Back when I was active on Usenet it was considered pretty normal to have house rules for any newsgroup, you were also expected to refrain from posting long enough to notice and learn the unspoken customs (this was called "lurking").
Nowadays people see it as an orchestrated attack against free speech, shout references to 1984, and threaten to move elsewhere.
Yet the ones asking us all to behave politely are called "hypersensitive"?
@jkb I think for me, I would rather see those posts, and ignore/block what I find offensive than have moderators decide what I should see. Maybe I want to see those posts so that there is a change for debate and dialogue? Breaking LEGAL terms I totally agree should be instaban - but otherwise I feel like it should be up to each individual user to choose what they want to see and don't want to see. Otherwise we are left with places like Gab.
@jkb isn't it hard to determine what people would find disturbing? i only know what I find disturbing - but no idea what it would mean for the general public
@b_cavello @jkb - thanks for response. I did lurk actually. I also read this: "Untagged pornography and sexually explicit content
Untagged gore and extremely graphic violence" at https://mastodon.social/about/more. I hadn't read anything else about content warning and for all those flooding in, they likely haven't either unless its on their own instances TOS etc. Also, cap locks weren't really necessary :D
@Birch I agree with this, that's why I'm glad that on my instance the rules ask for content warnings for things pretty much anyone would find disturbing instead of simply deleting toots.
Managing people is hard, moderating debates even moreso; let's all keep it civil and see where that takes us.