So for particularly nasty EULA violations we are supposed to send screenshots to firstname.lastname@example.org. However for your non violating troll our only option is to mute them. And in fact most responses to peoples complaints about other behavior is that there is a block feature for a reason.
But what happens when there is no longer a viable block feature?
Yeah the person I want to block is still spouting obscenities at me and the rest of chat. Whoops, apparently when block lists went from client side to serverside, I had too many blocks, so I am no longer able to filter any of the trash that shows up in chat anymore.
The server side block list is nice because it is permanent, but at the same time it must be limited for storage reasons. Client side was nice because it was unlimited but unfortunately was also transient in nature.
Perhaps rather than having one or the other we should have both? When you click on the option to block someone, I think that a window with a simple question should pop up.
"Do you want to add this person to your account ignore list?"
Yes, No, Cancel.
Clicking Yes adds the blocked person into the serverside block list, clicking no will add them into your cookies, and of course obvious cancel is obvious. People who you really do not want to ever see or talk to again can go into a limited but permanent file, while transient trash who you probably will not have to bother with soon can go into an unlimited temporary bin. At the very least if you end up filling up the server side block list, you still have an alternative when chat simply falls down the drain.
Edited by Etimai, 14 October 2013 - 05:33 PM.