comment: >
  
  This sub is at its best when people from both sides of a position engage in the comments. Sometimes the OP isnt very good at articulating an argument, but another user can do it better.
  Otherwise this sub would just be a very strange advice sub rather than the lively discussion sub it is
context: The irony here is the Top thread is from someone who has me blocked. The only place I'd disagree is maybe there's some kind of technical limitation. Also it's a person who blocked me for misunderstanding their point... so be careful >
  
  Yeah, I think they blocked me as well. I made a top-level comment with my reply to the version of their comment that was still in my inbox. 
  Kind of an illustration of my point that I hadn't even considered, that a user can block the OP of a post and then limit OP's discussion within their own thread! >
  
  
  Revert block to its old form. Remove fully comments of people you block from your feed, don't make it control commenting.
  
  It sounds like you do agree with my full opinion, that the block should be done away with. I didn't make that my CMV because I do understand reddit's reasons even if I disagree with them.
  If it's the case that reddit won't revert to the old block, would you support my proposal? In your anti-vax example, under my proposal you'd still be able to present your counterarguments, at least within that thread. >
  
  Bruh, I’ve been blocked for far less than harassment. I’ll get blocked all the time for simply having the audacity to disagree with someone, and then months later, all over different places all over Reddit, there are all sorts of fucked up and broken threads that I can’t even see half the responses.
  Far too many people are far too liberal with using the block feature.
  Like, if you want to stop engaging with someone on a particular thread, just stop engaging them.
  I don’t understand why people even start in conversations with people if they are so fragile that they are just going to block people as soon as someone has the audacity to disagree. >
  
  
  They're curating their own experience which they're entitled to do.
  
  That's not how the feature works. If it did, it would be fine. They are curating EVERYONES experience. They almost get moderation powers by using the feature. You can use it to stake your claim with a thread and exclude others from the eye of everyone else. A couple times people have used it here on CMV against me to put up an outrageous last word and paint it like i was too afraid or couldn't come up with a reply >
  
  Sure, but that's clunky, and also against rule 3 here. Accusing others of bad faith etc. To be fair, the one that used the feature also had their comments removed but still >
  
  Well im not a mod and i didn't ask them to outline their reasoning, but abusing that feature is bad faith, and when you say that they did that, well that's an accusation of bad faith >
  
  IMO the problem isn't really that the block feature can apply to threads that the blocked user is engaged in, but rather that the block feature has this effect without any way for the mods to interact with it. It's the non-moderatability that make this behavior problematic. For example, on this sub, there are several problematic repeat blockers who seem to have blocked multiple people in response to being pressed hard on points—if the mods could just see that this is the case and make doing so a rule violation, this wouldn't be a problem. Conversely, your solution would still allow people to exclude others from future discussion: for a relatively small community, a poster who blocked most of the active userbase could then proceed to spread misinformation on a subreddit at will (and I've seen people do this even here on this subreddit). >
  
  I agree, the top comment is one of those people ironically >
  
  There are many, many persons in this thread that claim to be blocked by this one single person.
  That's how it works. Most persons don't block but a small minority are power blockers who block very quickly over simple disagreement, and they very often have authoritarian views. >
  
  Nobody should be blocked from a community >
  
  If I'm engaging in a thread and someone behaves in a way I no longer want pushed to my notifications I will block them. In what context would I block someone in a thread I'm not participating in? >
  
  Replies from other people, maybe? When you block one user, you lose the ability to respond to someone else jumping into the convo. >
  
  If someone replies to you, you can still see it. So if someone wants to reply to your point they can still do so. And if you are worried people will just reply later in the thread, edit your comment to say the person blocked you and you will respond to direct replies. >
  
  
  edit your comment to say the person blocked you and you will respond to direct replies.
  
  If your initial comment is in reply to the user who blocked you, then you can't even respond to other direct replies to that comment. >
  
  The reason to block is because a person is engaging in behavior that is deemed bad.  Why should there be tolerance for continued bad behvavior in the very context they have demonstrated it?  That doesn't make much sense to me.  
  If anything a block should end someone in the conversation they are in and it should be a distinct decision to block them from the sub.  Ending harmful/unwanted/counter-productive/off-rule conversations is in the interest of the sub (according to its rules and governance) so why would allow it to continue in the one context we are absolutely sure it's unwanted be a good thing? >
  
  Why should a single user be able to block another user from a subreddit if they aren't a moderator? >
  
  apologies.  i believed this was about the moderator feature to block. >
  
  Can't you just continue a conversation elsewhere in the thread? >
  
  You'd have to use a new parent comment. For example, the top commenter here has me blocked. I can't reply to any of the people who have replied to them. >
  
  So? If you feel you have a substantive point to make outside of what you've already posted, make it elsewhere in the thread. >
  
  And if that point is a response to someone else? >
  
  Well, the person blocking clearly doesn't want to hear about it, do they? And that's okay, isn't it?
  Make your point elsewhere. If people don't want to scroll down to read your point, that's no different than any Reddit thread. We can only state our cases out in the ether. We can't require people to read them. >
  
  If I'm replying to someone else in a thread they don't get a notification anyways, so they wouldn't even be hearing about it. >
  
  I have only been blocked when I have been pestering or have a pretty controversial view, I just dont see the block feature being abused so much so that reddit needs an overhaul, It is a little annoying but it also does shut down problem people more that it is a tool to be used to further disparage the blockee from replying in the thread "omg... he just blocked me, what a loser" .... people feel the need to get the last word or still talk shit.... I have blocked people that jumped on alts to tell me off... the feature is more so to just stop harassment in its tracks. >
  
  Yeah, except for the fact that people will be blocked forever.
  So you get in one heated discussion over one topic on one particular thread, and now you’re blocked forever.
  And it fucks up reddit, because then all over reddit there will be tons of threads that are broken and half the comments you can’t see because some idiot 4 months ago couldn’t handle someone disagreeing with them, and then blocked you. >
  
  yea but it prevents harassment, like there is a dude in this thread that has me blocked, I aint gonna lie... ill just play devils advocate on all his points and just basically be a troublemaker for him if I was allowed, Id assume most people would join in on a thread that they are blocked in just to cause trouble... being blocked kinda sucks and is annoying but it prevents harassment and that is a big goal of mods and reddit in general, we are all children that love to argue and cause trouble, there need to be ways to prevent that. >
  
  “Prevents harassment”
  Pretty much every time I have ever been blocked , it’s the first time I have ever interacted with a person, and got in a disagreement over a particular thing.
  It’s fucking stupid that some people are so fragile that they have such low thresholds for blocking. >
  
  Similar experiences, often I was blocked for undeniably proving people wrong or asking for sources for their ridiculous claims.
  People say it's to stop harassment or bad behavior but it's clear in the overwhelming majority of cases that's not how it's used. Perhaps it should only be possible to block persons who have replied to one in at least three different threads in the past month or something similar.
  It's as though one make beating up people for any reason whatsoever legal and say “The purpose of this is to stop stalking and harassment.”, obviously  the majority of cases of persons being beaten up will simply be because the beater feels like it, for whatever arbitrary reason. >
  
  At the very least, initially, you should only be able to temporarily block someone.
  I guarantee you that 99.9% of the people who have blocked me, probably didn’t even remember why 2 days later.
  Block someone for a week, and then you’ve already forgotten who they even are. >
  
  I periodically make new accounts on Reddit, I did that before the block feature but especially now.
  I've actually ran into people that blocked me over simple disagreements who now called me really helpful or even I quote “their hero” for answering something. >
  
  Exactly… which is why it’s so fucking stupid that people are so short-sighted and feel the need to block people the instant they have the audacity to disagree >
  
  I'm confused about your diagram. If A blocks B, it turns off B's ability to see the thread as A was OP. Makes sense to me.
  Now, if B blocked C and A can no longer reply, we have a problem. But I don't think that's how it works.
  Which scenario bugs you, exactly? >
  
  A blocks B, which prevents B from responding to C as A is the top level. It's effectively giving A moderation powers over the thread, which OP - and I - disagree with. >
  
  You know you can just edit your comment before to call out the user that blocked you. Uno reverse. >
  
  Have you ever been blocked in a thread where you had been speaking to multiple other users? You can make edits to your comments, but the other users won't see notifications and it's just all around a difficult way to communicate from there on. >
  
  Yeah, and I've never had any issue continuing the conversation with other users in that thread. Not sure exactly what you're talking about. >
  
  So... reddit studied this, and while this is hypothetically a big problem that causes issues all of the site... actually, block abuse is very rare even in the rare subs where it's a non-trivial problem at all.
  But... I really think the biggest problem with your view is a mind-bogglingly huge underestimation of the problem the block feature is there to solve:
  Repeated harassment and stalking across the site with multiple alts, where someone not only harasses the user, but also interferes with their conversations with others by calling them names, making up false stories about them, etc., etc.
  With the old version of these feature, not only could the stalker still stalk the person and interfere with their conversations, but the person they were harassing indirectly couldn't even see that it was happening and defend themselves, because the comments from the stalker were removed from their visibility. 
  This is actually an enormous problem on reddit (everywhere online, actually), especially for women that some asshats consider "uppity". 
  No one has the ability to block you from talking with others. They can only block you from participating in their conversations, that they started. 
  As for dealing with OPs that block someone to keep them from participating in a post at all... please report this to the moderators. 
  We can't see the actual blocks, but we can see all the actual comments/posts from both sides, and can judge whether a block appears to be genuine/reasonable/understandable or is clear abuse. We then can report that to the admins directly (which you can as well... there's a block-abuse report). >
  
  If someone else blocks you, then that person wants to no longer get any interaction with you. If you can still reply to ongoing discussions, you can just endlessly chain reply with harassment if you want and the block is nearly useless again.
  Plus, you seem to be viewing conversations on reddit in terms of what some 3rd party spectator will get out of it. We are not performing for others when we comment, it is just a public conversation. Using a block to get out of a conversation is a perfectly acceptable way to use it. >
  
  How is it harassment if they can't see your comment? >
  
  
  if A blocks B, B can no longer reply to C either.
  
  This is quickly fixed by starting a new comment thread? 
  If B and C want to spend the time getting into it, no reason why they can't. You can quickly copy the text and tag them. >
  
  So I'll jump in here. The current top commentor is someone who has me blocked. I'd love to reply to someone who has replied to them but I can't. This may not be an issue in lots of subreddits but in one like this where the purpose is to facilitate discussions it's rather limiting. If the person who blocked me doesn't want to see my comments that's fine, I don't mind, but it seems ridiculous to bar me from interacting other people as well. >
  
  
  I'd love to reply to someone who has replied to them but I can't
  
  Can't you literally copy their text, start a new thread and tag the person? If you own the thread, its all yours. >
  
  You cannot, as all top level comments must be a challenge to the OP so your comment would be removed. >
  
  Lol aren't you arguing OPs point to begin with? Unless you want to explain why OP is correct, which is the opposite purpose of the sub. 
  CMV Mods have already stated they don't like this Reddit wide feature for this particular sub, but I don't think Reddit should build features for individual subreddits. >
  
  Ah but see, you can agree with OP in replies to top level comments. I disagreed with OP in that my opinion is that this may be due to some kind of technical limitation which he had either dismissed or failed to consider. >
  
  Sure, but who cares about your personal opinion why OP is correct? Arguing with anyone who is trying to hijack posts generally result in useless talking passed each other. 
  I don't care or need you to explain to me your thoughts on OPs posts. 
  
  Ah but see, you can agree with OP in replies to top level comments.
  
  Don't care.
  
  I disagreed with OP in that my opinion
  
  Don't care.