Making the Block function more exhaustive.

[jesuscristo]

Hello, I've noticed that the Block User function hides the comments of the users I'm blocking and shows a message that says, "this comment was hidden because you blocked xxx" instead. I think this way of blocking a user is a bit incomplete.

I suggest two possible ways to improve this. One would be to hide the name of the user as well. This change would be very useful since sometimes the reason for blocking someone is the username itself. This is the way Disqus, Discord, and IIRC Reddit do it. The other way would be to have a toggle in Settings that hides those messages altogether. Or maybe even not having a message at all, like Facebook.

Thanks!

 

[sterven]

This sounds pointless to me since the whole premise behind blocking someone is just to stop you from viewing their comments which as you've stated already occurs.

 

[crazybars]

@jesuscristo

You do know that people you blocked can still talk to other users right? If even the name is removed, it would almost be impossible to follow a comment chain they are a part of if you removed the reference to blocking them as it would look like one user is talking to themselves.

This is part of why there is an Undo blocking function on Mangadex, just in case you need to see what is being censored to continue the comment chain to talk with someone else in the comment chain on a thread regardless if the Blocked user is in there or not.


Facebook, Reddit, Twitter, IIRC and such places don't give you these options because they don't actually care about you if you can read the thread or comment chain or not so they make blocks more permanent even if it is not to your benefit. They are NOT YOUR FRIENDs, they could give 2 shits if you could read a thread or not.

 

[jesuscristo]

I think hiding the username is necessary nonetheless.

For example, if someone doesn't want to see a username such as @IvanRemovekebaboff, then they should be entitled to. Of course, if someone doesn't mind the meme, they can just not block the guy.

Edit: This comment led people to believe this is the only reason why I want to the username to be hidden. It's not.

 

[BestBoy]

I agree with OP. I don't want to see the user I blocked. Completely defeats the purpose. There's a plethora of reasons for blocking a user. For instance if they use an explicit name.

 

[Tamerlane]

I thinking blocking people is dumb in general.

Hell, if you block someone just for their username, I'd argue that says more about you then them, but that's none of my business.

Really, I don't like the way blocking works on most sites, and I prefer the way Mangadex does it, even if it is basically just "muting" someone.

Hell, I'd argue that it's important to show their username in case you ever want to unblock a person or you wonder why you're seeing gaps in a thread to begin with.

 

[justforthelulz]

Currently, my MangaDex blocklist is empty.
Whether I'm on anyone else's blocklist, I obviously can't tell.

Generally, the only times I block people are in instances like this:

 

[Tamerlane]

Yeah, being able to tell if anyone else has blocked you would be interesting, though it might be counter-intuitive. @justforthelulz

I don't believe in blocking people on principle unless it's a spam bot taking you to virus sites. I want to listen to what anyone would have to say, though I think I have been blocked before because some guy said I was pretentious and another in that thread believed him. (Which I find weird because most of what I do is shitpost.)

 

[Halo]

OP, if a name is that offensive, why won't you report it? Pretty sure the mentioned example is against the rules, meme or not.

And let's say a blocked person happens to be a scanlator (or anyone who posts chapters). Do you want to stop seeing their releases as well?
To clarify on that question. People usually put their names in credits, so you might end up seeing their names there. Even worse, scanlators are free to write whatever they want in their credits. So, the obvious solution would be to hide chapters as well. But then someone else from their team can upload chapters, that means teams with blocked people should be blocked also. That's a lot of blocking.

 

[pandascepter]

Rather than blocking, i prefer to report that person.....

Ahhh, i am offended by senpai *blush blush.

oi , dont get me wrong, that's not my fetish k.

 

[jesuscristo]

There could be a lot of examples of names that aren't exactly reportable but still touch topics a user doesn't want to see. It would be pointless to name any because each user would have their own reasons. My point is precisely that it should be up to the user if they want to see them or not, and currently, that is not an option.

The slippery slope argument you pose is kinda far-fetched. But anyway, biting into it, you can block groups, and this function works the way I am proposing. When you block a group, there is no message saying "this chapter was hidden because you blocked xxx", it's just gone. For comments that would be ideal, but simply hiding the name would be an improvement still.

 

[Tamerlane]

I'll admit it, I do find "Ivan Removekebabof" funny just because it's so ridiculous and I've had Serbian friends who take the piss out that meme more than anything, but I can understand why someone may find it offensive.

I don't think that hiding the name of someone would do anything. All it does is mean you can see who posted something, and if you need to unblock them, it makes it difficult to. Hell, I don't even think blocking someone because of their username is even a healthy mentality to have, because it just removes the possibility of engaging with someone based on that alone, which I think is silly. @jesuscristo

 

[Halo]

I'm only trying to make sure you got everything covered, OP. You never know when blocked names can show up.
There's one more you missed. What about people pinging or using names of blocked users? Do you think these messages should be hidden, or just have the mentioned names censured out?

 

[jesuscristo]

@Tamerlane If you don't mind a meme about ethnic cleansing it's ok. Some people do.

@Halo There are a few ways to go about this. The way Discord does it is hiding the entire message, name and all, and displaying a button that says "show message". If someone pings that person, the name is shown regardless. Another way could be hiding the name as @Hidden, like you're mentioning. This would be up to the devs.

 

[Tamerlane]

Well, I'd argue that there's nothing wrong with making a joke about a dark subject matter, and the inherit absurdity of "remove kebab" is more why it's really kinda become a meme divorced from what the people who recorded it intended it to be, but that's neither here nor there.

Back on topic, seems like a lot of work for not much reward. I go by the philosophy of if it ain't broke, don't fix it, and I think there's much more important things the devs can spend their time and money on. Seems too niche and too small of an issue compared to the implementations it would take to fix it. I don't think seeing someone's name alone is grounds for implementing all these changes, and I think that it just means the person needs to grow thicker skin more than anything. It's not like seeing someone's name alone is harassing or potentially harmful enough that it can't be forgotten in a few minutes on its own. It's superfluous at best. @jesuscristo

 

[justforthelulz]

No matter how immaculate your defense, until the devs decide to tweak the way comments appear, some things will remain

 

[jesuscristo]

@Tamerlane it's simply a thing of the devs coming together and deciding if the message instead of saying

"This message was hidden because you blocked xxx."​

should say

"This message was hidden."​

I don't see how it will take more than a few hours of dev time, which will be mostly agreeing if it should be done or not.

Also, if you're suggesting that people should just grow thicker skin then you are clearly missing the point of having a block function in the first place.

 

[Tamerlane]

No, asking people to grow thicker skin to not be offend over the name of someone appearing is not missing the point of the block button.

Blocking someone is to make it so they stop engaging with you, whether it be because they keep harassing you through DMs, in chats, or if they are targeting you in such a way that makes your ability to read or engage with material harder or more difficult.

Blocking someone over petty disputes I feel is just counter-productive and makes everyone want to retreat into a little bubble where everyone agrees with them, rather than actually engaging with people.

All of this doesn't really matter because being offended just by seeing someone's name is trivial to the point of absurdity. There is a certain degree to which the issue is so minute, that the effort to stamp it out or appease the people bothered by it isn't worth it, and it's more on the people who take issue with it than the system itself.

I think this is one of those cases. @jesuscristo

 

[Halo]

I see. Yeah, having ＠Hidden for usernames and "This message was hidden." is reasonable. I think your campaign would have been more successful if not for the initial reasoning of blocking people simply because of their usernames.

 

[jesuscristo]

I focused on that point since it's a clear example, rather than being relatable. There are of course a lot of reasons for hiding the username like BestBoy said.

Ultimately this would be an aesthetic change, and it should be decided by the people who actually care about the feature and the devs.