What would happen if Yahoo issued each of us a "stalker" report that told us who had been reporting us?

They'd never do it. I think they like their little rat finks.

Hi Wayne,

It's a good idea but will have repercussions as others have mentioned. Yes, it would likely cut down on the number of false reports, but it also might make people more hesitant to report the real violations - such as attacking people with hate or threatening violence.

I do like what Captain Atheism suggests, if the "abuse report is overturned, the reporting party should lose points or face suspension for multiple attempts." Sort of like how the legal system works. If you file a frivolous lawsuit, you are liable for paying the other side's lawyer's fees.

I think we're all missing the real crux of the problem. It's not so much the frivolous reactionaries who report every question that threatens their fragile belief structure. That would not be an issue if YA didn't comply so readily. Captn Atheism mentioned "if the abuse report is overturned". Has this EVER happened?

Bottom line: the solution is twofold. One: there needs to be a means of limiting people's ability to use false reporting as a weapon - maybe limit the number of reports each person can file to one per week, maxing out at 5 per level, and if you file a false report, you lose 200 points. Secondly, YA appears not to have the resources to verify whether each and every report is true or not. It appears to be just an automated process with very little human intervention. This needs to be changed.

I'd be happy to sign each report I ever sent. I wish it was an option. Maybe I'll E-mail a notice in the future.

None on you, by the way. But there are some real hatemongers and sickos on here.

My fearless prediction is that most reporting and loss of accounts would come to a screeching halt even faster than I can go through a box of Godiva chocolate.

Anonymity is what that kind of person counts on because they know there won't be any consequences for their mean-spiritedness. If they knew their names would be available to the person they were harassing, the little cowards wouldn't be nearly as quick to hit that Report button.

"42" was a nice number of responses...the answer to life, the universe and everything...

but I have a hard time thinking 42 people would care about being reported...

So what... you can just go and put the same question up again and maybe the reporter will miss the next one.

Interesting question. Honestly, I wouldn't do anything, but I think that might change the habits of some chronic reporters.

I also wonder if people would keep giving the thumbs-up or, more importantly, thumbs-down if they could not do so anonymously. It's easy to be critical when sitting in front of a monitor and not doing it face-to-face.

I already know who mine are. I can tell by the froth on their mouths when they reply to my questions. When I get abuse reports, there are always certain names associated with the same questions.

I don't know if Yahoo does this or not, but personally, I think if an abuse report is overturned, the reporting party should lose points or face suspension for multiple attempts.

They can't, then how would they keep us from retaliating?

Besides, half the fun of getting reported/blocked is to go back and figure out what pissed them off in the first place.

Well there goes the conspiracy.

I know for a fact it's that damn answers hamster reporting me. The Y!A team is in on it. They won't be giving themselves up.

No need. Conviction lets me know what's the schpiel. Besides, they usually cool-off and get psycho with another, they move on quickly. I shook off my thumbs down stalker for a while, but they've resurfaced. Whateva, God will deal with them in His time. He never leaves a stone unturned, especially when it comes to one of His children. Daddy wuvs His own. {sucks thumbs}

Who's yer Daddy?!

{{{HUGS}}}

people would stop answering questions and start posting private emails to their reporters. They would act like first graders mad at the kid in the back who follows the rules.