[michaelteter]

It's obviously an exaggeration, but I think the point is to suggest that you'll have much higher success (as opposed to being blocked) with this service vs rolling your own.

Anyway, if you want to be technical about it, the marking is correct. YOU won't be blocked. The agent running on your behalf might be blocked, however...

But from a marketing perspective, this "you won't be blocked" falls into the acceptable simplification category. Maybe they could add a * footnote, giving some more detail elsewhere. But at this point in the landing page, it wouldn't make sense to try to state it more accurately as that would require too many words.

[WhitneyLand]

There’s a difference between acceptable simplification and misleading, and while the line is not stark landing on the wrong side of it won’t build as much trust over time.

How block you’ll be “blocked less” or some variation of that form?

Still simple, less risk of disappointment/trust issues.

[bdcravens]

Oftentimes being "blocked" is more nuanced than whether the site returns a 200 vs a 4xx. The site may render, but the backend API may respond differently based on the behavior it sees.