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.
There's this streamer I sort of follow who did some reaction streams to proximitychat videos. If you don't know, it's basically this guy in VRchat who joins public lobbies and trolls the people in there - most of them crazily obsessed with the game and roleplay to the point of basically living in VR.
This guy will be in a public lobby for maybe hours, constantly trolling, and all they do is ask him to stop. Maybe they'll threaten to remove him as a friend (which is such a common occurrence that it might almost seems like capital punishment to these terminally online dweebs), but they almost never kick or block him outright.
In the reaction streams the question is always, why not just kick and block the guy? Sure, don't block everyone who makes an annoying remark outright, but as I said, this guy is in there for hours without seemingly any attempt to actually get him to stop. It seems that the easiest thing is to just talk a bit, find out he's there in bad faith and then block him, but they never do.
What I'm getting at is, people should block more. Not that, again, you should block everyone who slightly annoys you or challenges your viewpoint, but as soon as you find out they are there in bad faith, just block and move on. I feel ancient for saying this but as they say: don't feed the trolls.
-
I think there’s far fewer genuine trolls than people claim
Most of the time, you’re blocking
Based on what data?
Is it on my list of blocked persons that I don’t think I have shared with anyone? Or on your overall knowledge of humanity in general, or maybe on the careful study of the average user of the Fediverse? Or have we discussed my decision process and how I decide to block a troll or a nuisance? Or is it, I think it is more likely that, based on the fact that I may have used words or expressions in a manner that does not please you, or that may even be incorrect?
For that last possibility, even not knowing where I may have been wrong, I’m pretty confident I can already apologize as I’m not a native English speaker and constantly do mistakes. I would also appreciate if you could tell me what sentences are concerned, so I can learn from my mistakes.
If that is the case, would you feel better if I used the word morons or assholes, instead? Or do you think I should always make a complete sentence? Because to me at least, it’s simpler to use a single word to describe a type of behavior, and even more efficient to use a word everyone should be able to instantly vaguely understand, instead of using a full sentence. I’d rather write ‘I block trolls’ than write‘After checking their behavior, post history, proportion of helpful/contributing content versus not so positive content, frequency of each, their choice of vocabulary and the way they deal with contradiction, I will block those persons that I qualify as trolls but are more exactly excessively obsessed with constantly arguing, proving other wrong (and proving themselves right), creating fuss and drama and triggering emotional reactions when it’s not needed’.
(which, btw, may give you an insight on what criteria I use to decide who is a troll and who is not)
Back to the point.
Someone being an asshole because they had a bad day? Not a troll. Someone deliberately pretending to be something they’re not in order to rile up people for fun? Troll.
How can you tell who they are and are not? I certainly can’t.
So, that’s just your opinion. What’s interesting is to realize that this could also be my own opinion (we all have our bad days, hard to disagree with that) but in any case this would still just an opinion. Not knowledge.
Your opinion is absolutely fine, obviously, but it’s just that: your opinion, aka a gut feeling. So, I hope you won’t get mad at me if I tell you that your gut feeling that I’m being wrong is unlikely to convince me that indeed I am wrong, and should start revising my decision process.
What I don’t consider ‘just an opinion’ is how I feel when I’m confronted to people that constantly/regularly/too often feel it’s ok to share their bad days with the world, or think it’s ok that they want to have some fun (at least, what they think is funny, not sure they would be as ‘open’ to allow what they themselves would consider offensive) by triggering reactions from their reader… A reader which happens to also be me.
but don’t pretend that just cuz your brother is warty that they’re a troll.
If I get this right, when I say I decide to block anyone I don’t wish to read anymore, calling them a troll I'm pretending something about them and I do it wrongfully because I don't really know them?
(That may surprise you but I would agree if I was doing that, which I am not. Because how could I know them? I’m not even sure I know myself after 50+ years trying. But I also thought I made it clear the only thing I was saying is that I did not want to be pestered by them anymore, that it was my choice to block and ignore them not a call to blame them. Like… Don't you have a door to your home, a door with a lock? I sure do. What is it for if not to prevent anyone from entering uninvited? It happens I select very carefully the few people I invite to our place IRL as well as online.)
But then, you telling me that I’m wrong, based on even less evidence than me calling them trolls since 1) you don’t know the persons I blocked and 2) you don’t know how (nor how often and how quickly) I get to this decision, this isn’t pretending anymore but it is you stating as a fact that I’m wrong and being a bit too ‘judgmental’ toward those persons, and too quick to block them?
So, like I said, no hard feelings, but I think I’ll stick with my method for the time being. As imperfect as it is, and it is imperfect, it works well enough to let me experiment an almost completely drama/anger/hate-free experience online, help me waste as little of my time as possible, without preventing anyone else to enjoy it. Which is exactly what I want.
And if you’re wondering, no, us disagreeing is not enough for me to even start considering adding you to that blocked list. Far from it, I appreciate being reminded I should chose my words more carefully
wrote last edited by [email protected]Jesus, what is all this? skimming it looks like half of it is a treatise on epistemology. you're really going to focus on the data?
I've been on the fucking internet too, that's the data. I'm speaking from my own experience in the shared world we've been in, like everyone always does. we at least are clearly on shared spaces.
so like, unless the trolls are all in your DMs, can we skip the text walls about data and skepticism and uncertainty principles??
The rest of your reply seems fairly good spirited but I'm not eager to read it when we start off with paragraph after paragraph of "what data"
I'm not telling you not to block people, I would recommend you double check what I wrote next time before spouting off like that. I said something closer to "you shouldn't call them trolls". I dont see you engaging with that point anywhere....
-
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 have blocked more in the last year than I have in the last 20 combined. There are far, far too many people arguing to troll, arguing in bad faith, threatening, or insulting that will do everything they can to bait you, derail your argument, DM you with insults, etc.
It’s probably because I’ve become far more critical of anti-science, shitty politics, and shitty people, so I’m sure that’s part of the reason, but nonetheless I don’t have the time or patience anymore to waste on the pigeons knocking pieces over and shitting on the chessboard declaring victory, so I block them.
I also have been blocked outright when presenting any objectively factual rebuttal. Facts are often strictly disallowed in the narrative, particularly political and anti-science ones. People don’t want their flow of internet “likes” interrupted.
-
I'm a mod at [email protected] we deal with them a lot. We have really hateful behaviour from them, but we're used to it
-
You see this is what I am talking about. This is either bad faith or someone so clueless they are not even worth talking to.
I'm a mod at [email protected] can confirm there are oodles of Manosphere types and incels here.
-
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]Blocking is self-care. Just with the added teeth of "get tf out of my phone."
That's it.
It's maintaining your personal peace, and frankly I find it weird that it's even a conversation let alone as stigmatized as it is. People still have a litany of ways to reconnect outside digital. It's literally what people had to do before blocking was a thing.
-
Blocking is a VERY GOOD THING.
The internet is a cesspool. You need to curate it.
Only issue I take with this is that the last year has shown us the internet represents living people, even if we put them out of sight.
That said, I don’t exactly know how we “solve” that cesspool.
-
I constantly block both users and communities on Lemmy. Mostly because they are spouting doomer nonsense, and I ain't got no time for their bullshit.
There’s definitely an addicting trend to making people more scared than they should be. News falls to it, individuals seeking attention fall to it too.
-
I have blocked more in the last year than I have in the last 20 combined. There are far, far too many people arguing to troll, arguing in bad faith, threatening, or insulting that will do everything they can to bait you, derail your argument, DM you with insults, etc.
It’s probably because I’ve become far more critical of anti-science, shitty politics, and shitty people, so I’m sure that’s part of the reason, but nonetheless I don’t have the time or patience anymore to waste on the pigeons knocking pieces over and shitting on the chessboard declaring victory, so I block them.
I also have been blocked outright when presenting any objectively factual rebuttal. Facts are often strictly disallowed in the narrative, particularly political and anti-science ones. People don’t want their flow of internet “likes” interrupted.
I need to start blocking people for my own sanity. You tell them the sky is blue, and they'll demand a source. You send them a picture of the sky and they tell you its not a source. You dick about spending 5 minutes of your time finding an actual source because you obviously weren't prepared to defend something so obvious, and they just tell you "pfft [source]. Actually trusting [source] in [thisyear]." It goes on.
-
I'm a mod at [email protected] we deal with them a lot. We have really hateful behaviour from them, but we're used to it
Thank you for sharing.
Reviewed the mod log but I don't see any content being removed for being incel
-
I have blocked more in the last year than I have in the last 20 combined. There are far, far too many people arguing to troll, arguing in bad faith, threatening, or insulting that will do everything they can to bait you, derail your argument, DM you with insults, etc.
It’s probably because I’ve become far more critical of anti-science, shitty politics, and shitty people, so I’m sure that’s part of the reason, but nonetheless I don’t have the time or patience anymore to waste on the pigeons knocking pieces over and shitting on the chessboard declaring victory, so I block them.
I also have been blocked outright when presenting any objectively factual rebuttal. Facts are often strictly disallowed in the narrative, particularly political and anti-science ones. People don’t want their flow of internet “likes” interrupted.
Same man.
I never used to block people on principle... but at the same time people never said horrible shit or harassed me so there really was no reason to.
People also were not posting all sorts of crazy nonsense 10 years ago in the same volume or lever of vitriolic hate they do now.
-
I need to start blocking people for my own sanity. You tell them the sky is blue, and they'll demand a source. You send them a picture of the sky and they tell you its not a source. You dick about spending 5 minutes of your time finding an actual source because you obviously weren't prepared to defend something so obvious, and they just tell you "pfft [source]. Actually trusting [source] in [thisyear]." It goes on.
Yeah I gave up 'sourcing' anything because nobody will believe sources anymore. They will just tell you the source is wrong.
And if you tell them to look up their own sources, they tell you to f yourself and how it isn't their job its yours.
It's stupidity and entitlement wrapped up into one neat package.
I also love people who tell you what you are staying is a 'fallacy' when it's not. And they really do not care about learning what a fallacy actually is... they just want to use it to call other people wrong even if they totally misunderstand how fallacies work.
They simple do not want to admit fault or mistake or god forbid... learn something new.
-
Only issue I take with this is that the last year has shown us the internet represents living people, even if we put them out of sight.
That said, I don’t exactly know how we “solve” that cesspool.
You don't. It's on other people to fix themselves.
Sadly, they think you're a cesspool too for not agreeing with them. I've noticed my opinions have become super controversial now because I'm not a polarized person. And non-polarized viewpoints are EVIL to anyone who is an extremist, and all the extremists think they are moderates are the only ones who see 'the truth'.
-
I think there's far fewer genuine trolls than people claim. Someone being an asshole because they had a bad day? Not a troll. Someone deliberately pretending to be something they're not in order to rile up people for fun? Troll.
Most of the time, you're blocking your brethren on their worst days. Which is your right, but don't pretend that just cuz your brother is warty that they're a troll.
they aren't my 'brethren'
they are strangers spouting nonsense.
i also block/stop talking to my friends/colleagues who also spout nonsense.
-
Because people online are jerks
dunno if you go out into the world much, but they are also massive jerks there too
-
Only way around this is editing your previous comment, though I've been told that can sometimes lead to a ban? Never happened to me though.
What really annoys me about that is that it prevents you from replying to anyone ELSE who replies to you in that thread, which is completely absurd.
for some reason 'editing' comments is considered horrible and awful.
i never understood that myself.
-
It also bleeds over into real life too. It's a habit people develop... just shut out anything/anyone who says anything I don't like or that causes me to have to think.
-
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.
Basically, I give people one or two chances, and then you're done.
Esp if they cross the line into insults and bad/false argumentation
-
It's baffling how quick people are to do it. A while ago, I sold an old electronic thing on Marketplace to someone. A day later, they sent me an angry message saying that it didn't work and how I scammed them, then proceeded to block me. I would've liked the opportunity to troubleshoot with them or even refund the item if it turned out to actually be broken, but... blocking me precludes all that. What exactly did they hope to achieve?
they are a dumb person.
there was no goal. just emotional expression at likely was their own mistake/foolishness.
i've definitely have co workers who blow up at me, then realize their error and sheepishly pretend they never blew up at me rather than apologize.
-
Blocking is self-care. Just with the added teeth of "get tf out of my phone."
That's it.
It's maintaining your personal peace, and frankly I find it weird that it's even a conversation let alone as stigmatized as it is. People still have a litany of ways to reconnect outside digital. It's literally what people had to do before blocking was a thing.
This logic can be applied to using corporate devices... but i guess it is harder
