Why is blocking so common nowadays?
-
There may be an age or generational explanation for this, but I especially notice this behavior on Reddit while not nearly as much here on Lemmy (though maybe that's also a mater of implementation).
It seems many are so quick to assert overly-confident positions, but then hit-and-run with some smarmy remark at even the slightest challenge, then quickly block. Like, not even crazy stuff. Just basic, civil disagreements. I can pretty well predict when it will happen, and it always feels like such a petty ego-sparing fingers-in-ears denial thing to do, and to me if anything shows they were not very confident in their views being challenged.
I think I've only blocked a handful of people over a decade who were actively spamming, stalking, or spewing extremely hateful rhetoric and I just reported them simultaneously. You have to cross a pretty extreme and irrational line for me to do that.
The reason I ask is to see if I'm missing something; to better understand the mindset of those who do.
I value my time, patience and sanity. There had been too many instances where I've poured way too much investment into things or people that just were not worth a single minute. The moment I feel someone gives me a snarky remark, wants to be a prick, wants to gaslight and whatever petty and bitter levels of engagement they want to bother me with. Fuck them, they'll be blocked.
It does not make you weak or petty, that's just them making up bullshit to excuse themselves when they knowingly were the problem.
Now in some cases it can be a little stupid to block people, like knowing you're the one starting shit or deciding to get into debates you aren't fitted to handle. Why would you do that to yourself? If you can't handle it, don't do anything. Lesson learned.
Damn if there was a function in real life where I can block someone and their existence disappears where other people can see them and I can't? Fuck, dude, sign me up.
-
Follow-up to this question after seeing many responses (and thank you): What is your default mode for self-doubt when engaging in discussions?
That is, no matter how confident you may be in something, do you maintain an open door, or are your beliefs you block over completely set in stone?
For me, little terrifies me more than becoming the thing I hate; to be clouded by my own cognitive bias; to inadvertently throw myself into an echo-chamber of self-validation. As such I try my best to always maintain at least the slightest bit of doubt in even my strongest beliefs, and to that end to at least let dialogue challenging that come through.
Little bit of a pointer but you can edit your post and title.
Anyways, digressing there. But, I am always willing to hear some alternative takes from different people with different perspectives. The dealbreaker is in the approach. If you cannot come into a discussion, a conversation, a debate or anything without feeling the need to put down someone to prove a point or be self-righteous? You can go fuck yourself and be placed in the blocked bin.
And even so, there is only so much irrational and wild things people do and say that just upsets the vibe with someone or groups to where, blocking can be seen as a way to filter that out.
-
Blocking is tempting when someone actively ignores arguments but keeps coming back with the same thing over and over, or can't avoid ad hominem attacks.
That said, my block list is empty, but I have tagged people so I know if I'm running into them again.
Pretty much exactly the same here. Can you tag people on Lemmy (how?) or do you do it on a separate text file?
-
I used to agree with you. Ever since I started just blocking anyone that was being annoying my experience on the web has been great.
If you are talking about banning people in debate, Then you are not being fair. Any criticism can cause annoyance to some people, even if criticism have pleasant wording
-
There may be an age or generational explanation for this, but I especially notice this behavior on Reddit while not nearly as much here on Lemmy (though maybe that's also a mater of implementation).
It seems many are so quick to assert overly-confident positions, but then hit-and-run with some smarmy remark at even the slightest challenge, then quickly block. Like, not even crazy stuff. Just basic, civil disagreements. I can pretty well predict when it will happen, and it always feels like such a petty ego-sparing fingers-in-ears denial thing to do, and to me if anything shows they were not very confident in their views being challenged.
I think I've only blocked a handful of people over a decade who were actively spamming, stalking, or spewing extremely hateful rhetoric and I just reported them simultaneously. You have to cross a pretty extreme and irrational line for me to do that.
The reason I ask is to see if I'm missing something; to better understand the mindset of those who do.
Counterpoint- why hasn't blocking been more common?
I'm a millennial, so I've basically grown up with the internet. Blocking has been a feature on basically any website, app, etc. that lets you interact with other people for as long as I can remember.
And I've never been afraid to use it. I've blocked probably hundreds of people across countless platforms over the last 2 decades or so, and I think my Internet experience has been better for it.
When I was in school, and I assume still to this day, one of the big things that always seemed to have people's feathers ruffled was "cyberbullying" and other sorts of online harassment.
Now I'll admit, somehow I ended up a reasonably well-liked, maybe even popular dude, (no idea how my weird, antisocial, probably-autistic ass pulled that off) so I was never really the target of it myself.
But it always baffled me how people let it be a thing. A whole lot of those problems always seemed like they could have been solved by just hitting the block button.
Not all of them of course, but a lot of them. Blocking someone of course doesn't stop them from talking about you to someone else, but at that point a lot of it can just be out of sight and out of mind.
Back when I still had a Facebook, I had probably half of my town blocked because they were always posting dumb shit in the local groups. I had a bunch of businesses blocked because they spammed advertisements everywhere. I had actual friends who I hung out with IRL blocked or at least unfollowed because they flooded my feed with shitposts. Half of my family was blocked because I just didn't want to deal with them on social media. I preemptively blocked people I work with or otherwise knew casually because they don't need to see what I'm doing online.
-
There may be an age or generational explanation for this, but I especially notice this behavior on Reddit while not nearly as much here on Lemmy (though maybe that's also a mater of implementation).
It seems many are so quick to assert overly-confident positions, but then hit-and-run with some smarmy remark at even the slightest challenge, then quickly block. Like, not even crazy stuff. Just basic, civil disagreements. I can pretty well predict when it will happen, and it always feels like such a petty ego-sparing fingers-in-ears denial thing to do, and to me if anything shows they were not very confident in their views being challenged.
I think I've only blocked a handful of people over a decade who were actively spamming, stalking, or spewing extremely hateful rhetoric and I just reported them simultaneously. You have to cross a pretty extreme and irrational line for me to do that.
The reason I ask is to see if I'm missing something; to better understand the mindset of those who do.
last I checked I had over 220 users blocked. now it's probably 250.
I block people who are willfully ignorant or trolls.
-
If you are talking about banning people in debate, Then you are not being fair. Any criticism can cause annoyance to some people, even if criticism have pleasant wording
I never said anything about a debate
-
There may be an age or generational explanation for this, but I especially notice this behavior on Reddit while not nearly as much here on Lemmy (though maybe that's also a mater of implementation).
It seems many are so quick to assert overly-confident positions, but then hit-and-run with some smarmy remark at even the slightest challenge, then quickly block. Like, not even crazy stuff. Just basic, civil disagreements. I can pretty well predict when it will happen, and it always feels like such a petty ego-sparing fingers-in-ears denial thing to do, and to me if anything shows they were not very confident in their views being challenged.
I think I've only blocked a handful of people over a decade who were actively spamming, stalking, or spewing extremely hateful rhetoric and I just reported them simultaneously. You have to cross a pretty extreme and irrational line for me to do that.
The reason I ask is to see if I'm missing something; to better understand the mindset of those who do.
I use it to curate my lemmy experiance. 99% of the users/communities I block aren't for anything personal, they're just clogging up my ALL feed with things I dont care about (for example, sports ball or foreign language comms).
-
There may be an age or generational explanation for this, but I especially notice this behavior on Reddit while not nearly as much here on Lemmy (though maybe that's also a mater of implementation).
It seems many are so quick to assert overly-confident positions, but then hit-and-run with some smarmy remark at even the slightest challenge, then quickly block. Like, not even crazy stuff. Just basic, civil disagreements. I can pretty well predict when it will happen, and it always feels like such a petty ego-sparing fingers-in-ears denial thing to do, and to me if anything shows they were not very confident in their views being challenged.
I think I've only blocked a handful of people over a decade who were actively spamming, stalking, or spewing extremely hateful rhetoric and I just reported them simultaneously. You have to cross a pretty extreme and irrational line for me to do that.
The reason I ask is to see if I'm missing something; to better understand the mindset of those who do.
I dunno I haven’t blocked anyone and I don’t know if anyone has blocked me.
-
Bots, trolls, egomanics, thin skinneds.
Does that leave anyone left?
-
Pretty much exactly the same here. Can you tag people on Lemmy (how?) or do you do it on a separate text file?
I use Voyager and it supports tagging.
-
There may be an age or generational explanation for this, but I especially notice this behavior on Reddit while not nearly as much here on Lemmy (though maybe that's also a mater of implementation).
It seems many are so quick to assert overly-confident positions, but then hit-and-run with some smarmy remark at even the slightest challenge, then quickly block. Like, not even crazy stuff. Just basic, civil disagreements. I can pretty well predict when it will happen, and it always feels like such a petty ego-sparing fingers-in-ears denial thing to do, and to me if anything shows they were not very confident in their views being challenged.
I think I've only blocked a handful of people over a decade who were actively spamming, stalking, or spewing extremely hateful rhetoric and I just reported them simultaneously. You have to cross a pretty extreme and irrational line for me to do that.
The reason I ask is to see if I'm missing something; to better understand the mindset of those who do.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I think the only thing that has really changed is that way more people just talk about who and what they block instead of just blocking and moving on.
-
I have done this a few times, for me it was just that I was writing a reply and 80% through I realized that I didn't want to argue any more, so I blocked the guy after posting it, just so I wouldn't get any more crap to deal with.
So I get this feeling— and I don’t mean to say your mode of operation is not valid— but why not just stop replying? I’ve never been in a situation where I’ve had an argument in a thread and one side stopped talking and it continued for more than two posts or something.
-
I use it to curate my lemmy experiance. 99% of the users/communities I block aren't for anything personal, they're just clogging up my ALL feed with things I dont care about (for example, sports ball or foreign language comms).
Why are you subscribed to them? No need to block just curate.
-
Counterpoint- why hasn't blocking been more common?
I'm a millennial, so I've basically grown up with the internet. Blocking has been a feature on basically any website, app, etc. that lets you interact with other people for as long as I can remember.
And I've never been afraid to use it. I've blocked probably hundreds of people across countless platforms over the last 2 decades or so, and I think my Internet experience has been better for it.
When I was in school, and I assume still to this day, one of the big things that always seemed to have people's feathers ruffled was "cyberbullying" and other sorts of online harassment.
Now I'll admit, somehow I ended up a reasonably well-liked, maybe even popular dude, (no idea how my weird, antisocial, probably-autistic ass pulled that off) so I was never really the target of it myself.
But it always baffled me how people let it be a thing. A whole lot of those problems always seemed like they could have been solved by just hitting the block button.
Not all of them of course, but a lot of them. Blocking someone of course doesn't stop them from talking about you to someone else, but at that point a lot of it can just be out of sight and out of mind.
Back when I still had a Facebook, I had probably half of my town blocked because they were always posting dumb shit in the local groups. I had a bunch of businesses blocked because they spammed advertisements everywhere. I had actual friends who I hung out with IRL blocked or at least unfollowed because they flooded my feed with shitposts. Half of my family was blocked because I just didn't want to deal with them on social media. I preemptively blocked people I work with or otherwise knew casually because they don't need to see what I'm doing online.
I have never blocked any one on the internet. And I probably have been in online conversations for longer than you have been alive.
I find it so strange that people do that. We learned in the 80's that people are probably liars and there are trolls. So just ignore them.
Turns out a lot of people may have something that gets you annoyed while at the same time have something worthwhile to say about a different topic.
And how are we ever going to learn from each other if we just block each other all the time?
-
I dunno I haven’t blocked anyone and I don’t know if anyone has blocked me.
If you want, I'll block you so you can feel included.
-
There may be an age or generational explanation for this, but I especially notice this behavior on Reddit while not nearly as much here on Lemmy (though maybe that's also a mater of implementation).
It seems many are so quick to assert overly-confident positions, but then hit-and-run with some smarmy remark at even the slightest challenge, then quickly block. Like, not even crazy stuff. Just basic, civil disagreements. I can pretty well predict when it will happen, and it always feels like such a petty ego-sparing fingers-in-ears denial thing to do, and to me if anything shows they were not very confident in their views being challenged.
I think I've only blocked a handful of people over a decade who were actively spamming, stalking, or spewing extremely hateful rhetoric and I just reported them simultaneously. You have to cross a pretty extreme and irrational line for me to do that.
The reason I ask is to see if I'm missing something; to better understand the mindset of those who do.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I've been online since BBS days. Never blocked anyone. Never could understand why people do that. Just ignore them, whatever.
So many people, later on down the road have something to say worthwhile that I wouldn't have known if I just blocked them. Gotta give some leeway on the internet, no one really knows tone or intent most of the time.
-
Why are you subscribed to them? No need to block just curate.
I subscribe to ones I'm interested in. But sometimes I browse all to stumble across new interesting communities. I block the ones I see repeatedly and aren't interested in. I block mass posters, I block bots, I block tankies, I block mods/admins of larger communities. It just makes my all browsing time more efficient.
-
I use it to curate my lemmy experiance. 99% of the users/communities I block aren't for anything personal, they're just clogging up my ALL feed with things I dont care about (for example, sports ball or foreign language comms).
wrote last edited by [email protected]next you'll tell me you don't like incredibly low effort political memes reposted from (social media site you specifically joined lemmy to avoid), smh
-
So I get this feeling— and I don’t mean to say your mode of operation is not valid— but why not just stop replying? I’ve never been in a situation where I’ve had an argument in a thread and one side stopped talking and it continued for more than two posts or something.
In situations where I do this, I am annoyed at the other guy, and the last comment they made was so glaringly wrong that it was far more important for me to reply and block and just to block.
I know it is stupid, but that is the feeling of the time.
