@tomw It is puzzling, but at least here there seems to be less (still non-zero, but less) emphasis on follower count determining who is allowed to reply. "How dare this person with 100 followers dare interact with me!"
@tomw I am both, depending on the day & what else is going on at the moment. Sometimes I post hoping for interaction because I’m bored or I think I have a good thought that I hope will spark discussion. And other times I post & then forget about it until someone replies and expects me to read an article or watch a 45-minute video on the subject and I’m like Sir I am already bored of this topic which I brought up, and also now I’m busy and resent randos making demands of me.
@KydiaMusic Maybe reply-as-social-obligation is part of it. The way I see it, this is heavily async communication and my reply may never be seen, person may be busy, drop phone in a lake etc, who knows? So I don't experience an obligation to acknowledge replies
@tomw Not just on Mastodon, but some people throw out disdainful "mansplaining"/"reply guy" subtoots whenever anyone even gently disagrees with something they post.
It seems quite an odd mindset to me - if you don't want any reaction, why post it on social media?
@GlasWolf Reply-guying is a real problem - post pretty much anything about a Windows problem for an example ("install Linux!") But yes, some people seem to want no replies ever.
@tomw Absolutely, I was trying to differentiate from that by saying "gently disagrees". It's the overuse of those terms to shut down discussion that grates.
@GlasWolf That said, an ostentatiously faux-civil tone is even worse than a hostile one, and almost always a sign of bad faith, so I can see why mildness can get ignored
@tokyo_0 I can understand it on some level but it seems to escalate to increasingly furious screeds about how no one should ever reply to them. A bit mystifying
Add comment