In this context, the word scope is referring to the phrase "Scope of Work." Now, I'm not 100% clear on what FN in particular is doing with this phrase, but I'm going to infer based on what the phrase means. The way I understand it, when a commissioner requests a commission from an artist and says, "I want my picture or story to include ___, ___, and ___," the commissioner is describing the scope of work he wants for his commission. The artist can choose to accept this scope of work and include these things in the piece, or reject it. If anyone finds me to be incorrect here, please correct me!

For the kind of site FN is (an art showcase, basically) I think preventing a user from favoriting or promoting or viewing submissions is a bit much and offers the blocker too much power. I can see people abusing that (You don't like the shading in my picture? FINE, hater, now you don't get to see any of my art!) and it isn't in the spirit of what this site is trying to do. User-based blocking should not prevent someone from enjoying the art on the site, but only prevent him or her from contacting or harassing others. It should also never be within a user's power to control what content someone else can view on the site. If FN implements things this way, Blocking and Ghosting should be limited to comments, posts, announcements, etc. and frankly I would lump ghosting in with blocking: a blocked user cannot comment on your work and cannot view your comments or posts.

Muting, however, sounds entirely fair. It's one user's decision not to view any more of another user's content, be that submissions, comments, posts, announcements, or anything else. You could even go further and if, say, the person is obnoxious but you still like his or her art, customize the mute to allow it to show submissions and announcements, but not comments or posts.

Quarantine is creative, but also unnecessary and I could see it nurturing bad blood. My following someone who turns out to be a jerk does not mean that I am also a jerk, or even aware of said jerk's behavior. It is not fair to then apply a block label to me, especially if that means that there's now art I can't access normally and I didn't do anything wrong. Further, many artists have large followings, and though they may be really good artists, not all of them are friendly to everyone. That's a LOT of people blocked unfairly.

It would need to be done better than Weasyl. I don't think many people use Weasyl's collection feature just because it's easier not to. You have to contact the artist, get them to sign onto Weasyl in the first place (because let's face it, FA's still everyone's furry home base), get them to accept or offer the collection... It has an extra step that requires cooperation from both parties. It will need to be a system like Y! gallery, where the person who uploads the file has the opportunity then to specify whether or not it's a commission, and who it was by or who it was for. The file's page can say "SUBMISSION NAME - by ARTIST (and ARTIST) - for USER (and USER)" and upon acceptance from both parties can show up in both respective galleries.