Should anonymous posts that block replies be banned?

[Sal_Monella]

Yes. If they do not take part in the dialog, ban them They are useless bomb throwers.

No. They need to say things ands not be held responsible.

Something else

[SereneScribe3]

I'm a bit confused. I was under the impression that when you ask a question anonymously, anyone can post in it, including people you've previously blocked. Unless you're referring to the No replies feature that doesn't allow anyone else, except the OP to respond

[sage2021]

I usually block opinions and replies because the person is being offensive to me personally. Or if I feel my blood pressure going up because they are antagonists and argumentative on purpose just to upset me.

[Sal_Monella]

Blocking certain "stalkers" who seek you you out to intentionally insult or throw bombs is understandable.

[egan3141]

I don't think replies should be blockable. You should of course be able to stop YOURSELF from seeing posts from certain people, but you should not be able to effect anything else.

[Sal_Monella]

I think you are saying one should not only block an abusive poster but also not see any posts by them. I agree.

[egan3141]

I'm not saying anyone SHOULD block. I'm saying that a block function should exist, but that it only affects what THAT user sees.
Let's say I was blocked by rando. I should still see rando's posts, comments, etc. I should still be able to post on and reply to rando's stuff. I should not be affected in any way. Instead, rando just stops being notified about my actions and doesn't see anything I do.

[DryGermanGuy]

Disallow anonymous answers in your questions - that stops a lot of trash.

[Ariesman81]

Bomb throwers is a good analogy.

[kavakava]

It's a great feature for spammers and trollers.

[Cydghj466]

Hi, please vote for my poll please 👍💙