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
[–] Zuzak@hexbear.net 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It closes a discussion so it's not left hanging. It's a neutral response to just close it with no one feeling pressured to respond. If you don't like it, take it up with the mods.

[–] SunriseParabellum@hexbear.net 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Okay, but, doesn't it only apply to the current thread? It doesn't really stop other people from replying to other comments you made in the same comment section, or even the same person from replying to you elsewhere, it'd be unreasonable to expect that cuz who the fuck is gonna keep track of which user said "disengage" where and when. If someone was really pestering me I'd just block them.

I'm not bothered enough by it to get into an argument with the mods, since those tend to be pointless, I just don't get the logic beyond it behind a more polite-ish sounding way to end the convo with a "fuck you".

Edit: Also shouldn't it be disengaging since YOURE disengaging? Saying "disengage" sound like you're commanding the other person to disengage, which seems like trying to get the last word in.

[–] hukurowl@hexbear.net 14 points 1 year ago
[–] Zuzak@hexbear.net 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It doesn't really stop other people from replying to other comments you made in the same comment section, or even the same person from replying to you elsewhere

It kinda does though. It applies to other comments in the same thread, with other threads I don't think there's a clear rule but if someone keeps telling you to disengage and you keep responding to them, it could be considered crossing a line into personal harassment. Though that was more for when we didn't have a block feature. Really a lot of the logic for it was for before we had that, but the rule still applies.

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

It applies to other comments in the same thread

In bigger threads I think that's a little unreasonable, I don't always keep track of the user names I'm engaging, so it'd totally be possible for someone to tell me to "disengage" them in one comment chain and for me to end up engaging them somewhere else in the same thread without realizing it.

I mean I kinda get it, but idk how necessary it is when we have block now. Also I still think "disengage" has a smarmy, condescending tone to it which still makes it come off as an attempt to have the last work, at least I've seen it used that way. IDK maybe posting like EXITING or something would come off less "fuck you".

[–] Zuzak@hexbear.net 9 points 1 year ago

I mean tbh if it gives an incentive to end a discussion and "get the last word in" then good. It can be hard for either side to extradite themselves from a toxic argument, and you're still leaving everything they said unanswered, which is hard to do. It's also like, you can read "Disengage" as telling them to disengage but it can be read as "[I] disengage" too so imo it's more neutral than you give it credit for.

I remember I've used "disengage" with a user before at least once, but tbh I don't really remember the context anymore, it blew over and we're cool now. It's less extreme than a block, and it's something to keep in your back pocket for when someone gets a little too intense or dunk brained, but you don't want to cut them off completely.

If you're worried that you can't keep track of all the people telling you to disengage, you can always block them.