4 ms·

I'm really wondering how this change passed Apple's App Store review process. They can be strict on features like this. But I guess the rules are different for

I'm really wondering how this change passed Apple's App Store review process. They can be strict on features like this. But I guess the rules are different for Big Companies, coz for example, none of us can have a single letter for an app name, like X.

dotnet00 2y ago
I don't get how this is so hard to understand (in general, so many people seem to be reading this completely backwards). Previously, if X blocks Y, X isn't recommended Y's posts, Y can't interact with X's posts, Y can't see X's posts. Now, if X blocks Y, X isn't recommended Y's posts, Y can't interact with X's posts, but Y can see X's posts. The new system changes nothing in terms of what the person doing the blocking experiences. It fixes abuses of the previous block system, where scammers, grifters and impersonators hide behind blocks to reduce the chances of being caught. It also eliminates the silly fiction that a block prevented stalkers from stalking their target on a platform that has free accounts and the ability to easily switch between multiple accounts. Apple's policy is that apps must have "The ability to block abusive users from the service." They don't say that users should be able to block other users from seeing their posts. In fact, this is also how blocks work on other platforms like Discord. If I block a user, I don't see their posts unless I click on them, they can see mine, but they can't directly ping or reply to me. Similarly with Reddit, being blocked from a subreddit makes me unable to interact with it, but lets me continue to view it.
- skybrian 2y ago
  Can they subscribe to Y’s posts? (I mean, without creating another account.) More generally, though, I agree. Twitter’s aggressive spamming of nearly every page with irrelevant posts (for example, the replies page) is a better reason to switch.
  - dotnet00 2y ago
    Seems to be unclear, apparently X doesn't do auto-unsubscribes, so you'd still be charged for the subscription. Previously it'd tell you that you can't access subscriber content anymore, but it isn't clear if that's still the case.
- orwin 2y ago
  > It also eliminates the silly fiction that a block prevented stalkers from stalking their target. I would have made the opposite move, adding an option for paying customers to be invisible to logged out users. We will see how it goes, but unless you add a rule to prevent people to screenshot tweets from people who blocked them and sharing that picture to their followers, I don't see how the changes are more improvements than regression. And to be honest, I'm not sure I really care about this change, the two person I know that were harassed on Twitter aren't using it anymore, so :/ Hopefully the platform improve thanks to this change :D
  - dotnet00 2y ago
    To me, this is an improvement. I don't care about the thing about preventing people from screenshot-ing tweets, since the barrier was so low it was happening often anyway. But, I've seen many cases of accounts being impersonated and used for scams, where the impersonated user only finds out after the damage has already been done. E.g. you sell commissions for something, impersonator makes an account, blocks you so you can't see him, then tricks potential customers into sending him money. You only piece things together weeks later when those customers start calling you out for running off with their money. Another variation involves someone commissioning something, then blocking when their order is ready as a way to harass the creator.
    - orwin 2y ago
      Ok, i see. It isn't an issue here, i don't think i've ever saw twitter used for real businesses beside crypto and "coaching".
      - dotnet00 2y ago
        Lots of artists do commissions via DMs.
        orwin 2y ago
        On twitter? Maybe in the US, but here it's mostly instagram and a book on DeviantArt or ArtStation, or emails for more serious project.
- bee_rider 2y ago
  Really mute would be a better word than block, right? I do agree that it seems like muting is a more sensible option than blocking though.
  - dotnet00 2y ago
    There is already a mute feature, when X mutes Y, X will no longer see Y's posts. Y will still be able to interact, but X won't see any of it.
- TimCTRL 2y ago
  thank you for the explanation.
- mintplant 2y ago
  > It also eliminates the silly fiction that a block prevented stalkers from stalking their target It's about adding enough friction to discourage the behavior. Human problems don't always need mathematically-perfect solutions.
- gitaarik 2y ago
  Wait, if X blocks Y, I'm confused now, who is Y? (Just joking)
TheAceOfHearts 2y ago
You can still block people, the change just makes it so that the blocked party can still see the blocking party's posts. If your account is public, it has always been possible to look at the posts by using an alt or incognito. And AFAIK this update is already how other social media platforms like Tumblr function.
- ChocolateGod 2y ago
  I think people enjoyed making others know that they blocked them, for some reason?
dogma1138 2y ago
Being able to block people from seeing publicly posted content was always stupid. Blocks should prevent people from engaging with you by replying to your posts or messaging you directly. The fact that social media decided to utterly change what it means was just making echo chambers worse. If you want to shout out to people who agree with you already just send it to them directly.
- EasyMark 2y ago
  It really isn’t because “out of sight, out of mind” is really a thing and it gives stalkers/ragers time to calm down after they’ve been rejected. I mean you can always use a second account to read it, but I’m sure that many people moved on after being blocked which is huge plus for people being harassed by trolls and even scarier people .
  - fwn 2y ago
    > it gives stalkers/ragers time to calm down after they’ve been rejected But afaik it's just right click -> open in private window to see the profile as the open internet would see it. Takes a second. It's the same on reddit. If someone replies to you and immediately blocks you (which is a bit of a funny pattern lately), you'd normally switch to logged out mode to read it. Mobile takes this into account as well: In RedReader (for reddit), you can just use the three dot menu to view it as a not registered user. I feel that giving users the ability to play around with this kind of hoops and tricks stirs up emotions instead of calming them down. In general: I don't know of a single scenario where it would be wise to create a situation where logging in on a platform reduces access to its content.
    - wlonkly 2y ago
      You can see someone's profile and top-engagement tweets logged out, but if you want to see anything recent or specific you need to be logged in, which means there's the friction of a second Twitter account, at least.
      - 2y ago
brightball 2y ago
Because it’s not a big deal and people are looking for something to be mad about. They changed the rules for public accounts, so that if you block somebody they can still see your posts just not interact with them. That’s no different than somebody being able to create a second account to get past your block anyway.
numpad0 2y ago
Anything that don't require a package change don't require an approval.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

dotnet00 2y ago

I don't get how this is so hard to understand (in general, so many people seem to be reading this completely backwards). Previously, if X blocks Y, X isn't recommended Y's posts, Y can't interact with X's posts, Y can't see X's posts. Now, if X blocks Y, X isn't recommended Y's posts, Y can't interact with X's posts, but Y can see X's posts. The new system changes nothing in terms of what the person doing the blocking experiences. It fixes abuses of the previous block system, where scammers, grifters and impersonators hide behind blocks to reduce the chances of being caught. It also eliminates the silly fiction that a block prevented stalkers from stalking their target on a platform that has free accounts and the ability to easily switch between multiple accounts. Apple's policy is that apps must have "The ability to block abusive users from the service." They don't say that users should be able to block other users from seeing their posts. In fact, this is also how blocks work on other platforms like Discord. If I block a user, I don't see their posts unless I click on them, they can see mine, but they can't directly ping or reply to me. Similarly with Reddit, being blocked from a subreddit makes me unable to interact with it, but lets me continue to view it.

skybrian 2y ago
Can they subscribe to Y’s posts? (I mean, without creating another account.) More generally, though, I agree. Twitter’s aggressive spamming of nearly every page with irrelevant posts (for example, the replies page) is a better reason to switch.
- dotnet00 2y ago
  Seems to be unclear, apparently X doesn't do auto-unsubscribes, so you'd still be charged for the subscription. Previously it'd tell you that you can't access subscriber content anymore, but it isn't clear if that's still the case.
orwin 2y ago
> It also eliminates the silly fiction that a block prevented stalkers from stalking their target. I would have made the opposite move, adding an option for paying customers to be invisible to logged out users. We will see how it goes, but unless you add a rule to prevent people to screenshot tweets from people who blocked them and sharing that picture to their followers, I don't see how the changes are more improvements than regression. And to be honest, I'm not sure I really care about this change, the two person I know that were harassed on Twitter aren't using it anymore, so :/ Hopefully the platform improve thanks to this change :D
- dotnet00 2y ago
  To me, this is an improvement. I don't care about the thing about preventing people from screenshot-ing tweets, since the barrier was so low it was happening often anyway. But, I've seen many cases of accounts being impersonated and used for scams, where the impersonated user only finds out after the damage has already been done. E.g. you sell commissions for something, impersonator makes an account, blocks you so you can't see him, then tricks potential customers into sending him money. You only piece things together weeks later when those customers start calling you out for running off with their money. Another variation involves someone commissioning something, then blocking when their order is ready as a way to harass the creator.
  - orwin 2y ago
    Ok, i see. It isn't an issue here, i don't think i've ever saw twitter used for real businesses beside crypto and "coaching".
    - dotnet00 2y ago
      Lots of artists do commissions via DMs.
      - orwin 2y ago
        On twitter? Maybe in the US, but here it's mostly instagram and a book on DeviantArt or ArtStation, or emails for more serious project.
bee_rider 2y ago
Really mute would be a better word than block, right? I do agree that it seems like muting is a more sensible option than blocking though.
- dotnet00 2y ago
  There is already a mute feature, when X mutes Y, X will no longer see Y's posts. Y will still be able to interact, but X won't see any of it.
TimCTRL 2y ago
thank you for the explanation.
mintplant 2y ago
> It also eliminates the silly fiction that a block prevented stalkers from stalking their target It's about adding enough friction to discourage the behavior. Human problems don't always need mathematically-perfect solutions.
gitaarik 2y ago
Wait, if X blocks Y, I'm confused now, who is Y? (Just joking)

TheAceOfHearts 2y ago

You can still block people, the change just makes it so that the blocked party can still see the blocking party's posts. If your account is public, it has always been possible to look at the posts by using an alt or incognito. And AFAIK this update is already how other social media platforms like Tumblr function.

ChocolateGod 2y ago
I think people enjoyed making others know that they blocked them, for some reason?

dogma1138 2y ago

Being able to block people from seeing publicly posted content was always stupid. Blocks should prevent people from engaging with you by replying to your posts or messaging you directly. The fact that social media decided to utterly change what it means was just making echo chambers worse. If you want to shout out to people who agree with you already just send it to them directly.

EasyMark 2y ago
It really isn’t because “out of sight, out of mind” is really a thing and it gives stalkers/ragers time to calm down after they’ve been rejected. I mean you can always use a second account to read it, but I’m sure that many people moved on after being blocked which is huge plus for people being harassed by trolls and even scarier people .
- fwn 2y ago
  > it gives stalkers/ragers time to calm down after they’ve been rejected But afaik it's just right click -> open in private window to see the profile as the open internet would see it. Takes a second. It's the same on reddit. If someone replies to you and immediately blocks you (which is a bit of a funny pattern lately), you'd normally switch to logged out mode to read it. Mobile takes this into account as well: In RedReader (for reddit), you can just use the three dot menu to view it as a not registered user. I feel that giving users the ability to play around with this kind of hoops and tricks stirs up emotions instead of calming them down. In general: I don't know of a single scenario where it would be wise to create a situation where logging in on a platform reduces access to its content.
  - wlonkly 2y ago
    You can see someone's profile and top-engagement tweets logged out, but if you want to see anything recent or specific you need to be logged in, which means there's the friction of a second Twitter account, at least.
    - 2y ago

brightball 2y ago

Because it’s not a big deal and people are looking for something to be mad about. They changed the rules for public accounts, so that if you block somebody they can still see your posts just not interact with them. That’s no different than somebody being able to create a second account to get past your block anyway.

numpad0 2y ago

Anything that don't require a package change don't require an approval.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]