Blocking a user behaves more like mute. Proper blocking needed to prevent harassment. - eviltoast

The block feature should be renamed to “mute”, which is what it seems to actually be. Currently I can apply this to a user and they can still see all my posts. So it’s a good mute feature but a terrible block feature.

  • Blaze@dormi.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    I agree. I’ve seen cases of harassment before when one person would block the other, but then the blocked person would comment on most of the blocker comments to harass them further.

    • Adam@doomscroll.n8e.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      ActivityPub implementations generally don’t allow this.

      This comment will, when I click ‘Reply’, be sent to your instance (dormi.zone), that instance should then run it’s filter/block checks on it and if it’s happy it will forward it onto the lemmy.ml instance for further disemination amongst the subscribers of the group.

      If you were to have blocked me then my reply will appear on my instance only (which is admitedly tiny - at 1 user) and go no further. This kind of falls apart if I were to be on a bigger instance as more people would see the reply.

      That said, Lemmy may not be doing that quite right as the whole Groups/Communities thing is sort of an extension of the main protocol. I hope it’s doing it the right way.