drama!
-
@benroyce
You do get that the word abuse itself is a memory trigger for abused people who don't like to be triggered by some news - no matter how valid or important it is?
If you get that, you understand that CW isn't there to censor, but to be nice and to make life better for certain people. That's part of why people use the Fediverse and don't use Twitter.@gobsmacked @benroyce I agree that authoritarianism and political violence should not be covered up. But I’m not convinced that there’s a dichotomy between denying or covering up fascist acts and broadcasting fascist acts to everyone. Does every person need to know the details of fascist acts? I would like to allow people to be able to opt out of reading or viewing material that they personally deem to be distressing, as much as possible and acknowledging that it might not be possible for an individual to avoid seeing every thing that is distressing to them.
Personally I think hashtags and filters work better for this purpose, as the receiver can opt out reasonably easily, but I think that the Fediverse has settled in content warnings as a default method. -
@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.
-
R relay@relay.an.exchange shared this topic
-
@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.
So anyone trying to enforce CWs is doing that because of *their own* sensibilities/fears/etc., you think
-
@mastodonmigration @benroyce @crow
Blocking you now then...
-
@mastodonmigration @benroyce @crow
Blocking you now then...
-
So anyone trying to enforce CWs is doing that because of *their own* sensibilities/fears/etc., you think
@sibrosan @benroyce Yes, of course they are, though they may pretend it's for some public good (what rubbish). Certain exceptions might exist, such as belonging to a group with specific rules about what people can post and what would require a content warning. But that isn't the case here, of course.
-
So anyone trying to enforce CWs is doing that because of *their own* sensibilities/fears/etc., you think
and what right does anyone have to tell someone else how to CW
on the terms of gore or porn, yes
on the terms of extreme sensitivities no. that doesn't mean someone won't be harmed. it means it is absolutely impossible to abide by ridiculous standards
you may CW your own content as you like. on any rationale
you have zero right to enforce this on others
-
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
I got so irritated by ridiculous CWs that I changed the settings in the control panel to disable them.
-
-
I got so irritated by ridiculous CWs that I changed the settings in the control panel to disable them.
i do the same
-
@sibrosan @benroyce Yes, of course they are, though they may pretend it's for some public good (what rubbish). Certain exceptions might exist, such as belonging to a group with specific rules about what people can post and what would require a content warning. But that isn't the case here, of course.
It's probably best, if you think a user violated your instance's rules, to report them rightaway without first politely warning them.
-
It's probably best, if you think a user violated your instance's rules, to report them rightaway without first politely warning them.
but the issue here is content warnings
-
@benroyce @msbellows @ignova @crow with that CW I expected some serious sh*t in your toot
. -
and what right does anyone have to tell someone else how to CW
on the terms of gore or porn, yes
on the terms of extreme sensitivities no. that doesn't mean someone won't be harmed. it means it is absolutely impossible to abide by ridiculous standards
you may CW your own content as you like. on any rationale
you have zero right to enforce this on others
@benroyce @sibrosan Seriously, I'm not putting a content warning on my fucking sandwich. Plenty of people do, and more power to 'em! I also don't think political views need to be hidden; that is the author's choice.
On the flip side, I see plenty of bullshit that other people post, but there's no way I'd be so arrogant and controlling that I'd tell another person that they have to hide something because I don't like it or because I disagree.
-
It's probably best, if you think a user violated your instance's rules, to report them rightaway without first politely warning them.
-
@benroyce I would hope the fediverse of all places would encourage us to expose these atrocities.
-
@benroyce @sibrosan Seriously, I'm not putting a content warning on my fucking sandwich. Plenty of people do, and more power to 'em! I also don't think political views need to be hidden; that is the author's choice.
On the flip side, I see plenty of bullshit that other people post, but there's no way I'd be so arrogant and controlling that I'd tell another person that they have to hide something because I don't like it or because I disagree.
-
but the issue here is content warnings
Yes, if someone violates your instance's rules with respect to content warnings, it's probably best to report them rightaway without politely warning them about it.
-
Yes, if someone violates your instance's rules with respect to content warnings, it's probably best to report them rightaway without politely warning them about it.
i don't think you understand what we're talking about here
we're talking about people who have their own personal standards for CW, and attempt to gatekeep by demanding other people follow their personal standards and CW their post. even though the person not using a CW is not breaking any server rules
-
@benroyce @sibrosan Seriously, I'm not putting a content warning on my fucking sandwich. Plenty of people do, and more power to 'em! I also don't think political views need to be hidden; that is the author's choice.
On the flip side, I see plenty of bullshit that other people post, but there's no way I'd be so arrogant and controlling that I'd tell another person that they have to hide something because I don't like it or because I disagree.
@alexpsmith @benroyce My instance's rules say thay you need to put a CW on sexually explicit material. That might apply to an image of a fucking sandwich.
