Single post in Implementing A 'Block' Feature
Forum Index > Core > Suggestions > Under Consideration > Implementing A 'Block' Feature >
QUOTE originally posted by selocon
I hate to be that user(tm) but I will be. My post here is directly addressing the concept of "there was no mention of more work being done." All quotes are snipped but from the original post.
Emphasis mine here
None of these require "reading between the lines" as one user put it, this is all legit from the post as it stands currently. There's no interpretation of the post that you have to do, Niet literally says he's willing to add more, we just have to show him which ones we want.
Sorry if staff feels like I overstepped, but this needed to be said in my opinion, and I'm not trying to be hostile here.
QUOTE originally posted by Niet
...making and sharing Userscripts in order to change how PFQ works. Let's start making some of them official!
QUOTE originally posted by Niet 2
The first of these is "Block Users", a script by /user/DrWho. Personally, I still have problems...
QUOTE originally posted by Niet 3
If you have a userscript or some custom CSS wizardry that you'd like me to consider adding as an option...
I think sanctioned userscripts are a great idea and good temporary solution, and I look forward to the implementation of an official block feature in the future. For now I think we should focus on this part of the post.
QUOTE originally posted by Niet
Personally, I still have problems with the idea of blocking users on PFQ as this is a game that's all about collaboration, and the web of data can't possibly account for all possible edge cases. For instance, what if you get stuff from a trade that originally came from a blocked user? Or an egg you found in the shelter was bred by them? This userscript doesn't solve all the problems, but it does solve the main ones - and it may be updated further to handle more situations in future. For now, it blocks profiles, hides posts in the forums (but in both cases lets you see them if you want), and it also anonymises blocked users in the Clickback view (using quite frankly very clever code, well done!).
QUOTE originally posted by Doduo
Grateful that the thread was bumped into Approved so we can discuss more!
Personally the thing I would like that is missing from the userscript is;
I don't want to be able to see who clicked me. (I tested this earlier with a friend and when I blocked them, I could still see their name in my clickbacks) this is something I'd like, I don't care if they can still click me, I just don't want to know they've done so if that's possible to add to the actual feature?
As for things like seeing who bred what egg/Pokémon in the shelter, as this was a question brought up in the News post, I personally don't care if I can see that "egg bred in daycare by [Blocked User]" because most of the time I don't check timelines unless I hatch a special. Even then, I'm sure people will appreciate the username being censored if that's possible, if it's not possible then it's just something we're gonna have to compromise on, get the block feature but still see their names on bred eggs/pokémon.
I agree with Doduo's suggestion to censor usernames. I also agree with the idea about not being able to post in a thread created by a user you've been blocked by, but that's where it starts to get tricky. I think hideboxes with censored names would be the best way to go even though I'd wish to be able to block completely. If someone I've blocked posts in my shop thread I can decline them. If they post something inappropriate or abusive I can report them. I personally don't think I'd mind being able to trade with some of the users I'll block. I believe blocks should be customizable and easy to modify. Preferably the options to censor usernames, disable DMs and disable trading will have individual toggle buttons.