WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

Last night I just removed myself from every friend groupchat and blocked everyone there, while leaving a status message about how they can reach me on Signal or call me. If they are actually your friends they'll come around, and families survived before Whatsapp existed. I'm also brazilian, I just won't stand with people dismissing what matters to me as if I'm a nutjob for not using their fascist app

I have been that guy a few times in last few years. But

> If they are actually your friends

this just takes the cake to a different dimension altogether!

Why would you block people instead of just messaging them about how you're moving to Signal, and then uninstalling WhatsApp?

This approach seems unnecessarily confrontational and might end up being quite counterproductive.

> I just won't stand with people dismissing what matters to me as if I'm a nutjob for not using their fascist app

I bet you're gonna be happier for it. In my experience, people that were friends stay friends, a messaging app won't change that (imagine if it did!).

Because then they have the option of readding you to group chats and sending you messages

ETA: there is no way to really uninstall Whatsapp around here because so much of society runs on it, the most I can do is move all of my private existence elsewhere and hope that decreased traffic will do something

I appreciate your point of view.

Please allow me to be devil's advocate here (and FYI, this comes from someone living in a country where government officials use [official state institution]@gmail.com to ask you to send passports and other info, and tell you they'll whatsapp you your papers when they're ready).

I have not yet been in a situation where you CANNOT skip WhatsApp - since having someone be your one-time intermediary is almost always possible. Can it be an incovenience ? Yes.

How much would this inconvenience compare to what my grandfather's grandfather would consider an inconvenience? Probably not much. (You mean, I had to twiddle my thumbs for twice as many minutes!? How difficult)

So in the end, you're asking people to experience what they consider to be a major hassle (having 2 apps) just for you, when you're not willing to go through the pain of having just one app. It feels unbalanced.

So please consider that people might be complaining that you're being too much of a Don Quixote, but actually, the reason it's not working is because you're not playing the Don Quixote card hard enough

I admire the conviction, but I think you're underestimating the social inertia that platforms like WhatsApp benefit from.

The unfortunate reality is that most people won’t follow you. Not because they don’t respect you or your concerns, but because the cost—in effort, friction, or just breaking habitual patterns—is too high. Social coordination is fragile, and it leans heavily on lowest-common-denominator tools. WhatsApp has become that denominator.

What’s likely to happen is this: group chats will move on without you. Events will get planned. Conversations will unfold. People aren’t going to message you separately to accommodate your principled stand—not out of malice, but out of convenience and momentum. You’ll be increasingly left out, not because anyone wants to isolate you, but because ecosystems don't fracture easily.

After a few months of being disconnected and missing out, there’s a strong chance you’ll reinstall WhatsApp—not because you’ve changed your mind, but because opting out of a near-universal platform means opting out of modern social participation.

This isn’t a defeat of principle—it’s a reflection of how network effects work. The only way to realistically challenge something like WhatsApp is if a critical mass moves at once. Individual protest, while noble, often just leads to isolation unless it becomes collective action.

Your predictions assume I live in a contemporary, "atomic", social organization where people aren't integrated in tight-knit communities apart from the internet. My core friend group meets a few times a week because of church-related activities at a fixed weekly schedule, to the point where if someone is missing with no explanation they get a phone call. Football night is also at a fixed, weekly schedule with no need for Whatsapp, and I run game night, so...

I was also reading some of the comments in this thread with incredulity. You switch messaging apps and your friends.. just aren't your friends anymore? Not being on a particular platform means you'll be "left out"?

I've seen a number of group chats move platforms because "we need to add X but he's not on imessage, let's use snap instead" etc. I have all sorts of group chats and contacts on various platforms and they move around all the time. A group being beholden to a single messaging platform sounds.. inflexible, and probably not the kind of people I'd want to associate with in the first place.

> This isn’t a defeat of principle—it’s a reflection of how network effects work. The only way to realistically challenge something like WhatsApp is if a critical mass moves at once.

This isn't the only way. The other option is a legally enforced (with real teeth) requirement for interoperability. That we can require device makers to support USB-C charging but can't require social media companies to play nice with others is absurd.

Good luck, but you are probably going to find out just how wrong you are.

Yes, like ggp explained its not something people do intentionally to spite you but just how social interaction works.

But you could also turn your argument around if you wanted to - what kind of friend refuses to talk to you unless you sign up for whatever new app they found.

Well said, it’s important people understand the importance of social momentum.