FYI @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] and a few others
A rage bait post they just restored: https://lemmy.world/post/24282976. The initial removal was about rule 3 - no rage baiting. That rule has been removed.
Another rage bait comment against vegans: https://lemmy.world/comment/14535452
Lemmy supports blocking users
Note to both @[email protected] and @[email protected] for the future. 1. Respect people asking you to
disengagein this instance. Just stop replying. Likewise if you want someone todisengage, don’t also write a wall of text to which they might feel they need to reply. Just reply withdisengage.Finally, this is an official warning that this discussion seems to have run its course and is devolving into a flamewar. I can’t just lock one thread, so please just stop replying to each other or I’ll have to issue a 1-day ban.
if this is an instance-wide rule, it should be stated in the main sidebar. it’s not a deal breaker for me, but I strongly feel people should be encouraged to use the block feature, rather than getting the power to decide who is allowed to participate in a discussion.
Ye I should probably add smt. Just a lot to do.
The point of the disengage is that sometimes you might not necessarily want to block a person. Blocking still allows them to talk shit about you without you seeing it for example. The disengage is a way to say “ok, let’s agree to disagree before things get (more) flamey” in a succinct and official manner. You don’t always want to block everyone you get into a heated argument with, so there’s good to have a way to disengage where neither party feels like they have to have the final word.
I hope lemmy at some point would give us a way to lock individual comment threads.
Disengage should only be enforceable if it’s invoked in good faith. Posting a wall of text and using it to get the last word forfeits any protection it provides. It’s the equivalent of calling for a fair catch in American football, then attempting a return.
Immediate edit: it doesn’t even have to be a wall of text. Any response included with the disengage request invites further discussion and suggests that there is a desire to continue the conversation, at least to the extent of having the final say.
That’s what I said already, yes
Great, then we see eye to eye on it. I think it needs to be made as explicit as it possibly can be, so I responded with my own thoughts. It’s wonderful to know that more than one person can share a viewpoint.
I am already aware, thanks for the reminder :) When someone says to disengage, it means they want to stop the conversation because it is not worth any more of their time.
I think animals are tortured in the industry, you do not, I think people not buying meat can cause a change, you do not. What more is there to say? Nothing. So kindly, please disengage and stop messaging me 3 times at once, 1 message is fine.
don’t tell me what to do.