Even as someone who tends to play along with bans, this seems like a weird concept. I’m referring to those moments you walk into a club or a service one day and the people in charge say something along the lines of “you’re banned from our establishment because we learned you’re an artist that deals with controversial subject matter” or “we banned you because we heard that was you who engaged in those reckless activities that sent that one person to need care”.
We barely are able to enforce the Hague convention, so it makes me wonder what the mindset is when people try to take this on, as outside your jurisdiction, something could potentially be of any kind of context, as rules, etiquette, and protocol can differ enough between clubs and services that it’s almost as if the laws of physics can sometimes seem to differ.
One day, I witnessed a conversation between some rule enforcers and someone I know, and the suspicious rule enforcers asked why the individual so often likes to remain as low a profile as possible, and the individual responded “if I was as open about myself to everyone as everyone else is with each other, the amount of restrictions I’d have would quintuple due to the sheer amount of people who have grown a habit of hating me for no ethical reason whatsoever”, which also drags the issue of openness into the conversation.
Or… or maybe I’m wrong and/or am missing something. What’s your opinion on this practice? And what stands out to you as the last or most notable time this happened?
Does this mean you assume it happens often, or it actually happens to you often?
It happens often. It has happened to me before, but not as often as I see from other people. In nearly half of all communities where it’s common to find people complaining about being banned, the reason cited for said ban is something along the lines of the authority figures judging the banned individuals based on things they do in their personal lives. And that has intrigued me as it’s difficult to wonder how they deduce things such as whether the place they did that thing didn’t already punish them in some way, or if they’re not perceiving the correct context from what they see. I once got banned from a science fair because they thought I had been spreading misinformation during the pandemic in a forum in a completely different place.
Oh. I thought you meant in real life.
Like a business owner telling you to leave and never come back because you’re wearing the opposing candidates t shirt.
What you’re talking about is talking on the Internet.
Just like talking in real life, people can choose what they want to listen to. If they block you it’s because they don’t want to hear what you say, but you can go somewhere else that does. If they don’t want to listen, why would you want to bother talking to them anyway?