Spectrum has the ability to block people but the implementation is counter intuitive and has a negative impact on the blocker not the blockee. Firstly, I think using a block function is fair if you've experienced repeated disruptive / negative or unreasonable behaviour from people. This happens on most forums - SC is not unique. Once a user blocks someone - I'd expect that to mutually exclude any contact. i.e. I can't see their input, they can't see mine. Spectrum's implementation works like this: You block someone because of their repeated negative input. You then go away and write a new post. The blockee can still see your post. Once the blockee "contributes" to that post, the blocker is then blocked from ... reading their own post (or sections of it). This can include their own opening section if the blockee tags it with an emoji. So the Spectrum blocking function has no impact on the blockee and only serves to hobble the blocker. This seems counterintuitive and I struggle to think it's as intended. If I block someone, I expect: The blockee not to be able to participate in my posts For me not to be able to participate in theirs. For neither of us to see each other's contributions in anyone else's posts. Exclusion is a normal reaction to inappropriate behaviour. If I abuse the feature by blocking widely, I miss out in the discussion, so ostracise myself (so it's self limiting) - but if someone goes out of their way to upset a wide number of people on a regular basis, or is unable to be civil, then they'll find themselves out in the cold. Please consider a rework.