@dajb sincere counterpoint: I feel the same as you but inverted.
My feed is curated to expose the reality outside my comfort zone. I follow people who challenge me.
I’d prefer it if people who typically post intellectually stimulating or socially critical content would CW their lifestyle and career updates or cat pics.
I get my timeline cleanse from closing social apps to talk with friends and family, collaborate with colleagues, touch grass, or get into a good story.
@dajb I suspect I’m not alone in my use case, but probably not in the majority. I suspect the same about you and yours.
If the standard is “this might not be something someone wants to see in their feed” then what doesn’t meet that standard?
There are bright lines. Content intended to harm the recipient is one. But is the reader the target of harm when they encounter news of harm done to others? Even if that harm was done to them, is the news of it intended to reinflict the harm?
@dajb a final thing this makes me wonder. Sorry for the rhetorical question format.
What does a growing list of keyword filters actually say about the feed and the accounts posting to it? Especially on a network like Mastodon where there are no corporate attention economy algos basing the quality of the feed.
What does it mean that it is becoming increasingly hard to filter out news of trauma, pain and suffering when there isn’t an algorithm preferentially serving up that content?
Robert Friedman