My point is that the primary content at the top of the page has a byline. It's already vouched for, somewhat, by the reputation of the domain, or publication, or author. We have an idea of whether to spend our time investigating further. By contrast my rando comment (or yours) has nothing to recommend it but some opaque username. That's why I (and I'm betting most people) will scroll right past the "autistic weirdo"'s wall of text. And why I personally choose to try not to write that text.

>If one posts a couple of solid paragraphs as a reply, one looks like an autistic weirdo info-bombing.

As one should. The rando who spams a discussion thread with an impenetrable wall of text is like that guy who uses their "question" at the end of an in-person panel discussion to ramble incoherently for three minutes. Yes, here we can scroll past it, but it's still presumptious and annoying. This is not primary content (that's at the top). Here we're all nobodies to everyone else. For my part I try to remember that fact - and get to the point.

>So I don't know what you're talking about

All this did was to inject venom into an otherwise civil exchange.

A "boarding pass" was always a redundant document anyway. As are "tickets" whenever ID is required for the service in question. The ID has a number on it, in the system that's the ticket. In police states like China, tickets are a thing of the past.

That flying - an entirely unsustainable mode of transport - is now widely viewed as a commoditized consumer good is already a form of ethical collapse IMO. Now this. We need regulation. But for that, people need choose it, to vote for it.

Technically true but I've found it to be less addictive than other text forums (like the R-site and Lemmy), let alone the algo-powered video-based abominations that normies are all hooked on.

I'm thinking that it comes down to one thing in particular: the absence of response notifications. There's only so much addiction you can get out of a page of text without so much as a bell icon.