# Does Blocking Someone...



## Desubutt (Apr 2, 2010)

Does blocking someone make it as to where they cannot view your art or submissions? 
Or watch you?


----------



## Duality Jack (Apr 2, 2010)

no


----------



## Verin Asper (Apr 2, 2010)

they can still see submissions just cant comment, and they can still watch you


----------



## Desubutt (Apr 2, 2010)

Not much point than other than harassment... : C hnnn.. Okay. I hope that get's changed to be like DeviantART's blocking style.


----------



## Desubutt (Apr 2, 2010)

Thank you guys. : )


----------



## Lobar (Apr 2, 2010)

No, nor should it.  If you really want to spite someone that much to deprive them of your precious arts, the cost is pulling down your art entirely.


----------



## Desubutt (Apr 2, 2010)

Well with the DeviantArt style they can't reply to people commenting your art and they can't see your journals so you don't have to worry about them stalking you to another site.
Also one person shouldn't ruin the whole site for someone.


----------



## Desubutt (Apr 2, 2010)

But whatever, I got my answer. I just wanted to know. The whole DA thing is my opinion. I didn't say it SHOULD. I said I HOPE. C:


----------



## Verin Asper (Apr 2, 2010)

Desubutt said:


> Well with the DeviantArt style they can't reply to people commenting your art and they can't see your journals so you don't have to worry about them stalking you to another site.
> Also one person shouldn't ruin the whole site for someone.



in truth they arent
there is a reason we arent like Deviant art


----------



## Stratelier (Apr 2, 2010)

Comparing to deviantART is occasionally useful, but only occasionally.

Think of it this way:  The blocklist system cannot prevent somebody from doing anything they could already perform as an anonymous guest.  It can only block them from activities that are tied to a logged-in user.


----------



## Artificial Ginger (Apr 2, 2010)

Stratadrake said:


> Comparing to deviantART is occasionally useful, but only occasionally.
> 
> Think of it this way:  The blocklist system cannot prevent somebody from doing anything they could already perform as an anonymous guest.  It can only block them from activities that are tied to a logged-in user.



Actually, anonymous guests can't watch people or comment. Just saying.


----------



## amnion (Apr 2, 2010)

Well, I think the OP gets it now.


----------



## Redregon (Apr 2, 2010)

Desubutt said:


> Well with the DeviantArt style they can't reply to people commenting your art and they can't see your journals so you don't have to worry about them stalking you to another site.
> Also one person shouldn't ruin the whole site for someone.



but... this isn't DA. 

and the blocking feature works fine enough as it is already. past that, if you have an issue with a particular user, you can confront them or you can ignore them. don't expect the staff here at FA to step in to moderate personal disputes, that's not their job.


----------



## Desubutt (Apr 2, 2010)

I know. I don't have a dispute with any body, I was just wondering how the block system works.
And I didn't mean for it to sound like I was demanding FA to be like Da.
I was just mentioning the way theirs work, sorry.
Thanks anyway. This thread can be removed now.


----------



## Artificial Ginger (Apr 2, 2010)

Desubutt said:


> I know. I don't have a dispute with any body, I was just wondering how the block system works.
> And I didn't mean for it to sound like I was demanding FA to be like Da.
> I was just mentioning the way theirs work, sorry.
> Thanks anyway. This thread can be removed now.


I was gonna suggest asking them to sticky it. I get the feeling people've asked about this before.


----------



## Kusatsu (Apr 2, 2010)

They can watch you, read journals and look at what you post.

They cannot reply to submissions, journals, note you (I think) or make shouts however.


----------



## Stratelier (Apr 3, 2010)

Artificial Ginger said:


> Actually, anonymous guests can't watch people or comment. Just saying.


True, but not what the OP originally asked about.


----------



## Lobar (Apr 3, 2010)

If you could block people from seeing your art, I can see a bunch of thin-skinned furries creating a shared blacklist so if you piss any of them off they all block you.

Then the blocked people make their own list and block the creators of the first list.

Eventually you get a retarded internet West Side Story.


----------



## Artificial Ginger (Apr 3, 2010)

Stratadrake said:


> True, but not what the OP originally asked about.


Well, in other words (since you seem to need them), your analogy sucks =V



Lobar said:


> If you could block people from seeing your art, I can see a bunch of thin-skinned furries creating a shared blacklist so if you piss any of them off they all block you.
> 
> Then the blocked people make their own list and block the creators of the first list.
> 
> Eventually you get a retarded internet West Side Story.


My god, the original was bad enough! D=


----------



## Armaetus (Apr 3, 2010)

Lobar said:


> If you could block people from seeing your art, I can see a bunch of thin-skinned furries creating a shared blacklist so if you piss any of them off they all block you.
> 
> Then the blocked people make their own list and block the creators of the first list.
> 
> Eventually you get a retarded internet West Side Story.



That is not what I would want to happen to FA..furries need to grow thicker skins and get over themselves with criticism and other legitimate reasons.


----------



## Duality Jack (Apr 3, 2010)

if people have that thin of skin they need to stay off the web and into reality if that does not fix it : suicide


----------



## Artificial Ginger (Apr 3, 2010)

Glaice said:


> That is not what I would want to happen to FA..furries need to grow thicker skins and get over themselves with criticism and other legitimate reasons.


Mmmm, delicious irony~


----------



## Verin Asper (Apr 3, 2010)

Glaice said:


> That is not what I would want to happen to FA..furries need to grow thicker skins and get over themselves with criticism and other legitimate reasons.


but think of it, if everyone ends up blocking each other, all we get is folks just viewing art :V


----------



## Fay V (Apr 3, 2010)

I could see adding not being able to see journals to the mix, but yeah no art blocks.


----------



## Stratelier (Apr 3, 2010)

Artificial Ginger said:


> Well, in other words (since you seem to need them), your analogy sucks =V


*What* analogy?  I just summarized a principle (registered users cannot have _less_ access than anonymous guests), nothing more.


----------



## Artificial Ginger (Apr 3, 2010)

Stratadrake said:


> *What* analogy?  I just summarized a principle (registered users cannot have _less_ access than anonymous guests), nothing more.



However, blocking a user from +watching someone would _not_ give them less access than an anonymous guest; in point of fact, it would give them approximately the _same amount_ of access.

Besides, I'm feeling whimsical today =3


----------



## Stratelier (Apr 3, 2010)

Artificial Ginger said:


> However, blocking a user from +watching someone would _not_ give them less access than an anonymous guest....


Ha, I was not arguing anything of the sort.


----------



## Artificial Ginger (Apr 3, 2010)

Stratadrake said:


> Ha, I was not arguing anything of the sort.



If you're telling the truth, then your post doesn't even need to be here, as it has nothing to do with the OP's question =D


----------



## Lobar (Apr 3, 2010)

Crysix Corps said:


> but think of it, if everyone ends up blocking each other, all we get is folks just viewing art :V



It's being suggested that blocks should prevent the blocked user from seeing art, and I'm saying that strengthening blocking like that will lead to it being used as a drama weapon and everyone blocking each other would be the consequence of that.


----------



## Kesteh (Apr 3, 2010)

Ok. You may block my user. There are two things that would dodge this concept:
I can simply log out and not see mature stuff.
I can use another username. Emails are too easy to make now.

Anyone suggesting "IP" blocks in the future need to be shot. Because they are worthless and ineffective.


----------



## Verin Asper (Apr 4, 2010)

Lobar said:


> It's being suggested that blocks should prevent the blocked user from seeing art, and I'm saying that strengthening blocking like that will lead to it being used as a drama weapon and everyone blocking each other would be the consequence of that.


would teach them to "GET THICKER SKIN"


----------



## El-Matto (Apr 6, 2010)

Thank you for posting this question. I now have an annoying member who doesn't like my stuff I posted cause it's not creative, lol. At least they can't comment.


----------



## Kusatsu (Apr 6, 2010)

El-Matto said:


> Thank you for posting this question. I now have an annoying member who doesn't like my stuff I posted cause it's not creative, lol. At least they can't comment.


Unfortunately it doesn't stop them from reporting you when you use FA as a photobucket though.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Apr 7, 2010)

El-Matto said:


> Thank you for posting this question. I now have an annoying member who doesn't like my stuff I posted cause it's not creative, lol. At least they can't comment.


 
Didn't the admins take your art down for breaking the rules?  Are you really bragging about blocking someone for pointing out that you broke the rules?


----------



## Stratelier (Apr 7, 2010)

If that's the case then indeed, breaking the rules and creativity are two different things.


----------



## Aden (Apr 7, 2010)

El-Matto said:


> Thank you for posting this question. I now have an annoying member who doesn't like my stuff I posted cause it's not creative, lol. At least they can't comment.



Holy christ everything about you pisses me off


----------



## Artificial Ginger (Apr 7, 2010)

Aden said:


> Holy christ everything about you pisses me off


Seconded. Kill it with blenders!! D=<


----------



## Verin Asper (Apr 7, 2010)

El-Matto said:


> Thank you for posting this question. I now have an annoying member who doesn't like my stuff I posted cause it's not creative, lol. At least they can't comment.


they dont need to go "LOL", when your gallery gets wiped from them reporting ya


----------



## pickledance (Apr 7, 2010)

.


----------



## CaptainSaicin (Apr 9, 2010)

I would MUCH rather be able to flag journals either individually or as a whole "friends-only"

After all, they can be read by anyone, including non-members, so blocking people on an account-basis is completely pointless.

also, I concur that FA's blocking feature needs to be more thorough. Blocked people shouldn't be able to view or reply to comments on journals or submissions any more than they should be able to reply to the submissions and journals directly. Last I checked, this wasn't the case (unless they did eventually fix that.)


----------



## Artificial Ginger (Apr 9, 2010)

CaptainSaicin said:


> I would MUCH rather be able to flag journals either individually or as a whole "friends-only"


This surprises nobody.



> After all, they can be read by anyone, including non-members, so blocking people on an account-basis is completely pointless.


Non-memberrs can't reply, so your complaint is also completely pointless =D



> also, I concur that FA's blocking feature needs to be more thorough. Blocked people shouldn't be able to view or reply to comments on journals or submissions any more than they should be able to reply to the submissions and journals directly.


And they _can't_, so...what's the problem?



> Last I checked, this wasn't the case (unless they did eventually fix that.)


And _how_ many years has it been since you last checked? =V


----------



## Foxstar (Apr 10, 2010)

CaptainSaicin said:


> I would MUCH rather be able to flag journals either individually or as a whole "friends-only"
> 
> After all, they can be read by anyone, including non-members, so blocking people on an account-basis is completely pointless.
> 
> also, I concur that FA's blocking feature needs to be more thorough. Blocked people shouldn't be able to view or reply to comments on journals or submissions any more than they should be able to reply to the submissions and journals directly. Last I checked, this wasn't the case (unless they did eventually fix that.)



This isn't Live Journal, your hugbox is big enough.


----------



## Verin Asper (Apr 10, 2010)

CaptainSaicin said:


> I would MUCH rather be able to flag journals either individually or as a whole "friends-only"
> 
> After all, they can be read by anyone, including non-members, so blocking people on an account-basis is completely pointless.
> 
> also, I concur that FA's blocking feature needs to be more thorough. Blocked people shouldn't be able to view or reply to comments on journals or submissions any more than they should be able to reply to the submissions and journals directly. Last I checked, this wasn't the case (unless they did eventually fix that.)


how to solve this: Leave FA

this isnt Live Journal, furs no longer support hugboxing as we now learn...it fucking dont do anything


----------



## Armaetus (Apr 11, 2010)

CaptainSaicin said:


> I would MUCH rather be able to flag journals either individually or as a whole "friends-only"
> 
> After all, they can be read by anyone, including non-members, so blocking people on an account-basis is completely pointless.
> 
> also, I concur that FA's blocking feature needs to be more thorough. Blocked people shouldn't be able to view or reply to comments on journals or submissions any more than they should be able to reply to the submissions and journals directly. Last I checked, this wasn't the case (unless they did eventually fix that.)



I think you need to grow thicker skin in dealing with some people on the internet, kiddo...and "friends only" is a lame excuse, atop it limiting your exposure to be watched by others.


----------

