I wrote a thread about Mastodon on Twitter, it needs to be read.
https://twitter.com/pati_gallardo/status/1590485665535643649?s=46&t=hpE2Unzsn-9qKirLfo3tYA
Patricia Aas 🐢🏳️‍🌈 on Twitter

“Ok fine. I have tried to hold my tongue, but there is a line, and when Mastodon folks threaten BIPOC people with getting blocked for not Content Warning when they talk about racism… I need to get real with y’all. 🧵”

Twitter

@patricia thanks for writing this.

Folks here on #Mastodon should read this, and take this seriously.
Clearly, there's a culture around how things are done here at Mastodon, but maybe there is a better way to teach folks about that culture instead of blocking/banning folks outright.

If #Mastadon is to be a place for well-meaning folks on the internet, threatening people may not be the best way forward.

And it is hard to know who means well, but @[email protected]'s call out is pretty clear cut #IMHO

an instance where "well-meaning" is not clear-cut:

I have refrained from posting anything about last night's elections here in the US, because I know I would be dinged about CWs. That makes me not want to post about elections/politics.

That does not feel very free-speech-y.

But I can also easily imagine discourse around US politics and elections getting out of hand (as intentioned by the OP), so a CW may not be a bad idea for all things politics (?). I dunno!

@krishnavp Hi, I'm a little confused by your post. If you're worried about getting dinged for CWs for posting on US politics. Why not just add "US politics" as the CW? Why refrain from posting instead?
@diego it’s about friction (one more thing to do when posting) and my want to be in people’s good graces (and generally not wanting to upset/bother folks)🙂
a CW (for me) implies something that may upset folks … I guess. Eg, I get that folks find US politics unappealing or triggering.
So why would I want to post about something, which even I admit may bother someone … even if it comes with a CW?
So I refrain. Unless I feel really strong about it. So in some ways, it’s a good thing? Not sure.

@krishnavp @diego

I had a similar experience when I first joined. I had someone thought police me about not wrapping a post about UK politics in a CW. It stung. I just wanted freedom to express myself.

But when I read the guy's post with a clear head what he was actually telling me was that he wanted to be able to scroll through things faster, and return to #UKPolitics posts when he had time to digest them in one go.

Seems to historically be a thing here.

@mackaj @diego yea. Something I am learning here. Certainly a new experience on social media. I just figured that CW would be used for the typical things that needed warnings — Violence, Nudity, etc.
This seems like a more extensive use of a CW system.

I guess I was comparing this to the rating system that movies use… but that is more about content being age-appropriate/not.

This clearly is different.