Imagine a streamer banning someone from chat and that person can't see the stream because they've been banned.
Only time I think blocking should include not being allowed to see your tweet is if you set your tweet visibility to followers only with follower approval on. Otherwise it's public speech.
What’s unclear is whether Musk’s changes fall in line with Apple’s app store guidelines, which mandate that social networks offer “the ability to block abusive users from the service.”
I bet they “reached out for comment” as well.
You could always view tweets from someone who blocked you by logging out or opening the profile in a private tab. Or using a different account like the article discusses.
Twitter's version of blocking has always been a problem because it leans towards the idea that you're blocking someone because they're harassing you (mods don't have time to punish everyone, the site is terribly huge) or are offensive to one's tastes (nebulous bullshit). The changes Musk et al are forcing doesn't do much to improve it, and sort of breaks the idea of allowing users to regulate their own interactions with others.
Blocking should be some mix that allows curation but doesn't deny the rights of other users. If I block someone, I should not be seeing the user's posts on my feed, however the user should still be allowed to interact with my posts. But even if they interact, I should not be notified that they responded, nor should I be able to see the responses.
and sort of breaks the idea of allowing users to regulate their own interactions with others.
No it doesn't. If you are posting publicly, being able to keep someone from reading your tweets if, and only if, they're logged in as themselves was never useful. You want to regulate who sees your posts? Make a private account.
My understanding was that the bulk of complaints were that blocking someone now means you can still see their tweets. If it means those you block can still see your tweets, then I don't see a problem.
Make a private account
Rendering the whole point of being on Twitter useless. ┐(ツ)┌
I don't know why that stupid feature is repeatedly suggested.
If you don't want your opinions out there, don't put them out there. If you want them limited, then make the entire account limited and invisible to everyone except those that you explicitly whitelist.
If you don't want replies, just hide them from the mute-r. But let the mute-ee reply and show them right along next to the other publicly visible replies.
Fuck this noise of "I want to be a public figure and make public statements but I don't want anyone to be able to respond in a way that I don't like."
I agree completely. If you want to post opinions in a public forum, it should be just that. I'm open to nation specific forums, but aside from that any further delineation is largely pointless.
One of the few actually useful usages of the old block system is actually for vtubers lol.
Vtubers know that people are going to make porn of their avatars, so a large number of vtubers who don't like the idea of seeing porn of their avatars asked the porn artists to block them, because then they wouldn't be able to see said porn artists' posts. Because there's a massive amount of people who post art of vtubers, the vtuber doesn't have the time to actually go looking for every porn artist and blocking them, especially the corporate ones.
Its not enough for them to not see it. They want to make sure others dont see it either. Its like saying nigger or faggot in a video game. Its not enough for them to block the person. They gotta block that person for everyone else via report + ban.
Its why multiplayer gaming sucks becuase community has been neutered. Everyone just has their own discord because they can say what they want in voice chat (for now). People always wonder why no one talks in game these days aside from console people with shitty mics or thots.
Blocking someone from seeing your content shouldn’t exist. Block should only work as my way to not see your stuff.
Imagine a streamer banning someone from chat and that person can't see the stream because they've been banned.
Only time I think blocking should include not being allowed to see your tweet is if you set your tweet visibility to followers only with follower approval on. Otherwise it's public speech.
That's actually an optional feature on Twitch.
That probably none of them use because they're dirty little whores who worship at the alter of money and attention.
fuck apple's rules.
Apple’s abusive monopoly
I bet they “reached out for comment” as well.
You could always view tweets from someone who blocked you by logging out or opening the profile in a private tab. Or using a different account like the article discusses.
"Hey, we will publish this in 10min. Care to comment?"
People seriously dont hate journos enough
"Elon made no comment upon us reaching out to him. Which can only mean that he knows he's doing something evil."
Like your crazy ex combing over everything in your life, the substance doesn't matter beyond "Elon bad"
Twitter's version of blocking has always been a problem because it leans towards the idea that you're blocking someone because they're harassing you (mods don't have time to punish everyone, the site is terribly huge) or are offensive to one's tastes (nebulous bullshit). The changes Musk et al are forcing doesn't do much to improve it, and sort of breaks the idea of allowing users to regulate their own interactions with others.
Blocking should be some mix that allows curation but doesn't deny the rights of other users. If I block someone, I should not be seeing the user's posts on my feed, however the user should still be allowed to interact with my posts. But even if they interact, I should not be notified that they responded, nor should I be able to see the responses.
No it doesn't. If you are posting publicly, being able to keep someone from reading your tweets if, and only if, they're logged in as themselves was never useful. You want to regulate who sees your posts? Make a private account.
My understanding was that the bulk of complaints were that blocking someone now means you can still see their tweets. If it means those you block can still see your tweets, then I don't see a problem.
Rendering the whole point of being on Twitter useless. ┐(ツ)┌
I don't know why that stupid feature is repeatedly suggested.
I agree, it would not make sense the other way. Being able to curate what you see is reasonable. Being able to curate what other people see is not.
But it was as I described:
They liked to block people, then talk shit about them, comfortable in the [mistaken] knowledge that the were doing it behind their back.
Who gives a fuck about apple's rules?!
Companies making apps that want to be accessible on their app store? Is this a real question?
X needs to offer block and mute, like Gab does. Block means they can't see or reply, mute means they just cant reply.
Neither should be offered.
If you don't want your opinions out there, don't put them out there. If you want them limited, then make the entire account limited and invisible to everyone except those that you explicitly whitelist.
If you don't want replies, just hide them from the mute-r. But let the mute-ee reply and show them right along next to the other publicly visible replies.
Fuck this noise of "I want to be a public figure and make public statements but I don't want anyone to be able to respond in a way that I don't like."
I agree completely. If you want to post opinions in a public forum, it should be just that. I'm open to nation specific forums, but aside from that any further delineation is largely pointless.
Mute is fine, spammers exist.
Did Forbes comment on Kum-face's SNL appearance?
I always thought blocking was ridiculous unless someone was legit harassing you. Imagine if radio stations could do that to listeners.
Rush Limbaugh used to do that to troublesome call-ins all the time in the early 1990s.
A loud vacuum sound, a baby's crying, and a lot of sickening crunches, then Rush would say:
"I'm sorry. Your call has just been aborted."
He had to stop because stations told him it was too disturbing. Which was the point.
God, I miss that man.
One of the few actually useful usages of the old block system is actually for vtubers lol.
Vtubers know that people are going to make porn of their avatars, so a large number of vtubers who don't like the idea of seeing porn of their avatars asked the porn artists to block them, because then they wouldn't be able to see said porn artists' posts. Because there's a massive amount of people who post art of vtubers, the vtuber doesn't have the time to actually go looking for every porn artist and blocking them, especially the corporate ones.
Its not enough for them to not see it. They want to make sure others dont see it either. Its like saying nigger or faggot in a video game. Its not enough for them to block the person. They gotta block that person for everyone else via report + ban.
Its why multiplayer gaming sucks becuase community has been neutered. Everyone just has their own discord because they can say what they want in voice chat (for now). People always wonder why no one talks in game these days aside from console people with shitty mics or thots.