drferox: pangur-and-grim: I want to address this publicly, so hopefully it’s okay to publish t
drferox: pangur-and-grim: I want to address this publicly, so hopefully it’s okay to publish this with your name cut out and the person in question’s name censored. if that’s not okay, just send another ask and I’ll take this down. I’ve already taken down my reblog of that person’s post.in full transparency, I do feel somewhat scapegoated, as by the time I got to it the post had already been reblogged by several petblrs (one of whom has a similar follower count to mine). I reblogged it because I agreed with the breakdown that @talesfromtreatment and @the-adventures-of-dave wrote. my reblog was a 1-sentence addition, with this written in the tags:I blocked [redacted] after they made a post screenshotting my 1-sentence addition with what I thought were unfair assertions, as I didn’t think it was healthy for either of us to have further interactions.after I blocked them, they published an ask from somebody who’s been harassing me for 2 years now (for longtime folk, it’s the anti-asexual person), so I don’t necessarily regret the block.here’s what I take responsibility for: by reblogging the post, I gave it higher visibility, and it got reblogged and replied to by people who might not otherwise have seen it. I believe it had ~1k notes when I reblogged it, and today it has ~2.5k notes. a lot of those are negative reactions to the original post.and I can also admit that me saying “don’t harass” in the tags of my reblog isn’t a magic solution that stops all harassment. I believe [redacted] when they say they’ve been harassed, and while I’m not convinced it’s 100% my followers, my reblog did contribute to it.it’s hard, because I’m not sure how to proceed in the future with discussions like this. I obviously don’t want someone to be stressed out or harmed because I reblogged their post, so this is a very serious question: in the future should I not reblog petblr discussions where I disagree with the original poster, because by giving the post more notes the original poster is likely to receive negative attention?if the answer is yes, then I’ll understand and make that change going forward. This is an ongoing issue with Tumblr, and while an individual blogger with a large audience may discourage harassment from followers, unfortunately if you publically disagree with someone a small percentage of the audience may take it upon themselves to be gremlins about it anyway. And even though you did not want this harassment to happen, and specified not to do it, it still happens and you still get blamed.At some point it becomes not about ‘protecting’ the other user who said something you disagreed with, but protecting yourself from accusations of harassment. There have been so many times when I have chosen not to reblog someone out of concern for the backlash they might receive which I can’t control, and one case where I’m quite sure it was an anti-vaxxer troll setting up some sort of character assassination to promote their own YouTube channel. One alternative method that seems to work on tumblr is rather than reblogging with disagreement, to make an entirely new post with your opinion instead. And if someone reblogs with a disagreement on your own post, instead of reblogging them for a conversation, to reblog your original with extra information or discussion. It kind of makes it look like you’re having a discussion with yourself, but it doesn’t highlight other people for unwanted attention from all but the most determined. It’s a way to still be part of the wider discussion without highlighting other users. -- source link
#popularpetblrproblems