Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2024 Poal.co

1.4K

The block functions sets a dire censorship precedent for Poal. (See full discussion HERE).

I propose that instead of outright blocking individual users, their replies and conversations are INSTEAD automatically collapsed so that their speech is not infringed upon by allowing the choice to see it, and that those blocking them don't have to see it if they choose not to.

In this way, both parties get what they want.

The block functions sets a dire censorship precedent for Poal. (See full discussion [HERE](https://poal.co/s/TellPoal/291278)). I propose that instead of outright blocking individual users, their replies and conversations are *INSTEAD* automatically collapsed so that their speech is not infringed upon by allowing the *choice* to see it, and that those blocking them don't have to see it if they *choose* not to. In this way, both parties get what they want.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (27).
[–] • 2 pts

Maybe we could meet in the middle? Blocked users can reply, the blocker doesn't see a red envelope, and the blocked user still gets a message telling him he's a faggot?

[–] • 0 pt (edited )

How about a timing penalty: there is a cool-down period before they can reply to anyone when they have blocked users, and it gets multiplied exponentially by each user blocked in quantity.

[–] • 1 pt

So we're clear, a cool down period before the blocked user can reply to the user who blocked him? That doesn't sound too bad.

Semi-related, I have concerns over a blocked user retaining his ability to shit up your posts. This more applies to the apparent change in my original comment.

It's difficult to do anything that covers every little loophole for someone aiming to subvert or otherwise do harm. Let me be clear in that I'm not advocating for any rule changes. I don't trust the admins nor their transparency in how site rules are applied. On top of that, several red users, present company excluded as far as I've seen, have stated their willingness to drop the soap if they thought it would please the admins. Poor leadership has caused site abandonment by good users thoroughly vetted on voat. I predict any noticeable changes enacted by the above mentioned will have a negative effect.

[–] • 0 pt

Actually, I jokingly meant a penalty for those blocking users with increased time per quantity blocked, but yours is an interesting solution too: would allow them to put out their message, without being inundated by those that hate it, but this too is another form of censorship by delay.

I wholly disagree with blocking of any kind because I value scrutiny, which is the basis to ensure the strength of an idea. Only ideas that can be fully attacked with everything and survive can you ensure that it is worth following, which is how we got to a point in our society where men are women, because it was not allowed to be questioned -- it was not allowed scrutiny.

I regularly get into conversations with the dumbest of shills, because they are the ones whom need that scrutiny the most.

Don't mistake me for someone trying to make friends or allies here, I'm here to do my best to ensure that you all are strong, because I know what's coming and you need to be ready for it.