Implementing A 'Block' Feature

And this right here is the problem. You can only hope. there's no way to ensure it. Also, I wasn't the one that made the twitter comparison, that was OP. I was just humouring them. I stated that the sites are in no way comparable.

All of these violate our rules on general respect and are absolutely reportable. However this does come with the caveat that disagreement does not equal disrespect. If someone is being objectively racist, homophobic etc then that is hate speech against a protected minority and will be yeeted with extreme prejudice. But if someone expresses an opinion that goes against yours, then indeed it may be allowed. If in doubt, you can still bring it to our attention and we'll either deal with it, or explain why it doesn't cross the line.

As I suggested on page 2. We could always make sure users know they should report bad behavior on the block button itself with a confirmation pop-up. We can push to make users aware they should report when they can.

You can definitely ensure it. Require a reason for blocking. Bam. Done. You now have to report if someone is harrassing you and you're blocking them for that. There are a couple of specific users I'm talking about, and while it's technically objective homophobia it's from several years ago and they just recently returned to the site. Not to mention the nightmare that is the ACA* thread... there are a lot of people there that I simply do not want to interact with. Even people whose posts were deleted - yes, the problem was solved, but I don't want to support those people in any way.

Good idea in theory, but people either don't read, or don't care. For don't read, See: the long list of users that have clicked through the multiple confirmations and still accidentally released special Pokemon For Don't care, See: rejected suggestions forum. 90% of suggestions didn't even go through the "summary of rejected suggestions" thread or check out the recommended template. a pop-up will do pretty much nothing to ensure reporting. @pixelkitty, can you imagine going through hundreds of reports that just say "blocked because they're my ex" or "i don't like their art" or "they hunt a pokemon I don't like" because that's what most of the reports will look like

Have an option that's simply "no rules were broken." No report delivered to mods. Also, this acts as if this suggestion is completely frivolous, and the reports would all be over incredibly silly or small things. It's not. One person does not report, and instead blocks. Another person does not report, and instead blocks. This continues. This person has now been blocked by 10s of people. That needs to trigger an alarm no ifs, ands, or buts. Something is up with that user's behavior, and the mods will hopefully understand that. The blocking still triggers an investigation.

Why do I want a block feature...? ... because my ex may log in one day and decide he wants to further hurt me. ... because often mental illnesses remove my option to walk away. ... because if done correctly the person would have to go out of their way to discover they were blocked. ... because even if it isn’t qualified as hate speech, I still don’t want to see it. ... because I don’t need to get staff involved everytime someone makes me uncomfortable but isn’t breaking a rule. ... because im not the only one who wants one ... because the mental health and safety of many is more important than clicks on your party. How would I make it work...? I suggest two types of blocking. A sort of “soft block” where these soft blocked individuals: - their farm content/threads/trainer card are hidden to you - cannot send/receive you/r PMs - cannot see if you’re online (always appears offline) - cannot add you to VIP lists - Their posts are hidden by default, much like blocks on discord work. - CAN see your threads but would need a direct link (!) - CAN interact with your party + fields (you can interact with them too) which means they can give your Pokemon the final bit of lvl 100) - CAN show up in users online click lists The other version would be hard blocking them, this would most commonly be used for: abusers and/rule breakers and should only be allowed with a report attached *regardless if the abuse was onsite or off* Hard blocked individuals would be barred from everything you do. You would not exist to them, and they would not exist to you. - their posts will not show up for you in threads where you both post, your posts wouldn’t show up for them either. - Would not show up in online users lists - In the event of a hard blocked user having Pokerus; ... do make YOUR block list available for you to see. and give the option to remove someone from your block list. ... do give the path to report when blocking sometimes people get reported and they get a slap on the wrist. I do not want to interact with the user further, but I also don’t want to go so far as to having a list of people/usernames to avoid. That would give them more attention and thought and that is what I am hoping to avoid ... do force feedback when blocking A drop down list of reasons to block someone. “rule break” “Harassment” “bad attitude” “No rule break” “other”. This should be all the communication the person blocking should expect when blocking, unless the blocked user has been blocked many times and an investigation is afoot. (!) ... by making my posts and farm content invisible to the people I have hard blocked. If I have blocked someone I do not want them able to comment on my threads. In order for them to not feel left out or shunned, they should simply not be able to see my threads. To the people worried they would be blocked... why would you be blocked? what about a block feature makes you feel like a target? what is it about your own actions do you think people would want to avoid and why, if worried about being blocked, do you not change that behavior? But Cutechem, giving people the option to hide from things that bug them isn’t making them stronger/they shouldn’t be on the internet if they can’t handle/pokefarm is a safe space and adding a block function would- If by giving this site a safe and non-confrontational way to avoid those who don’t agree with your existence or have the ability to hurt you makes the site an unsafe space for you, perhaps you should reconsider what makes the site a “safe space” for you. Making this site safer for everyone shouldn’t threaten your good time, and if it does, maybe reconsider what it is you’re having fun with. It is not your place to decide who has to see what, and quite frankly shouldn’t concern you if you have everyone’s best interest at heart. Things I have posted with (!) next to them are things I am unsure on, and would love further input.

@annador i realized i left it out of my post but... in regards to my suggestion of having two seperate block types the "hard block" i mentioned would simply show a page that says "you have blocked this user" whenever you get to their page ie; during pokerus. if you hard block them and they get pokerus thats just an L you gotta take IMO. An L I, a pokerus hunter, would be HAPPY to take. the soft block would still allow you to interact with the users pokemon so it wouldnt effect 'rus

I just want to drop in and say that we did have an approved version of a block feature before but we couldn't figure out how to implement it - aside from some interactive issues (which we can now deal with) there was the question of exactly what it is we want a block to do - but moreover that a block feature of any kind should NOT function as a disconnect for reports. But it's also not a report. It's... Complicated. We have a generic idea but for the most part those are our issues. We don't want it to lead to no reports so we can actually deal with things (such as the fellow that we learned was placed on probation for his actions). I will say that our active role in this is probably the most important thing... We've been so active in dealing with these things but I wish I could say the same for the police and even the FBI. We were so adamant to report such issues that at one point we were given Interpol's phone number. Interpol is NOT a number civilians are supposed to have! That's a number for international police forces to talk to one another and we're... Well, not police. And we were told as much when they asked us to identify ourselves. That was admittedly a little bit scary. Honestly the fact we got that number is a little bit alarming - either someone screwed up and just did the wrong thing or they plain and simple didn't know what to do... My point with that being that if they won't, or can't for whatever reason, do something - we definitely have to. This is why we can't have that disconnect. If we can resolve that problem then a block feature is no longer an issue and can be implemented post-haste.