That really depends on what we’re talking about. For most hobbyist sites with community content creation and without DMs blocking isn’t really necessary - you just ban bad users and hand approve new accounts. Moderating the environment so it’s consistent for everyone is usually better than delegating that to individuals since new users would instantly be exposed to the most toxic version of your place.

I also tend to prefer opt in following (like Twitter but without any trending bullshit - just opt in to seeing interesting things without ever needing to block) vs. the more common “hit them with a firehose of content and let them block what they don’t like” approach preferred by people who measure success by “engagement and ad revenue”.

Oh, if your site supports non-public communication (i.e. DMs) you must support blocking because (and I understand you might not realize this if you’re a dude) if you admit to having boobs on the internet you will receive unsolicited dick pics - it sucks but in large sites it’s fucking inevitable… even if the admins try to stay on top of it one bad actor will DM like 500 people and it’s deeply fucking abusive.

Do you mean, blocking people from accessing it? Not every website needs that.

That said, on my own blog I just manually approve every comment. People I have already approved may post comments without waiting for moderation.

I’d have a “Mute” button, which stops someone’s posts from being seen, and then a separate “Block” button, which would prevent any interaction.