Discussion
@scottjenson 100%
It's *your preference* if you don't like some type of content, and the rest of the world isn't obligated to consider every possible thing any stranger might find objectionable.
Mastodon has filters so *you as a reader* can configure what you want to see and how. Use them.
@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.
@RandomMusickMayhem ah, I read your comment wrong. Thank you.
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
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.
@wjmaggos As an old white guy, I've had a personal journey here. It's taken me awhile to understand that being comfortable with being corrected is a privileged place. To see that others didn't have this same comfort level was a big step, but it was also difficult to see how correcting people without being asked is an intrusion. It may be welcome some of the time, but it's still an intrusion.
But this is a very general point. I'm just saying to do this over CWs just feels so unnecessary.
@scottjenson The moment someone says: "We need a moderator", the first thought that should pop in your head is:
🧠 "𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘦𝘴 𝘮𝘺 𝘧𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘥𝘰𝘮!"
-- Me 2009
@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.
@deutrino I'm all for you policing your own instance in any way you see fit. I'm just saying it's a lost cause if you want to police the other 10000 instances. Not only doesn't it work, it just pisses people off. It's a lose/lose effort.
⁂ Article
Re: We need to talk more about reducing "tone policing" here.
If you read the writing of the people who came up with content warnings as implemented in Mastodon, then you'll know that they somewhat regret implementing them.
Meanwhile, I think Bluesky's labeling approach, for all its faults, largely got things right, which is why AP T&S decided to do a content labeling idea (not that I've had time to write the FEPs for it).
Most use-cases for content warnings today are like one-word keywords for people's filtering to hide. The content warnings approach puts the onus on the publisher to consider every possible way that someone may not want to see something that they post, when really it needs to be a balance of power: some self-labelling of content, some automated, and some opt-in, then people can choose what they do and do not want to see, without suppressing the publisher's voice to people who do want to see their content.
Edit: see the swicg/activitypub-trust-and-safety repo's issues on github for the background and links
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
@scottjenson > If you're giving people advice they didn't ask for, you're harassing them.
this probably depends. i generally like getting unsolicited advice
@lkundrak What I'm pushing back on here isn't that "all replies are bad" but more that "schooling people on CWs" isn't helpful. When I say that I get "but I'm just replying to public post" which is where I say "unwanted replies can be a form of harassment."
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!
> call out this almost entirely white male issue
I want to add something to this, my memory of what CW-policing looked like when I joined in fall 2022 was that most of it was people trying to police what they though *others* would want CWed. eg. not "I was triggered by this, you should have CWed it" but "some other people might be triggered by this therefore you need to CW it" - if you think you are being by doing this, you are almost definitely not
@scottjenson Have you considered this idea?
@stefan We actually do this on our native apps already.
@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?
@stefan I'll have to get back to you on that. I'm not sure
Nah - not really. Satire, maybe 🙃
@scottjenson Arn’t you language and tone policing to try to make your online environment more to your liking? You want to set a community standard of being more chill about content warnings while your opponents want them taken more seriously.
Why not engage in an argument on the merits of the practice of content warnings. Why turn it into a meta conversation about the fate of the platform? You don’t have strong arguments against content warnings so you want to expand the playing field to include “civility” and “the usage of the Fediverse”?
People should advocate for what they believe in, if it makes you feel bad then you should change your behavior not demand they stop pointing it out.
@kevinhippert Not at all! I'm just asking people to be civil and not harass others. If they don't use CW, it's not your job to "train them". It's the number one reason we've been told that people leave Mastodon, that so many people harass them about "they are. doing Mastodon wrong". I hope we can agree that we don't want to chase people away?
Would like to suggest combining "tone policing" with how we can make it easier for new users to grasp how every instance can set their own "rules" for their users - often in a CoC and/or ToS.
But within limits, as otherwise risk getting defederated.
Some guidelines on making it easy for users to find someones home instance and the rules it has could also be good. Both for instance admins and users.
@tsvenson @scottjenson the tone of the tone policing matters too. For example, a suggestion that using appropriate hashtags (to help filters) and/or CWs might actually increase reach since people who care about this will only boost properly tagged and/or CWed posts will elicit a different reaction than a shouting match to the tone of «CW YOUR POLITICS, ASSHOLE».
@tsvenson excellent suggestion
Thanks. But realized it should just be for "new" users.
I do think if we can make progress on these things, it will be easier for more to appreciate how instances with different focus is empowering the Fediverse to keep growing stronger and better,
@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 @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!
@alcinnz @thibaultamartin @scottjenson Yeah, I've seen people put a CW and then a link to the thing they wanted to boost in the body, since the original didn't have the CW they wanted on it.
@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.
@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
@thibaultamartin I don't think it matters as many people never use CWs the "right way" so will never be caught properly.
Btw, I'm not saying we should never use CWs there could be some strong content that a server wants to always be me marked. But that's up to server admins to enforce not randos yelling at newcomers
@scottjenson @thibaultamartin OTOH, filters don't work reliably either given how many people have carried over from The Other Places the bad habit of intentionally mistyping names to avoid algorithmic demotion/shadowbanning/etc.
@scottjenson I generally agree with the sentiment here, I'd just add that the appropriate use of CWs should be clearly stated in the server rules, and posts breaking them should be reported to the server's admin to handle, rather than a bunch of people from different servers forming a perhaps well-meaning mob and repeating the same message.
Have you seen this poll, by the way?
https://stefanbohacek.online/@stefan/113623004004461223
Nicely shows how leading by example works best!
@stefan I completely agree! If it's part of your server rules then by all means, but it's up to the folks of that server to enforce, not some rando that doesn't like your hashtag.
I'm not saying never use CWs, I'm saying don't lecture people about it.
@scottjenson Yep, we're definitely on the same page here.
I do trust that people mean well when they do this, but a big part of the issue, I think, has been the fact that federation hasn't always worked so well before, so when you reply to someone to tell them about how to use CWs or alt text, you might not see 10 other people doing the same.
I always found CWs to be backwards. How the hell am I supposed to know what is going to set someone off? They should honestly be removed and let readers self-filter.
had one of them the other day, told me off because they didn't like my tone, gave me a list of rules to follow and they broke their own rules 2 & 3 to tell me to follow those rules.
@Thebratdragon yeah we can add all sorts of features to mastodon but if these folks keep chasing new folks away, it just won't matter
yep, I follow the, let people be, use mute and black and just move on with life.
@scottjenson 100%
It's *your preference* if you don't like some type of content, and the rest of the world isn't obligated to consider every possible thing any stranger might find objectionable.
Mastodon has filters so *you as a reader* can configure what you want to see and how. Use them.
@mattwilcox @scottjenson
@Hawaii
CWs are different from filters.
I call them „Content Wrappers“. And I like them because they give me a choice whether I feel able to view that post •today• or not. Because depending on my energy level, that may vary. One day I may want to see your close-up spider picture, the next day please no.
Content wrappers give me time to take a breath and brace myself. They do not require me to filter out the whole post, but let me view it at my own pace.
Just two more examples:
as an autistic person, I find portraits with eye contact *extremely* distracting. I love a content wrapper around one so that I can read the posts next to it, unwrap the picture and appreciate it, and then wrap it up again to continue reading.
Food pictures can be hard when I’m hungry and can’t eat. A wrapper around it helps.
Food is also really difficult to filter out, so many different words. I want to see your chickens, but alive and well, for example, not on your plate.
So a CW has a different purpose than a filter, and there are good reasons for the fedi to have both in its toolbox.
A space for Bonfire maintainers and contributors to communicate
