Do you have a criteria for what qualifies as block-worthy offence or are you just doing it when you feel like it?
Bonus question: how long is your block list?
You must log in or register to comment.
I blocked two accounts on my instance that kept posting porn without the NSFW tag, as a troll. From the message it was likely the same person who owned both accounts.
Mostly racism, sexism, bad-faith arguments, and some religious stuff. I often double-check a person’s post history to make sure I’m not just reading it wrong. I also do so to make sure I’m not blocking someone for a single bad day or bad take.
I think younger me would have argued more or tried to convince them of things by showing evidence, but I just don’t have the time or energy at the moment; I have a full-time job, a small farm, and home maintenance on the (used) house I moved into 6 months ago.
I don’t tend to block anyone online unless I feel like they are harassing me. Haven’t blocked anyone on Lemmy so far. I think people can be too quick to block others who have different points of view these days.
Bad faith arguments and hatred of any minority. That covers about 99% of it
Beyond the obvious trolls and complete loons, I also block people who never contribute an original comment or post and only reply to other comments in order to “correct” other people or “call them out”. Their comment history makes it immediately obvious when they are this type of user.
They strike me as particularly cowardly and obnoxious, because they only want to attack / start something against, and never risk a simple original assertion of their own. Offense being the best defense, etc. They probably think of themselves as verbal judo masters.
IOW, they are basically using Lemmy as fodder for their pedantry. I’m not interested at all in engaging with this type of jackass. Unfortunately there are a lot of them on the internet. My block list is long.
Tankies go straight to the Shadow Realm
Being unnecessarily rude, or arguing in bad faith. Got about a dozen people on my block list.
My blocklist is 30~40 users long. [For reference, my blocklist in Reddit reached 400 or so.]
To keep it short, I typically block people who, egregious or consistently:
- show lack of reasoning, even if I agree with the conclusion
- misrepresent what others say
- take things off context to judge them, even if I agree with the judgement
- vomit lots of “hard” certainty on things that they cannot reasonably know (e.g. the others’ emotional states over the internet)
- engage in passive aggressiveness (note that I tolerate some clear hostility, just not pass-aggro)
- show clear signs of sealioning (e.g. “I don’t understand” + misrepresentation of what someone else said)
- tell others shit like “trust me” = “I expect you to be a gullible piece of rubbish”
Note that “egregious or consistently” are key words here. Like, I’m not going out of my way to block someone out of a brainfart; this is not some sort of petty revenge, it’s just removing from my sight people who I believe to not contribute with my overall Lemmy experience. I also don’t take issue when people block me, for whatever reason they might have.
I’ll reply to myself to avoid editing the above. The other user made me realise that what I said about pass-aggro is unclear - since the expression is used with multiple meanings.
In this specific context, by passive aggressiveness, I mean “an utterance showing politeness as a disguise for rudeness”.
I’ll give you guys an example. Imagine that Alice says “I saw a potato tree today”. And Bob replies to Alice one of the following:
- “Potatoes do not grow on trees.”
- “Potato tree? Are you braindead or what?”
- “Yeah sure, and I saw some unicorns today. Because you know, potatoes totally grow on trees, right?”
- “Oh dear perhaps you’re a bit confused, so let me enlighten you. Potatoes do not grow on trees. I understand that this might be a bit too complex for you to understand, but put on some effort, okay?”
The first three are not pass-aggro. #1 is simply dry (no attempt at politeness or rudeness); #2 is simply rude (I’m typically OK with that within limits). #3 uses irony and sarcasm in such an obvious way that it comes off as simply rude, there’s no attempt to use the irony to disguise the insult. Only #4 is pass-aggro, as it calls Alice stupid and lazy in a disguised way.
I tend to block people who do this because they rub me off the wrong way - it shows a lack of dignity to be upfront that you don’t see in plain rudeness.
Sealioning is a made up term by those too lazy to explain a concept and looking to antagonise others because they “cannot possibly be unaware of X fact that I care so much about”.
Funnily enough saying someone is sealioning falls within the passive-aggressive behaviour you seem to despise so much.
Sealioning is the discussion equivalent of a DoS (denial of service) attack. In both, the content of the reply is irrelevant; the goal is to flood the person/machine with multiple requests, until they reach a limit and
stop droppingdrop the requests altogether.And while the concept has some problems because it handles some esoteric babble called “intentions” (see: “goal”), it’s still useful when you focus on the behaviour instead.
Funnily enough saying someone is sealioning falls within the passive-aggressive behaviour you seem to despise so much.
Pass-aggro is about tone, not content. You can state something like “you’re sealioning” in a passive aggressive way, or a rude way, or under a bald-on record, so goes on.
[Edit reason: phrasing.]
Sealioning is the discussion equivalent of a DoS (denial of service) attack. In both, the content of the reply is irrelevant; the goal is to flood the person/machine with multiple requests, until they reach a limit and stop dropping the requests altogether.
Thank you for putting it this way. This clarifies some things for me.
You made me notice a revision error in my own comment (“stop dropping” is supposed to be simply “drop”). I’m glad that the meaning is still retrievable though, due to the analogy.
I wasn’t the one who created the analogy, by the way, but it’s damn useful/didactic. Specially because there’s also a sealioning equivalent of DDoS, far more effective than when done by a single entity.
I knew what you meant. It is damn useful, especially for understanding peoples motives offline too. Saving the analogy to my brain for later use.
I’m happy to block people. I don’t owe anybody my time or energy, if they’re tedious and annoying in situation a, they probably will be in B as well.
Its the internet, I just dont care. I’m going to make my experience tolerable and if I can’t I’ll leave. 🤷♂️
I agree. I could block 90% of the people online and there would still be an endless feed of new content to pay attention to. I don’t miss anything by blocking users that I wouldn’t be missing either way.
I block assholes. It drives me up the wall when someone is disrespectful for no reason. I also dislike those who get unnecessarily aggressive on the first message because the previous comment doesn’t align with their views. I’ll usually set a boundary and let people correct their attitude. After that, I’ll block.
I’m also considering blocking those who make a hobby of subverting the previous comment by twisting people’s words and overloading them with something the person did not mean to say, but those are trickier.
I’m also considering blocking those who make a hobby
of subverting the previous comment by twisting people’s words and overloading them with something the person did not mean to say, but those are trickier.What do you have against hobbies? Why do you think that people should only eat, work and sleep? Do you loathe people that much??? /s
Serious now. I block this sort of people, and heavily recommend others to do the same. They’re a waste of time; even if you clarify what they’re distorting they’ll do it again, and again. It is a bit tricky because genuine miscommunication also happens, but I typically solve that by checking the profile for consistent behaviour. The “controversial” sorting works wonders here.
Pretty much my criteria exactly. An off remark is fine, we all fuck up once in awhile, but consistent rude or dishonest behaviour gets them a block. It’s not worth my time and emotional energy to deal with angry children. I get enough of that at work already.
What I think is funny is someone I blocked also responded to your comment.
Yeah, I have no patience for these types. Just dealt with one. They love to assume something weird and awful that no one would’ve meant and then harass you about it. I struggle not to be rude to dickheads like that.
That’s why I tag people who do this. It becomes much easier to figure out who is consistently being a shithead or pushing an agenda.
What are you using to tag users? I want to do this too.
EDIT: nevermind, you mentioned it in another comment (Boost). It wouldn’t work for me as I’m using Lemmy from a computer. Still, it’s some great functionality, I wish that it existed for the web interface too. (There was/is a Firefox extension for that in Reddit, and I miss it. It wasn’t only useful to tag “bad” users, but also good ones - I used it all the time in r/linguistics to tag the expertise area of some laymen.)
It’s definitely a feature that’s sorely needed for the browser versions.
those who get unnecessarily aggressive on the first message because the previous comment doesn’t align with their views
i feel like thats more of a turbo-redditor-moved-to-lemmy thing
Being a bad actor.
insulting and calling what they are doing ‘a discussion’.
Telling everyone else they suck on a game that requires they participate.
Making rude demands of others in a free for all group that benefits themselves only.
Being on the internet whether it’s on a forum, dating site, YouTube or game is for entertainment. We’re each paying for this entertainment too. So if your idea and my idea do not line up for what qualifies as entertainment then we don’t need to be interacting.
A demonstration that the person is not interested in a conversation, they just want to grandstand and use rhetoric tricks to feel like they are superior and are strictly aiming to used the conversation as a way to inflate their sense of self worth at the cost of treating you like a human being.
“No way I am reading all that” on a average sized post while expounding their opinion in an equally lengthy paragraph is usually the same start of the end. These people are generally not actively trolling they are just up their own ass. If they cannot demonstrate basic intellectual mutual respect after having this pointed out to them blocking them is both for best of us.
A particular pet peeve is people who quote every bit of a post in sections to refute it. It’s lazy and I have witnessed it from people in my life who are extremely narcissistic. Writing your own brief is respectful. Essentially writing over someone else’s entire post with red pen isn’t. It’s not a block, but it’s a contributing factor
If it’s someone using very bad faith rhetoric like moving goalposts or extreme cherrypicking - basically any stuff that demonstrates obvious trolling I don’t block, I counterpunch. My goal becomes making sure you do not leave the arguement with what you come there for.
All in all I have blocked about 3 people. I believe in second chances so someone has to show no signs of improvement after about an average of 7 replies.
Hexbear users mostly. About 20 of them harrased me because I said South Park is funny. One guy was even using an alt to insult me on all of my unrelated comments. That was my introduction to Hexbear lol.
Hey be nice to them, that’s actually written in chapter 420 of Das Kapital, “Thou shalt save the world by being dicks online”
I usually tag problematic users (usually those who constantly discuss in bad faith, are needlessly hostile or rude towards other users, or push dis/misinformation and propaganda) so I know who are repeat offenders with consistent bad behaviour, but I rarely block people unless it’s very clear that they have no interest in participating in good faith or are so irritating that I can’t deal with them anymore. A lot of problematic users still have valuable things to say and I’d rather not make my feed an echo chamber, even if those people often piss me off with their nonsense. But with some of them it sure is tempting.
My block list has I think 7 people on it. I only block if someone makes my Lemmy experience worse any time I see something from them. Disagreement I am fine with. It’s healthy to see other viewpoints, even if I don’t agree. (Or if it’s an issue of morality, like not viewing minorities as people, a grim reminder that people think like that. Fortunately by the time I see those, someone else has replied on the matter.) Being inflammatory and adding no value to any discussions is what gets you blocked for me. I know I have blocked several spammers, but it appears that their accounts got deleted.
I have blocked many communities though. It’s mostly porn. Furry porn, not for me. Anime porn where the subjects look too young… Just don’t want to see that. Porn that just isn’t my taste. I would just block NSFW but there is some NSFW that isn’t necessarily porn that I want to see. (Ex: frank discussions about anatomy)The stuff that isn’t porn is just communities that are inflammatory echo chambers.
I browse all because I don’t have many subscriptions that are active, so that is why I have so many communities blocked.
Anime porn where the subjects look too young
That seems to be all of it. The amount of pedo bullshit on this platform is staggering. I still see it even with instance and keyword filters.
