Thinking of making a filter for "no at" messages. If all one wishes is to voice something but in no way engage, why even toot? Just write it to /dev/null or something?
Prompted by seeing a no-at message complaining of a tech issue that has a super easy fix the poster clearly doesn't know about, which makes me wonder why they didn't no-at the tech support email address instead. :shrug:
@cathal I can imagine reasons why someone would post publicly but say they don't want to engage:
- Complaining is part of their identity. They want to tell their friends and acquaintances what's on their minds, or posture for them, but they don't want to solve the problem. They don't want others pointing out that the problem is solvable, because that makes the posturing uncomfortably clear.
- "No at" is an indirect, face-saving way to request broad expressions of support and nothing else.
