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.
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.