grenv: Picture this: someone picks you at random and starts sending you crazy messages. At the first one or two you even reply, but then the other one just get's crazier and crazier and you end up blocking him to avoid receiving such crazy messages.
As long as that user keeps the first couple of replies you sent, (s)he'll be able to go around the blocade and keep sending you messages...

Try to ask someone to send your message to that user instead. And to ask why (s)he has you on their eneemy's list, while you're at it...

pauloaguia: That's easy to avoid, just put a time limit. Any response within a week gets through.

Any other potential problems? If not I think we have a working set of requirements. :)

grenv: It wouldn't work. As per my example, that user would be able to nag you for a whole week...
A better requirement could be "only replies to posts made after putting the user on block". Which would probably not work very well, if the unsuspecting user would first block someone and then sent the other a message saying "you're blocked now so you won't be bothering me any longer". In this case, he would have inadvertly oppened a hole through the block.

How about if a warning message was issued pointing out that "you have this user on your enemies list. He will not be able to reply to your message" when someone is trying to send a message?

pauloaguia: ok, better warning messages would work as well. I notice you use "enemies" rather than "blocked users". "Enemy" is a better description :)

grenv: I think it used to be called Enemies List didn't it? Or maybe I'm just mixing it up...
Anyway, you got the idea ;)

grenv: why not just notify you when you attempt to write a pm to someone who has you on block? you would simply stop immediately ;)

Best thing to do is just put that user on block (so they can't unblock, harass you more, then block again) and just ignore them and forget about them.

Some users can be very childish in the way they play like that - ignoring is the best way to deal with those type of users.

Mr. Shumway: I do like the idea of notifying you that the user you are about to post a message to has you on block so don't waste your time writing to them. I have done this a few times. Gotten a message, go to send an in depth reply only to have a message come up telling me I was blocked.. WHY write me and tell me off then ask me a question, BUT have me on block the second you write me the note? Very childish!

Rose: Well in this case it's even more confusing since the note was a real request for some feedback on a recent tournament, so I assume the user was not expecting me to be blocked.

grenv: Well then as one person requested ask someone to send them a message asking why they route it and that they have you blocked so you can't respond.

I think the warning message when trying to send someone a message on your block list should also ask you if you want to "unblock and send", "don't send message", "send anyways".

mctrivia: Good suggestion on the options, except that the third option is "send anyway" ;)