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.
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.