Comment on Musk’s plan to axe X's block button is a real win for stalkers and abusers.
FJW@discuss.tchncs.de 1 month agoTwitter massively reduced visibility for logged-out users,
I know, but it still didn’t fully remove it.
Not sure that being “more honest” is worth the price
The thing is that there really is no price, nor was there ever one. Your suggestion that you think there is demonstrates that the way blocking worked gave people dangerously wrong ideas. It’s about being clear to people what they can and cannot expect. Anything else is ACTUALLY dangerous.
Wearing a seatbelt in a moving vehicle does not magically prevent all deaths upon an accident. Do you recommend we should stop wearing seatbelts?
If there are measures in place that reduce the danger of something happening, it’s not wise to remove them just because it’s not 100% effective.
I’m not advocating against a seatbelt, I’m advocating against not wearing it, “because I am confident that I can hold on to something in case of a collision” or similar stupid reasons. Expecting that blocking does anything to hide public posts that you can simply open in another browser (or in the same browser in private browsing mode) is not a seatbelt, it is the equivalent of a slightly stronger handle on top of the car window that is being advertized as a feature to protect you in case of an accident.
This change first and foremost makes it clear that that handle does nothing meaningful and that you should wear an actual seatbelt (follower-only posts, ideally with restricted followers) instead, if you are worried about a collision. Twitter is a public forum. You can’t tell people to leave you alone, shout with a megaphone across the marketplace and then be annoyed when they hear you. If you don’t want them to hear you, don’t use a megaphone.
FooBarrington@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Sure, but it doesn’t have to be fully removed to have an effect.
Sorry, but you don’t get to define how humans work. There is a price, because friction reduces the likelihood of people following through. You might not want to believe this to be the case, but please read studies on the topic - it’s just how humans work. You don’t get to dismiss negative effects because you don’t believe in them.
FJW@discuss.tchncs.de 1 month ago
The argument here is literally about stalkers. Not about random uninterested people that don’t care.
FooBarrington@lemmy.world 1 month ago
No, it’s not just about stalkers, it’s about harassment in general. But even if it were, even stalkers are still people and don’t work fundamentally different.
Feel free to show any research proving me wrong, but unless you find any, the reasonable position is “humans work the same on this topic as on others”.