I understand why you may say that, but it's not about misanthropy or introversion. It's about scaling. If you are in a situation where your posts get maybe four

I understand why you may say that, but it's not about misanthropy or introversion. It's about scaling. If you are in a situation where your posts get maybe four comments, all from your real-life friends, all generally positive, hey, great. You don't have a problem. But let's say you're writing a technical blog, and you've picked up 10,000 readers. You may get a few hundred comments. And they're going to look like an HN discussion area; a few positive hints, but mostly negative comments. If you don't moderate, they're going to start to tend to actively insulting comments as the inevitable escalations develop. So maybe now you need a moderator. Who wants that. If anything, it's the misanthropic ones who don't care! They're the ones willing to host a brawl in their comment section and give as good as they get, if not better. They're the ones who don't lose any sleep over ban-hammering someone just because. It's the normies who start having problems here. The social media you describe and are implicitly praising promotes drive-by interactions and tons of shallow connections. The weblog community structure promoted fewer, but stronger connections. You might not have realized this, but a lot of "web rolls" back in the day weren't just "Hey, you may be randomly interested in these blogs"... after all, why would anybody put those up? They were actually a community. Conversations would wander back and forth in these communities for days at a time on a topic, with cross-linking, rebuttals, amplifications, etc. And it was nothing like the heat-but-no-light of a twitter reply chain. I miss it. It was much nicer in a lot of ways, and could have been improved even more. But it takes a bit of a critical mass, maybe not a ton, but even so we've lost it to an endless chain of mostly vapid, regress-to-the-mean boring homogeneity.