I've never blocked a person. I value all perspectives especially coming from an angle I may have not considered or previously rejected.

It's good to block people who engage in ad-hominem attacks. It is definitely better than participating in an online flame war.

It is still possible that they're open-minded. It's not like every idea is equally good anyway, and I don't like this mentality of "you will listen to me, or you're something bad". It encourages people to stupidly listen to every idea.

I have never blocked a person over ideology or conversation. The idea doesn't even go through my head. Disagreements are growth. I have been blocked, I am sure. Though, I have never noticed...haha...Sometimes you have to dig for someone to get to what they are really trying to say. And a lot of people hate that.

Some people, I just cannot abide to listen to. Racists, sexists, hate mongers

You can only listen to a guy that has no idea what he’s talking about for so long. Block that d d

I intentionally seek exposure to differing perspectives for the purpose of honing my own, polishing my objectivity, and developing humility and compassion.

Engagement is a different story. I try very hard not to prejudge anyone, for any reason. I do not think it's prejudgment, however, to say that among most people--of any viewpoint--there exists a relationship of inverse proportionality between the strength with which a view is held and the willingness to fairly and objectively evaluate an opposing view --as if entertaining opposing viewpoints somehow threatens your own.

I don't go looking for this phenomenon here or there; I just realize it's endemic to people in general. So in the presence of those with whom I disagree--particularly in a curated environment like a forum, class, club, church, etc.--I generally hold my tongue until and unless I see someone outwardly demonstrate very obvious signs that they are secure in their own thinking enough to not be threatened by dissenting views and enjoy and value engaging with the same. In other words, someone like me.

It's exceedingly rare. I don't hold my breath. But occasionally the planets align and I find someone like me who is not identified with their views and enjoys the exquisite mental exercise of entertaining an idea without accepting it.

Finding these needles in such a prickly haystack is neither easy nor pleasant--but its totally worth it.

When someone starts spouting Woo-Woo science, God, a conspiracy theory, Bermuda Triangle, Loch Ness Monster, Big Foot and other cryptozoology nonsense.

The answer to your question is both yes and no.

I’ve had to block someone on here because they didn’t like my opinion and felt the need to insult me and make assumptions about me. And even when I tastefully said I disagree but do not wish to argue the point, and wishing them a pleasant day, they had to state something else rudely.

However, someone else disagreed with what I said and I had a thoughtful conversation with that person and listened to their point. While I still disagreed with them, and they disagreed with me, it was a pleasant conversation.

So, to sum it up, keeping an open mind isn’t an invitation for people to be jerks. We aren’t here long enough to willingly let people be rude. Block those that aren’t being constructive in your life.

Trolls are a waste of time. The occasional bit of wisdom is completely overwhelmed by the disruptive aspects of trolling.

It could be that the opposing view has already been analyzed and rejected. Blocking distasteful, erroneous, or harmful views doesn't necessarily mean that you are close-minded. Sometimes you have to do it for your own mental health, and sometimes it saves energy to not have to deal with the same issue over and over once it's been decided already.

I block religious people who post hate memes and religious themes. On this website, if someone keeps attacking me, saying "fake news!" with everything I say, I only reply a couple of times before blocking them.

I think you can be open minded and still reject certain ideas/notions without having a conversation about them with someone. For example, I have an acquaintance who is very anti facts--he thinks everything is a conspiracy theory and is very misguided in believing that he's the only one that knows the truth about anything. I refuse to have conversations with him about his ideas because I don't want to elevate the random spewings of his mind to the level of fact.
I'm open to change--provided you have facts and evidence to back your claim, but not accepting someone's ramblings as truth is hardly being close minded.

I have blocked only one person, and it was because we have had a few conversations. I've been blocked by a handful of people and only one sent me a nasty msg first. The others just blocked me. I don't guess it really matters.

Depends. Sometimes if the perspective is so skewed, antithetical to what you think or hostile, sometimes it's not worth a dialogue. Fairplay doesn't require abuse!

maybe I am or maybe I'm not. I just can't be arsed with bullshit anymore. life kicks you in the nuts enough already without dickheads fucking arguing, especially about fairy tales. I really would be happy if I never argued or spoke about fucking religious bullshit ever again.

You must be able to defend your position and that takes listening to theirs.

No vote, I could be open minded and yet not available to waste my time.

Personally I have been /continue to hear the "other side" of my views constantly. I refuse to waste any more of my time or attention on that idiocy than I must. No one owes you attention or to "have your say". Especially when it's the same poorly thought out drivel every other idiot spouts.