They shouldn’t be able to do that!

  • deaf_fish@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    No, I don’t think that would be good. So for example if there was a guy who thought we should all be eating lead. And every time he posts you put up facts about how eating lead was poisonous. And then the lead guy blocked you. Then every time the lead guy posts about how everyone should eat lead, you wouldn’t see it and so you wouldn’t be able to reply with how lead is poisonous.

    So if the lead guy blocked everyone who disagreed with him publicly. Then the lead guy can just post whatever they want and no who knew lead was poisonous would reply because they wouldn’t see the post. So others who didn’t know lead was poisonous would start seeing this guy posting about eating lead without being challenged. And so they might think it’s a good thing.

    • AstralPath@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 hours ago

      I see what you mean. Personally I’m gonna side with the folks that need the block functionality as a defense against stalking/harassment though.

      The lead eater can ban anyone they want but that doesn’t stop others from posting direct challenges to the lead eater’s rhetoric elsewhere. I think its better to help those in need than to leave them vulnerable with less than ideal tools to protect themselves.

      • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        But even that case doesn’t work because someone could use a different account (or no account at all) to do the stalking.