"What you see is all there is." (TF&S)
(Using deception in entertainment is fine. It is NOT fine in argument).
Much etiquette is just sincerity.
- There is *nothing* wrong with discussing an important ideas *without a content warning*. With no exceptions. What is wrong is *not* discussing those ideas.
*This includes politics*
Obscuring/hiding such discussion (ie using CW) *is* harmful to an informed society of electors. It facilitates persistence of fallacy.
Considering #satire is both argument, deception and entertainment though, and the result is you can't have CWs for political discussion without CWs for political satire and political jokes.
And who gets to decide if a joke is political/offensive?
This quickly becomes a problem that isn't about #etiquette.
@Barcode it's not about hiding, but allowing people to engage with it on their own terms.
It's about allowing other people to manage their energy better.
It's about thinking about how something you write can affect other people, both in negative and positive ways.
Just sit with that for a moment.
A CW as #etiquette norm isn't allowing a reader to engage on their own terms, it's a barrier to reduce discussion on a topic.
I couldn't make people manage their energy *worse* if, out of malice I tried. I could only waste their time by creating a distraction, but since they're on social media, they already are indulging in distraction, and that is on them. Not I.
I already factor in whether a comment is worth posting. A CW on important ideas as takes value away.
This is regress.
@Barcode I don't think CW is about obstruction. I think it's about choice and mental safety. Contents warnings don't permanently hide a topic or opinion, but allow the user to interact with that topic on their terms.
The users that still want to interact with it will do so. But if they don't have the spoons for it that very second, then they can choose to keep scrolling.
For me, I also like long threads to be CWd because it keeps it organized on my TL
Mental safety is nonsense because thoughts of an ideas don't harm any more than thinking about cartoon violence resembles acting out violence.
Mental safety arguments are the same ones used to blame rock music and videogames for corrupting the youth; also for justification of book bans.
I have not argued CWs permanently hide topics any more than I have argued for banning cartoon violence.
CWs hide them until revealed by click; if not clicked then they *are* permanently hidden.
@Barcode just because a fact is used to support a fallacious argument doesn't make the fact less true. It makes the argument unsound.
Mental health is real, and if you don't believe that then I have nothing more to say on the matter.
Are you saying you DO think CWs hide things permanently, or you DONT? The last 2 paraghs were unclear. In any case, the CW is a toggle. Toggles change things.
And you can still make jokes with CW. The creative people #onhere do it all the time.
I have not said fact supporting a fallacious argument made that argument sound. I don't know why you mentioned this.
Mental health, an aspect of one's wellbeing, is not mental safety which is an academic's nonsense and a cousin of 'will somebody please think of the children!'
My last 2 paragraphs:
-described & proved CWs do NOT hide things permanently (ie deletion)
-instead sabotage visibility of things adults are must inform themselves of; in some cases it's the same as deletion
@Barcode ok.
Well it's clear that you don't like CWs. Good to know.
Most of us here do, and we'll keep using them.
So *kanye shrug* have a good day I guess.
@Barcode Speaking from personal experience... no. Past trauma means there are some things that will leave me shaking with adrenaline and upset for hours after if I’m not in a resilient frame of mind when I read them. CWs give me warning and a chance to prepare.
You've given me something to think about, though since I've received a message from a mod it's probably just more practical for me to self censor.
@Barcode That’s cool. Have a think and if you really can’t stand CWs there are instances that prioritise “free speech”. (Though they often have... unpleasant... politics and a lot of places won’t federate with them.)
I'm going to be as polite as I can and ask you under section 4C (https://mastodon.social/about/more) of the mastodon.social rules to not contact me over this again.
@Barcode HI there. Regardless of your feelings on the matter, we ask that you do use a content warning for political topics, if only because this is not a US-based server and many people simply don't care about the minutiae of other countries' politics and would rather not have them clogging up their feeds.
I'm afraid this is not a subject for debate, simply an administrative request from the moderators.
This is a 4a request from the Mastodon.social rules, is it not?
"Continuing to engage in conversation with a user that has specifically has requested for said engagement with that user to cease and desist may be considered harassment, regardless of platform-specific privacy tools employed"
typo: *any important ideas