It never made sense that blocking someone stopped them from seeing your public posts. The point of blocking is so you don't have to see their posts (including them not being able to interact with you), not the other way around.
And it was pretty easy to get around until he (stupidly) started requiring you to be logged in to see anything. Even then you just need an alt account to get around it and the blocker would never know.
It never made sense that blocking someone stopped them from seeing your public posts
Yes it does. It's actually good to make it harder to stalk people. Yes, it wasn't a perfect system but every layer of extra work makes it harder to harass people who blocked you is good.
Wanting to post something publicly except to all the specific dipshits you took additional actions to not want to interact with seems like a pretty reasonable want.
Considering that's the exact moderation approach of the website were all on.
There's a level of anonymity here where OpSec is up to the user for the most part.
Twitter is much more connected to a lot of people's actual identities as it was also a space for organizations, businesses and other public figures to post to the general public, with these accounts being run mostly by the public figure themselves, and PR for the really rich people and orgs. As such protections on Twitter needed to be as broad as possible.
All fences are scalable and climbable, but as the other user was saying, it's good to make that climb harder for the bad actors in this scenario.
If somebody's being an antagonistic asshole they get banned pretty much immediatly because the mods understand there's nothing of value from some nazi coming in and quoting fbi crime statistics everytime somebody says you shouldn't murder black people.
Also nobody gives a shit about them reading your post it's the part where they respond like a nazi would that people have a problem with.
You can literally say "disengage" on this website to stop that shit and if the person keeps being a tool they can get banned just for that.
I think you're misunderstanding the change here. The change is solely about a blocked user being able to read the posts of the person who blocked them. This has nothing to do with banning or stopping them from being able to reply.
The current system makes it harder because you have to create a new account. There are people who are either too dumb to realize they can do that or just won't bother jumping through the extra hoops. Obviously it's not perfect, but it's better than doing this.
And being worried about stalking is extremely counter to posting something publicly.
Using Twitter on private kinda sucks. It makes the site less fun. All this is doing is making it so the creeps can have more fun on the site while marginalized people being harassed by those creeps have a worse experience on the site. not sure why y'all are defending this but whatever.
because i've been using it for years and it's the social media platform all my friends are on. i'm a nonbinary communist, they're all owned by people who hate me.
i tried to get my friends to come here! i have a few that are always complaining about reddit and i know this site would scratch the same itch for them while not having all the reddit garbage but for whatever reason, they never checked it out.
The only hoop you have to jump through is using a Nitter instance. And the most dangerous abusers are most likely going to be determined enough to where doing this or creating a new account is not a deterrent.
False security is worse than no security. If people trust that the block function is reliable at stopping people from seeing your posts, and then those people post things publicly that they wouldn't share otherwise, that is leaving more people vulnerable than having no way to stop people from seeing your posts.
Most people don't know what Nitter is. Most people aren't "the most dangerous users," they're lazy, so any extra steps is a deterrent. Keeping the weak deterrent is still a net positive.
The types of posts i'm talking about here aren't things like "this is where i live" but innocuous things that transphobes or racists decide to take out of context. I would post all these things publicly but it's good to be able to make them more private from the freaks who are gonna freak out bc I said trans kids exist and put me in a cringe compilation to encourage others to harass me. Twitter never made it impossible to do that, but Elon's making it easier.
Nah if I block you I don’t want to interact with you at all, not even unknowingly. I prefer it being an opaque window going up.
Also is it not making it where we still see public posts that we’ve blocked? Bc that’s what I assumed since he’s like the most blocked account on the platform lol
Someone seeing your public posts isn't you interacting with them. You are posting something for everyone to see. If you don't want someone seeing it, don't make a public post.
There are rings of people and little pocket communities on Twitter and I think it’s good to be able to keep unwanted people out of that if someone wants to.
If I block someone I don’t want them stalking through my account. I think it’s fine to let people decide who can and cannot see their content
That's not really how public posts work. If it can be seen by any arbitrary person you don't know and have never interacted with, it can been seen by anyone. To think otherwise is to misunderstand the nature of your post which can be dangerous.
Clearly there's a bunch ofnpeople who don't want chuds to see their posts and have their replies filled with slurs because they said that republicans suck.
So I guess they just need a new word for whatever that fucntion would be (block seems pretty good to me) especially considering most people don't want to see OR hear from dipshit chuds if they've said dumb enough shit to warrant additional actions, whatever you chose to call that action.
Also "remove the current block button" is such an incorrect and sensationalist way to put it. The block button isn't being removed, it's still there and its main functionality is still there.
tbh he's right here (eww)
It never made sense that blocking someone stopped them from seeing your public posts. The point of blocking is so you don't have to see their posts (including them not being able to interact with you), not the other way around.
And it was pretty easy to get around until he (stupidly) started requiring you to be logged in to see anything. Even then you just need an alt account to get around it and the blocker would never know.
Yes it does. It's actually good to make it harder to stalk people. Yes, it wasn't a perfect system but every layer of extra work makes it harder to harass people who blocked you is good.
That doesn't make it any harder for someone to harass you. They can't harass you if they can't interact with you.
And being worried about stalking is extremely counter to posting something publicly.
Wanting to post something publicly except to all the specific dipshits you took additional actions to not want to interact with seems like a pretty reasonable want.
Considering that's the exact moderation approach of the website were all on.
Except it literally isn't? You can't block someone from seeing your posts on here.
There's a level of anonymity here where OpSec is up to the user for the most part.
Twitter is much more connected to a lot of people's actual identities as it was also a space for organizations, businesses and other public figures to post to the general public, with these accounts being run mostly by the public figure themselves, and PR for the really rich people and orgs. As such protections on Twitter needed to be as broad as possible.
All fences are scalable and climbable, but as the other user was saying, it's good to make that climb harder for the bad actors in this scenario.
If somebody's being an antagonistic asshole they get banned pretty much immediatly because the mods understand there's nothing of value from some nazi coming in and quoting fbi crime statistics everytime somebody says you shouldn't murder black people.
Also nobody gives a shit about them reading your post it's the part where they respond like a nazi would that people have a problem with.
You can literally say "disengage" on this website to stop that shit and if the person keeps being a tool they can get banned just for that.
So yea that very much is what's happening here.
I think you're misunderstanding the change here. The change is solely about a blocked user being able to read the posts of the person who blocked them. This has nothing to do with banning or stopping them from being able to reply.
Oh shit my bad if they already can't reply to the post yea this seems trivial.
Sorry, don't use Twitter I thought this meant blocked users could see your posts and respond to them you just couldn't see their posts.
Im a dumbass and I apologize for wasting everyone's time.
The current system makes it harder because you have to create a new account. There are people who are either too dumb to realize they can do that or just won't bother jumping through the extra hoops. Obviously it's not perfect, but it's better than doing this.
Using Twitter on private kinda sucks. It makes the site less fun. All this is doing is making it so the creeps can have more fun on the site while marginalized people being harassed by those creeps have a worse experience on the site. not sure why y'all are defending this but whatever.
why even use twitter at all? Especially now that it is owned by one of those aforementioned creeps who hate you.
because i've been using it for years and it's the social media platform all my friends are on. i'm a nonbinary communist, they're all owned by people who hate me.
Not hexbear...
i tried to get my friends to come here! i have a few that are always complaining about reddit and i know this site would scratch the same itch for them while not having all the reddit garbage but for whatever reason, they never checked it out.
Unfortunate
The only hoop you have to jump through is using a Nitter instance. And the most dangerous abusers are most likely going to be determined enough to where doing this or creating a new account is not a deterrent.
False security is worse than no security. If people trust that the block function is reliable at stopping people from seeing your posts, and then those people post things publicly that they wouldn't share otherwise, that is leaving more people vulnerable than having no way to stop people from seeing your posts.
Most people don't know what Nitter is. Most people aren't "the most dangerous users," they're lazy, so any extra steps is a deterrent. Keeping the weak deterrent is still a net positive.
The types of posts i'm talking about here aren't things like "this is where i live" but innocuous things that transphobes or racists decide to take out of context. I would post all these things publicly but it's good to be able to make them more private from the freaks who are gonna freak out bc I said trans kids exist and put me in a cringe compilation to encourage others to harass me. Twitter never made it impossible to do that, but Elon's making it easier.
Nah if I block you I don’t want to interact with you at all, not even unknowingly. I prefer it being an opaque window going up.
Also is it not making it where we still see public posts that we’ve blocked? Bc that’s what I assumed since he’s like the most blocked account on the platform lol
Someone seeing your public posts isn't you interacting with them. You are posting something for everyone to see. If you don't want someone seeing it, don't make a public post.
There are rings of people and little pocket communities on Twitter and I think it’s good to be able to keep unwanted people out of that if someone wants to.
If I block someone I don’t want them stalking through my account. I think it’s fine to let people decide who can and cannot see their content
sounds like they're actually posting something for everyone but the people they don't like to see, which sounds reasonable?
That's not really how public posts work. If it can be seen by any arbitrary person you don't know and have never interacted with, it can been seen by anyone. To think otherwise is to misunderstand the nature of your post which can be dangerous.
This seems like pointless semantics.
Clearly there's a bunch ofnpeople who don't want chuds to see their posts and have their replies filled with slurs because they said that republicans suck.
So I guess they just need a new word for whatever that fucntion would be (block seems pretty good to me) especially considering most people don't want to see OR hear from dipshit chuds if they've said dumb enough shit to warrant additional actions, whatever you chose to call that action.
Also "remove the current block button" is such an incorrect and sensationalist way to put it. The block button isn't being removed, it's still there and its main functionality is still there.