comment: >
  
  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.
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?