D&D 5E No Magic Shops!

[Ovinomancer]

That's the one change that isn't actually broken. Mentioning notifies the person, so if they have blocked you it make sense for it to be disabled. They don't want to have interaction with you any longer. "Fixing" it is one of those cheats you are talking to [MENTION=44144]CB[/MENTION]WJM about.

Yes, Max, in a thread where I discuss how the block feature breaks functionality and can be evaded, I very badly behaved by being curious about another broken feature and how it's broken. Because, when I @ lowkey, some other poster was substituted and notified. It doesn't work right at all.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Only because I have no choice. It's forced on me.

And if the poster just stops posting? Are you forced to ignore them then?

 

[cbwjm]

So you tend to use something which circumvents the thing you're advocating for, and when people said hey it impacts us in a bad unexpected way you didn't think it was relevant to mention the thing you're advocating for happens to rarely impact you?

Dude...I call foul. Why would you advocate for a feature which you've circumvented, whether by intent or not, in a way where it doesn't harm you but does harm others? Wouldn't that be the very first thing you'd say, that it doesn't even work for you? And then to intentionally brag and laugh about it behind people's backs?

Actually, I've mentioned that the block system didn't integrate well with the app a few times, I think people just like to ignore it so they can say I'm actively trying to get around the block system. I even went onto the website and tested it out to see what the problem was and noted that it had affected me before and that I can understand how it might annoy some people, perhaps you had me blocked at that point and missed it.

Edit: And yes, I was laughing about it because I found the whole situation to be funny. I wouldn't say I was bragging, I was just making light of the situation.

 

[Maxperson]

Yes, Max, in a thread where I discuss how the block feature breaks functionality and can be evaded, I very badly behaved by being curious about another broken feature and how it's broken. Because, when I @ lowkey, some other poster was substituted and notified. It doesn't work right at all.

Relax dude. I didn't say you behaved badly. You even said you were just testing and wouldn't do it again. All I said was that it was one of those cheats you two had been discussing. Nothing more.

If people here stopped reading into what I say and asked when the don't understand something, they wouldn't go so badly wrong so often when replying to me. I don't play games and have hidden messages and/or agendas when I post. I'm very straight forward.

 

[Maxperson]

And if the poster just stops posting? Are you forced to ignore them then?

That's a pretty blatant False Equivalence. If they don't post, then there's nothing to ignore at all. If they do post, then there is something to ignore and I am forced to ignore it.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

That's a pretty blatant False Equivalence. If they don't post, then there's nothing to ignore at all. If they do post, then there is something to ignore and I am forced to ignore it.

Nope. You aren’t forced to do anything. You just don’t see their post. Because they’ve every right to block access to their posts to people they deem detrimental to their enjoyment of the website.

 

[Lanefan]

This is absurd. If I block you, I haven’t forced you to do anything.

Forced? No. But your block would, it seems, have perhaps-unintended knock-on effects; and that's where the issue lies.

If, say, one of you or I were to block the other and the only effect was that neither of us could see what the other had written (unless a third party had quoted one of our posts in theirs) then it would, I think, be working as intended.

But it seems to do more than that: it messes up the notification linking when we've both been active in the same thread (which is annoying but not earth-shattering), and it blocks us from seeing entire threads just because the other one happened to start said thread (which IMO is complete overkill).

The one thing I'd like to see, knowing that I'll never block anyone, is some sort of notification telling me I've been blocked by someone else...preferably with a reason attached, that the blocker would have to type in as part of the blocking process.

 

[Maxperson]

Nope. You aren’t forced to do anything. You just don’t see their post. Because they’ve every right to block access to their posts to people they deem detrimental to their enjoyment of the website.

This is wrong. 1. I want to see those posts. 2. Against my will, I cannot. Therefore, I am being forced to ignore them. You may believe that they have the right to force me, but it is in fact forced. Not only that, but my viewing their posts is not detrimental to their enjoyment of the website.

 

[Charlaquin]

This is wrong. 1. I want to see those posts. 2. Against my will, I cannot. Therefore, I am being forced to ignore them. You may believe that they have the right to force me, but it is in fact forced. Not only that, but my viewing their posts is not detrimental to their enjoyment of the website.

Which is more important, your right to information or their right to privacy?

 

[SkidAce]

/tangent

If someone posts on a public venue, they have no rights to privacy for what they posted. (from a legal point of view)