Maybe there's a little of circle theory in the CW discourse? Vent outwards, support inwards. I would *never* tell someone to CW shit that affects *them* more than it affects *me*.
Conversely, I don't want to be the guy that says "hey, oppressed friends, here's some more upsetting stuff for you!" without a heads-up.
If you ask "should one CW this?" you seek a universal that shouldn't exist. Ask "should *I* CW this?".
I guess re: "CW politics", governmental politics, politics in the narrow sense, is the absolute definition of people discussing things that affect you more than it affects them.
It's old men sending young people to die in wars.
It's millionaires deciding on a reasonable minimum wage.
It's majority groups deciding whether prejudice is an issue worth putting resources into fighting.
Which probably fits reasonably into the "vent outwards, support inwards" theory of CW, I guess.
@derwinmcgeary this is interesting, like esp as contrasted to a NSFW tag which, as it denotes, is a corporate politeness tag, that's exactly how i use it. c/w when people already harmed by thing would be further harmed by thing.
@jonny I guess that's the line of "when is it OK to tell someone else to CW?": when it's harming. I think some of the rancour in the discussion comes from that line: "don't tell me what to CW, this is my lived experience" (paraphrasing) and as a gentleman of cisness it's definitely not my place to referee that line for transphobia, for example.
I still can't quite work out where boosting things fits into this framework though. You're not saying it, but you're showing it to everyone?
The other thing to note is that some mastodon clients give you the ability to automatically open cws. So the choice is in the receivers hands.
So if there is a potential for causing trauma to others and you realise that it could. Perhaps CW the toot.
Hashtags are your friends. You can filter out posts that contain words. For example I filter out w#####le and their clone toots.
So I think there's an element of consideration for your audience, plus self protection.
@derwinmcgeary alternatively, if you have to ask "should this have a cw?", the answer is "if it's you posting, yes."
Much easier to determine what others interacting with you should put cws on.
@derwinmcgeary yes yes yes this this this
i've been thinking along the same lines but struggling to put it into words, this is exactly what i've wanted to say
This was the kind of thing I was *trying* to come up with yesterday and the day before. But I couldn't.
At this point, I CW anything which I worry is running over-long. It actually makes certain subjects easier to find again later on when I go back through my own TL.
@derwinmcgeary just do what i do: specify in your profile what specific themes you always use CWs for so people know going in they are safe from being bombarded by specific stuff that could harm them. i can’t CW every trigger because people can be triggered by anything, any time and for any reason. but i can make sure to hold myself accountable for specific types of violence that i know cause harm
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!