@zkat@toot.cat@woozle @GrouchyHydra @news can I interject to add why we’re fediblocking based on an internet disagreement with someone who has clearly communicated has no intention of implementing this GDPR violation? Does having bad armchair opinions on tech really count here?
@zkat Unironic: please, do give me more information about this. My policy is to act quickly and research later; all hasty decisions are subject to change or reversal as new information comes in. 
@zkat @GrouchyHydra Since he hasn't actually built anything yet and is just discussing it, I'll remove the block.
Some context:
This has always been a contentious area -- the fact that public posts technically can be aggregated without anyone's consent or federation has never stopped people from being upset at anyone who does so, openly/transparently or not. This is especially true for search.
There are good reasons to be upset about how it might be abused, but I also think it's a mistake to think we can stop it by just defederating from anyone who does it.
There are also good reasons to think that a lot of the fears stem from abuses of these sorts of tools on less-well-moderated sites and instances. It's my view that tool-abuse is best dealt with through moderation, rather than by refusing to allow the tool.
We need to, basically, do our own EEE on these kinds of uses: flood out abusive uses with responsible & transparent ones.
...and we need to start by discussing what kinds of uses are reasonable.
cc: @news @osslate @idlestate
So this temporary, now-reversed block: Was it a silence, or a suspend?
Because the latter has effects that are not all that reversible.
A lot of pixels have been spilled about the sudden stux defed from .art and how many follows that broke, as a big and recent example.
I like the .art model--be quick to silence and, if warranted, to unsilence. Suspends need at least a little warning in all but the most egregious cases.
(I'm trying to ask this in the spirit of having those discussions, and to avoid any sense of recrimination.)
@idlestate It was a suspend -- if there are irreversible effects, I should probably understand that better. (We rarely end up wanting to reverse full instance suspensions).
@woozle just came across this thread and was talking about something similar on the mastodon discord earlier this morning. Suspending breaks follower/followed connections between users with no sort of notification, so if you unsuspend, those users need to find and refollow eachother. That’s about it from my understanding.
(Silencing doesn’t break the connections)
@woozle @zkat I respect your decision to moderate in your users best interests.
FWIW this did start off as a civil disagreement (I don't think anyone was "mad" as he claimed, I certainly wasn't).
Yes: bad actors can find ways around defederation to suck all the data they want. It would be naive to believe this isn't already happening. I doubt anyone disputes that :)
Ultimately for us, it isn't worth federating with a server run with the views expressed.
Yeah, there is room for legitimate disagreement on this issue. It's complicated, and the stakes are significant.
@zkat@woozle @GrouchyHydra @news @osslate @idlestate thanks. I appreciate you looking further into it. Of course, I would’ve trusted whatever conclusion you came to here but I thought the extra context might be helpful because I felt like the OP was kind of misrepresenting what happened