So I just got blocked by a QA for the first time since joining this site. It was kind of surprising as I hadn't really crossed any lines, I simply disagreed and told him that he was wrong about something. Anyway, he said some rude things back (nothing hurtful or obscene, simply rude) and blocked me so that he looks like he got the last word.
So I'm wondering, should we be allowed to block people JUST because they don't always agree with us? Sure we need a mechanism to prevent harassment and blatant belligerency, but if a respectful exchange is going on, I think that the moderators should be able to override it so as not to silence opposing views.
So what do you think?
- Blocking should be entirely up to the QA for any reasonVote A
- Blocking should be verified by moderators SOLELY to stop harassmentVote B
- Blocking shouldn't even be an optionVote C
- I don't know, no opinion, see resultsVote D
Most Helpful Girl
It should be allowed, because there are cases of harassment, cyberbullying, cybersexing and spamming.
Some people do hit the block button easily, for not agreeing with them or telling them what they want to hear "my boyfriend watches p*rn and I hate it!" answerer1: most guys are going to watch p*rn. He's with you & loves you. accept it" BLOCKED! A bunch of users had that happen on a p*rn question.
Anyways, anon people shouldn't be allowed to block. Or what they should do, is when an anonymous person blocks you, they're automatically on your block list and you can remove them and they can remove you, but them unblocking doesn't mean they're off of your block list. People would get around the block by unblocking and commenting unnecessarily and then blocking again.1