Sorry guys, but why is there no block or user ignore on this website?

Two nights in a row now a guy is posting sex fantasies as questions. If that is what you want on worldbuilding I don't care, but why can't I block these users? or at least have the option to set their sex posts to ignore?

Can we have this feature? In most web communities I can visit a user's profile and flag him to ignore when I'm logged in.

  • $\begingroup$ Are you generally opposed to all questions with sexual overtones? Just wondering if you could just block the sex tag and eliminate the need for "NSFW" $\endgroup$ – apaul Jun 8 '17 at 5:19
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ The problem with tags is that not everyone uses them properly on the first try. You might still see the questions when they are posted until someone sees the post, knows about the correct tag (possibly because he read this discussion) and edited the question. So there is no real way to block a user here. But if the user writes a lot of bad content he will automatically get banned by the system or manually by the mods. $\endgroup$ – Secespitus Jun 8 '17 at 5:33
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @apaul34208 "Are you opposed to all questions with sexual overtones?" No, my Q evolved between title / body. Hoping for voluntary "opt-in" solution, also trying to NOT make it about any individual, but by body of Q I'd refocused on problematic user (history of tantrums and disappearing posts)…. I see 3 ignore options: Tag, Question, and User – each has a use…. WB Mods seem obsessed with search ranking and quality of Q. You are naive if you do not admit connection to problem users and low impulse control. NSFW could be fun but would need real mods and ignore.... Excited to block "zombie" ;) $\endgroup$ – wetcircuit Jun 8 '17 at 13:10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Retagging because this isn't a request for a new feature (at least as far as I can tell) but rather seeking help with using the site. If you meant to propose this as an addition to the site's functionality, then you should edit your question to make that clear. $\endgroup$ – user Jun 9 '17 at 9:50
  • $\begingroup$ It is a request for an Ignore/Block User feature that most web communities have. It is absolutely a feature request. $\endgroup$ – wetcircuit Jun 9 '17 at 11:08
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ In that case I misread, because to me, "Have I missed this feature?" did not appear to be a request for that feature to be implemented, only (if anything) a request for information about (how to use) that feature. Your accepted answer also seemed to indicate that. $\endgroup$ – user Jun 9 '17 at 13:45

With the exception of chat, Stack Exchange doesn't support the ability to block users. This is the relevant meta.stackexchange discussion.

This is a meta.stackexchange discussion about using a greasmonkey script to create a personal block list.

If you feel a question is inappropriate please flag it for moderator attention.
If you feel a user is behaving inappropriately please contact a moderator.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Note: Often the easiest way to contact a moderator about a particular user is to flag a contribution by the user for moderator attention, and describe the issue you are having. If the moderator feels further clarification is required, they can bring up the matter in chat (either a public or a private chat room) or via private messaging; if no further clarification is needed, the moderator can act on the flag directly. This might be ever so slightly more work for you the flagger, but can significantly reduce the workload required on the part of the moderator, which generally is a good tradeoff. $\endgroup$ – user Jun 9 '17 at 13:41

In response to the OP's clarification that this is

a request for an Ignore/Block User feature that most web communities have. It is absolutely a feature request.

I disagree.

Stack Exchange is supposed to be about the content, not about the user.

As long as a question is appropriately titled, it should be easy to tell from the title whether it's something you might want to read. If a question is not appropriately titled (as in, the title accurately and succintly summarizes the question), then that's a whole separate problem and one that can often be quite easily fixed by (you or someone else) proposing an edit.

Same with tags; if I come across a question that I feel is inappropriately tagged based on its content, I will happily go in and re-tag it, sometimes dramatically, such that the tags match the actual content of the question.

Tags plus title, and sometimes the initial few sentences as seen by hovering over the question title or on the newest questions page, should in the ideal case be sufficient to give you an idea of what the question is about; at least sufficiently so to know whether you want to read more of the question.

There is already a feature to mark tags as "ignored", though it's somewhat hidden under the "favorite tags" feature. This can be adjusted on a per-site basis under your account preferences. Doing so visually tones down questions with that tag, but they are still visible and readable.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Keep in mind it wasn't until revision 6 of This question that a filterable tag was added to it. $\endgroup$ – sphennings Jun 9 '17 at 14:18
  • $\begingroup$ @sphennings We can always find counterexamples in questions that are or have at some point in time been incorrectly or inappropriately tagged. IMO that does not invalidate my reasoning. $\endgroup$ – user Jun 9 '17 at 21:22
  • $\begingroup$ That question didn't get tagged until after this question was asked. I didn't cherry pick it as an example. I chose it for its relevance. $\endgroup$ – sphennings Jun 9 '17 at 21:28
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I agree with the logic about why stack exchange doesn't have block lists. Making it not about the individual but the questions and answers is an excellent idea. I offered my example to illustrate that things aren't always so simple. The OP is talking about not wanting to see content. Asking them to go and edit the content the want to avoid is a pretty big ask. $\endgroup$ – sphennings Jun 9 '17 at 21:31

I went ahead and added a NSFW tag...

Seems like both you and the OP in question wanted it, so there it is.

I would strongly advise people against adding it to other people's questions though... It seems reasonable for someone to judge their own question as being "not safe for work" but less reasonable for someone else to do it.

To ignore a tag, do one of the following:

In the tag’s tooltip, click on the star twice (or once, if you have favoured that tag). On the main page’s sidebar, click on edit next to Favorite Tags. On /users/preferences, use the respective field in the Tags section.

What do "favorite tags" and "ignored tags" do?

After further investigation I'm thinking that "NSFW" is probably a bad idea. It's a Meta tag and not a great one.

Perhaps it's better to read the title of a question? In this specific case it was pretty obviously not something you wanted to read more about. You clicked anyway and then engaged with the op in what turned into a mess. I'm not saying that the question was good, by any stretch, but you kind of knew that you were going to have a problem before you opened it...

In these cases, just downvote, flag, and/or vote to close and walk away. If you flat don't want to see it, don't click on it.

Now let's drop it and have waffles or something.

  • 5
    $\begingroup$ We have discussed adding a NSFW tag before. The concensus was that it was not a good idea. $\endgroup$ – sphennings Jun 8 '17 at 5:01
  • $\begingroup$ @sphennings consensus changes let's give it a go. $\endgroup$ – apaul Jun 8 '17 at 5:05
  • $\begingroup$ That sounds like an excellent question to ask on meta $\endgroup$ – sphennings Jun 8 '17 at 5:07
  • $\begingroup$ @sphennings I see what you did there... $\endgroup$ – apaul Jun 8 '17 at 5:08
  • $\begingroup$ @sphennings let's call it an... Um... Experiment... Ya... That's it, an experiment. $\endgroup$ – apaul Jun 8 '17 at 5:13

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