Add a flag to roles / users which allows users to bypass other user's block list. #8

New Issue

2026-02-16T12:28:57-05:00

yindo commented

2026-02-16 12:28:57 -05:00

Originally created by @insertish on GitHub (Jan 13, 2022).

For example, to prevent moderators from being blocked by users who are trying to ignore them / being disruptive.

Alternatively, this could be applied to only people with platform moderation powers.

Originally created by @insertish on GitHub (Jan 13, 2022). For example, to prevent moderators from being blocked by users who are trying to ignore them / being disruptive. Alternatively, this could be applied to only people with platform moderation powers.

yindo added the enhancement label 2026-02-16 12:28:57 -05:00

yindo commented

2026-02-16 12:28:57 -05:00

@CLtheman1 commented on GitHub (Nov 1, 2022):

This should only apply within the guild that a user is staff in, probably with a permission for this.

@CLtheman1 commented on GitHub (Nov 1, 2022): This should only apply within the guild that a user is staff in, probably with a permission for this.

yindo commented

2026-02-16 12:28:57 -05:00

@m3w88 commented on GitHub (May 16, 2023):

well there is the argument of not allowing a personal block interfering with a moderator's duty, there is always that balance.

when we consider that a moderator managed to anger someone into blocking them on another server, doesn't that demonstrate potential behavioral conduct issues? a personal block could be for any reason, the fact that they got blocked is on them rather than the person who blocked them.
core problem is that a blocked user's replies or pings will be muted which creates a problem.

All this is rendered moot if the built-in system can be marked as unblockable and we have built-in commands for warn, mute, ban that trigger an automatic DM with the reason. Those commands must require a reason.

By not having a specific moderator's name being the one issuing can eliminate a lot of emotions and potential retaliation over at servers where target user is a member of staff & moderator issuing is powerless. Best to avoid a cycle of retaliation.
Instead having a system bot issue the message will keep the focus on the "moderation action" instead of a specific moderator.

one goal that revolt.chat has is to build better than Discord.
now obviously any such flag must be on a per guild/server basis
there is also the issue of whether blocks are local to a guild/server or is global

@m3w88 commented on GitHub (May 16, 2023): well there is the argument of not allowing a personal block interfering with a moderator's duty, there is always that balance. - when we consider that a moderator managed to anger someone into blocking them on another server, doesn't that demonstrate potential behavioral conduct issues? a personal block could be for any reason, the fact that they got blocked is on them rather than the person who blocked them. - core problem is that a blocked user's replies or pings will be muted which creates a problem. All this is rendered moot if the built-in system can be marked as unblockable and we have built-in commands for warn, mute, ban that trigger an automatic DM with the reason. Those commands must require a reason. - By not having a specific moderator's name being the one issuing can eliminate a lot of emotions and potential retaliation over at servers where target user is a member of staff & moderator issuing is powerless. Best to avoid a cycle of retaliation. - Instead having a system bot issue the message will keep the focus on the "moderation action" instead of a specific moderator. one goal that revolt.chat has is to build better than Discord. now obviously any such flag must be on a per guild/server basis there is also the issue of whether blocks are local to a guild/server or is global

Sign in to join this conversation.

1 Participants

Notifications

Due Date

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: stoatchat/javascript-client-api#8