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.

  • Zuzak [fae/faer, she/her]
    hexagon
    ·
    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.