• figjam
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      No. Its the amplification of the message that is the problem.

        • figjam
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Because the more attention the platform gets the more likely corps put time towards shutting it down.

          • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think you overestimate how hidden we are. Anyway if anyone doesn’t want it, they can tag their post to skip it.

            • Draconic NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I would agree with this but I still think having an opt-out for bot replies is important. That opt-out shouldn’t be compliance.

    • Draconic NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      If blocking the bot prevented their interaction with users and the posts/comments those users make that would be a good solution, but as is blocking is just an “eww I don’t like this, I don’t want to see it” instead of “This entity will not be able to interract with my account/posts”. In this case there is concern regarding the bot’s behavior, and the unwanted exposure it gives to users who may not want it, which blocking doesn’t solve because it doesn’t provide an opt-out from replies, just to stop seeing the replies.