Determinations

Under-construction monkies.gif This document is a work in progress. Everything in this document is subject to change.

This page is used to collect together the determinations we've made on requested features, either for or against, along with the reasoning behind those decisions, and where possible links to the relevant discussion process.

Rejected Features

  • If a person you follow specifically blocks a person and includes a reason, then you get a pop-up with that reason when you try to interact with this person. Also you could set a threshold like, if X people I follow manually block this person, block them automatically for me and let me know about it.
An abuser could use this to isolate somebody, sending mass alerts to their followers that <target> is bad and should be blocked, encouraging pile-ons and ostracism for accusations that may or may not even be true. It's the same as posting or boosting false information that would get said person blocked, just more insidious. More formally, let's say Bob blocks Anne. Bob can enter whatever he wants as the reason for the block. If Bob's followers trust him enough to follow him, they're likely to trust what he writes (whether or not it's true) and block Anne too, increasing her isolation. This is reducible to the problem of spreading false information. The blocking threshold can be easily overcome when X is too low (whether relatively or absolutely), or when a false call-out post gets enough attention. Having both of these would result in far-reaching effects across networks; users with a low X value would contribute towards surpassing higher X values set by other users. This would also be a source of information leakage: a fake account could be created to follow a particular person and interact with different accounts to "test" if said person has blocked them.
  • Let block activities be routinely published and federated through the fediverse.
A malicious person could start a custom instance with software for aggregating just those lists and publish them as harassment honeypots. They could even do the collection using what seem like ordinary Mastodon or Pleroma instances and publish them separately/anonymously, so that it isn't clear who is doing the collecting. Any group concerned about harassment would have to be extremely careful about what leaves the boundaries of an instance, and which instances they put their trust in. Any block/blocklist publication would become a feature waiting to be abused.
  • Add CWs to boosts of other people posts.
Someone could use this as quote-posting, enabling easier harassment (like seen on Twitter).