The "User" of an IP can be many users - so this seems like a non-starter as is. However possibly a "dismiss" option that uses a browser cookie would do?

In T310641#8003813, @Xaosflux wrote:

The "User" of an IP can be many users - so this seems like a non-starter as is. However possibly a "dismiss" option that uses a browser cookie would do?

"However possibly a "dismiss" option that uses a browser cookie would do?" Exactly.

In T310641#8005496, @Aklapper wrote:

I would like IP users to have an option to disable the block prompt (using a cookie), I don't want to see the YOU ARE BLOCKED FROM EDITING WIKIPEDIA!!! message every time I try to access the source of a page.

Adding cookies to make IP users identifiable across IPs does not sound like a good idea when it comes to privacy.
IP users could create an account and add CSS to their Special:MyPage/common.css. Or use whatever browser add-ons they like to locally manipulate content.

You can’t create an account if your blocked. Also, I don't mean a tracking cookie, I mean a local cookie that disables the prompt.

I don't mean a tracking cookie, I mean a local cookie that disables the prompt.

@Ilovemydoodle2: What is the technical difference between a "local cookie" and a "tracking cookie"? All and any of your cookies are local? Without reading your cookie, how would a non-local website be supposed to know that you had a cookie to define that the non-local website should not display something?

In T310641#8007447, @Aklapper wrote:

I don't mean a tracking cookie, I mean a local cookie that disables the prompt.

@Ilovemydoodle2: What is the technical difference between a "local cookie" and a "tracking cookie"? All and any of your cookies are local? Without reading your cookie, how would a non-local website be supposed to know that you had a cookie to define that the non-local website should not display something?

By a local cookie I mean a cookie that isn’t assigned to the IP, rather assigned to the web browser.

In T310641#8008032, @Aklapper wrote:

By a local cookie I mean a cookie that isn’t assigned to the IP, rather assigned to the web browser.

That's not how cookies work. Please do not reopen this task - thanks.

Could you please elaborate?

Adding cookies to make IP users identifiable across IPs does not sound like a good idea when it comes to privacy.

@Aklapper , how is this different from essentially how autoblock works?

@Base: In my understanding it is not. And I guess you've got a point here because we are talking about blocks anyway.

To go further and away from just blocks, my understanding of how IP hiding is going to work is that everyone would have some kind of throwaway account created every time they edit (or open a wiki, no idea at what point it will occur) which will be cookie based. This makes it potentially possible for those accounts to have some preferences, and accordingly this task is potentially actionable.

To go even further, I think mobile users already do have some preferences even when not logged in (although there recently was a regression because of which those weren't shown, not sure if it was fixed yet).

@Ilovemydoodle Do not add random tags; please read their description first. Thanks.

In T310641#8181286, @Aklapper wrote:

@Ilovemydoodle Do not add random tags; please read their description first. Thanks.

Sorry, I misunderstood the meaning of it, I should've looked more carefuly.