Heidi Li FeldmanA word about my decision not to use content warnings when I post about Kamala Harris and U.S. politics and law more generally: It is something I have given thought to, not a cavalier lapse. It seems to me the norms about CWs are in flux. I appreciate that not everybody is interested in these topics and that.... 1/
....not using CWs for U.S. politics and law related posts can seem, may even be, rather provincial of me. But, I believe democracy and rule of law in the U.S. are facing an existential crisis. Many of my posts are part of an effort to protect what democracy and rule of law we have and to rebuild and build to new heights. .... 2/
... Especially when fundraising for Kamala Harris, I feel we can't afford any friction in getting the word out, not even the small rub of having to go through a CW.
I hope things in the U.S. won't always be so dire. If and when we ever return to reasonable political, legal, and policy disagreements in a secular, pluralist, constitutional democracy, I may well add CWs to posts. ... 3/
Ande JacobsonCWs are not necessary. If somebody doesn't want to read something, they can just scroll by it.
Now we just need to be up front and support Harris for president. Our lives really do depend on it.
Mimirif i don't want to read your posts and you're not CWing them I'm blocking you, not ignoring them. More efficient.