Suggestion More granular profile access settings

[Dionicio3]

Hey, I was wondering if we can get better access controls in regards to who can access our profiles.

Currently, these are the only options we have regarding that, with the only options being "All Members" (view only), "Members only", "People you follow" and "Nobody". While it is possible to set up a whitelist using the "People you follow" option, there is no way to my knowledge to setup a blacklist, as iirc Ignoring members doesn't deny them access to your profile.

 

[SylverReZ]

I like the idea of that, but you can set everything in the options to "People you follow", which is more effective to keep certain individuals out of your profile and you can unfollow them at any time if you don't like them.

 

[Dionicio3]

I like the idea of that, but you can set everything in the options to "People you follow", which is more effective to keep certain individuals out of your profile and you can unfollow them at any time if you don't like them.

While it is possible to set up a whitelist using the "People you follow" option

Learn to read, that's a whitelist and not what I'm asking for

 

[SylverReZ]

Learn to read, that's a whitelist and not what I'm asking for

I've read the entirety of this post. Thought that 'People you follow' was both.

Post automatically merged: Dec 6, 2022

You've already got 'People who follow' which is already affective, still, I have no problems with everything privacy wise.

 

[KleinesSinchen]

While I've never been a fan of "block" and "ignore" or similar functions (I don't want to concern myself with[…]), this suggestion sounds less invasive than most other functions of this kind (the already existing whitelist option being way more impactful).

So… am I now for this idea… or against? Mhmmh.
I Can imagine cases where blocking a single person from constantly spamming a profile might be sensible… on the other side, such a behavior would almost certainly violate the "general decency rules" and could be stopped by staff when it occurs.

I'm gonna "upvote" this, because more options in this regard seem better to me than less options, and a short "block list" isn't as radical as a personal echo chamber simulator "allow list"