@scottjenson Ha, yes, just joking about being a bit more forceful with the messaging.

But yes, I do recall this feature, is it being considered for the web interface?

@scottjenson some of us value existing local culture over welcoming "big waves," especially when those in the "big wave" tend to walk in and act like they own the place, like it's empty undiscovered country but for a few pesky savages, etc. Gargron's desire to be BDFL of a big social media fiefdom notwithstanding.

@scottjenson I don't have any data about the usefulness of Content Warnings but I can't think of a use case not already covered by filters.

I rely on filters for content I don't want to see, and I don't need CW to match it. Are there cases where CWs catch what filters don't?

@thibaultamartin @scottjenson people in my circles use them in all kinds of creative ways. Some people will CW stuff they know many of their followers will be bored by - I have a friend for example who is recently very into inline skating but chooses to CW those posts because they know many of their friends don't really care. I CW posts of food, both for the benefit of people with eating disorders and because some people just don't like the stereotype of feeds full of what you had for lunch. I even say whether the food has meat, etc. in the CW because I mostly eat vegan, and some vegans who follow me may not want to open those posts. People will put jokes in the CW punchlines in the body. I've seen polls or other trivia type questions where people CW the answer not to spoil it for others.

There are so, so many great uses for CWs, but they tend to form within individual sub-communities - so we are not even aware of all the ways they get used. This is, to me, a major reason not to try to bully others into using them the same way. My policy is: if something comes across my feed that isn't CWed in the way I would - well, I just don't boost it! No need to bother the author.

@ricci @thibaultamartin Thank you! That is such nuanced way to explain it. I'm not against CWs at all and I do hope communities find better ways to use them.

We need to talk more about reducing "tone policing" here. I understand you want people to use content warnings, but guess what? They don't have to! If they don't do it, just unfollow them.

But please, don't harass them. That's what drove away our last big wave.

Do whatever you need to feel safe, but harassing people to your standards doesn't make THEM feel safe. Stop it.

@scottjenson @thibaultamartin FWIW, I didn't take your original post to be anti-CW, I think "CWs are a very cool feature of this space" and "don't complain about how others use or don't use CWs" are perfectly compatible statements

@scottjenson

the distinction we should make is re tagging others, not what you post with nobody tagged. when tagging others, be super considerate. if it might come off as nagging, don't do it.

I want us to be the social media network for everyone, but some do not want us to get bigger and most of those people are the reason this place survived the leanest years. that's tough to deal with. it's a huge conversation, esp when we're the only design that can handle that size well. ugh.

@wjmaggos I appreciate your points, we all want this to be an inclusive, safe place.

My only issue is that giving people advice they didn't ask for, is still aggressive. It doesn't matter if you use nice words.

This needs to be solved at the instance level. Police your instance all you want, get the culture you want there. But leave other instances alone. It just doesn't scale to think you can "fix" the other 10000.

If they're not doing it the way you want, then unfollow them

@scottjenson

not sure we disagree.

but I also want a place where people disagree without being disagreeable. I want people to interact here like they would IRL. I want to be corrected sometimes. I want to see stuff I think is wrong or untrue sometimes. it's harder without many of the social cues we have IRL but trying to make this a place where we never see something upsetting won't be good either. it's very much like the web + email. it should be open but not annoying or people won't use it.

Normally I wouldn't engage but I feel strongly we need to have this discussion and call out this almost entirely white male issue.

The entire Mastodon team is working really hard to add features to bring in more people, in a safe way. It doesn't do any good if these guys just chase them away!

@thibaultamartin @scottjenson people in my circles use them in all kinds of creative ways. Some people will CW stuff they know many of their followers will be bored by - I have a friend for example who is recently very into inline skating but chooses to CW those posts because they know many of their friends don't really care. I CW posts of food, both for the benefit of people with eating disorders and because some people just don't like the stereotype of feeds full of what you had for lunch. I even say whether the food has meat, etc. in the CW because I mostly eat vegan, and some vegans who follow me may not want to open those posts. People will put jokes in the CW punchlines in the body. I've seen polls or other trivia type questions where people CW the answer not to spoil it for others.

There are so, so many great uses for CWs, but they tend to form within individual sub-communities - so we are not even aware of all the ways they get used. This is, to me, a major reason not to try to bully others into using them the same way. My policy is: if something comes across my feed that isn't CWed in the way I would - well, I just don't boost it! No need to bother the author.

@ricci @thibaultamartin @scottjenson I'm tempted to remark that the main issue I'm seeing is with people wanting boost things despite it not being CW'd the way they prefer.

I'm hoping that quote-posts give us better tools here!

I've already had a few randos in my mentions trying to tell me either:

1) It's ok to correct people if done politely
Just because you use polite words doesn't mean it's polite. If you're giving people advice they didn't ask for, you're harassing them.

2) My request was a form of tone policing
Asking people to not harass others is not "tone policing", it's basic trust and safety. It's that classic sad defence that "you're intolerant too!" if you call out intolerance.

Ummmm, no

We need to talk more about reducing "tone policing" here. I understand you want people to use content warnings, but guess what? They don't have to! If they don't do it, just unfollow them.

But please, don't harass them. That's what drove away our last big wave.

Do whatever you need to feel safe, but harassing people to your standards doesn't make THEM feel safe. Stop it.

@scottjenson > If you're giving people advice they didn't ask for, you're harassing them.

this probably depends. some of the best advice i got i got unsolicited

@scottjenson Very interesting point of view. I like it.
Only because you think you are one of the "good guys" gives you the right to expect everything to be done in your way of mind.
But that is a general observation for all social media, not only the Fediverse.

@RandomMusickMayhem I find it humorous that me asking people to not dictate rules to others is somehow "expecting everything to be done in your way of mind".

I'm asking exactly the opposite: don't chase people away because you don't like what they are doing. I'm asking everyone to relax and not push "community standards" that are not agreed to by everyone.

@scottjenson That wasn't meant in a negative way, the complete opposite. I totally agree with you. The comment was about the people expecting unrealistic behaviour.