Looking for Advice as Blocked by GB Staff on Twitter

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for crazy_tinker
Crazy_Tinker

41

Forum Posts

676

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 Crazy_Tinker  Online

I am a GB subscriber and I was recently blocked by a GB staff member and am looking to the community to see if anything similar has happened to any others and constructive ways to handle the issue. I am not trying to attack GB staff, I just feel this is the most likely place I may find people with similar experiences.

To explain I went to click on one of the featured tweets listed on the home page of the site and found I was unable to view this as I was blocked by the staff member. I was very confused and frustrated by this as I am fairly confident I have never even sent any tweets to the staff member or even commented on any replies/comments to their tweets. I am not a regular or active user of twitter and I do not send or retweet anything particularly offensive or curse on my twitter account so it puzzles me what this happened for...

I am still feeling some frustration as a paid user and fan of the site I am unable to see tweets that the site is promoting. I am also disappointed that whatever "reasons" said staff had for blocking me must have been flimsy and I would think staff members who agree to perform a job in the public eye would not be so quick to pull the trigger on blocking followers who likely are a consumer and supporter of their employer.

I want to emphasize that I am not opposed to staff blocking users who are abusive or threatening from twitter, just disappointed in the lack of coherence in this case. I understand as twitter is a 3rd party app so it is not a simple issue (however the site DOES promote staff tweets on its main page so I feel my concern has some merit).

I understand many twitter users prefer an echo chamber but I guess I am just disappointed as I hoped for more from GB staff given their general tolerance and decision to conduct and promote and profit from twitter (I have seen from some paid promo type tweets from staff in the past and the staff would not have much following if not for their GB roles - not meant as denigration just my best guess).

Has anything similar happened to any other community members (be it with GB site or somewhere else)? I ask as it still bothers me to see said tweets on the site and at times has me ponder if I should reconsider my membership but I do not want to do anything out of the emotional frustration. Any constructive idea or sharing would be greatly appreciated (but please avoid saying "just get over it" as I am aware that is one possible destination but I have not been able to reach that place at this point in time).

Avatar image for syce300
Syce300

246

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Firstly, the individual Twitter accounts of the GB staff are personal accounts which they operate on their off time. Nobody is entitled to what the staff feel like talking about in their free time. Nobody is entitled to their free time, period. This includes getting upset when someone doesn't reply to a comment or a tweet. Secondly, the only thing you are entitled to as a paying subscriber is the premium content. Nowhere does it say that premium members are guaranteed access to staff twitter feeds.

As to why you may have been blocked, many people, especially those who have experienced harassment, utilize block lists. You may have been hit by one of these lists based on other people you follow or things you may have tweeted about. Or there have been instances where someone has been incorrectly flagged by a block list which can be unfortunate.

Avatar image for sethmode
SethMode

2261

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6  Edited By SethMode

Look, you could have been on a block list, you could have said something you thought was fine but it rubbed the staff member the wrong way (your casual mention of "echo chamber" is kind of a red flag...that is terminology usually used by the kind of people that some individuals don't really want to deal with when they're bumming around on Twitter -- not saying that's you, just saying it's language used by a type). Either way, Twitter is Twitter and I personally think it would be silly to cancel your membership just because someone blocked you. But that's just me.

If you really feel like you are missing out on something, and you don't really use Twitter all that much anyway, why don't you just make a new Twitter account? Honestly, you really aren't missing much in general from Twitter, and certainly not from any of the staff with the exception of Alex and Abby and maybe sometimes Jeff? The former two are the only ones that really tweet with any kind of regularity.

Avatar image for imhungry
imhungry

1179

Forum Posts

1211

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 3

Fairly certain you don't even need to be logged in to browse twitter so just pop open an incognito browser if you want to see a tweet so badly.

Avatar image for rebel_scum
Rebel_Scum

1452

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 3

So a guy cant use the term echo chamber without having an agenda? What a rough world it is today.

Disclaimer: 1st I’ve heard of this term so I dont know the history behind it.

Avatar image for gundato
Gundato

488

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@rebel_scum: In a nutshell, it is the idea of removing differing opinions/voices and making for an environment where nobody has to think about or discuss anything and everyone just rolls along with the hive mind. I've heard, and even used, it to explain situations in the past and it is probably the most accurate term to describe the increasing tribalism that occurs on the internet.

I personally don't think the use of "echo chamber" is any worse than "safe space" and the like. It really is just a tone and context thing. When people tend to angrily talk about echo chambers they are usually doing so in the context of, ironically, having their viewpoints or statements questioned in a way they don't want. Ergo it is an "echo chamber" of all the things they don't want to hear or talk about.

But I also get it. Like a lot of terms it has very much been co-opted by some shitty people.

Avatar image for rahf
Rahf

603

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10  Edited By Rahf

@rebel_scum: an echo chamber is a place filled with yes-men, where the social strata is completely level and everyone agrees. If you want a more traditionally practical example: it's when a guy or girl go and complain about love to their friends. Most of the time they will get a lot of nods and, "He wasn't good for you anyway." Nobody grows, nobody wins, and everybody stays exactly the same in some sort of static psychological limbo.

One issue with an echo chamber, as I see and experience it, is that individuals within will eventually start feeling mighty claustrophobic; especially the ones that were pulled in by peers are at risk of feeling uncomfortably restricted. And then, since it's subjective opinion, each individual has their own perception of how one should proceed in expressing this opinion. Should it be violent? Kind? Aggressive?

Regarding Twitter: what the staff does with their Twitter accounts is completely up to their discretion, and their discretion alone. If someone has blocked a person, they likely have some sort of reason. I can also imagine it as completely exhausting to be challenged on both your current, and historical, opinions every single day.

Bottom line: you do not have to interact with everything. And if something has burned you, perhaps the underlying reason lies with you instead of them. I can only speak for myself, but there are countless times where I have been 'wrong' or incorrect, with personal scorn as a resulting outcome. Only much later did I learn that the fault was mine. I was incorrect.

Owning one's mistake does not truly happen in an echo chamber. Yielding to pressure does.

Avatar image for sethmode
SethMode

2261

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@rebel_scum: Gundato summed it up well, but just to speak for myself a little: I don't think that the term is bad, but in the context here I could see the potential of its use, particularly in the way it has been co-opted against the game's press. It is regularly used as a pejorative about "game journos" by communities like KotakuInAction and their ilk, used to dismiss the supposed "cabal" of hyper liberal games media members. Sometimes, the term is right (Waypoint Radio is an example of an echo chamber -- I like it, but they ALWAYS agree), but in this case it is basically), but say in the case of KiA, it is used to basically say the person is stupid and unwilling to think for themself.

Again, I don't know what happened here, and it might not have anything to do with that term, but it can be used in some dicey ways nowadays and I guarantee you if it was said about something regarding politics or an opinion on a social issue, I would not be surprised if a block from a staff member was the response if they saw it.

Avatar image for mike
Mike

18006

Forum Posts

23067

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -1

User Lists: 6

#12 Mike  Moderator

This has nothing to do with the site or the forums, if someone blocked you on Twitter that is between you and them. Sort it out elsewhere, please.