Elon Musk Will Remove Users Blocking Feature, Except For DM

[Nemo 4,411]

3 hours ago, Reality said:

He knows that no matter what he does, very little people will actually leave Twitter. If we wanna stop these stupid changes, we actively need to stop using the app.

Let's face it, Twitter is dead. This is X.

I deleted the app months ago. My account still exists, not sure what I'll do there.

[Ayesha Erotica 1,925]

This is a good change because certain people massively abused the blocking feature and blocked everyone who disagreed with their tweets and voiced an opposing opinion, and had thousands of users on their block list. The blocking feature contributed heavily to living in self-confirming bubbles and polarization and fragmentation of society, where people don't engage with opposing views, instead they omit them. While the older generation discussed things from different angles, parts of the younger generation grew up accustomed to blocking and not having to discuss contrary views, thinking they are always right. Balanced discussions like @StrawberryBlond does are rare on Twitter. If someone insults s.o. else in public, they should report it to Mods who then ban that user - different opinions do not count as insults - from which the entire community profits. Blocking does not really protect you from viewing your tweets b/c s.o. can always simply make a new accout and spy on you and read everything you write, unless you choose to be entirely private.

 

However, I suppose six months or one year after that feature will be gone, Musk will re-implement it through a Pay Buying option, and since a lot of people want it, they are gonna buy it (Capitalism at its worst).  He's not fully interested in having balanced discussions (which is evidenced by reducing his staff and the number of mods), he wants just money after all.

[monstertoronto 11,774]

36 minutes ago, RAMROD said:

Perhaps because Bluesky are still invite only, so not many are there yet

And people wanna avoid Threads cos it's connected to IG account

 

I didn’t know people were worried about threads being connected to IG I thought that it was plus that you already had your following. But maybe they want to be awful on threads and want anonymity? 

[RAMROD 117,257]

1 minute ago, monstertoronto said:

I didn’t know people were worried about threads being connected to IG I thought that it was plus that you already had your following. But maybe they want to be awful on threads and want anonymity? 

I believe that's one of the reasons. So they fear if they are banned on threads, cos their Insta will be gone too.

[monstertoronto 11,774]

Just now, RAMROD said:

I believe that's one of the reasons. So they fear if they are banned on threads, cos their Insta will be gone too.

Interesting. Maybe they should just try to not be terrible and not get banned but trolls are the lifeblood of twitter I guess. 

[Pennywise 36,080]

28 minutes ago, LoliLux said:

This is a good change because certain people massvely abused the blocking feature and blocked everyone who disagreed with their tweets and voiced an opposing opinion, and had thousands of users on their block list. The blocking feature contributed heavily to living in self-confirming bubbles and polarization and fragmentation of society, where people don't engage with opposing views, instead they omit them. While the older generation discussed things from different angles, parts of the younger generation grew up accustomed to blocking and not having to discuss contrary views, thinking they are always right. Balanced discussions like @StrawberryBlond does are rare on Twitter. If someone insults s.o. else in public, they should report it to Mods who then ban that user - different opinions do not count as insults - from which the entire community profits. Blocking does not really protect you from viewing your tweets b/c s.o. can always simply make a new accout and spy on you and read everything you write, unless you choose to be entirely private.

 

However, I suppose six months or one year after that feature will be gone, Musk will re-implement it through a Pay Buying option, and since a lot of people want it, they are gonna buy it (Capitalism at its worst).  He's not fully interested in having balanced discussions (which is evidenced by reducing his staff and the number of mods), he wants just money after all.

…sis what the **** 

[CatelynnMarie 4,544]

i've been holding out, i don't want to lose my gaga follow after this whole time, the reason i started twitter way back when, but this is just, this is for sure the worst change and might be time to cut the cord on it. idk i don't want to lose it, but it doesn't feel safe if that isn't an option? i'm already private on twitter for safety reasons and it sucks when i go on there because i can't interact with people i'm not mutuals with. you really can't win and i genuinely don't understand this, individual's, mind

[RichAssPiss 5,045]

Next Up: Elon Musk proposes banning all lock and keys so that strangers can walk into your home and call you a slur to your face any time they want.

[REALITY 80,176]

1 hour ago, LoliLux said:

This is a good change because certain people massively abused the blocking feature and blocked everyone who disagreed with their tweets and voiced an opposing opinion, and had thousands of users on their block list. The blocking feature contributed heavily to living in self-confirming bubbles and polarization and fragmentation of society, where people don't engage with opposing views, instead they omit them. While the older generation discussed things from different angles, parts of the younger generation grew up accustomed to blocking and not having to discuss contrary views, thinking they are always right. Balanced discussions like @StrawberryBlond does are rare on Twitter. If someone insults s.o. else in public, they should report it to Mods who then ban that user - different opinions do not count as insults - from which the entire community profits. Blocking does not really protect you from viewing your tweets b/c s.o. can always simply make a new accout and spy on you and read everything you write, unless you choose to be entirely private.

 

However, I suppose six months or one year after that feature will be gone, Musk will re-implement it through a Pay Buying option, and since a lot of people want it, they are gonna buy it (Capitalism at its worst).  He's not fully interested in having balanced discussions (which is evidenced by reducing his staff and the number of mods), he wants just money after all.

I feel like you're talking a lot, but saying little.

If someone blocks somebody else on their own profile, who cares? Someone blocking someone else on their profiles doesn't affect you in any way—unless of course, you're the person being blocked. If they want to block a user for whatever reason, they can choose to do so. A lot of people block others because of bullying or harassment, which are completely valid reasons to do so.

This whole "let's come together and talk about our feelings and settle our differences" bs is something I'll never really understand. Yeah, if it's something trivial or something that isn't that serious, sure, it's best that you settle your differences, but why should I not block people spreading inflammatory remarks? Why shouldn't I block racists, homophobes, misogynists, etc.? Those people are not ones you can just sit down and have a conversation with to settle your differences. They're people I just simply don't want to see on my timeline and I'd rather block them and move on. 

[TaylorSwift 162,667]

 

[RahrahWitch 6,985]

3 hours ago, LoliLux said:

The blocking feature contributed heavily to living in self-confirming bubbles and polarization and fragmentation of society, where people don't engage with opposing views

That's just how people behave, social media or not.

Allowing muting but not blocking is dangerous with how little moderation there is on twitter since elmo took over. A muted person can still reply, retweet, quote tweet and harass someone but now only the person being harassed can't see but everyone else still can. Blocking is good, It cuts communication to people you don't want to interact with, The pros far outweigh the cons. There's a reason why it's a basic feature of all social media.

[Reginald 13,841]

  So they want an  "X" subscription fee, government ID, selfie, drop of blood, social security number... and you can't even block whoever you want?! 

 

  

45 minutes ago, Teletubby said:

 

Edit :  PLEASE let this fool accidentally get Twitter unlisted from Apple and Google's storefronts 

[StarstruckIllusion 53,579]

3 hours ago, RudraCNG said:

Afaik, muting doesn't prevent someone from seeing your tweets/profile (someone correct me if I'm wrong).

Oh lmao, I think ur right. Oof 

[Ayesha Erotica 1,925]

6 hours ago, Reality said:

 A lot of people block others because of bullying or harassment, which are completely valid reasons to do so.

You describe an ideal situation in which it's like this:

Person A is gay.

Person B says "fa****t!!" in a tweet to him.

Person A blocks person B.

Alright, OK. Here we do not disagree, this is a valid reason.

 

What I observe(d), though,  on twitter is the following in 70%-80% of cases:

 

Person A tweets about a new movie she liked.

Random Person B comments on it and remarks a scene she didn't like.

Person A is upset about this and blocks Person B.

 

 

Person A tweets about Taylor Swifts new single.

Random Person B comments on it and describes it as mediocre.

Person A blocks Person B afterwards.

 

Person A shares his travel experience from Sofia, Bulgaria and writes he wouldn't visit the city again.

Person B, became follower of Person A weeks ago, feels offended b/c she is from Bulgaria and blocks Person A.

 

Person A tweets about how she had a Pizza Hawaii today.

Person B says it's racist to say Pizza Hawaii and blocks Person A.

 

Person A has become "friends" with Person B and both follow each other.

Two weeks later, Person B posts a selfie with JK Rowling, her idol [because of Harry Potter].

Person A calls her transphobic supporter and blocks her.

 

Person A tweets about how he thinks that Christopher Street Days have become somehow commercial [in big western cities].

Person B is an organizer of CSDs [in NYC], reads that tweet and blocks Person A.

 

Don't you (a question for everyone) have made experiences like these?

The definition and threshold of harassment is for certain users very low. The blocking feature is MASSIVELY abused and misused. Too many people literally have thousand of users blocked because of situations like these.

I have these experiences from twitter and from people who are even proud that they blocked them and wrote tweets about how they blocked them. Also from a dating site, where one user stated half of the people from his city are empty tiles [this doesn't mean no profile pic, it means he blocked every second user from his city].

 

 

 

 

[Franch Toast 27,737]

7 hours ago, monstertoronto said:

I didn’t know people were worried about threads being connected to IG I thought that it was plus that you already had your following. But maybe they want to be awful on threads and want anonymity? 

In my case, my Twitter account uses my full name and is part of my public professional identity––I mainly use it for work-related stuff. My Insta, meanwhile, is mainly for fun and is more about my personal life. It is connected to a dummy email account and does not contain my full name. If I were to use Threads the way I use Twitter, I'd need to start a new IG account. If it comes down to it, I'll do it, but I'v spent a lot of time and effort building up my Twitter profile.