Dangerous flaw in block member system

When person A blocks person B, person B is no longer allowed post in threads created by person A.

This means that someone can use the forums (and this is not a hypothetical situation) as a vehicle for their dogma, spouting baseless '"facts" and firing unjust accusations while not fearing any reproach since he/she can just block whoever raises points or states opinions they disagree with.

This should be rectified immediately in the interests of a fair and transparent discussion forum

I agree...Person B should be allowed to post messages even though they are blocked.

P.S. Please don't block me.

Do you really need the use of the word dangerous?

I think it makes sense too. If someone is constantly giving abuse towards you and you block them, you have a right to block them from your threads. I can exclude who I want from my conversations, that is up to me. The problem only occurs if the one sending the abuse does the blocking, which I guess would be very rare, and even if they did start talking rubbish, it would either get deleted or be shot down by the good peeps of chess.com.

 But the danger is that other people reading the thread who are less informed might take it as truth

It should be up to the moderators to decide what is and isn't spam/abuse, not individual members. This is after all a public discussion forum and when posting a thread you should know that not everyone is going to agree with your arguments (especially if they're blatantly false and based on nothing more than your own fantasies).

The block system should only apply to private communications and game seeks between members

A discussion that has proven controversial in the past:

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/uses-of-the-block-feature

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/people-being-rude?page=1

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/the-uses-and-powers-of-the-block-feature

Personally, I agree with the OP in that halting spamming is the task of the mods.  Particularly since we have so many overly sensitive members here.

@checkmateibeatu The block system doesn't just apply to friends. You and I are not friends but if I were to block you, you wouldn't be able to reply to any of my threads.

The main point is that it should be a moderators responsibility to decide who can and cannot post in a thread. Not only is the current block system open to abuse (it has happened to me, and anyone who reads my posts can tell I'm generally a reasonable person) but it is also not necessary...there's already a system in place where you can report behaviour you believe to be abusive

Whether or not people are going to believe is not the point, though; slander is slander, and a person should be given the right to defend themselves, within reason.

So you want two threads for every argument?  Isn't that just a waste of space?

Holding conversations across multiple threads?  Seems like it would lead to some ludicrous "he said, she said" scenario.  But then, I'm against the idea of blocking from the outset, so I've a horse in this race.