Blocking people on social networks is beautiful.
You should block people without hesitation or guilt, and for a long list of reasons.
Most people have the wrong idea about blocking. They see it as an anti-social act of aggression or a petty act of censorship. But it’s the opposite.
When you go to a nightclub and somebody gets drunk and starts acting like a jackass, a bouncer will drag that person out and deposit them on the sidewalk outside. Is that inconsiderate to the jackass?
When a presidential candidate is making a speech to supporters, and a supporter of his opponent starts yelling slurs and profanity, a group of people will escort them out the door. Is that rude to the heckler?
When a woman nobody knows shows up to a party uninvited and starts preaching loudly about her religion, the host will ask her to leave. Is that unkind to the evangelist?
The answer to all these questions is no.
In the real world, nobody tolerates people who selfishly ruin conversations in a social setting. The reason society ejects conversation-killers is that allowing one person to ruin things for many people is unfair.
Blocking on social networks is just as important as removing conversation-wreckers in the real world. In fact, it’s more important. The reason is that people online are either “anonymous” in some way (if they use a pseudonym or fake profile information, you don’t have any idea who they are), or feel “safe” to ruin conversations because they’re not physically present.
Anonymity and physical distance emboldens some people to behave in ways they would never do in person.
And when one person selfishly hijacks a conversation, they can wreck that conversation for ten people, or a hundred, or a thousand. Block the one for the sake of the many.
Who Should You Block?
As a general rule, I recommend blocking anyone who you don’t like. It’s your social stream. It’s your cocktail party. You don’t have to justify it to anyone.
And I recommend that you block anyone who wrecks a good conversation. Here’s who I block:
Trolls. Wikipedia has a wonderfully accurate definition for an online troll: “Someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community.... with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.”
When trolls are successful, they re-direct the conversation away from the subject of your post and direct it at themselves. If you don’t block trolls, you’ll rarely have good conversations.
Bigots. Racists, religious bigots, ageists, sexists and everyone else who ascribes bad characteristics to every member of a group.
If racists and bigots enrage members of the group they hate, then the conversation becomes all about the bigotry. They can also silence members of that group. Both outcomes ruin conversation.
Fanatics. Churchill said: “A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.” These people won’t stop until everyone reading your social stream agrees completely with their personal views about religion, politics, operating system or cause-of-the-day. They’re toxic to the free flow of ideas.
Idiots. It’s not politically correct to say this, but some people are just plain stupid. The wider world may be devolving into some kind of idiocracy. But it doesn’t have to happen in your own social stream.
Sexual harassers. I follow a lot of brilliant, accomplished women who post some profoundly insightful material, and occasionally someone replies with an inappropriate sexist comment. It’s demeaning and counter-intelligent.
The worst part is that in general the pervasive climate of sexism and harassment keeps women from posting things they otherwise would. Instead of backing off, women should post like maniacs and block like crazy.