Twitter, or X, as some are now calling it for whatever reason, is a weird place. So many changes have happened since the Musk of it all, but also people at their core still act exactly the same. Nothing changes on social media, ever. It's a jungle out there!
Maybe it's just me but I feel like the block feature on these sites exists for a very valid reason, but is constantly abused just like everything else on these platforms. Sure, if you're being endlessly harassed or bullied by someone who just won't leave you alone... block them. That's what it's there for. However, that is hardly ever why the block button gets pushed.
More often than not I see users issuing blocks like an addict popping pills. People use it as a way to get the last word in on an argument or flat out remove all dissenting opinion from the content that they publish. How many times have we seen someone use it as a threat?
Act such and such way or you're getting blocked.
It's full on adult toddler status on the internet made real. It's become so bad that getting blocked by a big account has become a badge of honor across the entire paradigm of social media. The recipe is simple: post reasonable dissenting opinions as comments on the main thread, get blocked, and then gloat about getting blocked and show off how weak-minded the account in question really is.
I honestly just can't get over this psychological disconnect that is the Internet and social media. We've all fallen victim to this; I'm not just talking about serial blockers right now. When we communicate through the Internet it is simply not the same as communicating in real life. It isn't real. We tend to use social media as an outlet for catharsis, drama, and conflict. We say and do things on the web that we would never do in person. It is what it is.
All WEB2 applications revolve around creating purposefully addictive user experiences (UX) that keep them coming back every day. The block button is no different. Even though these companies know that their users are abusing this functionality it simply does not matter. The block button gives these people this god-mode sense of power and so they are simply allowed to use it in whatever way they see fit. The customer is always right.
There are a few key differences in WEB3 that add a bit more nuance to this situation. For starters in WEB3 all the data is public, so while we do have a mute button that gets enforced on the frontend everyone still has access to all the data on the backend. In fact it would be very possible to purposefully create a frontend that purposefully shows all of the content being censored by the other frontends. That alone creates some interesting rabbit holes we could go down. Of course nothing like that has actually happened yet because the value of such a thing just isn't in the cards at the moment. For now it's just all game theory.
But also on a very real level WEB3 takes reputation and right-action a lot more seriously than its WEB2 counterparts. WEB3 networks can enforce this type of behavior because there is actual money on the line. At the same time we can avoid being controlled by outside entities by sidestepping or ignoring the WEB2 data-selling ad model. Everything is transparent. We can all see what's happening on the backend. Any potential strong-arming is visible in broad daylight rather than be tucked into these secretive little shadow bans and echo chambers that WEB2 social has come to employ.
On a fundamental level I would argue that the honor system and personal reputation simply matter a lot more under the WEB3 paradigm than they do on WEB2. In addition, I'd say that it's much more difficult to sellout on WEB3 and cash in on those good graces at the expense of others. I mean just look at the hostile takeover. Where is Ned? Where is that little shit? He certainly didn't fail up to bigger and better things like so many before him within the traditional corporate ladder. Get wrecked, failure: you'll never work in this town again!
Hey guys look at me it's Ned Scott that dipshit who never did anything noteworthy after selling out like a bitch.
-ned
I write this post today because I got blocked by someone on Crypto Twitter who I used to get along with quite well. That being said this person clearly has some major personal issues because their attitude shift online over the last few months has been nothing but insulting and aggressive across account interactions.
Over a series of discussions I was called an "idiot" for not making money on Solana, a sociopath and troll for making valid arguments, and a 'failed influencer' with a weak ego needing a boost. Meanwhile, I'm just doing my thing that I always do and giving my honest opinion on things, not even trying to escalate the situation. Oh but escalate it did!
Solana is a trash VC network that I have refused to engage with since day one. That's just a basic and understandable political stance. Being called a sociopath and a troll for mirroring logic seems a bit extreme. Like if someone says something is a "false equivalence" and I correctly use that term down the line, is that trolling? Hm!
As for being called a failed influencer, I feel like that one was supposed to hit the hardest, but honestly I've never even considered myself an 'influencer' at all so it's kind of funny to even be called that in the first place. Aren't influencers those douchebags who try to act like experts on things and monetize their brand in any way possible? Woof, no thanks.
In any case it was unceremoniously ended with one of those classic "do what I say or I'm blocking you" moves where they block you anyway just to get the last word edgewise. Classic Twitter. End of an era!
At the same time I feel like it's a bit petty to sit here and give my potentially biased side of the story within some pointless and random online argument. The other side of that coin it's kind of the perfect example to showcase exactly what I'm talking about. People love to lie to themselves.
This guy convinced me that he was blocking me because I "had nothing to offer" and "wasn't learning anything" from our discussions. That is such fantastic cope. What this guy needed was yes-men to cradle his fragile ego for whatever he's going through in his personal life. You can't learn anything from people who blindly agree with what you say, and I can 1000% guarantee I would not be blocked if that's the strategy I chose to employ. If we're being honest that's not a bad way to get followers and likes. People love that shit, but it's not for me. Being fake take too much work.
Well at the risk of airing my own dirty laundry I guess I'm about to push that publish button and get my very own dopamine hit. Was it worth it? Was it justified? Meh, I don't know. I just thought it would be cool for a failed influencer to make money from a social interaction I had on WEB2 and turn it into a 1300 word blog post. Like, I know how much it sucks being me, but someone's gotta do it! Damn it!
