Content Warnings for what?

[agturcz@circumstances.run]

@pockets That assumption of symmetry is very untrue. Each of us have some personal boundaries, which are not only different from other people boundaries, but also, they might fluctuate in time.

I'm giving CWs for more subjects, that I need CWs to. And that looks list is rather consistent. And for the CWs given by others, some of them are required (if not given, I will consider unfollow/mute), and some of them I appreciate, because even if not needed, they still improve my experience, because I can chose, if I want to read about the subject at the very moment, or just skip it.

[pockets@lgbtqia.space]

@agturcz
I only made the assumption because it saved the effort of picking one over the other or making two polls, and possible misunderstanding of people trying to answer one or both polls.

If you think it would be better split, be my guest and make your own polls.

[agturcz@circumstances.run]

@pockets I'm not the one seeking knowledge here. What I've wrote is a feedback for "If it's not symmetrical for you, I'd like to know why."

[oohokaykay@beige.party]

@pockets
Missing in this poll are animals, snakes, and insects.
Not everyone wants to see them, so if you can't be bothered to CW them, at least include the name (eg cat, spider, snake) so we can filter them out.

[statsguy@mas.to]

@pockets I usually (though not 100% reliably) put content warnings on posts about politics or the various wars that are going on at the moment.

This is not symmetrical. I don't use content warnings at all when I read toots, I've set it to show the whole post by default, even if there is a content warning on it.

[superball@norcal.social]

@pockets
I don’t need content warnings except for spoilers, but I include them for my rare mentions of politics, erotica, and violence.

[earthshaking@mastodon.eternalaugust.com]

@pockets I always appreciate NSFW spoilers so I do so in kind. I also spoiler all my talk about food and weight loss stuff because I want to be respectful for people who have struggled with disordered eating. Likewise my medical/mental health stuff. Those don't bother me when I encounter them from others, but I want to try and be considerate to folks they ARE issues for. Those are my main

[irina@wandering.shop]

@pockets I CW food (and also church) because there are people I know who appreciate that. I don't want/need a CW for either myself. (I do for politics, spoilers, jokes, health and NSFW, in no particular order)

[vfrmedia@social.tchncs.de]

@pockets I don't post NSFW content myself, but the CW is useful if I've got Fedi running at work, so I don't get yiff etc on my screen when I sometimes share an office with a devout Christian accountant

the rest of furry art I just say "my friends who are into computers like drawing cartoon animals"

I also tend to CW pictures of snakes, spiders etc as a lot of my mutuals are in countries where you get gnarly venomous species (often in places you do not want them to be such as when going to the loo) and folk are understandably wary of them..

[hellomiakoda@pdx.social]

@pockets It's not symmetrical for me because others need CWs that I don't, so I put CWs that I don't particularly care if others put.

[edgeofeurope@mastodon.social]

@pockets I set a cw on all correctly tagged dog content. I don't expect people to do that for me though. It's neither shocking nor traumatic to me, just sometimes unpleasantly gross.

[schafstelze@don.linxx.net]

@pockets For myself, I removed CWs and very rarely regretted it. This doesn't mean I don't use CWs if I think that it might be (re-)traumatizing (like in war footage, not like in 'eeeew, I don't like this food/animal').

[mdione@en.osm.town]

@pockets my reason to vote politics is: even for the most populated countries, more than 80% of the world does not live in your country.

In particular, one of the most populated countries has the tendency of never qualifying their assertions, so most of the time the rest of the 95%+ of the world must qualify them by adding "[this shit is going good or bad] in the US".

[artemis201@mstdn.social]

@pockets I listed the CWs I want to see. There are additional CWs that I use out of respect for other people (mostly pictures of food)

[lukyan@lukyan.eu]

@pockets I'd use a CW for mostly all of that, and for subjects otherwise associated with these.

I really need CWs for posts with images I couldn't be looking at in public (NSFW and gore), and for long posts (or otherwise making it hard to browse); I want them for politics, and I appreciate them for all categories. (I click the "hide" button on posts with eye contact: I want to see them in context but not stay on the screen.)

In the "Other" category, I want CWs for loud audio, flashing images and triggers of phobias of friends.

[euan@speedlines.stctp.zone]

@pockets I also put CWs on the kinds of things that tend to ruin my mood and my day, so mentions of AI, mentions of Harry Potter, and mentions of transphobia (so me personally, I would also CW discussion of bigotry more generally in ways that don't all apply to me with consideration for anyone who feels the same way about those as I feel as a trans woman about having talk of transphobia out in the open across my timeline. But I know some people don't take kindly to being told to CW discussion of bigotry directed at them, so I wouldn't expect that as a rule for everyone else.)

[nic@toot.wales]

@pockets there's a few I use, but don't care about personally (eg. eye contact and food don't bother me but I try to CW them myself) and there's some that are non-negotiable for me (un-CWed lewds or gore are probably going to get you blocked; I scroll this feed on the bus). Some grey areas, like politics - I’d prefer hashtags or CWs but will mute/block as needed. Mental health stuff is tricky, depends where I am in my own MH.

[fnessa@social.data.coop]

@pockets I have unfollowed people because they post pictures of non-vegan food without content warning (still don't feel good about it even with content warning for obvious reasons), but honestly I'd count that as violence and gore.
I sometimes am more careful with content warnings when posting myself, as I know that some people appreciate it, even when I don't think it'd be necessary for me, so that is technically not symmetrical.

[luc@chaos.social]

@pockets spoilers only for lack of actual spoiler syntax on Mastodon. Otherwise you can just mark as spoiler the part that's a spoiler and not have to hide entire posts

[captainvellalives@lgbtqia.space]

@pockets

I use a lot of content warnings for long posts because I worry about clogging up folk's timelines¹ (especially on niche topics). For me, I appreciate other folks doing the same but honestly if an account gets too much I just mute or unfollow depending. Otherwise, I go by the "if someone looked over my shoulder in public and suddenly saw/read this would it cause them psychic damage?" rule and that's usually things like graphic content (violence, NSFW, etc). If an account doesn't CW something like that I'm out. It's not always one to one but as a rule the folks I follow CW their posts in ways that I would if I were posting them so for me it's ended up being pretty symmetrical

I should say by "CW" I mean hiding it behind the "show content" prompt and clearly labelling it, not just writing "CW:..." at the head of a post. If it's worth content warning then I feel like it's worth using the content warning system²

¹: this post is (well) over 1,000 characters so personally I'd consider this "Long Post" CW worthy
²: these are my own personal opinions and I'm not trying to tell anyone how to Fedi or get on anyone's case. It's not a big deal. Mute/filters exist for a reason. If someone posts in a way that you personally don't like then mute/filter, take a deep breath and let go. It's not worth getting excited about just be chill and respectful ️