@revk @Geoff @inkstainedmags @JonChevreau content warnings are not about preventing "offense" they are about preventing pain. There are many topics or images that cause some people anxiety or sadness. Pictures of food can stress people with eating disorders. Eye contact can cause panic. Talk of terrible politicians can cause anxiety in people who live in places with those politics but no ability to escape or change their situation.

There is no list of topics to warn about. But if you can empathize with people, you might want to use CWs for some topics. That's it.

@sixohsix @revk @Geoff @inkstainedmags @JonChevreau yeah the opinion that CWs should be used sparingly is a common opinion of someone brand-new to Fediverse.

The opposite is more true: you will find more respect and a larger audience when you give out the respect for people's eyeballs by using CWs liberally.

CWs should rightly be renamed "subject line" because it's a phrase to let you know if you want to click before exposing your eyeballs. For traumatized people, that consent is everything.

@CanonicalAbstract @wilbr @revk @Geoff @inkstainedmags @JonChevreau the way you navigate nuance is by trying things and by observing what others do. Just like going to a new place (a social event or club meeting) you see what people do and you do it too. See what others on your instance cw, and try doing that too, because that's your local culture.

Remember, content warnings are not about avoiding offence, but harm. Unlike Twitter people here will not scream at you for "offending them", or quote your tweet as a form of punishment. You might get a polite message from someone asking you to CW some topic in the future. That's about it.