Intentionally abusing it so that I can continue to respond to a poster while preventing them from even ever seeing it?
Can anyone find us a verified instance of this happening? Morrus has already noted that third-party applications like Tapatalk may not respect this, and that we cannot help. But otherwise, the point of two-way blocking is to
prevent that.
Again, NO PROBLEM with ignore. Or even a block that removes the blocker's posts. The on-the-fly editing of people who are neither the blocker or the blockee to remove context from their posts is, at the very least, frustrating and does not seem to be what a discussion forum intends.
So, you have Poster A and Poster B. They have a spat. A blocks B.
Poster C comes along, and quotes A. Poster B can see the post by C, but cannot see the quote, and doesn't understand what C is talking about.
That's the situation you've observed? Presumably, you are B in this scenario?
I think that's as intended. If B does see the quote from A, then we get into the possibility of passive-aggressive posting at each other through proxies, which is seven different kinds of nonsense.
I will note that A does not put in the block
for the purpose of making reading C difficult. It isn't like anyone using this is twirling their mustache saying, "
Bwahahaha! Now, I will annoy a person blocking them, and then having a bunch of people quote me! My plan is sheer elegance in its simplicity!" The intent is for A to be invisible to B. Sometimes, you experience the "negative space" of A, and maybe that's annoying. But it is unavoidable. I'm sorry if you find it a problem, but it comes from allowing people to protect themselves.
You may not believe in allowing folks to protect themselves. However, it is an often-requested feature, and Morrus believes in it. So, you may have to just live with being outvoted on this one.