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.

  • lennybird@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Very well said, and I think that’s a reasonable take. A balance between protecting yourself but also not necessarily promoting a self-validating echo-chamber. Temporary blocks are genius.

    It’s funny you mention the AI thing. I’m no pro or anything but I am a software engineer and was recently blocked by someone for just noting that AI has its uses in the fight against extremist hate and online discourse and that we shouldn’t necessarily limit our tool box in the fight against fascism — especially when it’s being used against us. That’s actually what spurred my thinking about these knee-jerk blocks.