Help me out here guys. I know things get people upset, including politics... but at what point do I need to put anything that can get anyone upset behind a content warning? NSFW stuff, things that can cause epilepsy, sure... but conversation about politics? Feels extreme to me. Let's talk about this. Why should people use a CW for it? Why shouldn't they?
@shivian I really enjoy the no-assholes-policies, and I would enjoy it further if toots about e.g. the minority president would be CWed, because it's an asshole, and I don't want to see its face or read its name.
@shivian @mothman It's a hard question that I think cannot be answered in generalized way. It also depends if you want people to read your posts or mute you.
From what I read from you so far I would say that you will set CWs responsible, and that the rest is up to taste.
Right now I find it a little bit unsettling tbqf that people use "war" as a CW...
@lieselotte @mothman :heart: thank you - and yeah, it's a touchy subject for sure (including the new "war" CW flag) but I also don't want to be a part of an experience where I have to walk on eggshells the whole time, worrying about whether something should be tagged or not - and potentially being seen as a total jerk if I don't tag something that someone feels I should have. Seems extreme to ask for anything offensive ever to always be tagged.
@shivian I mean, you use a flashy gif as an avatar, what is as far as I can take from multiple posts regarded as very impolite if not even unacceptable around here. So we are way past egg shells.
Idk, if you want to let it rip, go to unsafe.space or maly.io?
Nach bestem Wissen und Gewissen, nech?
@shivian There is a lot of pressure already on the person to 'move past' it. I'll cw anything anyone who follows me asks me to, I have that policy on all my social media. But not everyone is going to do that, and I've had conflicts before, even recently, where friends haven't wanted to cw things. Some people even cw harmless stuff that happens to be long. It's just personal preference I suppose.
@mothman it's not personal preference if a lot of SJWs on Mastodon instances are telling everyone else that they HAVE to tag stuff with the CW flag if it's "political" :disappointed_relieved:
@shivian I dont know, I agree with the other person saying it's a complicated issue. It's really easy to get caught up in tagging everything, I have ocd and the thought of hurting someone unintentionally is really upsetting to me! It's difficult because on masto it's a public timeline, instead of a personally curated one like on most sites. I find that most people with very severe 'oddball' triggers (I use that word gently, you know what I mean) use blacklist widgets already.
@shivian @mothman @lieselotte I think you're mixing up content warnings (which is like saying 'hey, you might not feel like reading this') with the idea of being offended. Sometimes I'm not in the mood to watch a comedy show so I watch a drama instead. Sometimes I don't want to read depressing political toots so I skim them and look at dog pics and shitposting.
@shivian @mothman @lieselotte It's not about censoring yourself, just about being mindful that people don't have to be always-on about depressing political stuff on a website that's supposed to be a fun place to hang out and chill, you know?
@lieselotte @mothman but anyone can be upset with anything... am I supposed to CW anything anyone ever asks me to, or I know *might* offend someone, otherwise I'm being a jerk? At what point is it the reader's responsibility to move past upsetting - but generally discussed - content that they don't like (be it politics, climate change, forest fires, or other upsetting topics)?