Some people have a very specific attitude that might not technically result in them breaking the rules, but can really push other's buttons or get under their skin. In cases like this, where a person MIGHT be a little helpful but with an attitude, or taking little cheap shots here and there, why can we not block them? Flagging or reporting them will do little good, maybe even no good, but they are simply not the kind of person one would ever want to hear from again.

It's very upsetting to me that I have to deal with people like that. I don't need my blood pressure shooting up like that, yet I VALUE ACTUAL answers to questions that I ask. I'm here on any given Stack Exchange site, JUST trying to find answers to a question, and here comes some guy with an attitude that decides he's going to vaguely answer my question to the point where I have to ask for clarification and then he comes back with an attitude telling me he already answered it and tries to point out how clear he was, all while giving me an attitude and even taking little cheap shots. Or worse, gives an attitude right away and for no reason. These people are basically taunting me, and then I might go off on them and then all of a sudden I'M the bad guy. It's not right and it's not just.

I am getting very turned off to the community because of people like that and it SERIOUSLY deters me from participating in the community, but at the same time, there are plenty of kind people that will actually answer my question, and if I ask for clarification, they will give it in a very nice way. I'm kind of tired of being turned into the bad guy because someone taunted me and shot my blood pressure up and really got under my skin. And everyone's answer to that? I shouldn't be on the internet, or I shouldn't be here. But why should I have to miss out on a great resource just because other people get on my nerves when if I could simply block them, that would be the end of it? I'm talking hard stop, solid wall end. No last word from me, just block them and be done with it. That's all I want, to block people that I know will never provide me with a constructive answer, or I know will only taunt me or give me an attitude. Please let us do this. As it stands, I avoid asking questions on stack exchange sites because of some of the replies that I've received in the past. It would be such a great relief to be able to ask a question with the knowledge that if someone is going to give me a hard time, I can simply block them and never hear from them again.

  • 2
    You made a feature request. Those can receive a downvote indicating someone doesn't like/want the proposed feature. Don't sweat them too much. It's particular to meta sites to see such votes. – Bart Nov 4 '15 at 16:43
  • Maybe I don't understand fully what you mean but I think you only want to accept users that go by your standards and not by mine, is that right? – rene Nov 4 '15 at 16:45
  • 1
    It's not really about standards so much as it is about finding out what kind of a person someone is and whether or not you will benefit from them or their answers in the future. If you don't like the way someone answered your question, or how they commented, chances are that you won't like a lot of what they say and they will only cause you grief. So it is silly that you should ever have to deal with that again really. And it can only potentially hurt you, as you're the only one that will not see their comments and answers. So it doesn't affect the rest of the community. – Soundfx4 Nov 4 '15 at 16:52
  • It is a duplicate I believe. I apologize for that. – Soundfx4 Nov 4 '15 at 16:57
  • 2
    You better grow a thicker skin because I don't see this feature being implemented soon, if ever. Install the userscript instead. – rene Nov 4 '15 at 16:58
  • 1
    Sadly, you're probably right @rene. But I'll look into that userscript that you linked. Thanks! – Soundfx4 Nov 4 '15 at 16:59
  • 1
    Is this about me? I think this is about me. This is about me, isn't it? This is about me. – user1228 Nov 4 '15 at 22:06
  • Yeah, being able to put some people on a blacklist would be awsome! – shiny-metal Dec 20 '18 at 16:47

This isn't a social-network; It's a Q&A site. If someone is leaving taunting / vitriolic comments / answers on your posts then flag them and the moderators will deal with it.

Blocking is something that happens on social networks like Twitter, not Q&A repositories. That'd be like deciding you don't want to read any Wikipedia articles that have been written by {person X}; you'd be losing out on valuable, interesting content.

  • 2
    To note: even if nothing is done (at least for as far as you can see) with your flag, it is always good to have a flag on record. If this user keeps getting flagged by others, all flags count. – Bart Nov 4 '15 at 16:41
  • Your answer to my feature-request is silly. This link pretty much points out why you are wrong. meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3353/… (also, it points out this is a duplicate. But someone answered what you did on that request and while it, unfortunately, has upvotes by people that just don't get it, it is fortunately not the most upvoted answer) – Soundfx4 Nov 4 '15 at 16:47
  • 7
    That is not a very respectful way to respond to this user providing you with a valuable answer @Soundfx4. The point is, this site is about content. Not about users. We don't focus on them at all. If you have problems with a particular user, we have mechanisms to deal with it. Use those. There is no real need to block particular users from participating at your desired fine-grained level. – Bart Nov 4 '15 at 16:49
  • @Bart Thank you for providing a prime example of the type of users I would like to block. You speak of respect, but this person is not being respectful to me. Whether or not they are answering my question, if they are giving me attitude, or taking cheap shots, why should I have to see that? There IS a need to block users. And it's NOT blocking them from participating, but blocking them so that you won't SEE their Answers and comments. – Soundfx4 Nov 4 '15 at 16:54
  • 1
    @JonW You are very much mistaken in how you are seeing this. You seem to think there will be some sort of a negative consequence to the community if users can block others, but it will not affect the community in any way what-so-ever. Blocking a user would not prevent them from answering or commenting, it only prevents you from seeing their comments or answers. So it can only POTENTIALLY hurt you if you block someone and will have no effect on anyone else. – Soundfx4 Nov 4 '15 at 16:56
  • That is just plain wrong. Let's assume you are the OP of the question. Only you can provide feedback as to the value of the answer. Only you can tell if the answer is correct or not, providing valuable feedback to others as to whether or not your problems have been resolved. You're not just cutting out those who bother you for whatever reason, you also potentially hamper the process towards a valuable Q&A pair, which in turn harms the site and all of its users/contributors. – Bart Nov 4 '15 at 17:01
  • I'm actually not a huge fan of this argument. Because it is characteristic of social networks isn't a good justification to not implement a feature here. (To be clear, I don't think we should have this feature.) – user206222 Nov 4 '15 at 17:16
  • 2
    @Emrakul My point is that being able to block people is a social network feature - social networks are based around the specific users themselves. Whereas Stack Exchange is based around the content, regardless of who has written it. We do have blocking here - we can block questions based on tags. I.E. we can block specific types of content, not specific people. – JonW Nov 4 '15 at 17:21
  • 1
    @Soundfx4 Are you saying that I am not being respectful to you? I don't see how that is the case. I have given you a polite answer. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean I'm not being respectful. If that is the sort of thing you'd block (i.e. people who disagree with you) then I don't think Stack Exchange is the platform for you. – JonW Nov 4 '15 at 17:23
  • @JonW Like I say, I agree, though I think the argument may be stronger without referring to social networks, since it's tangential to the issue. – user206222 Nov 4 '15 at 17:23
  • disagree is not disrespect – user306364 Nov 4 '15 at 18:26

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .