I'm blocking folks who tell me "the fediverse isn't for you if you don't let us decide for you what the culture should be [and by the way that's going to be anti-black]". You're obsolete and I'm not wasting my mental energy on you.

The core premise, often disguised, of people adamant that no form of QT ever exist here is "you shouldn't have an audience only interpersonal conversations". They only reveal this once you debunk the "abuse vector" claim with trivial ways to prevent that (no private QRT, opt-in).

That leaves out everyone who needs to have an audience to survive or help people they care about to survive.

@dalias So what you're saying is that there's no value in the fact that my first instinct was to dunk on you to all the people who do, or should, know better, BUT THEN… when I discovered no ready-made tool existed to facilitate my dunk, and the effort required to achieve the same effect to devalue your point, but without getting the same network-effect benefits, I thought instead of what I'd spend my time better on to achieve change & consider nuance, I wrote this *to* you instead?

@bobbyd0g I see no value in that. I would have been fine with just ignoring you or blocking you if I felt like having folks read your dunk was against my interests, rather than having you come argue with me.

@dalias Just admit you're a dunkposter, then. If you're not interested in actually interacting with people, and prefer to talk past them with QRTs, or to make plausibly deniable gamesmanship decisions about their reach versus yours, maybe you're not being entirely forthright with yourself about your purposes. What you just described is deeply antisocial & opportunistic. Never mind how now I'm "coming" to "argue" with you by responding in earnest to your belligerent public statement.