You can complain about what people post, sure, but demanding people use content warnings is a form of gatekeeping.
You can mute any account you like if you don't like their content, but instead you wish those accounts only post things you'd like to read.
By trying to control what other people post I assume you don't quite understand how social media works.
Edit: I'm really just talking about CWs for people posting about political news and commenting on it.
@Anke @lydiaconwell I don't mind when people ask or suggest content warnings. I tend to try to use them myself.
But I'm also not going to complain to a marginalized group that they're not using CW and offending my delicate sensibilities.
I suppose what /I/ am saying is that I try to use CW to defend those with less privilege than I, and will not use them if the intent is to bring down those in power or comfort.
It's a balancing act that will inevitably be wrong at times.
@Anke Yes, but not all instances require content warnings unless for specific topics. So you're not necessarily breaking server rules but posting without them.
I think a much better feature -- which Mastodon is very good for -- is filters. I use plenty of filters. The things that bother me tend not to be offensive things, just certain hashtags, etc, used repetitively. You can filter out any word for any topic you don't want to see.
It's why it's also very important to spell your swear words correctly so people's filters catch them.
Another feature that is good is the lists feature. You can put different people in different lists and hide them from you main feed, putting them in a separate feed. That's also a good way to avoid content when you don't feel up to it. Or make sure you see the things you want. This also means no one is muted so you can still receive messages from them.
You see, my preferred ways of working accepts that I cannot control other people's content, but I can direct it into different feeds or hide it entirely.
CWs are a polite way of giving others the ability to avoid seeing things that might impact them negatively.
Think that there are many people with emotional health issues or trauma that are driven out from a society or social media community that doesn't give a shit about their needs.
However, we also have to be aware that liberal bootlickers that demand "please CW politics" or "I don't want to see descriptions of experiences of racism because I rather prefer to continue with my privileged life" do not deserve so much consideration. (using hashtags such as #USelections can be a good thing though, because the dominance of some events can be really annoying and such hashtags allow people to mute these posts)
Suggestion:
- putting CWs on heavily traumatizing stuff (sexual violence, disturbing images etc.) is community care.
- See CWs also as a tool to put informative titles/mini-resumes on your posts. Then you will like the function a lot 
@earthworm Absolutely.
I use CWs for both those reasons. CWs are also good for jokes.
Also, another thing to mention is that I have the CW feature turned to auto reveal, so I sometimes don't even notice when one is used.
But I think using filters or muting annoying accounts are by far the most effective ways to hide content you don't want to see.
But actually, maybe I should really be telling people to use CWs but turn them to auto open if you don't need them.
Lydia Conwell
Wayne Werner
Anke
Earthworm 🐌