so this CHEF-KOCH guy banned and deleted my comments from his community. I messaged to ask why and he blocked me from messaging him. He recently made a post in /c/linux and i am unable to comment on the post of any of the comments to the post.
Is this intended by the devs? It seems like it only functions to hinder discussion. Say this dude just started posting all over the place in different topics and such, they could effectively block anyone they don’t agree with which would just kill any actual discussion on any of these posts. It seems incredibly backwards when he is not the admin of those communities. Who is he to say who gets to comment there?
So you think that anyone who blocks anyone which also prevents them from posting elsewhere is a good model? That basically excludes anyone they want from the discussion. Yes it can be seen as a culture thing but IMO that’s a cop out. This place is supposed to be better than reddit (i assume) so why are we still falling into the same ol habits?
It’s not a cop out. Design has a major influence on behavior, but it’s not a guarantee. Manual community building and curation is still a major part of making a place where people enjoy posting. And the decisions made while community building have a huge impact on the feel of a space. If you’re literally worried about someone exerting excessive social control, how is it a cop out to say that the solution is social? If a user makes up such a large percentage of posts in your feed that them blocking you amounts to censorship, the problem isn’t that the block feature is ill-designed. It’s that the instance is dead. Otherwise it’s a non issue and the most frustrating thing is that you can still see the un-interactable posts in the first place. Because the inability to reply is a surprise. That’s the problem. The solution is to hide those un-interactable posts and comments. If you have literally any solution other than “break the block feature entirely”, I’d love to hear it