FUCK OFF with your “THIS IS TOO IMPORTANT TO CW” bullshit!
We told you how bad it’s gonna be.
We told you the impact of it.
We told you all the tech corps will be complicit.
We told you they are facists!
Don’t come screaming on my lawn only because it took YOU until now to realize what is happening.
I cannot afford to stay uninformed anyway, but if I shall function somewhat as a normal human being, I need to be able to decide when I am engaging with this. And I don’t even live in that fucking country and this is the effect this has on me!
Put a fucking CW on your fucking post.
(Boost if you agree.)
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from drakulix@tech.lgbt
@drakulix yeah... sadly those discussion often diverge too quickly into "the people have to see this" and move away from "this is a mental health issue".
If one thinks ones take is more important than the mental health of others, one is causing more damage than by not posting anything at all.
There are hundreds of others doing similar takes, but still respecting the mental health of others.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from karolherbst@chaos.social
@drakulix ghh i've said pretty much all of those things about tech dot lgbt lol
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from jackie@deadinsi.de
@drakulix applause gif
Love to have normies telling me what I should and shouldn't be allowed to avoid, as someone targeted by the worst of what they're just now finally beginning to understand.
All they're saying is "I AM TOO IMPORTANT TO CW." Naah you aren't sweetie!
I can only imagine how maddening that arrogance is to non-USians.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from erosdiscordia@onycha.monster
@drakulix Why not take responsibility for setting your own filters?
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from msbellows@c.im
@msbellows @drakulix that's part of the problem... if people were cw-ing properly... then filtering would be a lot easier....
Also keep in mind: some people might WANT to read us-pol stuff..... but just .. once a day...
So the argument of "people shouldn't try and hide the news" isn't valid. It's up to the people themselves to decide how and when they want to consume the news .... Some days.... you just don't want to care cause you have enough shit going on
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from thibaultmol@en.osm.town
@msbellows @drakulix (that last part wasn't necessarily directed at you btw.
But just felt by the tone of your toot that you might not understand why it's important.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from thibaultmol@en.osm.town
@msbellows @drakulix
That’s victim-blaming, and “take responsibility” is a dog whistle.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from felyashono@disabled.social
@felyashono @drakulix I'm honestly trying to understand this, but it makes no sense to me. Some people have been traumatized by fire, but we don't put content warnings on stories about the recent wildfires. Some people have nearly drowned, but we don't CW "swimming." Some CW topics are obvious (#DV, #SA), but why is the burden on the poster to guess what topics might traumatize a hypothetical reader, when readers can set their own filters to exclude words that bother them from their screens?
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from msbellows@c.im
@msbellows
You're conflating two issues here.
First:
In context, the point was raised apropos of anti-semitic hate speech, which is an obvious CW topic.
Second:
Why shoulder the burden yourself to guess what topics might traumatize a hypothetical reader? Kindness. Empathy. Selflessness. Community. Respect. The principles that will get us through this.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from felyashono@disabled.social
@felyashono My question remains: is there a reason people can't filter out the topics they know trouble them? It seems analogous to masking: I mask for the sake of others, but if someone who could mask themselves chooses but to do so and instead insists that I need to mask for their sake, I'd be a bit resistant.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from msbellows@c.im
@msbellows @felyashono one way or another I don’t think it’s practical to expect people to mute every combination of words that might relate to a topic they’d want to avoid, especially when it’s a topic as broad as US politics or similar.
Not least because people insist on actively working around filters. I have the names of certain political individuals muted because nearly everything anyone has to say about them is incredibly boring. And yet it’s no good because there’s always one more HILARIOUS nickname that someone has thought up that I don’t have muted.
There are definitely limits to what I’d consider it reasonable to expect others to CW (even with the best intentions it’s impossible to know every topic that might require a warning for someone) but politics is such a common one that I don’t think there’s any excuse.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from benjamineskola@hachyderm.io
@msbellows @felyashono I also think there’s a difference between not realising you should CW something, and actively deciding not to CW something because it’s “too important” (because you think you know best what other people’s priorities should be).
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from benjamineskola@hachyderm.io
@benjamineskola @felyashono VERY fair.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from msbellows@c.im
@msbellows why don’t you try it and find out why not for yourself
(it doesn’t work)
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from bri_seven@queer.party
@msbellows but you know what really helps a lot with helping people take responsibility for the content of their own feed with filters?
CWs with consistent keywords in them
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from bri_seven@queer.party
@drakulix I am so god damn exhausted
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from soller@fosstodon.org
@drakulix @astrid
Not to put too fine a point on it,
but if you yourself are traumatized by something and deeply upset by it,
why do you think traumatizing others with it, instead of giving them the opportunity to engage with it thoughtfully, would be a correct choice?
That's obviously a case of being controlled by the trauma instead of being able to mount a thoughtful, careful, and -effective- response, which makes you less effective now -and- in the future.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from munin@infosec.exchange
@munin I am genuinely not sure, who this exactly is directed at?
Are you referring to as the people using “Too important to CW” as deeply upset and traumatizing others? Or are you implying I am traumatized and somehow traumatize others via this post?
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from drakulix@tech.lgbt
@drakulix
sorry, unclear 'you' -
yes, to the people using 'too important to cw'
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from munin@infosec.exchange This content has been proxied by September (3851b).Proxy Information
text/gemini