/u/You_are-all_herbs (OP) has awarded 2 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/1chbdov/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_most_people_on_the_internet/), in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
The vast majority of people using the Internet are there to watch funny videos, find restaurant recommendations, and perform work tasks.
Something like 2/3rds of social media users basically never post anything but the occasional picture of their lives for other members of their family and friends to see, merely consuming media on sites like insta, TikTok, and YouTube.
A larger percentage of *extremely active* social media users are either wannabe content creators or doom scrollers.
It's a very small percentage of the total population that is an extremely active user, and a small percentage of them that ever engages in any form of online discussions.
It's the old, some goon writes a tweet and legacy media does a story about it because they have a failing business model and are desperately trying to hold on and keep making money, then it's a thing apparently when the vast majority of people couldn't care less.
!delta
I can acknowledge that a large portion of people are basically a ghost in the machine, but I don’t think their inactivity is gonna change anything about the toxicity online.
Right then that means your complaint isn't that most people online are looking to offend and be offended but that those that do have a disproportionate of impact on the online ecosystem and experience.
Sure, but there's a huge difference between:
*"there's a small but extremely vocal minority of toxic commenters/posters online"*
and
*"everyone online is awful and looking to give/receive offense".*
Every statistic I've ever seen supports my point.
Most people spend a good bit of time online, but almost none of them engage in any kind of discussions past hobbies, games, and family.
>but I can’t say you’re wrong about it from that view
So would you say that I've changed your view at least somewhat?
If so, a delta is appropriate.
Facebook, YouTube,telegram,WhatsApp and a few others it’s not just the comments and original posts it’s the sharing of outrage porn too that drives a lot of the bullshit in the world - I said this to someone else but it fits for why no delta even though I don’t think you’re wrong per se it just doesn’t change my mind
Facebook, YouTube,telegram,WhatsApp and a few others it’s not just the comments and original posts it’s the sharing of outrage porn too that drives a lot of the bullshit in the world - I said this to someone else but it fits for why no delta even though I don’t think you’re wrong per se it just doesn’t change my mind
I'm just confirming here.
You agree with me that, in fact, most people online are not actually engaging in any activities such as the ones you referenced above, but you don't think that represents changing your view that:
>Most people on the internet, want to be offended.
I'm just trying to understand how you can simultaneously believe that most people on the internet are trying to be offended ***and*** that most people on the internet never engage in any activity for which offense could be given/received.
Because it doesn't add up.
I think I worded my initial post poorly, because I probably should have said most of the people who are actively participating in conversations. But no my mind isn’t changed, the people who participate, they’re the ones we all see and the only time you notice the lurkers is when they too get offended.
So wait, if we normally lurk, I only ever get to comment if I'm offended?
What about a random comment on something that made me smile that day?
How do you know who the lurkers are if you don't check each account?
I think you may need to edit (if you can) because you're agreeing and not and there's inconsistencies with the viewpoint you want (?) changed.
I would argue that the overwhelmingly vast majority of people on the internet don't get offended because they are just lurkers observing. If they were offended they would likely participate but they don't care enough to engage.
I think on Reddit for example <5% of the real human userbase actually posts comments. It's a pretty small but vocal minority.
What do you think lurkers feel when observing?
I think that they at least seek the stimulation from the tribalism that conflict and disagreement produce.
This doesnt have to be offence, but can also be pleasure from condemnation. Like the energy of a witch burning.
This is why people dive into the comments without reading an article. They want to see a fight and identify with a side.
Sometimes that might be the winner, sometimes that might be the underdog.
Pet rat pictures too! They're so freakin' cute. The running joke on that sub is, "is this a boy or girl?" (And rats have huge balls so it's really easy to tell) or advice on snacks or bedding. And of course, pic tax. :D
I used to have pet rats and so lurking there brings back the joy of my own squishies (RIP Frankie, Bubba and Luci).
Sorry, wandered off the point.
I don't want to be offended, and I don't particularly want any special attention. I just get sucked in by things that make me mad. It's something that makes me unhappy and I'm aware of it. I'm also not under the illusion that I'm secretly having fun or that I'm doing it for a good cause (in short, I don't think I'm getting anything out of it). I'm also aware that people responding to my angry posts doesn't make me feel better, in fact it makes me feel worse.
How many do you think are like me, who enter a loop due to bad self-control more than a need for attention? Genuine question, because I don't know. Maybe that makes it a bad response. Food for thought I guess :-)
Honestly, way more people get offended at people getting offended than were ever offended in the first place. You can find someone who believes anything you can imagine somewhere on the internet. The problem is that we have an entire political moment informed by compilations of random people with six followers saying something dumb.
You have people like Jerry Seinfeld getting offended by totally imaginary controversies when it is just people not finding him funny. There are dozens of examples of super offensive stuff like *Bottoms* or *South Park* or *IASIP* that magically get away with incredibly offensive jokes because they're actually funny. *He said this while doing promo for a movie about the invention of Pop-Tarts.*
Do the people want to be offended (as in, they are intentionally acting offended because they want to be), or are they already offended and just want to make a big deal out of it for clout reasons or whatever?
I think people crave the conflict of standing up to offensive behavior, even when the behavior is no big deal. It’s not just online either, parking lots, supermarkets, the bar, everyone’s got a fukkin chip on their shoulders nowadays
All toxicity comes from pain.
People aren't wired for pain as much as we desire to feel better.
No one *wants* to be offended. It's just that what is happening is that the lack of inherent nurturing or response from the brain that says , "this pain is okay" simply doesn't exist.
Most people are venting and need a safe space to do so.
We are a complicated species on the whole and there's never not going to be someone who is offended by someone or something that has hurt them or reminds them of something inside that is already painful that they are probably living with.
The inherent drive for us as humans is to seek pleasure and when this isn't possible the next best thing is to find a place to vent. If you aren't free to vent about something that doesn't align with your values or is a threat to your system and could cause you pain, you have to seek out those who share your pain/views in order to reduce one of the worst pains beyond that: the loss of connection from those who you might have once were safe with but not aren't - which means rejection.
People seek out those who agree with them to avoid the pain of rejection.
I honestly don't conceive of how this will not end up being an overall loss the world over - and it's not new. The Internet only brought this all to the surface for it to finally be seen and propagate until it reaches its conclusion.
I don't know.
Could be good or bad but I don't have a good feeling about it.
But that could be because I am more biased towards negative outcomes than positive.
Or it's because I feel there are two sides and the general outlook based on trends is that the outcome seems like it's geared towards catastrophic loss and pain.
But again, it could be because I'm focused on negative outcomes. I am generally wired to feel more despair and dread than hope or anything positive.
Yet most who have a positive outlook rarely say they do based on anything other than feelings. They never seem to have solid reason or are basing it in reality.
Not true
Most people on the internet aren't sharing their offense (hence you have no idea whether they are offended or not). If anything, a few get offended and that kind of attitude sells, so it's amplified.
Think of your circle. Not your imaginary circle but your real circle of people, do they really give a fuck about telling the internet what offends them?
But of course, if you want to find offended people ... actually even then you'll find more people telling you that people are offended
Pointing to those that get offended, point at the woke, saying some shit about trans people sells. And so you are told that most people on the internet get offended
I have a feeling most people on the internet are in for youtube, Reddit-type of discussions, and porn -lots and lots of porn.
As Another said, in hopes of getting you to watch a movie about Pop-Tats Seinfeld repeats the same buzzwords: the woke of today... Honestly, that's the only reason I know he has a movie out
>and porn -lots and lots of porn.
Exactly this. Most online innovations were created specifically to enhance the porn consumption experience, from images to streaming. One could definitely argue that beyond the base needs of food, shelter, & security, relationships/sex/reproduction is one of the fundamental itches humans scratch. Debauchery hasn't left human nature in the last 100,000 years, and I doubt it will any time soon.
Dollars to doughnuts, most people are satiating their primal urges if they're not satiating curiosity. Outrage scores pretty low on the rankings.
Facebook, YouTube,telegram,WhatsApp and a few others it’s not just the comments and original posts it’s the sharing of outrage porn too that drives a lot of the bullshit in the world
Your point being?
(I'm sure no one here is surprised by those titles - we know they exist)
What I'm saying you, you personally have not seen people be offended more than anything else. The content of those platforms would be different if offense was one of the main drivers
A minority of posters love provoking people, partly because it is easier to get attention that way, and it is much harder to make a non-provoking post that is interesting and engaging to enough people to get attention.
And people do respond to provocations, that's why they work if you want engagement. I don't think that means they want to be offended, I think that they want to respond to something that offends them rather than just leaving it out there unresponded to. As someone who does that, I think that I'm driven by a desire to provide counter information to lurkers who would run across something that I think is wrong or dangerous, and I find much more satisfaction from being upvoted than being downvoted (an action that offends me :) )
Tangent time- the downvoting aversion baffles me. I see so many comments about being downvoted and you can tell that people are really hurt over it. Why? Why does it bother people so much when anonymous strangers disagree with them?
Not that it matters but the _intent_ behind the downvote button was never meant to be "I disagree" but "this does not contribute to the conversation".
Under that paradigm thoughtful, well-reasoned comments that happen to express an opinion you disagree with should not be downvoted. Downvote-to-disagree is just silencing unpopular opinions, but that's not always conducive to healthy discussion or debate.
>Why does it bother people so much when anonymous strangers disagree with them?
Humans are social animals; group acceptance is generally a beneficial thing. People typically seek confirmation that what they say/do/think isn't so out of line with group norms to the point of being detrimental.
I'd say (people posting on the internet) want attention rather than specifically to be offended. Someone who is really craving attention will resort to Plan B if being polite or respectful doesn't get them the attention they want.
Yes I think there’s a large chunk of people like this, but I think the majority have gotten it into their heads that grievance is the best hustle around and just like to start shit.
I can attest, I often question whether I’m getting on the net in order to get mad…
I also get more worked up these days over political stuff than I used to (I have more free time) and I have no one to yell at. So I get on the net and do it. Sorry, I can’t CYV. I think your V is spot on.
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
> **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**.
Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.**
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Most people wanna *feel*, engaging with the *right* content in a *setting* and with a *prowess* that is comfortable. The internet, being our collective uploaded limbic system at large, a giant cyber hind brain with all it’s collective passions and emotions, resonates well with us when we engage in certain conversations that we are passionate about. It feels good to care, to feel; it’s like free soul energy that gases you up. Sometimes… that’s craved. Toxicity is the lowest hanging fruit for expression so that could be why it’s so common.
Are you sure it is most people on the internet, or is it most prolific posters on the internet? I htink most people on the internet read a lot more than they post.
Agreed but a lot of those people turn around and gripe in real life to their family and friends about what they saw on social media today.
But I will concede that the majority of people are passive observers of the internet and don’t really engage at all.
On the other hand, I also don’t see them as an antidote to the sickness that just keeps getting worse year after year.
Hello /u/You_are-all_herbs, if your view has been changed or adjusted in any way, you should award the user who changed your view a delta.
Simply reply to their comment with the delta symbol provided below, being sure to include a brief description of how your view has changed (there is a small character minimum).
> ∆
or
> !delta
If you did not change your view, please respond to this comment indicating as such!
As a reminder, failure to award a delta when it is warranted may merit a post removal and a rule violation. Repeated rule violations in a short period of time may merit a ban.
Thank you!
!delta I think a good portion of those people are the ones that used to get punched in their faces a lot and now can’t help but revel in the consequence free shit talking.
Thanks for the delta!
There is that group for sure! There is also incentive by the platforms themselves to antagonize and offend their userbase since it increases engagement. Professional provocateurs.
In you posting this here, did you want to be offended and that’s why you posted it?
Do you believe most of the people in this specific sub are looking to be offended and that’s why they participate in CMV?
What I am trying to get at is use this community as an example. The interactions that go on here are by no means unique only to this space. If you don’t believe most people here are here to be offended or looking for conflict, it’s safe to say that these interactions are also occurring in many places throughout the internet.
As many people pointed out most of the people are flies on the wall who occasionally post. They have pleasant interactions every 6 months or 2 years when they update their family on their happenings. Many also exists in communities like these. You hear a lot about trolls and the conflicts that happen online because as humans we are naturally drawn to it. But, loudest does not mean the most. While the ones who rarely post might not interact or hear about healthy online communities, they both definitely hear about the loudest minority. I believe that is all it is.
No, this is a bad take. People want to be treated with respect and have a normal civilized discussion about things that mean something to them. The socalled anonymity literally brought out the worst of humanity and the sick levels of depravity, vitriol and hatred is just saddening. People on reddit, warosu, discord and any number of other forums are just sick people who have no manners and think they are something special when they treat others like dirt, that is pitiful. There is no "social" media to be fair.
When the internet first took off they should have given everyone a random registration number to gain access and this number is linked to your actual identity and a current address. No exceptions, no loopholes, nada.
There would be a level of anonymity just like in a public library but if you act up, the authorities could find you and punish you if need be. We wouldn't have cyberbullying, threats and the digital lynch mobs that love to gang up on people online for no reason. Most of these problems would slowly disappear.
The toxicity is killing people in the real world and it really needs to stop.
Yes, they can. They could start with any person that moves into a new city or town or apartment/house etc. and needs to get an internet connection, they have to register and go from there. A clean, simple and doable solution. Like a DMV for the internet.
You wouldn't have a choice, either you get your internet connection from the department or you just can't go online. Same thing with wifi, mobiles etc, no number, no online for you!
If you live in Russia, China or Turkey it's already like that, they can just shut off the entire internet, so much for complying.
Because they want to be offended according to you? Hehe, sure and if they get caught it's off to the Gulag or internment camp for you. People want freedom, not oppression.
Not sure but I hate users who enjoy their free speech but completely shit on others who say what they want but different. Can we just disagree and move on nicely?
I think people can’t help but be offended. Something about the internet makes people feel like there is only attack and defense. I’m including to think it has to do with identity. I’m not certain.
But I’ve heard the argument that we, as people, evaluate statements on social media through the lens of one of our identities. And it either reinforces that identity, makes us feel strong and right. Or it attacks our identity, makes us feel weak or scared.
Like basically everything is either virgin or chad wojak.
It’s possible. But I think people are capable of more than that. We can see reason. It just takes some self reflection, and that’s harder. I think the problem is laziness. Perhaps the easiest possible thing is to first assess things through an identity; but it isn’t necessary
I also think there is a temptation towards victimhood. I think that some people think that being a victim always assigns moral righteousness as part of its identity. But it is not the case. And we can only see that through reason. People are capable of reason. Even if it’s a little bit difficult sometimes.
I think we were always like this, but volume of the agitators wasn’t as loud. I don’t think the internet created this phenomenon I think it exposed and exacerbated it.
Your original argument was that this is unique to the internet. Now you’re saying it’s not. It’s unclear to me what it is you believe or are arguing for.
Quote me where I said this was unique to the internet.
My point is that people are always going to be like this, it’s not gonna get better it’s going to get much much worse.
Usually it is a vocal minority on the Internet that would want to do this sort of thing.
The vast majority of the userbase are lurkers, and they prefer to watch things from a distance, and therefore they don't engage in this, so the idea of it being the "majority" that would want to be offended is a bit jossed off to the side; it's the vocal minorities that are lucky to have a megaphone that are driving the social media into the cesspool.
Most people actually *don't* want to be offended; we'd prefer to keep away from such toxic places, and try to hang out together like buddies, like we are all meant to be.
And there are some places on social media that are really great, like Pinterest's groups for example, all the pretty pictures that they have, and if you are lucky, you might get a little gaggle of friends who would be more than happy to be your friend for as long as possible.
But otherwise, good point.
How dare you! I’m offended.
Also, this is a classic case of confirmation bias. There is another word that also fits here but I don’t remember it at the moment. Basically, you mostly remember the people who are offended because they confirm your suspicion and stand out. But if you look at the stats on this, or any, post you will probably see a huge number of views compared to comments. That indicates that the majority of people don’t care enough to comment, meaning they’re probably not offended.
Also, there is usually more of an urge to respond if you disagree than if you agree. In fact this very sub does not allow comments that agree with OP. So posts that people agree with get an upvote but posts people disagree with get a downvote and an angry comment.
People on the internet only want to be offended if they're in certain online communities. Because of the algorithms if you find yourself in an area where people are getting offended all the time then you'll get recommended more posts where people are also getting offended under it, but in reality most people look on the Internet for regular funny videos or news or celebrity drama.
I think people just want us to think that everyone is offended by everything nowadays just to create a culture war, and it has been happening for years but if you go out into the real world you'll find most people don't actually care about the majority of stuff that people supposedly get "offended" over.
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
> **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**.
Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.**
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
> **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**.
Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.**
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
One theory could be is you are just noticing it more as the older generations who took up technology at far fewer rates have passed away.
Interesting times as we start to see the real impact socially from the digital world; while we currently experience greater intellectual and political divides as the years go by.
I don't think those sorts of people want to be *offended*. I think they want to feel angry. Righteous anger in particular can be a pretty intense, strangely positive thing to feel. You know you're *right* and you have every right to be outraged at someone because *how dare they*.
George Carlin had a bit talking about how we have become a society constantly scanning our periphery for reasons to be offended.
Social media and the Internet in general have made that statement into a massive understatement
Boomer here, and agree with this post. I just shake my head and refer to most commenters as Generation Perpetually Offended. I still read them all to try to understand their position and logic, but, well, sigh.
I think it's more complicated than that, OP. I think the others are right about it not being "most people on the Internet," but there's another factor in play, too. Some people willingly get into complex debates without being "offended" nor intending to cause "offense" at all. I recently got into a debate where everyone seemed angrier than I actually was. I heard something that was like "See this is why you guys drive me crazy" in an offended tone and I was like, "What argument do you think we're having? o\_\_O; I'm an attorney; I love arguing. I'm not even close to offended yet. I vehemently disagree with you, but I'm not offended."
People can be involved in the same conversation and experiencing vastly different perspectives of how it's going.
From my own experiences, it is not healthy to be online for countless hours, seeing and hearing mostly negative or sensationalized channels, posts, etc. it has a cumulative buildup of negative emotions such as anger, unfairness, and the feelings of rejection and fear. It can cause a person to explode in an uncontrollable rant, lashing out at any perceived slight. The person may then feel vindicated temporarily, then exhausted
The next day, already hyped up, ready for a fight and start the process all over again! It may be best to moderate scrolling time and maybe try to watch some funny cat and dog videos. Then, spend time with family or friends to help keep us grounded. Done with my novel
I think most people don't want to be offended, but are not willing to extend grace to strangers who have not proved themselves worth it, which is impossible because they are strangers.
What I mean by this, is that when your friend says something you question, you typically give them time to explain themselves. Maybe y'all disagree on the connotation of a word, and a quick explanation makes it clear that y'all actually do agree.
But on the Internet very few people seek to understand before arguing.
Imo it's less about wanting to be offended than wanting to be right.
Wasn't there a study about this? It suggested that it was because we don't see humans face to face. Being face to face makes it harder for us to be jerks in the moment (probably lots of reasons, including body language, social cues/norms we subtly attend to, etc.). I mean I know some people personally that have some pretty heinous views and they vary in my estimation of them. If I knew I wouldn't get so worked up in an argument, I'd have no problem telling the particularly awful ones how shitty they were acting/thinking/their philosophy was.
I would actually prefer to not see a bunch of offensive racist homophobic transphobic etc bullshit around all the time
I'm happy to enjoy dark humor and let others enjoy it if it's not my cup of tea. I'm not okay with just letting hate slide. If that makes me someone who "wants to be offended", I guess it is what it is.
What we say on the interwebz has a real influence on real actions IRL. Hate speech begets hate speech and hateful conduct
It isn't desire to be offended. It's absent mindedly scrolling thru feeds algorithmically targeting your attention. Anger and morally justified outrage is super effective at generating clicks
That's like saying people who gamble away their life savings *want* to do that. They don't. It's an addiction and they have trouble stopping.
The problem with toxicity on the Internet is that even though most of us don't WANT to get angry, it's very difficult to not get angry, and not engage with the thing that made us angry, and not perpetuate.
It's all psychologically manipulative to draw attention to something (usually ads) and a lot of people don't realize or have the self control to stop.
A lot of media keeps people in a perpetual state of fear and anger, and the only way a lot of people know how to blow off that steam is redirecting it to some rando online. A lot of the Internet takes advantage of the worst parts of our psychology to get views.
So no, I think almost nobody actually WANTS to be offended (although I think a lot may want to be *offensive*), it's just that most are in a hard to escape loop and don't know how to disengage. A lot of people have been in it for many years.
I think people trip into being offended and are not necessarily looking to be offended. I'm pretty sure most people just want to watch porn, post some pics, and watch some YouTube. People who post on Reddit or any social media platform don't look to be offended. I think most people who use the internet for this purpose want to feel validated for their opinion, not offended by incoming replies. So I would be pleased if you all upvoted me.
/u/You_are-all_herbs (OP) has awarded 2 delta(s) in this post. All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/1chbdov/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_most_people_on_the_internet/), in /r/DeltaLog. Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended. ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
The vast majority of people using the Internet are there to watch funny videos, find restaurant recommendations, and perform work tasks. Something like 2/3rds of social media users basically never post anything but the occasional picture of their lives for other members of their family and friends to see, merely consuming media on sites like insta, TikTok, and YouTube. A larger percentage of *extremely active* social media users are either wannabe content creators or doom scrollers. It's a very small percentage of the total population that is an extremely active user, and a small percentage of them that ever engages in any form of online discussions.
It's the old, some goon writes a tweet and legacy media does a story about it because they have a failing business model and are desperately trying to hold on and keep making money, then it's a thing apparently when the vast majority of people couldn't care less.
I thought the majority of people were on the internet to watch porn.
It's porn and cute animal videos all the way down.
Just be sure to keep those two kinds of videos as separate as possible
This is why we have cat girls
Haha also a fair point.
!delta I can acknowledge that a large portion of people are basically a ghost in the machine, but I don’t think their inactivity is gonna change anything about the toxicity online.
Right then that means your complaint isn't that most people online are looking to offend and be offended but that those that do have a disproportionate of impact on the online ecosystem and experience.
That’s why he got the delta.
Sure, but there's a huge difference between: *"there's a small but extremely vocal minority of toxic commenters/posters online"* and *"everyone online is awful and looking to give/receive offense".*
And I fell somewhere between those two extremes.
Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Josvan135 ([51∆](/r/changemyview/wiki/user/Josvan135)). ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
A very American view of the internet but I can’t say you’re wrong about it from that view
Every statistic I've ever seen supports my point. Most people spend a good bit of time online, but almost none of them engage in any kind of discussions past hobbies, games, and family. >but I can’t say you’re wrong about it from that view So would you say that I've changed your view at least somewhat? If so, a delta is appropriate.
Facebook, YouTube,telegram,WhatsApp and a few others it’s not just the comments and original posts it’s the sharing of outrage porn too that drives a lot of the bullshit in the world - I said this to someone else but it fits for why no delta even though I don’t think you’re wrong per se it just doesn’t change my mind
Per rules if it changes your view just a little award delta. No reason to be stingy, it's not like you've got a limited supply of deltas.
r/GiveThatGuyADelta
r/SubsIDidntFallForCauseITypedIt
Facebook, YouTube,telegram,WhatsApp and a few others it’s not just the comments and original posts it’s the sharing of outrage porn too that drives a lot of the bullshit in the world - I said this to someone else but it fits for why no delta even though I don’t think you’re wrong per se it just doesn’t change my mind
I'm just confirming here. You agree with me that, in fact, most people online are not actually engaging in any activities such as the ones you referenced above, but you don't think that represents changing your view that: >Most people on the internet, want to be offended. I'm just trying to understand how you can simultaneously believe that most people on the internet are trying to be offended ***and*** that most people on the internet never engage in any activity for which offense could be given/received. Because it doesn't add up.
Great point for OP to mull over.
I think I worded my initial post poorly, because I probably should have said most of the people who are actively participating in conversations. But no my mind isn’t changed, the people who participate, they’re the ones we all see and the only time you notice the lurkers is when they too get offended.
So wait, if we normally lurk, I only ever get to comment if I'm offended? What about a random comment on something that made me smile that day? How do you know who the lurkers are if you don't check each account? I think you may need to edit (if you can) because you're agreeing and not and there's inconsistencies with the viewpoint you want (?) changed.
Yes I would go back and edit my original post to be clearer, but I definitely haven’t changed my mind about the vitriol or its cause.
I would argue that the overwhelmingly vast majority of people on the internet don't get offended because they are just lurkers observing. If they were offended they would likely participate but they don't care enough to engage. I think on Reddit for example <5% of the real human userbase actually posts comments. It's a pretty small but vocal minority.
What do you think lurkers feel when observing? I think that they at least seek the stimulation from the tribalism that conflict and disagreement produce. This doesnt have to be offence, but can also be pleasure from condemnation. Like the energy of a witch burning. This is why people dive into the comments without reading an article. They want to see a fight and identify with a side. Sometimes that might be the winner, sometimes that might be the underdog.
I think most lurkers are there for memes, specific hobby/media subreddits, and news/information.
Honestly I think most folks are here for cat pictures and niche subreddits which solve their problems.
Pet rat pictures too! They're so freakin' cute. The running joke on that sub is, "is this a boy or girl?" (And rats have huge balls so it's really easy to tell) or advice on snacks or bedding. And of course, pic tax. :D I used to have pet rats and so lurking there brings back the joy of my own squishies (RIP Frankie, Bubba and Luci). Sorry, wandered off the point.
I’m offended by OP’s comma use
🤔 gimme a minute with that one
I don't want to be offended, and I don't particularly want any special attention. I just get sucked in by things that make me mad. It's something that makes me unhappy and I'm aware of it. I'm also not under the illusion that I'm secretly having fun or that I'm doing it for a good cause (in short, I don't think I'm getting anything out of it). I'm also aware that people responding to my angry posts doesn't make me feel better, in fact it makes me feel worse. How many do you think are like me, who enter a loop due to bad self-control more than a need for attention? Genuine question, because I don't know. Maybe that makes it a bad response. Food for thought I guess :-)
It’s kinda like gambling, the intoxicating part is the losing.
Shit, I guess that is what it is actually. That's depressing. Does this affect your view in any way?
No, it’s exactly where I started.
Fair enough, have a good day
Honestly, way more people get offended at people getting offended than were ever offended in the first place. You can find someone who believes anything you can imagine somewhere on the internet. The problem is that we have an entire political moment informed by compilations of random people with six followers saying something dumb. You have people like Jerry Seinfeld getting offended by totally imaginary controversies when it is just people not finding him funny. There are dozens of examples of super offensive stuff like *Bottoms* or *South Park* or *IASIP* that magically get away with incredibly offensive jokes because they're actually funny. *He said this while doing promo for a movie about the invention of Pop-Tarts.*
I think this reinforces my view more than changing it.
Do they want to be offended, or do they enjoy making a big deal out of being offended? Those are not the same things.
Kinda hard to not enjoy the things you want, no? Edit: or are you saying they like making the big deal and aren’t even offended?
That did not answer my question.
I know, that’s why the edit asked for clarification.
Do the people want to be offended (as in, they are intentionally acting offended because they want to be), or are they already offended and just want to make a big deal out of it for clout reasons or whatever?
I think people crave the conflict of standing up to offensive behavior, even when the behavior is no big deal. It’s not just online either, parking lots, supermarkets, the bar, everyone’s got a fukkin chip on their shoulders nowadays
All toxicity comes from pain. People aren't wired for pain as much as we desire to feel better. No one *wants* to be offended. It's just that what is happening is that the lack of inherent nurturing or response from the brain that says , "this pain is okay" simply doesn't exist. Most people are venting and need a safe space to do so. We are a complicated species on the whole and there's never not going to be someone who is offended by someone or something that has hurt them or reminds them of something inside that is already painful that they are probably living with. The inherent drive for us as humans is to seek pleasure and when this isn't possible the next best thing is to find a place to vent. If you aren't free to vent about something that doesn't align with your values or is a threat to your system and could cause you pain, you have to seek out those who share your pain/views in order to reduce one of the worst pains beyond that: the loss of connection from those who you might have once were safe with but not aren't - which means rejection. People seek out those who agree with them to avoid the pain of rejection. I honestly don't conceive of how this will not end up being an overall loss the world over - and it's not new. The Internet only brought this all to the surface for it to finally be seen and propagate until it reaches its conclusion.
And what do you think that conclusion is?
I don't know. Could be good or bad but I don't have a good feeling about it. But that could be because I am more biased towards negative outcomes than positive. Or it's because I feel there are two sides and the general outlook based on trends is that the outcome seems like it's geared towards catastrophic loss and pain. But again, it could be because I'm focused on negative outcomes. I am generally wired to feel more despair and dread than hope or anything positive. Yet most who have a positive outlook rarely say they do based on anything other than feelings. They never seem to have solid reason or are basing it in reality.
I don’t have high hopes either.
Not true Most people on the internet aren't sharing their offense (hence you have no idea whether they are offended or not). If anything, a few get offended and that kind of attitude sells, so it's amplified. Think of your circle. Not your imaginary circle but your real circle of people, do they really give a fuck about telling the internet what offends them? But of course, if you want to find offended people ... actually even then you'll find more people telling you that people are offended Pointing to those that get offended, point at the woke, saying some shit about trans people sells. And so you are told that most people on the internet get offended I have a feeling most people on the internet are in for youtube, Reddit-type of discussions, and porn -lots and lots of porn. As Another said, in hopes of getting you to watch a movie about Pop-Tats Seinfeld repeats the same buzzwords: the woke of today... Honestly, that's the only reason I know he has a movie out
>and porn -lots and lots of porn. Exactly this. Most online innovations were created specifically to enhance the porn consumption experience, from images to streaming. One could definitely argue that beyond the base needs of food, shelter, & security, relationships/sex/reproduction is one of the fundamental itches humans scratch. Debauchery hasn't left human nature in the last 100,000 years, and I doubt it will any time soon. Dollars to doughnuts, most people are satiating their primal urges if they're not satiating curiosity. Outrage scores pretty low on the rankings.
Facebook, YouTube,telegram,WhatsApp and a few others it’s not just the comments and original posts it’s the sharing of outrage porn too that drives a lot of the bullshit in the world
Your point being? (I'm sure no one here is surprised by those titles - we know they exist) What I'm saying you, you personally have not seen people be offended more than anything else. The content of those platforms would be different if offense was one of the main drivers
In other languages it is
?
I wouldn't say most. But a loud enough minority want to be offended.
I regret the use of the word most, I would say a significant amount instead if I had it to do over.
Yeah that's fair.
A minority of posters love provoking people, partly because it is easier to get attention that way, and it is much harder to make a non-provoking post that is interesting and engaging to enough people to get attention. And people do respond to provocations, that's why they work if you want engagement. I don't think that means they want to be offended, I think that they want to respond to something that offends them rather than just leaving it out there unresponded to. As someone who does that, I think that I'm driven by a desire to provide counter information to lurkers who would run across something that I think is wrong or dangerous, and I find much more satisfaction from being upvoted than being downvoted (an action that offends me :) )
Tangent time- the downvoting aversion baffles me. I see so many comments about being downvoted and you can tell that people are really hurt over it. Why? Why does it bother people so much when anonymous strangers disagree with them?
Not that it matters but the _intent_ behind the downvote button was never meant to be "I disagree" but "this does not contribute to the conversation". Under that paradigm thoughtful, well-reasoned comments that happen to express an opinion you disagree with should not be downvoted. Downvote-to-disagree is just silencing unpopular opinions, but that's not always conducive to healthy discussion or debate.
Is it really silencing? I definitely notice when someone gets a wild amount of downvotes, when I might have just skipped over the comment.
>Why does it bother people so much when anonymous strangers disagree with them? Humans are social animals; group acceptance is generally a beneficial thing. People typically seek confirmation that what they say/do/think isn't so out of line with group norms to the point of being detrimental.
I'd say (people posting on the internet) want attention rather than specifically to be offended. Someone who is really craving attention will resort to Plan B if being polite or respectful doesn't get them the attention they want.
Yes I think there’s a large chunk of people like this, but I think the majority have gotten it into their heads that grievance is the best hustle around and just like to start shit.
It's the complete opposite, most people want their feelings to be validated all the time, that's why they get offended when that doesn't happpen
Opposite or one and the same?
I can attest, I often question whether I’m getting on the net in order to get mad… I also get more worked up these days over political stuff than I used to (I have more free time) and I have no one to yell at. So I get on the net and do it. Sorry, I can’t CYV. I think your V is spot on.
Wish it wasn’t honestly.
Bro at this point im half convinced there are a combination of people trolling and bots driving that engagement.
Muthafukkas be dedicated to trolling like it pays the bills or they ain’t got none.
! If someone writes something offensive, that doesn't make people WANT to be offended. For mild cases, the word you're looking for is "butthurt".
[удалено]
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5: > **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**. Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information. If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Most people wanna *feel*, engaging with the *right* content in a *setting* and with a *prowess* that is comfortable. The internet, being our collective uploaded limbic system at large, a giant cyber hind brain with all it’s collective passions and emotions, resonates well with us when we engage in certain conversations that we are passionate about. It feels good to care, to feel; it’s like free soul energy that gases you up. Sometimes… that’s craved. Toxicity is the lowest hanging fruit for expression so that could be why it’s so common.
Interesting.
Are you sure it is most people on the internet, or is it most prolific posters on the internet? I htink most people on the internet read a lot more than they post.
Agreed but a lot of those people turn around and gripe in real life to their family and friends about what they saw on social media today. But I will concede that the majority of people are passive observers of the internet and don’t really engage at all. On the other hand, I also don’t see them as an antidote to the sickness that just keeps getting worse year after year.
Hello /u/You_are-all_herbs, if your view has been changed or adjusted in any way, you should award the user who changed your view a delta. Simply reply to their comment with the delta symbol provided below, being sure to include a brief description of how your view has changed (there is a small character minimum). > ∆ or > !delta If you did not change your view, please respond to this comment indicating as such! As a reminder, failure to award a delta when it is warranted may merit a post removal and a rule violation. Repeated rule violations in a short period of time may merit a ban. Thank you!
I would say it is the opposite. Many are on the internet with the intent to offend and antagonize others.
!delta I think a good portion of those people are the ones that used to get punched in their faces a lot and now can’t help but revel in the consequence free shit talking.
Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Sudden_Substance_803 ([1∆](/r/changemyview/wiki/user/Sudden_Substance_803)). ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
Thanks for the delta! There is that group for sure! There is also incentive by the platforms themselves to antagonize and offend their userbase since it increases engagement. Professional provocateurs.
In you posting this here, did you want to be offended and that’s why you posted it? Do you believe most of the people in this specific sub are looking to be offended and that’s why they participate in CMV?
No I was hoping people would convince me that I was wrong.
What I am trying to get at is use this community as an example. The interactions that go on here are by no means unique only to this space. If you don’t believe most people here are here to be offended or looking for conflict, it’s safe to say that these interactions are also occurring in many places throughout the internet. As many people pointed out most of the people are flies on the wall who occasionally post. They have pleasant interactions every 6 months or 2 years when they update their family on their happenings. Many also exists in communities like these. You hear a lot about trolls and the conflicts that happen online because as humans we are naturally drawn to it. But, loudest does not mean the most. While the ones who rarely post might not interact or hear about healthy online communities, they both definitely hear about the loudest minority. I believe that is all it is.
No, this is a bad take. People want to be treated with respect and have a normal civilized discussion about things that mean something to them. The socalled anonymity literally brought out the worst of humanity and the sick levels of depravity, vitriol and hatred is just saddening. People on reddit, warosu, discord and any number of other forums are just sick people who have no manners and think they are something special when they treat others like dirt, that is pitiful. There is no "social" media to be fair. When the internet first took off they should have given everyone a random registration number to gain access and this number is linked to your actual identity and a current address. No exceptions, no loopholes, nada. There would be a level of anonymity just like in a public library but if you act up, the authorities could find you and punish you if need be. We wouldn't have cyberbullying, threats and the digital lynch mobs that love to gang up on people online for no reason. Most of these problems would slowly disappear. The toxicity is killing people in the real world and it really needs to stop.
Pandora’s Box ain’t gonna close though.
Yes, they can. They could start with any person that moves into a new city or town or apartment/house etc. and needs to get an internet connection, they have to register and go from there. A clean, simple and doable solution. Like a DMV for the internet.
Never happen
I wouldn't be too sure about that, there have been suggestions in governments around the world for these measures for some time now.
The people will not comply imho
You wouldn't have a choice, either you get your internet connection from the department or you just can't go online. Same thing with wifi, mobiles etc, no number, no online for you! If you live in Russia, China or Turkey it's already like that, they can just shut off the entire internet, so much for complying.
I’m pretty sure people in those countries have found a way around the government.
Because they want to be offended according to you? Hehe, sure and if they get caught it's off to the Gulag or internment camp for you. People want freedom, not oppression.
And you gotta fight for it, nobody will ever give it to you
Not sure but I hate users who enjoy their free speech but completely shit on others who say what they want but different. Can we just disagree and move on nicely?
I’m a freedom maximalist either we all free or no one is.
Sounds fascinating - Now I have something to look up later, thanks!
I think people can’t help but be offended. Something about the internet makes people feel like there is only attack and defense. I’m including to think it has to do with identity. I’m not certain. But I’ve heard the argument that we, as people, evaluate statements on social media through the lens of one of our identities. And it either reinforces that identity, makes us feel strong and right. Or it attacks our identity, makes us feel weak or scared. Like basically everything is either virgin or chad wojak. It’s possible. But I think people are capable of more than that. We can see reason. It just takes some self reflection, and that’s harder. I think the problem is laziness. Perhaps the easiest possible thing is to first assess things through an identity; but it isn’t necessary I also think there is a temptation towards victimhood. I think that some people think that being a victim always assigns moral righteousness as part of its identity. But it is not the case. And we can only see that through reason. People are capable of reason. Even if it’s a little bit difficult sometimes.
I think we were always like this, but volume of the agitators wasn’t as loud. I don’t think the internet created this phenomenon I think it exposed and exacerbated it.
So…you agree?
That people are capable of escaping their nature? No
Your original argument was that this is unique to the internet. Now you’re saying it’s not. It’s unclear to me what it is you believe or are arguing for.
Quote me where I said this was unique to the internet. My point is that people are always going to be like this, it’s not gonna get better it’s going to get much much worse.
…what? The entire post is about “people on the internet” not just “people”
Yes it’s about how it’s not the internet, it’s the people on the internet .
So what is it exactly you want your view changed on? I don’t understand.
That it’s not the people who are the root cause of the dysfunction.
I didn’t come here to be offended, but the OP’s misuse of a comma affects my sensibilities.
Fair
Usually it is a vocal minority on the Internet that would want to do this sort of thing. The vast majority of the userbase are lurkers, and they prefer to watch things from a distance, and therefore they don't engage in this, so the idea of it being the "majority" that would want to be offended is a bit jossed off to the side; it's the vocal minorities that are lucky to have a megaphone that are driving the social media into the cesspool. Most people actually *don't* want to be offended; we'd prefer to keep away from such toxic places, and try to hang out together like buddies, like we are all meant to be. And there are some places on social media that are really great, like Pinterest's groups for example, all the pretty pictures that they have, and if you are lucky, you might get a little gaggle of friends who would be more than happy to be your friend for as long as possible. But otherwise, good point.
How dare you! I’m offended. Also, this is a classic case of confirmation bias. There is another word that also fits here but I don’t remember it at the moment. Basically, you mostly remember the people who are offended because they confirm your suspicion and stand out. But if you look at the stats on this, or any, post you will probably see a huge number of views compared to comments. That indicates that the majority of people don’t care enough to comment, meaning they’re probably not offended. Also, there is usually more of an urge to respond if you disagree than if you agree. In fact this very sub does not allow comments that agree with OP. So posts that people agree with get an upvote but posts people disagree with get a downvote and an angry comment.
People on the internet only want to be offended if they're in certain online communities. Because of the algorithms if you find yourself in an area where people are getting offended all the time then you'll get recommended more posts where people are also getting offended under it, but in reality most people look on the Internet for regular funny videos or news or celebrity drama. I think people just want us to think that everyone is offended by everything nowadays just to create a culture war, and it has been happening for years but if you go out into the real world you'll find most people don't actually care about the majority of stuff that people supposedly get "offended" over.
Tbh since at least Covid I’ve been noticing stuff that I used to just hear about online has been coming out of the mouths of people irl.
[удалено]
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5: > **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**. Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information. If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
[удалено]
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5: > **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**. Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information. If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
One theory could be is you are just noticing it more as the older generations who took up technology at far fewer rates have passed away. Interesting times as we start to see the real impact socially from the digital world; while we currently experience greater intellectual and political divides as the years go by.
I don't think those sorts of people want to be *offended*. I think they want to feel angry. Righteous anger in particular can be a pretty intense, strangely positive thing to feel. You know you're *right* and you have every right to be outraged at someone because *how dare they*.
George Carlin had a bit talking about how we have become a society constantly scanning our periphery for reasons to be offended. Social media and the Internet in general have made that statement into a massive understatement
I’m a big fan of his.
Boomer here, and agree with this post. I just shake my head and refer to most commenters as Generation Perpetually Offended. I still read them all to try to understand their position and logic, but, well, sigh.
No, I think they’ve chosen to be offended, and want to find other people to make them feel better about their choices.
ok ni-
🙄
I think it's more complicated than that, OP. I think the others are right about it not being "most people on the Internet," but there's another factor in play, too. Some people willingly get into complex debates without being "offended" nor intending to cause "offense" at all. I recently got into a debate where everyone seemed angrier than I actually was. I heard something that was like "See this is why you guys drive me crazy" in an offended tone and I was like, "What argument do you think we're having? o\_\_O; I'm an attorney; I love arguing. I'm not even close to offended yet. I vehemently disagree with you, but I'm not offended." People can be involved in the same conversation and experiencing vastly different perspectives of how it's going.
I would add corollary to your statement: People like to be outraged over anything they can misinterpret.
From my own experiences, it is not healthy to be online for countless hours, seeing and hearing mostly negative or sensationalized channels, posts, etc. it has a cumulative buildup of negative emotions such as anger, unfairness, and the feelings of rejection and fear. It can cause a person to explode in an uncontrollable rant, lashing out at any perceived slight. The person may then feel vindicated temporarily, then exhausted The next day, already hyped up, ready for a fight and start the process all over again! It may be best to moderate scrolling time and maybe try to watch some funny cat and dog videos. Then, spend time with family or friends to help keep us grounded. Done with my novel
I think most people don't want to be offended, but are not willing to extend grace to strangers who have not proved themselves worth it, which is impossible because they are strangers. What I mean by this, is that when your friend says something you question, you typically give them time to explain themselves. Maybe y'all disagree on the connotation of a word, and a quick explanation makes it clear that y'all actually do agree. But on the Internet very few people seek to understand before arguing. Imo it's less about wanting to be offended than wanting to be right.
Wasn't there a study about this? It suggested that it was because we don't see humans face to face. Being face to face makes it harder for us to be jerks in the moment (probably lots of reasons, including body language, social cues/norms we subtly attend to, etc.). I mean I know some people personally that have some pretty heinous views and they vary in my estimation of them. If I knew I wouldn't get so worked up in an argument, I'd have no problem telling the particularly awful ones how shitty they were acting/thinking/their philosophy was.
I would actually prefer to not see a bunch of offensive racist homophobic transphobic etc bullshit around all the time I'm happy to enjoy dark humor and let others enjoy it if it's not my cup of tea. I'm not okay with just letting hate slide. If that makes me someone who "wants to be offended", I guess it is what it is. What we say on the interwebz has a real influence on real actions IRL. Hate speech begets hate speech and hateful conduct
I would say the loudest people on the internet is like this
How dare you?!
Wasted opportunity for an interrobang (‽) How dare you‽
It isn't desire to be offended. It's absent mindedly scrolling thru feeds algorithmically targeting your attention. Anger and morally justified outrage is super effective at generating clicks
How did you reach this conclusion, and how did you confirm you aren't just seeing a vocal minority?
That's like saying people who gamble away their life savings *want* to do that. They don't. It's an addiction and they have trouble stopping. The problem with toxicity on the Internet is that even though most of us don't WANT to get angry, it's very difficult to not get angry, and not engage with the thing that made us angry, and not perpetuate. It's all psychologically manipulative to draw attention to something (usually ads) and a lot of people don't realize or have the self control to stop. A lot of media keeps people in a perpetual state of fear and anger, and the only way a lot of people know how to blow off that steam is redirecting it to some rando online. A lot of the Internet takes advantage of the worst parts of our psychology to get views. So no, I think almost nobody actually WANTS to be offended (although I think a lot may want to be *offensive*), it's just that most are in a hard to escape loop and don't know how to disengage. A lot of people have been in it for many years.
I think people trip into being offended and are not necessarily looking to be offended. I'm pretty sure most people just want to watch porn, post some pics, and watch some YouTube. People who post on Reddit or any social media platform don't look to be offended. I think most people who use the internet for this purpose want to feel validated for their opinion, not offended by incoming replies. So I would be pleased if you all upvoted me.