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.

  • SunriseParabellum [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 year ago

    I just don’t get the point. Why bother saying “disengage” when you could just, yah know, stop posting. To me it seems like saying “disengage” rather is just ceasing to reply is still an attempt to get the last word cuz “disengage” has a subtly insulting tone to it, it’s a final “fuck you”.

    • Zuzak [fae/faer, she/her]@hexbear.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      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 [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        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.

        • Zuzak [fae/faer, she/her]@hexbear.netOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          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 [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            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 [fae/faer, she/her]@hexbear.netOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              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.

    • mar_k [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Sometimes a lib will make one libby comment and an hour later have a dozen replies from different hexbear users dunking on that comment, even if they don’t reply to/engage with anyone here. I guess now if they edit their comment with “disengage” at the end, no more of us can come in to dunk? Idk