this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2023
155 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13535 readers
57 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Gossip posts go in c/gossip. Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from c/gossip

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

That's it. Our instance requires us to stop responding if you explicitly ask us to. It's right here buried in our Code of Conduct

Any discussions may be opted out of by disengaging.

In the past, this rule has only applied to the specific user you say it to. I'd like to suggest going forward that if someone on another instance uses it, we treat it as applying to all of us.

Unfortunately this rule wasn't communicated clearly before, so I'm making this post for visibility.

Edit: As the comments clarify, this has to be done in good faith, typically just a one word "disengage" comment. If you add more stuff to the discussion and then say "disengage" at the end, you're not disengaging, it's a way to put a stop to a toxic argument not to get the last word in.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] PM_ME_YOUR_FOUCAULTS@hexbear.net 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The person asking to disengage has to disengage as well. Ideally the format is just saying "disengage" and the other person leaves it at that

[–] SunriseParabellum@hexbear.net 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You could just disengage by, yah know, not replying. What's the point of saying "disengage"?

[–] PM_ME_YOUR_FOUCAULTS@hexbear.net 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)
  1. I actually kind of agree with you on this one, but some people don't have the self control to do this when they're in the midst of a heated argument

  2. It also covers cases where one person does that but the other person keeps replying to them elsewhere in the thread or in another thread, keeping the argument going

  3. And also we didn't have a block function then, if you really need someone to get off your ass then there had to be some way to handle it and this is what was decided on

[–] SunriseParabellum@hexbear.net 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It also covers cases where one person does that but the other person keeps replying to them elsewhere in the thread or in another thread, keeping the argument going

Well yeah I agree with that, should be bannable. But fell like there's more eloquent ways of initiating it than saying "disengage" flatly to someone. Comes off as a bit of a condescending way to end a convo.

I didn't really like the rule when it was proposed and I don't think that it ever really worked as well as it was intended to, but eh, its fine