What's the problem if any account mute other account even if that's an official account. You're content will be still seen on your blog, not on theirs blog. Many people here don't understand the blockchain. There is a difference between a frontend and a blockchain. Blurt.blog is a frontend, blurt is the blockchain. It's impossible to delete anything from the blockchain. All the muted content you may find here : https://blocks.blurtwallet.com/#/
That's the blockchain explorer. In case I muted someone you will not see what he/she wrote on my blog, but you can see that on the blockchain explorer. The main account they use for announcements of course can mute some spammer in their own blog, but not on your blog. And even that will be always seen on the explorer.
As well, only blurt.blog, and I guess blurt.live have this new mute option, other frontends not all of them have it.
Let me give you the example of hive, they have ecency, they have peakd, they have hive.blog, they have leofinance.io, proofofbrain.io and many many other frontends. Each one of them could have it's own rules, own settings, and even it's own politics.
- Ecency they were taking I guess 5% from all the earning of people, now they are taking nothing.
- Peakd.com I guess they never took beneficiaries.
- 3speak.tv takes I guess 11%.
- Other frontends also can set their preferences the way they like it.
And again, if you are muted by any account in blurt, even if that's the main account of announcements like @blurtofficial, or any of them, that doesn't mean your content in your blog for your followers will be hidden.
I hope I could explain it to you well now. And when I told you to give me evidnece, I mean of someone wrote something not aligned with the political view, or anything else and his content or her content was hidden in his own blog, for his own followers. I doubt that could be ever found here.
Read as well the content of one of the main figure in blurt and you will see how he's against censorship. @rycharde , please confirm my words here if I'm right.
Let me add some thoughts to this particular thread.
I personally dislike muting users as it means I can become ignorant of the true environment. The few levers of control that a user has, should be used to create their preferred environment; a judicious use of the "follow" and "mute" features are designed to facilitate this. The additional "lever" of one's own psychology and state of mind is not something a chain can encode - that is everyone's personal responsibility.
The new extended mute feature is no different to the powers a "community moderator" would have, if we had the community-feature such as on Steem and Hive. Such a mod can block a user from their community for whatever reason. I have been pressing for many months to reinstall Communities, and it is now back on the list of future features, but is not a simple add-on, so will require some time.
However, moderating one's personal space is not identical to moderating a defined group of users - a community. It can be used in that way, and I wonder if some community-centred-accounts may wish to investigate how that can be done. The main difference is that a user can step into and then out of a particular community; they can choose to post within such a moderated environment, or not. But once you create your own environment, you then have to think carefully about the consequences - you cannot then "step outside" the environment you yourself created, apart from having an alt account. Much of the current discussions are about articulating those consequences.
Also note that such "personal environments" are dependent upon the front-end chosen. It would be better if such moderating parameters could be coded as levers of control by an individual user, but the choice still remains as to which platform one wishes to use. That is, in itself, a parameter. I do hope that there will remain one minimalist platform, just to see how that experiment would progress. Although not designed for posting, the Blurt blockexplorer is always there as a record of every action.
I dislike talking about "rights", though I sense most people feel they have some. The whole UDHR could easily have been written from the opposite point of view: a declaration of government obligations. Look around at how such "obligations" are being totally ignored and abused. This isn't the place for a long rant on rights, but let me focus on two Articles that contradict each other.
Article 19 states,"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."
Article 12 then limits the above rights with,"No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks."
See the dilemma? You have "the right" to do both. So, freedom of speech goes hand in hand with the freedom to protect oneself. Indeed, this includes the freedom of silence. We also see this throughout the world; the promotion of the freedom of ignorance by the removal of all dissenting voices. But on this chain, you still have freedom of choice - and so does everybody else.
The "law", in the case of a blockchain, is the code, or more precisely, the functions given to users. My own aim is to ultimately create a set of functions that are both universal and reactive. We remain very far away from this goal. By universal, I mean that every user is subject to the same rules and functions - everybody has the same rights, if you wish to define it in those terms. The obligation of the chain is merely to process those actions. This is not a static environment, so as we bump up against limits, be they social or financial, then either the chain is reactive by design, or the design needs to be upgraded.
The consequences that arise from financial changes are often easier to predict, whereas those from social changes can open up new avenues of discontent. This doesn't mean the changes were wrong, it just means monitoring the resulting behaviour. This takes time.
I understand your point, and would say it's true that ....
"... a lot of people here don't.understand.blockchain."
As long as these people (I use the term "dumbest user" to clarify what I mean, in no way is it meant to be insulting). The dumbest user doesn't know anything about front-ends and back-ends. He has no technical understanding whatsoever (that's why I think "user" is a very appropriate word). I myself have been such a stupid user for a very long time (and still am to a large extent) because I don't fully understand the technology and secondly because I don't feel like familiarising myself with the many different frontends.
"What's the problem with one account muting another account, even if it's an official account."
That IS always a problem when the management side makes its own official communication channels inaccessible to a particular user. It would be like your phone provider making it impossible for you, the customer, to communicate with their various departments.
"Your content will still be seen on your blog, not on their blog."
It would be as if the reviews, for example on amazon or other webshops, of certain users would no longer appear. I call this a problem when critical reviews or those that help other prospective buyers make purchasing decisions are suppressed.
A relaxed management deals with emotional criticism in such a way that it filters out the emotionally charged messages and then looks at whether the complainant is making an important point. Smart management always listens to criticism from the dumbest or most aggressive user because it often reveals something valuable or even free advice from users on how management can improve parts of its product or service.
Good day and greetings
Ok, let's suppose someone has a website where he promotes his products. And a competition will come and spam the comment section with the competitive product lying about the product on the website to discredit it. Should that spam be left there so no one will buy the product on the website what the owner spend money to promote buy the way. And when I'm telling spam, I don't mean only links, but lying about the product, making fun of it, memes to not make people buy it.... etc. Will you as a businessman leave all that spam there ?
Good morning,
I ran an online wordpress site for a few years where I encountered spammers and aggressive users wreaking havoc in the comments section. But since I didn't do any aggressive marketing myself or include any form of advertising or indirect promises in my online presence, I kept it to a minimum and simply ignored such provocations. Or I set myself the challenge of whether I would be able to reach a level of conversation with someone that I was not sure I would be able to reach beforehand.
If, for example, I were selling a product or a service or running a blockchain, it would be clear to me that I would be required to use a thousand per cent more thoughtfulness and clever strategy in my communication at all times, as much more would depend on how I express myself than for a single user who provokes me.
There are clear rules for spam, I would no longer allow such an account after a short time or set it to inactive.
For other types of provocation, such as users who don't leave me alone and constantly complain about something or don't let up, I would consider the following:
If I can answer all this in the affirmative, no further reasons are needed to deny access to my business to someone to whom I showed my cooperation and willingness to communicate in this way. However, if I feel pure contempt, anger and rage towards someone who, in my eyes, is damaging my business, not only will it not get me anywhere, but I may not realise that I am further damaging myself and my business by handling a very hot potato in the same manner that is now called "cancel culture". Unfortunately, we have plenty of bad examples, don't we?
I understand. That's your strategy to do things. But other people will like to do it their own way as well. We can't push everyone doing just like we do, or thinking as we do. Here I also feel a suppression of freedom, when a group of people push for something, why everybody should be like them ? They can always fork, or create their own frontend and do what ever they want there. That's the beauty of the blockchain. That people with different ideas, different point of views, different looking at things can co-exist. You and the other folk can create a frontend where there will be no muting, we will keep posting on blurt.blog and others that have the muting option. And that will create a competition between both folks, and the better will be used by the most. ☺
"his content or her content was hidden in his own blog, for his own followers. I doubt that could be ever found here."
I know this and I never said that. I also know rycharde and his views, I have enormous respect for him. I'm not talking about blogs being hidden.
We are all putting our thoughts and personal feelings on a public forum here. We are standing up and exposing our deepest thoughts for others to read and ENGAGE with us. The mute button (this new one) is like a performer going out on stage, say a comedian, and banning all hecklers. A comedian who did that wouldn't last 5 minutes in show business. If you can't take stick then you shouldn't be blogging. This is why we used to hide our journals under the mattress, even have a lock on them.
So this a public forum. For socializing. It's not the 3 wise monkeys.
OK, but in your example, that comedian would come to realise that muting part of the audience was a "bad idea" and starts to undo it. So a knee-jerk reaction may evolve into a more mature reaction. "grow up, brave it!" if one can - hence why in my response I added a "control lever" that no chain can control: one's own psychology.
Everyone has his own personal reason for blogging.
We don't have to talk to people we don't like to talk to. Or do we have to ?
No, we don't.
Some thrive on the drama, tho.
Some do thrive on the drama, this is true and in all walks of life. I for one learn a helluva lot from reading comments. For me it's like the discussion after a public presentation. The Q+A. What is social media and blogging without free and open discussion? It's a bit like jazz which I like to call musical masturbation.
It's socializing without the social.
It's just lizing.
Did anyone else notice blurt went down AGAIN shortly after this new move? I had over 1000$ worth of blurt a few months ago now it's under 400!! It just keeps going down the more blurt I add.