Well from what i know it’s not really blocked, the targetted users and communities get their content either not displayed, either as an error message. They’re technically there, not blocked, but the frontend chooses to hide them.
Yeah it doesn’t need “permission” in the traditional social media sense, that’s the thing. Dude just made it so the things or people he didn’t like caused “error messages.” And yeah it really should have to be the instance that blocks things, that’s what everybody’s pissed about.
whuh? why does a front-end have the ‘permission’ to block users? shouldn’t that fall to the instance instead?
Well from what i know it’s not really blocked, the targetted users and communities get their content either not displayed, either as an error message. They’re technically there, not blocked, but the frontend chooses to hide them.
And that, you see, is the crux of everybody’s objection to it.
Yeah it doesn’t need “permission” in the traditional social media sense, that’s the thing. Dude just made it so the things or people he didn’t like caused “error messages.” And yeah it really should have to be the instance that blocks things, that’s what everybody’s pissed about.
My guess is that the blocking is done client-side.