Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 155 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

Possible Duplicate:
Add the ability to ignore users

There's a user, a contractor working at our company, who's decided to prove to me that on-line cooperation is not functioning. He's already caused me to be banned for a week and I fear that he'll keep doing stuff to make my life sad.

Is there a way to delete or ban him? Of course, he can register again but it takes a while before he has reputation high enough to start messing with me again.

Even better solution would be to ban him from seeing me and my posts, so he can bother someone else or none at all.

EDIT:

I'm shocked at the negativity. In fact, he did nothing of the kind you're assuming. In fact, he UPVOTED my posts so I got canned for inappropriate reputation manipulation.

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by juanformoso, John, Lorem Ipsum, Al E., Bo Persson Sep 25 '12 at 20:23

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

6  
A contractor...? Did you consider the obvious? – Arjan Sep 25 '12 at 16:03
3  
Why were you temporarily disabled? He was trolling you and you were not able to decline the bait? Ignore the user and move on with using Stack Overflow normally. If the other user misbehaves, he'll be flagged by the community and handled by the moderators as needed. – Martijn Pieters Sep 25 '12 at 16:05
    
If he is downvoting all of your posts then this link should help. If he's posting abusive comments, making abusive edits, etc. then just flag the relevant comments/posts and a mod should handle it. – Servy Sep 25 '12 at 16:05
7  
"He's already caused me to be banned for a week"...that sounds to me like there was a problem with your behaviour or contributions. I don't see how you could have been banned otherwise. – Bart Sep 25 '12 at 16:08
3  
If we vote you back to zero, you'd end up gaining reputation -- there you go, trying to manipulate the system again... we won't fall for it! – juanformoso Sep 25 '12 at 16:35
1  
@Chamster I have read your edit. And my answer (see below) remains the same. Explain the situation to a mod and let that be the end of it. You're 36 years old I see? This should really be a trivial situation which should lead to nothing more than a shrug. – Bart Sep 25 '12 at 16:38
1  
@Chamster: I doubt JQAn was being serious there. – Martijn Pieters Sep 25 '12 at 16:39
1  
Which doesn't change my answer at all. The same still applies. – Bart Sep 25 '12 at 16:41
4  
I think you should clarify why you actually got banned, a "vote fraud reversal" alone shouldn't warrant a ban. If the system/management thinks you're upvoting your own posts it could lead to a ban (same IP address as your co-worker perhaps, looks suspicious), and if you're not, you should address that issue. – Wesley Murch Sep 25 '12 at 16:44
3  
As I said, this might take some investigation on their part. It won't be the first time someone claims to have been banned without any wrong doing. And you're not causing annoyance. You're just making much more out of this trivial situation than you should realistically do. Not for us, but for your own good. It's a Q&A, not your life. – Bart Sep 25 '12 at 16:48
1  
@Bart Good point. It's just that my work got affected. And that is my life. Sadly the work is all of it... Couldn't post, couldn't ask. Dark times... Maybe I should start dating again, haha. :) – Konrad Viltersten Sep 25 '12 at 16:52
2  
@Chamster Okay...we'll get right on that and fix your contractor for you. – Servy Sep 25 '12 at 17:02
2  
Guys, see this question if you want a little more context. @Chamster, as I commented in that question, not answering questions from that user strikes me as the way to go. Nothing would probably have happened had you refrained to do so. – Frédéric Hamidi Sep 25 '12 at 17:14
3  
@Chamster If a contractor I was working with was actively trying to impede my ability to do work, or impede the work of my boss/employee/co-worker I would most certainly want them to be fired. Not only are they not being helpful, but they are actively being harmful. Clearly that is not behavior that should be rewarded or even not punished. If this isn't an isolated incident but in fact is a pattern of behavior then it's all the more reason to want him gone. – Servy Sep 25 '12 at 17:16
4  
@Chamster His trying to prove a point is not the issue here. He is perfectly within his rights to think that SO is a terrible site. When he took that opinion to the extent of actively sabotaging your ability to do work he went from the completely acceptable to the completely unacceptable. I don't know if I would fire someone for that alone, but I'd consider it, and if it was a pattern of behavior I would be considering it very strongly. In any case, it is not your responsibility to determine if he is fired, it is his bosses. It is (probably) your responsibility to inform him of this issue. – Servy Sep 25 '12 at 17:28
up vote 23 down vote accepted

Ok, first off: next time someone tells you they're gonna "prove online cooperation isn't functioning", contact a moderator. It's a lot easier to convince someone of your story when you're telling it before bad things happen.

Second: if this starts to happen again, contact a moderator. The user in question hasn't been active since his suspension; if he returns to the same behavior, there's a pretty solid chance the account will be deleted straight away.

Third: if you're making this up because you got caught sockpuppeting, you're wasting your time - just don't do it anymore, and you'll be fine.

share|improve this answer
    
That was a splendid answer. Since the length of this thread is starting to resemble a list of complaints at my local restaurant, I'll be shutting up, from now on. Thanks to everybody who help (or at least intended to). – Konrad Viltersten Sep 25 '12 at 17:28

The answer to this is very simple really. If he does or says something inappropriate, flag the offending answer/comment for moderator attention, perhaps explaining what's going on.

Should he be consistently downvoting or upvoting your contributions, then the system will most likely pick this up and undo it. If not, flag a related question/answer for moderator attention, explaining what you think might have happened.

And that's it. There's nothing more to it. A moderator will investigate the case (which might take some time) and take appropriate actions if any are necessary.

Whatever you do, don't try to go into full war-mode with a particular user. Use the systems/tools already available and let moderators handle it.

share|improve this answer
    
Of course not. No any scale of war. That would be childish and undignifying. There's enough of that on the net. Arguing on the net is like participating in special olympics. Even if you win, you're still a retard... Can you post a link on how to contact a moderator so I can check you? – Konrad Viltersten Sep 25 '12 at 16:55
    
Just flag a post. Even your own. Either an answer/question or comments. Under "It needs moderator attention" for posts or "other" for comments you can enter your own message. – Bart Sep 25 '12 at 17:00

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .
http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/148303/block-another-user-from-abusing-one/148320
meta.stackexchange.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2016-18
98579
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:QTIVDNYE6JGACSYD36A43CUU734WHOK2
<urn:uuid:371fedf2-15bb-4f2a-af95-82bbbfb33976>
2016-05-01T10:10:13Z
104.16.116.182
sha1:VTALD4MLONF2YT3CXIDICDSP4UV442Q2
<urn:uuid:c18f3f82-f119-487c-afde-fb384db55af2>
http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/148303/block-another-user-from-abusing-one/148320
response
<urn:uuid:8b83dbfd-c473-4d4b-ae0b-b957e0f09786>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-239-7-51.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2016-18
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for April 2016
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf