Allowing blocked users to post only causes drama when not allowing them to post diffuses negativity and drama. Agree?

GAG admin should not have allowed blocked users to post because people being blocked DIFFUSES DRAMA. It deters future arguments and hostility, whereas people who should be blocked from the person's atmosphere yet continue to talk excessively and boldly, rudely keep their presence there just stirs up even more sh*t. While blocking is an action to prevent more disruption, GAG admin has set it up to where people can continue to stir up drama and be disruptive.

Do you guys think that GAG admin
should stop playing with the colors and layout and start focusing on how to actually diffuse stressful, dramatic, hostile situations?

  • Yes, GAG admin doesn't solve core issues of GAG; just colors/layout
    50% (2)17% (1)30% (3)Vote
  • No, GAG should allow people who should be blocked to continue being disruptive
    50% (2)83% (5)70% (7)Vote
And you are? I'm a GirlI'm a Guy

0|0
5|8

Most Helpful Guy

  • Admins and mods are the ones to judge who's disruptive, not individual members. The previous system made everyone an admin.
    I prefer the system where the blocker does see any longer the posts of the person he blocked but other members still can continue the discussion without censorship.

    3|0
    0|0
    • That's a really good idea. The way things are set up has too much potential to prolong a hostile, dramatic atmosphere.

    • typo "system where the blocker does nNOT see any longer the posts of the person he blocked but other members still can continue the discussion without censorship." , of course.

What Guys Said 7

  • The only time blocked users can post in your topics is if you go anonymous. Like if you were to block me, you're be forced to read an opinion from me because you are anonymous now.

    Otherwise the block function seems to work just fine. If anything, this update helped the blocking as I am no longer writing opinions on questions I was already blocked from. Now I don't have that problem anymore.

    From what I am reading it sounds like you want a blocked user to be removed from a site or entire questions which makes no sense as people seem to block each other over trivial matters instead of agreeing to disagreeing.

    If you're getting hostile over and argument online, you need to step away from the internet and stop arguing with people.

    1|2
    0|0
  • I think blocking is silly to begin with. I have never blocked anyone. Usually people use it merely to reject opinions that differ from their own: who question the motives of the QA.

    This site is meant to offer free, honest and genuine opinions to those that ask their questions; in order to provide an alternative perspective. If someone just wants to ignore someone's insights on the matter, they can just ignore their comment and disregard it. Preventing them from sharing their opinion is absolute overkill, and in my opinion, goes against what this site stands for.

    2|0
    2|0
    • I don't care what you think. As I have stated several times. Stop stalking me.

    • Show All
    • But I do disagree with blocking being un necessary. Girls need to be able to block pervs.

      But for someone disagreeing with you? Nah that's just silly.

    • ...okay

  • section A is a little confusing you should probably label it something like "Yes, GAG admin should block abusive users"

    Honestly I'm a constitutional freedom of speech advocate but I want to point out that intentionally abusive language is not covered in the constitution. Granted thats a very thin line that has been drawn. I personally think sites like GaG shouldn't be required to follow free speech code but out of convention they should all the same follow it.

    2|0
    0|0
  • I think we should be allowed to block anonymous people

    1|0
    1|0
  • I disagree with you. If a poster chooses to go anon then they should forfeit their right to block users. I think GAG is doing the right thing.

    1|1
    2|0
    • By the way, I think GAG does a good job of not encouraging users to get addicted to the blocking feature. Some users block anyone who disagrees with them. Sound familiar, QA?

  • It is your contention that GAG should not allow any user that has been blocked to post here. That would work quite well. Because with the "problems" you describe, I am sure several people have blocked you, and if GAG removes you, the rest of us will not have to put up with the rants.

    2|1
    0|0
  • If this site is causing you personally to engage in stressful, dramatic, hostile situations, then perhaps you should stop using the internet because you lack the maturity to handle interactions with other people.

    If somebody is saying something you don't like- ignore it. Ignore the response and keep it moving. The world isn't here to protect your mental security blanket. Does this post have a confrontational tone to it? Perhaps, but only because your post had an attitude to it as well.

    2|3
    1|0
    • That doesn't make any logical sense and you have no true, credible experience on me to gauge how I handle interactions with others.
      Just because you handle something one way and someone handles it differently, doesn't make you more mature than them. It's a huge waste of time when answerers make their post more about trying to psychoanalyze a stranger r egotistically showcase false knowledge rather than actually being useful.

    • Show All
    • Somebody isn't defensive at all...

    • lol, honey, you really overestimate the worth of what comes out of your mouth. I don't care how you feel about me.

What Girls Said 5

  • So what, if you block someone, you want them banned from the site entirely?

    2|2
    0|0
    • That's not what I said.

    • Show All
    • When you post on an Anonymous's comment, and the first response from the QA is akin to this:
      "I don't care what you think. As I have stated several times. Stop stalking me."

      or this:
      "Like I have repeated, you can be nosey all you want, ..."

      It's kinda hard not to tell that it's the same person, especially when you just provided your honest opinion on the question at hand. Afterwards, it would just seem disingenuous not to admit that I kinda figured it out after that.

      I really just navigate through the Live Feed, and I don't see anything wrong with that.

    • Msnfld, you talk to much and you already know I don't want to communicate with you so leave me alone, stop harassing me, and stop trying to force a conversation with me by posting on other people's comments.

  • No, i dont like the idea of not allowing people to voice their opinions, if you block someone they can't contact you and that should be enough. Just because you are annoyed by someone doesn't mean everyone is. I dont like censorship, and I think that if GAG thought is was a major issue, hopefully they would take some type of action

    1|1
    0|0
    • If someone is doing nothing but being nasty, antagonsitic, and stirring up stressful drama, then the QA should be allowed to silence them because they are being a nuisance.

    • Show All
    • Yeah, that is thought. :)

    • All reports are reviewed and handled within 24 hours, always.
      We'll never allow mods to permanently remove anything... there are always admins to take care of it ^_^

  • I feel like you have been arguing with a lot of people or them being rude to you. Perhaps a break from gag would give you emotional recovery. It can be intense here when hostility is runnin' high through the war of words.

    1|1
    1|0
    • a lot of people? where did you get that from?

  • I agree with everything sparrow said.

    0|1
    1|0
  • I'm not sure what you're referring to exactly...
    Are you saying you'd like people to be blocked even from your anonymous posts?

    The reason this was changed (way before the new G@G actually) was to protect anonymity.
    For example, if a user has only been blocked by a few people that they know of, and they try to share on an anonymous post, they can more than likely whittle it down and figure out who posted.
    It was also changed so that people don't waste their time trying to post on something to learn that they're blocked by some anonymous user who they would've known to avoid if the user hadn't been anonymous.

    What DID change in the new G@G is that NOW when you block someone, you're blocked back. This cuts down on the one sided harassment that we often saw with the old blocking system.

    I hope that clears things up some ^_^
    FAQ is always there to help too http://www.girlsaskguys.com/faq

    1|1
    0|0
    • While I understand that, I'm referring to anonymous posts I have made BECUASE THEY ARE VERY INTIMATE AND PERSONAL. I am really pouring my hear out and due to the immaturity I see around here, I simply don't feel comfortable with some of these a**holes knowing my username. Yet, there's one user in particular who is practically STALKING my posts. He has gone to several of them and he is trying to pry into my conversations with other people, being nosey and pushy even though I have told him over FIVE TIMES that I have no desire to communicate with him. So even if I just ignore it and let GAG admin deal with it a few days from now, HE IS GOING TO OTHER POSTS being a nuisance and disrupting other conversations. It's practically harassment and it brings negative vibes. Had I been able to block him and stop him from stirring up drama and negativity, it wouldn't be an issue.

    • I get that GAG is trying to good thing, but it's going to be manipulated either way. The way it is now, it can be manipulated in a way that only CAUSES MORE DRAMA AND STRIFE. Some users who take pride in being a nasty nuisance should have been shut up and dismissed from participation, but the way GAG has it set up, they are enabling drama.

Loading...