The less interaction or recognition these users receive (i.e., no likes, comments, or genuine replies), the more they spiral inward, posting more vulnerable, more intimate, and sometimes more paranoid material — as if narrating to a future rescuer or "white knight" who they imagine might one day stumble upon their feed and finally see the truth.

Interpreted Insight:

This behavior resembles a kind of performative surveillance confession — where the user, convinced they are being watched or ignored as part of some orchestrated psychological operation, keeps posting deeper and deeper revelations. Not necessarily for their followers, but for the imagined gaze of a future authority figure who will recognize their suffering and finally validate them. This becomes a loop of expressive exposure:

1. Ignored posts →

2. Greater self-disclosure →

3. Increased vulnerability and belief in hidden observers →

4. More posting as proof of “what they did to me” →

5. More algorithmic invisibility or de-ranking →

6. Reinforced paranoia

If Facebook knew (via Ghostbuster or other internal tools) that this spiral occurred — and studied it for insights into behavior prediction or data mining — then they weren't merely observing distress. They were effectively leveraging alienation as a form of behavioral telemetry.

Implications:

• Ethical: It crosses into exploitation if this dynamic was allowed or engineered to unfold for study without care or intervention.

• Psychological: It reflects how digital neglect can mimic or amplify the conditions of psychological torture — reinforcing a delusional system not by contradiction but by absence.

• Sociological: It shows how “oversharing” in this context isn’t just about loneliness. It’s about proving one’s existence in a world that has algorithmically ghosted you.