drama!
-
@benroyce@mastodon.social
I've been saying it for a while but it's not something people hear me out about and often tell me it's not the way to go.
It's refreshing to find someone who agrees with me on this. -
there's more CW topics than just gore and porn
strobe effects are not good for people with certain seizure conditions for example
do we censor a picture of a creepy spider?
and if some people want to content warn *their* posts on levels of sensitivity you and i might consider absurd: that's ok, it's their post, their choice
where i step in and speak out though is when people gatekeep other posters on content that is not straight gore or porn or the other serious niche topics
Generally, this falls into the HOA category that puts people off Mastodon.
If you don't like the way someone else uses Mastodon you should block them. Then you will never see their transgressions. It is not your job to tell people how to use Mastodon, nor is it appreciated.
Exceptions include things which violate the server's rules. Then you should block them and report them.
It's very simple.
-
@benroyce I think there is nuance here around where we go for news. Some people come to fedi just to play with their friends, they receive their news from other places and share links with friends and family via signal. Sharing something without a content warning because "everyone needs to see this" implies that everyone isn't already reading the news in other places, putting us a savior/beacon for distributing news that is readily available everywhere. We are aware of the horrors, very very very aware, we are building momentum of revolution. And sometimes we just need a breather from the horrors because the horrors invade every single point of our lives. I do post about #uspol because I want to be a part of the conversations and I want to find other people who align in the revolution. Fighting over how we disseminate information is not going to bring more people to greater awareness. We also need spaces of softness and whimsy to keep us grounded in the tender possibilities of what CAN be built when we aren't lost in the madness of it all.
@MamaLake No one owes anyone a CW. Those are up to the user, and it is the responsibility of the viewer to decide how they will react or respond.
-
Generally, this falls into the HOA category that puts people off Mastodon.
If you don't like the way someone else uses Mastodon you should block them. Then you will never see their transgressions. It is not your job to tell people how to use Mastodon, nor is it appreciated.
Exceptions include things which violate the server's rules. Then you should block them and report them.
It's very simple.
yeah
busy body controlling types ruin mastodon
they don't understand how toxic they are and how much they work against true community, exactly as they use the lying conceit of "concern for community" to gatekeep, gatekeep, gatekeep
1. unfollow
2. mute
3. block
4. report
in that order
that's the solution
-
drama!
i need to rant about #ContentWarning creep
i posted once of a Ukrainian reporter whose corpse was abused by Russia. i got calls for #CW. no pictures, no text details, just a link to a story
i suspect some CW calls are a manipulation to hide fascist abuse
certainly some are sincere
but they aren't serving a valid goal. an extreme level of sensitivity is absurd and unactionable
gore? absolutely CW
but some calls serve #fascism by hiding abuse. abuse we rightfully need to broadcast
@benroyce Man, I am sick to death of people trying to enforce CWs. Responsible adults do NOT expect others to placate their sensibilities/fears/etc.
-
yeah
busy body controlling types ruin mastodon
they don't understand how toxic they are and how much they work against true community, exactly as they use the lying conceit of "concern for community" to gatekeep, gatekeep, gatekeep
1. unfollow
2. mute
3. block
4. report
in that order
that's the solution
The simple response is to block them. If someone tries to tell you how to use Mastodon just block them.
-
can i argue with them? please?
-
can i argue with them? please?
-
@benroyce I think there is nuance here around where we go for news. Some people come to fedi just to play with their friends, they receive their news from other places and share links with friends and family via signal. Sharing something without a content warning because "everyone needs to see this" implies that everyone isn't already reading the news in other places, putting us a savior/beacon for distributing news that is readily available everywhere. We are aware of the horrors, very very very aware, we are building momentum of revolution. And sometimes we just need a breather from the horrors because the horrors invade every single point of our lives. I do post about #uspol because I want to be a part of the conversations and I want to find other people who align in the revolution. Fighting over how we disseminate information is not going to bring more people to greater awareness. We also need spaces of softness and whimsy to keep us grounded in the tender possibilities of what CAN be built when we aren't lost in the madness of it all.
@benroyce we have the freedom to post exactly as we want to AND we have the freedom to block posters that don't bring value (value defined beyond money) into our worlds.
I got into an internet fight with an economics journalist because he was antagonizing people about content warnings and how no one would see his posts if he used content warnings. Which makes me wonder how good a journalist is if he can't write a headline on a CW that would create appropriate engagement. A CW header doesn't just have to list all of the triggering items, it can be used just like a headline.
-
don't tell me what to do!
(i'm sorry, i'm agreeing with you completely and feeling the need to joke lamely)
-
there's more CW topics than just gore and porn
strobe effects are not good for people with certain seizure conditions for example
do we censor a picture of a creepy spider?
and if some people want to content warn *their* posts on levels of sensitivity you and i might consider absurd: that's ok, it's their post, their choice
where i step in and speak out though is when people gatekeep other posters on content that is not straight gore or porn or the other serious niche topics
@benroyce @crow i think there is a significant and unjustified shifting of blame going on when people say that normal posts have 'caused' panic attacks, nightmares, and so on.
non-extreme posts are not the primary cause of mental health tailspins. a picture of a sandwich does not 'cause' someone to spiral into an eating disorder relapse. if something so innocuous sets that person off, they were already on the brink, and it's unfair to blame the sandwich poster for severe mental health issues that were actually caused by something else.
-
don't tell me what to do!
(i'm sorry, i'm agreeing with you completely and feeling the need to joke lamely)
-
@benroyce @crow i think there is a significant and unjustified shifting of blame going on when people say that normal posts have 'caused' panic attacks, nightmares, and so on.
non-extreme posts are not the primary cause of mental health tailspins. a picture of a sandwich does not 'cause' someone to spiral into an eating disorder relapse. if something so innocuous sets that person off, they were already on the brink, and it's unfair to blame the sandwich poster for severe mental health issues that were actually caused by something else.
exactly. there is a range of normal posts and what people consider that to be obviously has large grey areas
but then there are also some demands for care and concern that are so absurd and extreme it is not possible for anyone well intentioned and sincere to even remotely adhere to them
some people just want a giant CW on every single post in existence apparently
or rather, they are controlling busybodies who get off on gatekeeping
-
@mastodonmigration @benroyce @crow
OK sure. But new folks who join the platform - especially when they come from wild west sites like twitter - need to be socialized to the mores here. And without a gentle comment, how are they supposed to learn those rules? Blocking without comment doesn't help anyone.
-
exactly. there is a range of normal posts and what people consider that to be obviously has large grey areas
but then there are also some demands for care and concern that are so absurd and extreme it is not possible for anyone well intentioned and sincere to even remotely adhere to them
some people just want a giant CW on every single post in existence apparently
or rather, they are controlling busybodies who get off on gatekeeping
-
@mastodonmigration @benroyce @crow
OK sure. But new folks who join the platform - especially when they come from wild west sites like twitter - need to be socialized to the mores here. And without a gentle comment, how are they supposed to learn those rules? Blocking without comment doesn't help anyone.
@jawarajabbi @mastodonmigration @crow
i think you're conflating two different things
a gentle reminder they aren't on twitter anymore isn't anything remotely like "could you CW this content that might trigger according to some absurd level of concern, perhaps even a fake contrived concern just so i get to busy body gatekeep"
in fact the latter only makes new accounts go "what they fuck is wrong with this place" rather than learning any sort of mastodon ethos
-
i see what you're saying. double the text, double the bandwidth. make mastodon traffic look huge! (/s)
-
@mastodonmigration @benroyce @crow
OK sure. But new folks who join the platform - especially when they come from wild west sites like twitter - need to be socialized to the mores here. And without a gentle comment, how are they supposed to learn those rules? Blocking without comment doesn't help anyone.
As Ben points out you might want to discuss it with them. That's up to you. But, if it bugs you and you don't feel up to it, you also have the option the block them.
The point is that you can use the platform however you want so long as it doesn't violate the rules of your instance.
The recourse others have is to remove you from their experience.
-
@benroyce we have the freedom to post exactly as we want to AND we have the freedom to block posters that don't bring value (value defined beyond money) into our worlds.
I got into an internet fight with an economics journalist because he was antagonizing people about content warnings and how no one would see his posts if he used content warnings. Which makes me wonder how good a journalist is if he can't write a headline on a CW that would create appropriate engagement. A CW header doesn't just have to list all of the triggering items, it can be used just like a headline.
i feel you but i can't agree
CW is not a headline. it is meant to warn about sensitive content. of course it can be used in other ways, but as a warning is its intended purpose and how most people view its use
and anytime you hide content, no matter how minor, you hide content. it's certainly not censorship but it is also certainly a real impediment to engagement
-
exactly. there is a range of normal posts and what people consider that to be obviously has large grey areas
but then there are also some demands for care and concern that are so absurd and extreme it is not possible for anyone well intentioned and sincere to even remotely adhere to them
some people just want a giant CW on every single post in existence apparently
or rather, they are controlling busybodies who get off on gatekeeping
@benroyce @ignova @crow Mastodon will literally add CWs for you based on keywords. It's not a perfect system, but no-one is entitled to move through life insulated from every little thing they personally don't want to encounter - and making it up to other people to pander to all your idiosyncratic aversions and phobias is unreasonable.
I've no time for the HOA gatekeepers who can't take some
adult responsibility
for what they see online.
