter users, who were accustomed to having a "block" feature, naturally found Reddit's "block" feature, which did something different from what they were used to, to be confusing. They click "block", and what it actually does is not what they expect --- and worse, at a surface glance, the behavior is the same. They think that they're acting as a moderator, but they're just controlling visibility of comments to themselves. Then they have an unpleasant surprise when they realize that what they've been doing isn't what they think that they've been doing.
-
I get the feeling that some of those blocking people can't suppress the urge to check what others are commenting to them, defeating the point of the block lol
-
oh thats rich.
let me quote to you every reply you've given me so far in this thread. this will be a good laugh.They would be, though. That’s exactly what they’re saying could happen - you just wouldn’t be able to see it. In effect, what they described is exactly what you’re claiming to be a problem, except worse because it’s exclusively in control of the harasser.
how would preventing the harasser from commenting on my posts give the harasser more control than letting them comment on my post?
How? One new account that blocks the victim and it’s exactly what you’re arguing against, except now the user doesn’t get the choice to ignore it or fight back. It’s completely invisible to them.
With how it works here, it’s the victim’s choice to endure it or isolate themselves from it. Do you not see how that’s better?
You still haven't explained how control is being handed to the harasser. In fact, you said the victim is getting blocked, so I'm not clear who you even consider to be the victim here. And in fact, it doesn't need to be invisible to them.
You’re hinging on the wrong part. The only difference between the scenarios laid out is who has the choice. In the one you are arguing for, the choice is in the hands of the harasser.
again, you haven't explained how control is being handed to the harasser
I have. Multiple times.
no, you have not.
and that is every reply that I can find that you sent to me.
but meanwhile I actually went into detail about who would be able to do what, and what that would mean for both parties.
so... thats pretty embarrassing for you.
I know it can be difficult to keep things straight with so many threads going on, but have a bit of humility.Yup, that's what I said.
-
I've blocked a bunch of people, who may be replying to me with harassing comments, but that isn't influencing what I do. It might influence the overall conversation, and that could be a problem, but I think the way that problem is dealt with should be public, because the problem is public, it's not something that's exclusively my problem. I don't think I should have the authority to act to police any arbitrary community like that, especially without anyone being able to know that I'm doing it.
wrote last edited by [email protected]yea it usually ends with the troll commenting"for your information it spelled like this or its discussed this way" followed with insulting comment" go back and learn how to do this or that before commmenting" i immediately block grammar nazis too.
-
then make the block community-specific.
thats finenobody said it had to be fediverse-wide.
