If I post anonymously?

quite the opposite, actually. It's very easy to figure out who has blocked you, if you really want to find that out. However, knowing who has blocked you, if you then go to an anonymously asked question and find that that person has also blocked you, you can usually come up with a good guess as to who the anonymous person was. But that defeats the purpose of being anonymous.

People should know who blocked them! I also don't agree with people who blocked you that go anonymous and attack you on your questions

I've been blocked to, but it doesn't bother me one bit, its their choice.

I have no problem with this.

I know several people who have blocked me (it's never been that hard to figure out) and I'm severely irritated when I waste my time writing out a long, detailed answer to a question that one of them has asked anonymously only to get "the user has blocked you".

This is the awesomest thing ever.

If you block someone then you don't want them answering your questions, they aren't able to.
If you're anonymous though then they obviously can answer cos otherwise it wouldn't be anonymous

no idea what you're even saying


how the f*** would they know not know you blocked them when they went to answer your question?

Are you saying the users you have blocked still shouldn't be able to answer your questions? That's stupid as well because then it ain't anonymous

and the anonymous button is the most retarded concept I've seen. The internet is fairly anonymous in itself. If you don't want people to know who you are, don't post a picture. It's simple. The button is just a way to troll people or spew hate without being punished

since you have already blocked them they can't contact you

However, when you ask anonymously they don't know it's you. So it's cool that you get answers from everyone and also those who are blocked since they may answer a good one but w/o knowing it's you. I think that's a great thing to happen :)

Not everyone who is blocked is necessarily a troll or lout ;) I had answered a typically forbidden question asked by a young girl once. After typing out a lengthy answer of a whole 3000 characters (Luckily I copy the content before I hit 'send') after abbreviating various words, I realized the question was pulled out probably by GAG. OK this young lady had posted the question non-anonymously so I sent her a friend request that I don't send anyone generally so that I can message her the answer (a lot of hard work there) and the young lady thought I may be some 'old pervert' lol and blocked me which I realized when I came upon answering another asked by her which was anonymously asked this time (I know it's her cause of the language and content) and I got the message 'you are blocked by the user' lol. So I say it's good that when asked 'anon' at least the answer goes through and benefiting both :)

Why is that unfair? If you're going to block someone, they should know about it. Heck I think it's reasonable if GAG puts a list on your "Friends" tab of all the people who have you blocked.

It's totally fair. Trolls often block people but continue to spam their questions anonymously.

People who continuously hide behind the Anon flag, shouldn't be able to block people.

How is that even important...

This site takes down questions if they're not posted in the "appropriate category".

SO, this doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

Not having read the policy, just going by what you've said, then what does it matter if they answer?

They still don't see you.

Vote them down, don't reply, leave it anonymous.

If they're real a**holes, maybe they can guess it's you, based on your writing style. If they're that big a troll, though, they are already irrelevant.

Let them leave their replies, and give them a stony silence in return. It's really the only way to deal with most Internet trolls, and even the way to deal with real life narcissists and/or sociopaths. Worst case scenario, take a month or so off. They will find another victim. Trust me. I know.

I don't always follow my own advice on this one, though. I grew up a scrapper. Never lost a sober fight, especially with a single, unarmed combatant.

If you word a question the right way, you'll get every d*** (or bitch) on here to slam you. It's a redundant, anticlimactic lesson involving the validation of your common sense expectations of douche baggery, for when you're bored. No, I'm not making that more readable. Don't flame me. I'm bored.

I understand you might get upset with their replies, but don't take them seriously. If they're giving such annoying answers to anonymous questions, f*** them. It certainly doesn't matter if it's you or not. They're off barking at fire hydrants and humping cats when they're not on here.

Probably even Tea Baggers, waiting to misspell some bullsh*t and carry it around on a sign in the wrong town square. Just think of it that way.

Finally, if you don't like their sh*t, give them an earful. Tell them what a waste of your reading time their responses are. How obvious their loserdom is. Enumerate their flaws. Most net babies will take their toys and go home.

There are lots of things on gag that don't make sense.

Meh, I haven't blocked anyone.

I disagree. It's stupid to block in the first place. I only block people that block me first, but it's usually anonymous spammers that want to sh*t out an answer and prevent you from replying, so you can't block them. That's what they should stop.

maybe if people would just stop posting anonymously there would be no more problems!

Personally, I think the anonymous function is abused on here. Most questions I see don't require it, yet most people just hop on going anon anyways. The funny thing is, if the anonymous function were dropped altogether, there likely would be less need for moderators, because a lot of people do their most aggressive trolling through that function

you are not alone

I agree and I bet most of the asswipes saying then don't post anon or the same fools that troll others.

...dont post anonymously...

i mean if your like the majority of other people who post anonymously then there not even personal questions, what's the point?

I think you just shouldn't block people. My policy is that blocking people is counterproductive and nonsensical, so I don't see your point.

Welcome to the New World Order. Nothing is secret.

I don't understand your point of view. Blocked users have never been allowed to post on questions by their prospective QA's. That is a big part of why people block other users. And if you're anonymously asking and someone was blocked from giving their response it would only manage to give the user information about who is behind anonymous QA.

The block feature works just as it should in my opinion.

The whole policy regarding blocked users and the possible interaction between you and them has been shoddy -to say the least- in its construction and implimentation ever since I joined this forum and probably even before then.

Personally I'm not bothered about people knowing who I've blocked (seeing how its none) but I would be interested in seeing who has blocked me. Mostly so I don't waste time typing out an answer only to be met with "this user has blocked you"

I don't understand how that forces users to expose who they blocked...can you explain that to me?

Right, and your question will probably be deleted within 24 hours for exposing their incompetent nonsense. Really and truly though, I don't see anything wrong with people knowing you blocked them. If you blocked them, then why not be bold about it? You only want to block someone if it can be secret? You only like the idea of blocking someone if they don't know and you can still hypocritically, unfairly participate in their activity yet they are banned from yours? Hmmm that doesn't sound like it makes very much sense at all.

What I find annoying about that new feature is that I block someone, it's me saying "I'm choosing to make sure you have nothing to do with me. I don't want you participating on my activity. I don't care to hear your opinions and insight. I don't want you involved in my business." This new feature forces you to involve them in your business and you can't even comment on their answer to defend or explain if they say something that's rude or offensive. But I guess this is GAG's way of dealing with people who unfairly block others yet still try to participate on their activity so kudos to them for handling that

It's not forcing anything.

See there's not just a limited number of people who can go Anon, any one can. So if someone posts on your anon question and then goes to post on your non anon question and can't there's no way in hell they're going to know that first one was you. I don't understand how that reveals who you've blocked at all.

Now if they DIDN'T have that policy it would reveal a lot more, because then they'd know that this anon user was some one who blocked them and they could probably figure out who it is a lot easier.

I think they didn't understand many of the complaints regarding the anonymous option. People were complaining about anonymous question askers who abuse the anonymous option by blocking anon answers and then blocking users they argued/debated/disagreed with.

I don't ask anonymous questions but it doesn't make sense. It could have been solved by making blocking a two way street. When the anon QA blocks, you're not only on their block list but they're automatically put on your block list. Then neither of y'all can answer each others questions or act a fool.

They also need to work on getting some new Supermods. Between an old butthurt supermod who trolls anonymously and butt kissers who delete any Q they like, they need to re-evaluate the requirements for being a supermod. Hell, the mods are better than the supermods

I don't think it's stupid. If you have a problem, just don't post questions anonymously. Anyway, I'm sure Belgie or someone could explain the exact reasons they did it. To me it seems sensible. The person blocked would know who you were anyways because they know who blocked them. That's one good reason.

Also, why would you even need to post questions anonymously?
Look at my account. No one has any idea who I am. OK, I posted anonymously once or twice, to avoid creating a reputation or just in case I was ever found out back when. But I refrain from posting anonymously. You don't have to have an account where people know who you are. It's called keep the account info to a minimum and don't post pictures of yourself. Then you won't need to post anonymously because people won't know who you are in real life at all ANYWAY. On here you could be whoever you want. You don't have to be scared to say who.

Why are you posting anonymously right now anyway? What the heck is the point?