[gpm]

Which is a solution that scales extremely poorly in a global environment with potentially billions of people you might want to mute. More so in an environment which supports anonymity, so that they can just keep creating new accounts.

[michaelmrose]

Kind of like spam you can heuristically figure out who is hurling abuse at people and ban/shadowban/automute their communications to people they are attempting to abuse.

I can imagine that the same way you have a shared list of undesirables. Essentially an assholeblock instead of adblock.

[themitigating]

This would be a good idea but people can just make new accounts. It would also be open to abuse so it would need an appeal system and some sort of judiciary.

I don't understand why reputation isn't a solution offered for spam and bad people. Why not make users on the internet build trust.

[michaelmrose]

For egregious breaches you don't need to give them an appeal just ban them. For less egregious situations client side filtering like adblock doesn't get one either by virtue of people not owing you their time.

[u801e]

In that case one could rely on an allow list rather than a block list.

[KyeRussell]

Now you’re so keen on being right that you’ve lost sight of the value that was originally proposed in the first place.