Start a new topic

Blocking someone should apply a silence/mute to them by default.

There were two topics posted here recently by people who were confused by why a block doesn't remove someone from their notifications or search results. The answer was that a block doesn't do this, but a silence/mute does. Personally, I think that a block should also do these things by default. If I block someone, I don't just want them to not see me - I also don't want to see *any* trace of them, anywhere.

31 people like this idea

Very weird that this isn't the case. 

2 people like this

oh yeah this is a weird one, personally I think of block as "stop this person from contacting me", I suppose because I think of blocking phone numbers as the original definition of block. I don't put too much value in "don't show this person I exist" because it's not immune to new accounts or logged-off use.  At the very least this distinction could be communicated better. Maybe if you click block, pop up a confirmation dialogue:

Are you sure?

This person will no longer see your posts or comments.
(checkbox) Also don't show me their posts or comments.

4 people like this

I did a search to see if anyone else had brought this up here because I've just noticed it too.  It feels like an oversight to me. I don't know if I can think of a situation where you'd block someone and still want to see notifications from them. Silencing and blocking someone at the same time works, but it does feel like kind of an extra step and not what you would intuitively expect

1 person likes this
I've run into a problem where I'll block someone, not remembering to silence, and only remembering later when I already forgot their username. now (since there's no way to see blocks at the moment) I have no way of silencing them and I end up interacting with them anyway. im not sure why blocking someone doesn't hide their activity
Login or Signup to post a comment