I agree with this this up to a point:
I can see how getting blocked is emotionally jarring:
Where it can trigger such unpleasant thoughts and feelings:
- Doubt: Am I really a good iNatter since I got blocked?
- Shame: Did I really do something so bad to deserve getting blocked?
- Safety: Getting blocked was so unpleasant, when will it happen again?
- Annoyance: Does this person even know how iNat works?
- Ostracism: Should I even be an iNatter since I’m getting blocked?
- Injustice: Is it fair that I got blocked?
None of which can be resolved since communication is blocked. I’d feel the same way too but strive to look at it more like:
Because iNat is volunteer driven by generous users like you taking their time to help identify and confirm observations. Being voluntary, it’s hard to make the case that anyone owes anyone else communication. Blocking is an extreme case of this, where instead of volunteering, they’re witholding. So I agree that blocking is unjustified 9 out of 10 times per community guidelines, but would forcing the blocking users to interact with those they block be the right call?
Back to unplesant thoughts and feelings, I think all non-duress users contribute something valuable to iNat, so if someone blocks you, they’re also choosing to take away from their iNat experience. Lastly, as appealing as the idea that people like us for ourselves or what we do, I’m sure there’s also a case for people (dis-)liking us for no reason at all. Maybe your blocker is an example of the latter and it’s not worth trying to figure out why? There are obviously enough people on iNat who value you, so don’t let this rotten apple spoil the whole bunch!