Guidelines: Clarification Regarding the Block System & Protocol

[Attaman]

I had a thought and just tested it.

I discovered you can't add somebody who's blocking you to your own block list.

Given the creation of new sections which can only be read by logged-in users, this asymmetry could be exploited to allow people to sneakily read the posts of users they block, by temporarily unblocking them while they snoop.

A good catch, and one I hadn't thought of.

One possible - if heavy handed - solution may be to see if you can add a timer to how frequently you can Block / Unblock somebody? I have no idea if that'd work with Xenforo's software, but if staff added something like a 24 hour, 12 hour, or even 4-8 hour timer before you could (un)block somebody added or removed from your list that would likely do the trick. If you're using the system as intended it most probably won't impact you in any noticeable fashion (the worst that can happen is you accidentally press the wrong button and either just wait half a day or PM a moderator asking to undo the hiccup), meanwhile if you're exploiting the system it'll be incredibly obvious when every other half-day somebody's posts reappear or disappear while viewing the forums.

 

[Fallowfox]

A good catch, and one I hadn't thought of.

One possible - if heavy handed - solution may be to see if you can add a timer to how frequently you can Block / Unblock somebody? I have no idea if that'd work with Xenforo's software, but if staff added something like a 24 hour, 12 hour, or even 4-8 hour timer before you could (un)block somebody added or removed from your list that would likely do the trick. If you're using the system as intended it most probably won't impact you in any noticeable fashion (the worst that can happen is you accidentally press the wrong button and either just wait half a day or PM a moderator asking to undo the hiccup), meanwhile if you're exploiting the system it'll be incredibly obvious when every other half-day somebody's posts reappear or disappear while viewing the forums.

Something I considered would be that, if you want to unblock somebody, they have to approve it, but I don't know how that would be achieved in code.

I get the feeling that the current pseudocode is

if ( grepp( block_list[user is "name_1"] , "name_2" )=True )
then
block_list[user is"name_2"] <- block_list[user is "name_2"] + "name_1"


Edit: I just found out if you type R code into the forum post box, the forum tries to run it

 

[Connor J. Coyote]

A good catch, and one I hadn't thought of.

One possible - if heavy handed - solution may be to see if you can add a timer to how frequently you can Block / Unblock somebody? I have no idea if that'd work with Xenforo's software, but if staff added something like a 24 hour, 12 hour, or even 4-8 hour timer before you could (un)block somebody added or removed from your list that would likely do the trick. If you're using the system as intended it most probably won't impact you in any noticeable fashion (the worst that can happen is you accidentally press the wrong button and either just wait half a day or PM a moderator asking to undo the hiccup), meanwhile if you're exploiting the system it'll be incredibly obvious when every other half-day somebody's posts reappear or disappear while viewing the forums.

Yeah.... but all someone really has to do is log off, and read the public postings anyway.... I mean, if they're contacting someone repeatedly by blocking and unblocking them.... well then, yeah - I can see where it can be exploited.... but, in my mind - (again) the other person can just report them to Staff themselves (after being bothered).

Perhaps if they can *request to the Staff* to implement a block on someone, after being blocked by the other person... and then, that may address that issue, I think.

 

[Fallowfox]

Yeah.... but all someone really has to do is log off, and read the public postings anyway.... I mean, if they're contacting someone repeatedly by blocking and unblocking them.... well then, yeah - I can see where it can be exploited.... but, in my mind - (again) the other person can just report them to Staff themselves (after being bothered).

Perhaps if they can *request to the Staff* to implement a block on someone, after being blocked by the other person... and then, that may address that issue, I think.

Ah, but there's new areas of the site that you can't read if you log out.

So that means that say, if I blocked you because I think your avatar is too yellow, I wouldn't be able to read your posts just by logging out. I'd have to temporarily unblock you to do that.

 

[luffy]

We have enough users and staff to moderate things without requiring someone who has been blocked to report their blocker's posts. If the user goes and blocks a ton of people and then posts, that defeats their purpose, since their audience is then diminished. Users unblocking to snoop will be hit with a 2.4 if they are found to be deliberately doing so. Unfortunately, we have to roll with the block system the way it is. There are going to be hiccups and it won't function the way we want, but we can work around it and will adapt to it as time goes on.

 

[Attaman]

We have enough users and staff to moderate things without requiring someone who has been blocked to report their blocker's posts. If the user goes and blocks a ton of people and then posts, that defeats their purpose, since their audience is then diminished. Users unblocking to snoop will be hit with a 2.4 if they are found to be deliberately doing so. Unfortunately, we have to roll with the block system the way it is. There are going to be hiccups and it won't function the way we want, but we can work around it and will adapt to it as time goes on.

If I might make another request, then: In Politics, it will be... in a word, difficult to discern if there's a pre-existing thread on a subject matter. Which will stumble into the issue that all threads must be Moderator approved (and that, by extension, duplicate threads likely won't be). If a user tries to make a thread on a General Discussion (as clarified earlier in this thread) and is slapped down for "This is a duplicate thread" reasons, is there any way they can be pointed towards the pre-existing thread (alongside, presumably, a reminder that one of the two parties has the other blocked and thus to keep the site's rules in mind before making any responses within that thread)?

 

[luffy]

If I might make another request, then: In Politics, it will be... in a word, difficult to discern if there's a pre-existing thread on a subject matter. Which will stumble into the issue that all threads must be Moderator approved (and that, by extension, duplicate threads likely won't be). If a user tries to make a thread on a General Discussion (as clarified earlier in this thread) and is slapped down for "This is a duplicate thread" reasons, is there any way they can be pointed towards the pre-existing thread (alongside, presumably, a reminder that one of the two parties has the other blocked and thus to keep the site's rules in mind before making any responses within that thread)?

Yes, this is doable.

 

[Bluefiremark II]

What if someone like.. harrasses you then blocks you so you can't report them and get them banned? It's happened to me several times in the past. (Not just FA forums btw) and there's nothing you can do but let jerks get away with free bullying since you can't report em? What would you do then... just let them run free to torment other people? I mean, you admins won't even do anything about a harrasment message and instead tell someone to block the other. That doesn't fix a dang thing. It only lets them run free to harass others with no consequences.

 

[Bluefiremark II]

the site needs a renevised system. It's pretty crappy right now tbh.

 

[Kingman]

I know this is in regards to the forum, but as I'm having an issue like this in the actual site I got to ask. Other than blocking and making trouble tickets, what can be done about users harassing you, including sexual harassment, including them posting lies and slander about you, I've been dealing with a person on the main site for almost 6 months, and several times this week and last alone. And all they get is suspended and they make a new account and continue the harassment. Including trying to post harassments directed towards me and others on group pages I'm part of and friend's pages to get around being blocked.

 

[quoting_mungo]

I know this is in regards to the forum, but as I'm having an issue like this in the actual site I got to ask. Other than blocking and making trouble tickets, what can be done about users harassing you, including sexual harassment, including them posting lies and slander about you, I've been dealing with a person on the main site for almost 6 months, and several times this week and last alone. And all they get is suspended and they make a new account and continue the harassment. Including trying to post harassments directed towards me and others on group pages I'm part of and friend's pages to get around being blocked.

All you can do is keep reporting them; sadly there isn’t much option for staff than to keep closing their accounts and hiding their comments/removing their shouts as they are alerted to more accounts. I know that sucks, but it’s kind of the reality of online spaces - you can’t actually keep people out if they’re determined to get in.

 

[Kingman]

It's frustrating though as this feels like it has to be getting into criminal territory in regards to the lies, slander and sexual harassment.

 

[luffy]

Hey, guys. I'm bumping this considering it was a hot topic. It seems as though the "block" function (now called "ignore") has been updated with the forum software we're settling into. The loopholes should be closed, but please let us know here if you encounter anything in the future.

 

[Fallowfox]

Hey, guys. I'm bumping this considering it was a hot topic. It seems as though the "block" function (now called "ignore") has been updated with the forum software we're settling into. The loopholes should be closed, but please let us know here if you encounter anything in the future.

I think the functionality has changed quite a lot as well.

You can now report users who you are ignoring, or who are ignoring you.

It also looks like the site no longer attempts to run code commands that are typed into the commenting box. So the developers must have decided to sanitise this input.

I'm guessing that was actually an exploit that could have been used to damage site function.

 

[Deleted member 82554]

I still think that it was an horrendous bulshit move to completely remove the block system here. There are some people I just flat out don't like on this website and I would rather break off communication with them and not have them spam up my threads altogether. In fact if I had to guess that's probably the reason why a few people here have deleted their account and change their name numerous times.

 

[luffy]

I still think that it was an horrendous bulshit move to completely remove the block system here. There are some people I just flat out don't like on this website and I would rather break off communication with them and not have them spam up my threads altogether. In fact if I had to guess that's probably the reason why a few people here have deleted their account and change their name numerous times.

But it's... not gone..? Please show me?

 

[Jansither]

test

 

[luffy]

I see. They nerfed it to make it absolutely unusable in the update lol. Well, nothing I can do about it but suggest that Dragoneer buy a forum addon to try to fix it. Just report people that contact you, please.

 

[Deleted member 82554]

Just report people that contact you, please.

A better, easier, more efficient and permanent solution would be to have a block feature. What would you do if I were to report someone that has continually tried to harass me with over a dozen troll/ alt accounts from other sites I am associated with, kindly ask them to leave me alone? Because nine times out of 10 that sort of thing doesn't work.

And what's the other solution, put up with it? Why should I or anyone else have to?

People have the right to feel safe here and a block feature will help with that a lot.

 

[luffy]

A better, easier, more efficient and permanent solution would be to have a block feature. What would you do if I were to report someone that has continually tried to harass me with over a dozen troll/ alt accounts from other sites I am associated with, kindly ask them to leave me alone? Because nine times out of 10 that sort of thing doesn't work.

And what's the other solution, put up with it? Why should I or anyone else have to?

People have the right to feel safe here and a block feature will help with that a lot.

No, they'd be banned eventually if they were bothering yoy here continuously. Nowhere did I imply or state I want the block feature to be useless. I did however state that I can't do anything about it and I have already pointed it out to Dragoneer as a paid extension that we should have.

 

[Deleted member 82554]

No, they'd be banned eventually if they were bothering yoy here continuously. Nowhere did I imply or state I want the block feature to be useless. I did however state that I can't do anything about it and I have already pointed it out to Dragoneer as a paid extension that we should have.

Oh ok so you have mentioned something to Dragoneer. I suppose at this point it's a waiting game until he implements it.

 

[luffy]

Oh ok so you have mentioned something to Dragoneer. I suppose at this point it's just a waiting game until he actually implements it.

Yes- it's something I mentioned even before the forum software was updated as it had loopholes, but maybe since it's a bigger issue now, we'll be able to find a solution. I don't block people, so until it's mentioned and I test it I'm unaware. I don't live for the social suffering of FAF folks lol

 

[Deleted member 82554]

Yes- it's something I mentioned even before the forum software was updated as it had loopholes, but maybe since it's a bigger issue now, we'll be able to find a solution. I don't block people, so until it's mentioned and I test it I'm unaware. I don't live for the social suffering of FAF folks lol

Well neither do I usually unless I have good reason to but unlike you I do have the choice. I can imagine being a staff member and not having the option to block problem users can be a bit of a pain in the ass.

 

[quoting_mungo]

Tbh I prefer the way it works now - it effectively being a mutual ignore with an expand option means there is no loss of context due to not being able to see WTF a third user is quoting (or even THAT they’re quoting someone). Granted I don’t know if it’s automatically mutual if the “block” was added after the update, and if it isn’t then THAT’S a problem.

I only click to show ignored content (ie content from people who blocked me) when they’re quoted in threads. I do so in order to be able to fully understand what people who DIDN’T block me are saying. Even if the “show ignored content” is removed, I really hope that the “something has been quoted that you’re not permitted to see” still gets shown with the plug-in you’re considering. Not having that indicator is just a recipe for confusion and miscommunication among users, IMO.

“I don’t want to interact with you” and “I don’t want to see what you’re posting” are both very valid. I don’t in any way mean to suggest those are options that ought not to be there. Just that I don’t think it’s reasonable for someone who doesn’t want to see what I’m saying to be able to interfere with my ability to correctly interpret what a third party is saying because that third party is building off of something that they said.

 

[luffy]

Tbh I prefer the way it works now - it effectively being a mutual ignore with an expand option means there is no loss of context due to not being able to see WTF a third user is quoting (or even THAT they’re quoting someone). Granted I don’t know if it’s automatically mutual if the “block” was added after the update, and if it isn’t then THAT’S a problem.

I only click to show ignored content (ie content from people who blocked me) when they’re quoted in threads. I do so in order to be able to fully understand what people who DIDN’T block me are saying. Even if the “show ignored content” is removed, I really hope that the “something has been quoted that you’re not permitted to see” still gets shown with the plug-in you’re considering. Not having that indicator is just a recipe for confusion and miscommunication among users, IMO.

“I don’t want to interact with you” and “I don’t want to see what you’re posting” are both very valid. I don’t in any way mean to suggest those are options that ought not to be there. Just that I don’t think it’s reasonable for someone who doesn’t want to see what I’m saying to be able to interfere with my ability to correctly interpret what a third party is saying because that third party is building off of something that they said.

As far as I can tell extensions for blocking allow users to either use the current functionality or the add on functionality. It doesn't replace it, so you can have either.