WelcomeWEFreedomWindsorEssexCounty-ActionCommunicationsRalliesResourcesSocialEventsWednesdayNightMeetings-ActivismAgoraAgorismCanadaCommonLawCommunityDataCentersDataCentresDoocracyFarmersMarketIntroductionsNaturalLawNewslettersOntarioOrganizingOutreachProjexProjexWikiRalliesResistanceAnalysisSoireesSoiréesWikiSpooksWindsorElectionsTop Subs
7
ideas4matrix - - (+7|-1)
Ability to block users(self)
19 commentsbyDrewski

I'm a free speech absolutist, but that doesn't mean I always want to listen to someone.

Additionally, it'd be neat to be able to hide a user's posts, comments, or both.

Comment preview

[-]x0x74(+4|0)

I agree. There has been some work on this. A bit of premature optimization got in the way of completing it that I need to get rid of that will let me finish the job.

parentlinkreply
[-]JasonCarswell2(+3|-1)

SaidIt added blocking, but it was incomplete and thus worse as it solved nothing for the community.

I believe it's important for a user to be made peripherally aware of blocked content. For example, it could be auto-collapsed with a [+] visible so they know there's more being said, and they could ignore that or peek. Not only could a user know there's further discussion, they could also see the responses to the blocked content. The worst thing would be to never know what's being missed for a variety of reasons.

IMO, it's more important to address problematic users and behaviours as a community rather than case by case. How? I'm not entirely sure. But it's certainly worth discussing and developing ideas on how to improve and elevate our discourse.

parentlinkreply
[-]redditbutt4(+4|0)

Saidit brought to light the whole problem with "blocking". On places like reddit, if you block someone, they can't respond to you or the child thread anywhere below your comment. You're not just blocking the person, but doing so for everybody else in that conversation. More often than not, it's always done right after responding (haha I got the last word; blocked!). So what are the real reasons for blocking them, because it's not that you didn't want to talk or see what they had to say, but to "punish" them by silencing them in some way.

On saidit, blocking is simply ignoring the person, but they can still participate unhindered and unaware. This can be an issue when other people are conversing with the "blocked" person, below your comment, and you can't see what others are saying. Quite often disruptive people get attention instead of getting ignored, so you may end up blocking people who have nothing positive to say, but then most other people get sucked in, and you have threads with 20 comments and only 3 visible.

Is there a real solution that satisfies both? Not sure. It would take some thinking. I try to reserve blocking for situations where they bring more harm/noise than good. I only blocked a couple people on saidit, and it was usually because their entire post history was emotional tirades about "i hate blacks, jews, mexicans, etc." and it just gets old to see the same stupidity over and over with nothing substantiating it.

parentlinkreply
[-]Neol3(+3|0)

For example, it could be auto-collapsed with a [+] visible so they know there's more being said, and they could ignore that or peek.

Good idea, thought of that too, or alternatively "/s/all" like section for everything you blocked/muted.

parentlinkreply
[-]YoureJewish1(+2|-1)

IMO, it's more important to address problematic users and behaviours as a community rather than case by case.

With the exception of people posting malicious spam and illegal shit, this is gay as fuck.

parentlinkreply
[-]JasonCarswell1(+2|-1)

With the exception of people posting malicious spam and illegal shit, this is gay as fuck.

How so?

My statement was short and thus perhaps unclear, but IMO we should actively shape the community we actually wish to have, rather than stumble into some default that either is shit or turns to shit. M7 and admins of other sites were hands off - and they failed.

parentlinkreply
[-]YoureJewish1(+2|-1)

No, it was clear what you meant.

I'm sure you count yourself among those with the proper moral and ethical standards to determine the "shape" of said community. Before you hide behind the "address problematic users and behaviours as a community" line, realize you've already made it clear you have designs on what "in the community" is... and isn't.

You just want to exclude people you don't like and encourage others to go along with it. Pure reddit faggotry.

parentlinkreply
[-]JasonCarswell1(+2|-1)

If I'm such a dictator, why do I keep saying "we", and why try to develop a consensus?

It is inevitable that problematic users and user-mobs will attack any forum that stands for freedom. They create the problem, we react, and they get their solution - less freedom.

However, if we come up with some strategies or plans to outline what we are for and against along with various methods to deal with them, then we've not only defined our community culture but established ways to defend it.

You just want to exclude people you don't like and encourage others to go along with it.

Tools can be used constructively and destructively.

Yes, I'd like to dissuade many folks from using GoatMatrix. I don't wish to waste time interacting with those who want GoatMatrix to be like Reddit, or filtering out their noise - brainwashed, shills, trolls, bots, sealions, and woke.

You clearly don't like Reddit either. I encourage you to voice your constructive ideas and solutions instead of attacking fellow users. Resorting to name-calling is low tier - especially when it's neither creative nor funny.

parentlinkreply
[-]YoureJewish1(+2|-1)

You just restated my summation of your stance with more words. It doesn't change the fact that you want to create an insular community where YOU and those YOU deem worthy decide who stays. If that's what X0 wants, fair play. It's his site, but I don't like it.

And feel free to persuade others to kick me from the site. I'm not going to not call faggotry "faggotry" just because some mid-wit hates mean words.

parentlinkreply
[-]JasonCarswell1(+2|-1)

You may try to put words in my mouth but people can read for themselves.

I said and meant WE - including you.

As in, actual Direct Democracy (without representatives) - to determine our own fate and defend against the inevitable bot swarms arrive that will try to corrupt everything.

It's better to prepare while we have the luxury of time (now), rather than under the gun (after they're already messing things up).

parentlinkreply
[-]YoureJewish1(+2|-1)

You clearly don't understand that I 100% understand your argument, and I vehemently disagree in principle. Seems you're not used to someone who makes no concessions for civility's sake.

It's a "real communism has never been tried" situation. The reason communism never works is because of the corruptability of human nature, and the framework you propose will spiral into favoritism just as it has on every other site.

But I get it. This time it'll work. Sure, bro. Enjoy it while it lasts.

parentlinkreply
[-]JasonCarswell1(+1|0)

You're free to find your uncivil unleashed freedom elsewhere.

parentlinkreply
[-]YoureJewish0(0|0)

Do what you must, faggot.

parentlinkreply
[-]x0x71(+1|0)

Update: User blocks are in.

https://goatmatrix.net/c/MatrixDev/3duX2U4m9v

parentlinkreply
[-]YoureJewish1(+1|0)

The userscript I wrote for poal that includes my own version of "blocking." I doubt it currently works anymore due to site changes. I haven't been a part of the community for quite some time.

https://pastebin.com/3cKmTSKw

The blocking functionality could easily be implemented here as a stopgap to take pressure off X0. Though, it wouldn't help mobile users who are unable to install extensions.

parentlinkreply
[-]YoureJewish1(+1|0)

As long as we're talking about blocking what you can see, and not blocking others from commenting under your posts.

The former is self-curation. The latter is pure cuckery.

parentlinkreply
[-]Neol2(+2|0)

I think he means "blocking" in Saidit sense, i.e. more like muting, when you don't see the posts/comments of users you blocked.

parentlinkreply
[-]YoureJewish3(+3|0)

I would be in favor of this. I wrote a userscript for poal to collapse posts from users I had listed as "blocked" and it would collapse and reduce the opacity of their comments under posts. I could click a button to expand if I felt the need to read whatever it was they posted.

parentlinkreply
[-]Drewski4(+4|0)

Yeah, this would be better than Saidit's method.

parentlinkreply