Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Rename content warning (CW) to content notice (CN) #20117

Open
leahoswald opened this issue Nov 8, 2022 · 166 comments
Open

Rename content warning (CW) to content notice (CN) #20117

leahoswald opened this issue Nov 8, 2022 · 166 comments

Comments

@leahoswald
Copy link

leahoswald commented Nov 8, 2022

Pitch

I would suggest to rename content warning to content notice in the mastodon frontend. This would make it more clearly what it is actually used for by many people without changing the meaning to much.

Motivation

After the massive influx of new people to the fediverse there is an enormous discussion, especially in the German speaking parts of the fedi. Many problems occur because of differences in the interpretation of what a warning exactly is and there is a lot of discussion summarized as "It is wrong if you use this feature for something that is not clearly a warning" and "I don't knot what is worth a warning". This is also understandable as warning is a strong word and a bit judgemental. For this reason I would like to rename this feature to content notice (CN) which is a more neutral wording that can be used to inform others about the content of a post if they open it. It can still be used like a content warning but it is more clear for everyone that the main aim is to inform the reader about the following content.

@jwalzer
Copy link

jwalzer commented Nov 8, 2022

Why don't we simply use hashtags for that?

@psy
Copy link

psy commented Nov 8, 2022

Why don't we simply use hashtags for that?

Because hashtags leave no choice if the content should be displayed or not. Hashtags are a completely different concept.

@leahoswald
Copy link
Author

Why don't we simply use hashtags for that?

I described it here in german: https://chaos.social/@leah/109302346469815862

@linux-lukas
Copy link

Why don't we simply use hashtags for that?

This would be a less effective way of solving the problem, whereas the solution described by @leahoswald is the better and, above all, more effective measure.

@leahoswald leahoswald changed the title Rename content warning (CW) to content note Rename content warning (CW) to content note (CN) Nov 8, 2022
@linux-lukas
Copy link

linux-lukas commented Nov 8, 2022

Would "content hint" (CH) perhaps be even more accurate, @leahoswald ?

@MarcoZehe
Copy link

Because Hashtags would not hide the content, with possibly pictures, from view unless the user chooses to view the toot.

Another thing that is mentioned often is that, despite a toot being hidden via a CW, link previews are still visible. That is kinda unexpected because the link may very well be the thing the user wants to warn against. I don't know if there is already an issue for this particular problem, but thought I'd mention it here just in case.

@leahoswald
Copy link
Author

Would "content hint" (CH) perhaps be even more accurate, @leahoswald ?

Maybe but content hint is not already that common like content note. But I get that it is maybe more accurate.

@igalic
Copy link

igalic commented Nov 8, 2022

it's also more in line with ActivityPub's spec. After all, Mastodon is using the subject line from ActivityPub for Content Warnings

@leahoswald
Copy link
Author

leahoswald commented Nov 8, 2022

Than content note is even better! Thanks for the hint.

@nourkagha
Copy link

I would suggest Content Notice (CN) instead of Content Note.

It's not as extreme as Warning, but it still has the same effect that it's intended to give readers a heads up.

@isotopp
Copy link

isotopp commented Nov 8, 2022

I wish there was a taxonomy or list to select from, to get an idea what exactly other people might need to be notified about. To me that is the larger problem (compared to what that thing is named). But that might be worth a different issue here, I presume.

@leahoswald
Copy link
Author

leahoswald commented Nov 8, 2022

I would suggest Content Notice (CN) instead of Content Note.

Content Notice is also possible yes. I think it's even a better wording for this case.

For the non native speakers here a good explanation: https://www.differencebetween.com/what-is-the-difference-between-note-and-notice/

@leahoswald leahoswald changed the title Rename content warning (CW) to content note (CN) Rename content warning (CW) to content notice (CN) Nov 8, 2022
@leahoswald
Copy link
Author

Updated my initial request accordingly. Thanks @nourkagha

@cornofear
Copy link

it's also more in line with ActivityPub's spec. After all, Mastodon is using the subject line from ActivityPub for Content Warnings

I didn't know this - but it is helpfully reflected in how many people on Mastodon use it like a subject line or headline, which are standard ways of summarizing information in the domains of email, blogs, and newspapers. So I agree, making the name of the tool more generic is an excellent idea.

@allo-
Copy link

allo- commented Nov 8, 2022

I wish there was a taxonomy or list to select from, to get an idea what exactly other people might need to be notified about. To me that is the larger problem (compared to what that thing is named). But that might be worth a different issue here, I presume.

I proposed something along these lines some time ago in #17667. Instead of the sender deciding what needs to be hidden, the sender only needs to add a category, like "politics," and each recipient can choose on their own if they like to hide political toots or not.

@vingle
Copy link

vingle commented Nov 9, 2022

100% yes to renaming Content Warning, it feels emotive and as said above, sounds judgemental. I've see some resistance to using them.

Content Notice and Note are both nice. Content Wrapping(/wrapper) was suggested by David Allen Green – which is appealing as it both describes what's happening, and preserves the 'CW' user interface (and so would also allow people to still think of it as Content Warning if they prefer/need/don't want to update their docs).

@leahoswald
Copy link
Author

Thats, speaking for me, to unspecific and too uncommon. Content Notice is already used in many context and therefore better described online and more people have an understanding of what it is. Also a Notice is a better match than a wrapping ;) It think wrapping would raise many questions for people.

@scy
Copy link

scy commented Nov 9, 2022

I think this issue is just as much about naming as it is about education of our user base.

I’ve had a lot of discussions about CWs in the past days, especially with people new to Mastodon. They boil down to these key items:

[Warning: I’m giving some examples for CWs, and why some people need them, in that list.]

  • “I’m opposed to tagging political issues, that stuff is important, people should not be able to ignore it!”
    I guess we all agree that yes, being able to ignore any toot, even if it’s a super important topic, is indeed important. Here the solution would involve educating people about the effects of doomscrolling on mental health, activist burnout etc. Is that something we can do in our UI? Probably not, but I’m open to suggestions.
  • “Why would I have to warn people about food?”
    A lot of people expect CWs to be just for violence, gore, and sex. Renaming the feature would probably help to a degree, but for many, “content notice” still sounds like what you’d put on a rap album, not on a picture of a dog. Maybe renaming it to “subject” would actually be the way to cater to that sentiment. This leads to the next item though:
  • “Hiding food pictures behind a click, and blurring the image, is too much! This should be reserved for really bad stuff.”
    I get where these people are coming from, and they might advocate for having both a subject and a CW tag. (Side note: Could be difficult to map this to ActivityPub…?) However, I tend to disagree with them. You might think a naked person is more “hide-worthy” than a picture of a dog, but the sex worker who was attacked by the family dog as a child would disagree. Those kinds of “second-class CWs” would always be highly problematic. Let’s not introduce them.
  • “I find it hard to figure out what to tag, and how.”
    This is feedback I’ve heard especially from people on the spectrum, and it’s a tough one, because “just go with your guts!” isn’t helping them at all. Some people suggest a kind of “taxonomy”, so that you’re able to choose from a predefined(?) list of CWs with a mental “if contains X, tag as Y” kind of algorithm. I think getting this right would be incredibly hard to do, and a way larger feature than what we’re discussing here. Let’s open a different issue for that.
  • “Opening all of these content warnings is tiresome, I have to click every toot!”
    There’s a large amount of users who don’t know about the “Always expand posts marked with content warnings” setting. An even larger amount of people have never noticed the “Show more for all” feature, the little eye icon in the header of a thread that will unfold or fold all of the CWs at once. Here, some kind of “pop-up tutorial message” when clicking on “show more” on a CW’ed toot could actually help. Something like “If you’re confident you don’t need content warnings, you can auto-show toot contents in the settings, or click Show more for all to open all of them in this thread.”
  • “Adding a CW for [topic X] is actually offensive!”
    That’s another hard one, because there’s no “correct”, not even a “compromise” solution to it, afaics. For example, some people with eating disorders advocate for food CWs, because being exposed to toots about food is challenging for them. Others however, with the same disorders, strongly oppose food CWs, because they’re trying to normalize food in their lives. Different example: Some people with HIV strongly oppose “CW: HIV/AIDS” because it may strengthen the stigma around the condition, while people who have lost someone to it might be very thankful for a CW.

Based on all of that, what’s my suggestion?

  • Rename “content warning” to “subject”. It reflects the way they’re used liberally on many instances, and eases people who are not used to generous CW’ing into the mindset of “there are a lot of things people might not want to see, even if you don’t consider it worthy of a warning”. As a bonus, it aligns with ActivityPub. Edit: After some more consideration, I think “content notice” is the better term. See below.
  • Rephrase options accordingly, like “always expand posts with a subject line content notice”. Maybe add a hint like “subject lines content notices are often used as a 'content notice', to inform people of potentially emotionally challenging content” or something like that (I’m not satisfied with my example here).
  • If we can’t agree on “subject”, I’ll happily settle for “CN” or anything that’s an improvement over “CW”. Please don’t take this as me being against Leah’s suggestion, I’m rather trying to further improve upon it.
  • Don’t introduce “second-class content warnings”, e.g. a CW and a subject field.
  • Make it easier for people who are annoyed by having to click through CWs to discover the various options to expand them.

Things that could be done outside of Mastodon (the software project):

  • Write articles & create videos about the CW culture on the fediverse, targeted at users who are new to them and don’t see any benefits.
  • Put together a list of example toots & CWs, explaining why the content in the toot might be perceived as challenging/problematic by some (who?). A lot of the CW misunderstanding isn’t malice, just *ahem* privilege.
  • Discuss solutions for helping people struggling with deciding what to CW and how. Maybe we could even crowd-source CWs. Please don’t use this GitHub issue here though, keep this one about a somewhat simple, short-term improvement.
  • Be kind to each other, but stay vocal about protecting safe spaces for marginalized people at the same time.

Thanks for having taken the time to read this.

@leahoswald
Copy link
Author

leahoswald commented Nov 9, 2022

Tanks for the explanations @scy but I think "subject" is to general the same as CW is to specific. Making it a subject line would always raise the question "Why should I write a subject if I write about food?" or "Why should I add a subject for a message that is limited to 500 chars?" for example. Subjects are something most of the people know and use totally different than what a Content Notice would and in my opinion should be. A content notice is something to inform the reader about what they could expect reading the content. And as this is something I see as being polite to others I would rather have an more explicit feature and naming than something as general as a subject line. Subject is great but doesn't hint the user for what it should be used for.

Beside the naming I agree with the rest.

@vingle
Copy link

vingle commented Nov 9, 2022

Rename “content warning” to “subject”.

This is a great idea. It's in the actvitiy pub spec, everyone knows the subject/message pattern from email, CWs are currently describing the subject of what you get when you click. 'Notice'/'note' is definitely better than 'warning' but I don't think either are as intuitive as 'subject'. Tho I support any improvement from 'Content Warning'!

Also a Notice is a better match than a wrapping ;) It think wrapping would raise many questions for people.

Very true, 'wrapping' definitely isn't intuitive. It's just the keeping of CW I was drawn to..

@simonw
Copy link

simonw commented Nov 9, 2022

I really like "content notice" - it seems to be (as a new Mastodon user) to much better match how people are using this feature.

I'm really enjoying the way this feature is used by people - a sign of a good feature is when people start using it to solve problems beyond its original purpose - but I understand why other new users are confused at seeing "content warnings" on things that they didn't think they should be warned about. "Content notices" feels a lot easier to form a mental model around to me.

@uwap
Copy link

uwap commented Nov 9, 2022

I don't think subject quite suits the problem. I'm posting a lot of food related stuff on mastodon and when I'm thinking about how to tag them with CWs or CNs, I'm immediately thinking: "Some people don't want to see food, so I should tag it with food." then I notice, some people might not want to see meat or egg or diary products or need to prepare themselves beforehand, etc.

So the CNs I generally end up using are along the lines of "Food (vegetarian)".

If it was named Subject, I would be thinking about it more from a content perspective, a little summary so to say. Does food need a summary? Normally not. But sometimes, I might tag them with "Look what I made! Delicious!" or "My cacio e pepe turned out clumpy :(", which is absolutely not the intention of CNs imo.

But maybe that's just my interpretation.

On another note, when I first joined mastodon, I was surprised that it used the wording "Content Warning", as i was used to "Content Notes" from other platforms and moreso I was suprised that the CWs were used as CNs on mastodon. I've gotten used to this over time, but I still feel like Content Note or Content Notice is the best choice of wording.

@nourkagha
Copy link

nourkagha commented Nov 9, 2022

I agree, subject is too broad and would make it feel more mandatory just like a subject line in emails.

Content Notice is also similar to what's used in TV and movies when there's potentially disturbing content to certain viewers ahead of a certain scene.

It's also versatile and can be used for both extreme and non-extreme situations. Subject is not alarming enough in case of extreme content.

@leahoswald
Copy link
Author

I would also suggest to add a descriptive icon. If we just change it to CN it may look like a confusing Chinese language selector beside the normal language selector.
Screenshot2022-11-09_20-51-02

@saschanaz
Copy link

Chinese language selector is ZH, not CN btw. (One may think zh-CN though.)

@scy
Copy link

scy commented Nov 9, 2022

Thanks for your feedback. I have put some more thought into this. My conclusion is that I have put too much weight on newcomers’ confusion/rejection of “content warning” and “content notice”.

My idea was to provide a compromise: If you think a “warning” about food feels too extreme, and a “notice” is still close to a “warning”, let’s avoid these terms altogether; we simply want you to tell us what the toot is about, even if you don’t think it might be problematic/dangerous/triggering.

But I guess “content notice” already is the compromise. It doesn’t directly imply that something might be super unsettling (as a “warning” could), but it still acknowledges that it can be an issue for some people, something they should be given “advance notice” of.

I retract my suggestion of renaming it to “subject” and support Leah’s proposal for “content notice”.

@nourkagha
Copy link

I would also suggest to add a descriptive icon. If we just change it to CN it may look like a confusing Chinese language selector beside the normal language selector.
Screenshot2022-11-09_20-51-02

Ideally it would be best to move away from lettering due to potential confusion with language syntax and replace this with an icon instead which also more accurately implies it does some sort of action.

Both Tusky and the official Android app have it represented well with an icon of a message bubble that contains an exclamation mark.

@bocops
Copy link

bocops commented Nov 28, 2022

This discussion has become heated. I don't agree with the statements that some of the conversation just "derailed" what would actually be a "simple" change. I also don't think that much of what's going on here is just "bikeshedding".

I think at least a good part of the controversy stems from the fact that Mastodon combines two separate properties of the underlying ActivityPub spec into a single feature:

  • summary - Used as CW text
  • sensitive - Used to determine whether status media or text should be hidden by default

Apparently, as soon as Mastodon's "CW field" is filled by the user, it is assumed that the resulting post needs to be marked as sensitive as well. This means that there's currently no way in Mastodon to use the summary field as intended by ActivityPub, to just neutrally summarize the content of a longer post, without also marking it as sensitive.

If we now go and change the "CW field" into something that is more akin to a simple summary, without also allowing resulting posts to not be marked as sensitive, this feels like Embrace&Extend of the originally two separate features of ActivityPub. As such, this suggestion really isn't that simple and uncontroversial and shouldn't be treated as such.

If Mastodon wants to comply with ActivityPub specs, there seem to be only two ways:

  • don't change anything: keep the "CW field" with the current label, to be used if and only if post content is sensitive, to summarize it; non-sensitive posts are not allowed having a summary as defined in ActivityPub, so they should not use Mastodon's "CW field"
  • change everything: the "CW field" would become a simple summary field, but then we'd need an additional UI element for users to mark their post as "sensitive" (in which case the summary will be used as before); at the same time, there would probably need to be some additions/changes to configuration, so that individual users can choose whether the summary should be displayed or not for non-sensitive posts, and whether content of posts with summary but without sensitive flag should be initially hidden or not.

@leahoswald
Copy link
Author

Pleas stop to making a social problem to a technical one and stop derailing it to "but the protocoll!1!!11". That never helps.

@bocops
Copy link

bocops commented Nov 28, 2022

Pleas stop to making a social problem to a technical one and stop derailing it to "but the protocoll!1!!11". That never helps.

Just as choosing to completely ignore the technical aspects of this doesn't...

@scy
Copy link

scy commented Nov 28, 2022

From where I’m standing, it really is a simple request: Rename the field in the UI.

Yes, Mastodon is bending, maybe even outright abusing the summary field, and it would be good to improve the situation.

Yes, being able to use a summary without automatically marking the post as sensitive would be nice.

But.

I agree with you that all of that is A Whole Can of Worms™, and way more complex to solve than simply renaming something in the UI.

Which is why we’re imploring you to discuss these things in different issues, and to keep this issue on topic. I agree that we’re not gonna solve everything related to CWs in one step. That’s why we’re not attempting such a thing in the first place.

This issue is about iterative improvement. About solving a current, ongoing issue, namely (mainly) new users being confused about the established praxis of using CWs liberally, because to them the word “warning” comes across as too strong.

This is what this issue is about, and this is what should be discussed in here. Which doesn’t mean that the other problems aren’t worth discussing! On the contrary. All of that is stuff that should be improved.

But let’s please first do a step in the right direction, and tackle the more complicated things in the next one.

@bocops
Copy link

bocops commented Nov 28, 2022

From where I’m standing, it really is a simple request: Rename the field in the UI.

Everything is simple if we just remove enough context. Using your wording, I believe that this suggestion is not an "iterative improvement" exactly because there are related "complicated things" that would actually be made worse by the change as suggested.

@andreykurenkov
Copy link

andreykurenkov commented Nov 28, 2022

The technical aspect @bocops brings up seems relevant to me, since Mastodon largely follows the ActivityPub protocol...(recap-"Mastodon combines two separate properties of the underlying ActivityPub spec into a single feature: summary and sensitive).

I think there are really 3 options:

  1. Just keep things as they are
  2. Just do what this issue asked for (rename CW in the UI) and deal with the sensitive property (and any other related aspects) later in separate issues (the content notice/label will not mark post as sensitive anymore)
  3. Deal with renaming and marking posts sensitive (and any other related aspects) all at once (would at least need a new UI element like a check-mark)

Just to make discussion progress, can people react to this with 👎if they prefer 1,👍 if they prefer 2, and 🚀 if they prefer 3?
I don't know if polls are seen as good practice in github issue discussions, but that seems like a good way to progress now...

I prefer 2, as it would not actually change anything about user experience on Mastodon (prior to people adjusting their usage of CW) - only the "Always expand posts marked with content warnings" option is relevant (I think?), and since it already is always expand it makes sense for it to just become "Always expand posts with content notices/labels". Mastodon already has a "Mark media as sensitive" checkmark, so it feels like that should be created for posts as well as a separate task, and it'd be clearly be good to de-couple the subject and sensitive properties. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good!

@viralpoet
Copy link

With regards to the name itself, we've just been using the term Content Wrapper.
It's fairly self-explanatory and takes away the stigma of a 'warning', for the reasons stated above

@timtfj
Copy link

timtfj commented Dec 4, 2022

scy wrote

From where I’m standing, it really is a simple request: Rename the field in the UI.

It seems to me a very simple change here would be to simply change the CW button to something like CW+.

The issue is that CW on its own is used elsewhere specifically to indicate a serious trigger warning, which can lead new users to think it shouldn't be used for anything else. Admittedly I'm just a new user doing my best to follow the norms of the community I've joined, but I'm using CWs to warn people

  • that the content might be upsetting,
  • that the content might be annoying,
  • that the content is long and technical,
  • that the content is about Twitter or Musk,
  • etc.,

together with a wording which explains why the CW is there.

Those uses are all warnings, and seem to be standard practice on my server. They also go beyond the range of what someone unfamiliar with Mastodon would expect to merit a CW. Adding the "+" would alert users to this difference, but wouldn't imply that it's no longer for content warnings, and wouldn't imply anything about what "extra" areas it covers.

It also has the advantage that CW is familiar from elsewhere and so is the idea of using "+" to extend things, so the meaning ought to be pretty intuitive for most users.

Any controversy about when and how CWs should be used is then a separate issue from how it appears in the interface, and likely to be resolved differently on different instances.

@ShadowJonathan
Copy link
Contributor

Does someone have a link to a patch file where I can implement this for our server?

I'd like to have this 4 years earlier than the resolution of this "discussion"

@timtfj
Copy link

timtfj commented Dec 13, 2022

I think this would be a good neutral alternative to the CW text in the UI,

I think the top version is ideal, and that you've got it the right way round: the thick bar is the part people initially see. My only change would be to make it a touch narrower.

I find the bottom one confusing. Maybe it should have extra lines replacing the thick bar, rather than simply blank space?

(Edit: fixed a typo.)

@andreykurenkov
Copy link

I like @RianQuenlin 's suggestion! 'CW' is honestly confusing for a new user who hasn't read up on what it means, whereas the UI version makes more sense.

Per @timtfj I feel like instead of a set of lines on the bottom it could just be a square or something, and instead of having the icon change it could just be a toggle like the current CW button (it changes color on click0.

@timtfj
Copy link

timtfj commented Dec 14, 2022

@andreykurenkov I'm with you on the colour change. There can then be just one, self-explanatory symbol, rather than two different ones, and it takes away any potential confusion over whether the button represents the setting you've already got or the one you want to switch to.

@andreykurenkov
Copy link

Also, worth pointing out that in my little poll "Just do what this issue asked for and deal with the sensitive property (and any other related aspects) later in separate issues" beat "Deal with renaming and marking posts sensitive (and any other related aspects)" 9 to 7. So i'd love it the discussion could just converge to renaming content warning to something like content notice, and for the UI to be updated per @RianQuenlin's design (it's much better than CW anyway).

@sami-huvilanet
Copy link

sami-huvilanet commented Jan 29, 2023

I would also suggest to add a descriptive icon. If we just change it to CN it may look like a confusing Chinese language selector beside the normal language selector.
Screenshot2022-11-09_20-51-02

There should a symbol instead of any letters (no CW, CN, etc..). Like is simple shield icon.

Only that language selector should use letters. Such change would breath better consistency.

I would even put those "Add a poll" & "content warning" icons elegantly behind a ••• icon (see more selector), as more rarely used features.

That 500 letter should appear only when one is typing (or has already typed) something to contribute for coherently practical elegancy.

An User Interface in its default mode should avoid appearing like a jet plane cockpit with 100million bells & whistles gasping on your face. An advanced user could then add more feature on one's interface as one's preferance, but not as a default setting for rookies.

@NuSkooler
Copy link

Excuse my ignorance if this is no the right issue. I've been implementing ActivityPub support in a project, and Mastodon being the, well Mastodon in the room, of course I want it to be a first class citizen. The sensitive boolean flag has been causing me grief however: If a summary is set, so is sensitive in Mastodon, which is confusing to other systems.

Example flow:

  1. Actor posts from non-Mastodon system and includes a summary
  2. Mastodon Actor replies
  3. We now have something that wasn't "sensitive" more or less automatically marked as such. The Mastodon user could clear the summary, but it's certainly not natural (and of course, we're losing a bit of the message context in this case)

@trwnh
Copy link
Member

trwnh commented Feb 10, 2023

@NuSkooler which part is confusing to other systems? that something is marked "sensitive" should have no connection to the summary text. it is perfectly fine for your posts to have a summary but also no sensitive, whereas replies can have summary and sensitive: true regardless.

@NuSkooler
Copy link

@trwnh The fact that a message is marked sensitive is not the issue. The problem is Mastodon is conflating the two. If a non-Mastodon system includes a summary, you end up with Note's marked sensitive. Certainly not the intent.

Please refer to the example flow in my original statement for just one of the real world scenarios.

If Mastodon were to separate the two concepts (which I think is pointed out a number of times in this thread) I believe it would be a non-issue.

https://www.w3.org/wiki/Activity_Streams_extensions

The sensitive property (a boolean) on an object indicates that some users may wish to apply discretion about viewing its content, whether due to nudity, violence, or any other likely aspects that viewers may be sensitive to. This is comparable to what is popularly called "NSFW" (Not Safe For Work) or "trigger warning" in some systems. Implementations may choose to hide content flagged with this property by default, exposed at user discretion.

@trwnh
Copy link
Member

trwnh commented Feb 10, 2023

@NuSkooler i still fail to see how this is a problem for non-Mastodon systems. Mastodon transforms incoming activities into statuses according to its own concepts. where's the "grief" in mastodon replies being marked as sensitive? your "example flow" is perfectly fine and shouldn't cause you any issues for your project.

@NuSkooler
Copy link

@trwnh I'm not sure what's being missed here. You have a Note that's not marked sensitive, and replies are automatically marked as sensitive simply because it contained a summary. Does this break other systems? Of course not. Is it confusing as heck to users? Absolutely.

@trwnh
Copy link
Member

trwnh commented Feb 10, 2023

@NuSkooler How is it confusing? The only thing I can see is if you assume intentions or semantics that are not there.

@NuSkooler
Copy link

@trwnh

  • User A (non-Masto) submits a Note with summary: "Long time no talk!", content: "Hey B, ..." to B (Masto)
  • User B replies -- Mastodon automatically marks this reply as sensitive
  • User A gets a reply that's effectively marked (according to spec) "NSFW"

How is this not confusing?

@charakterziffer
Copy link

charakterziffer commented Feb 11, 2023

@NuSkooler @trwnh Would you please open a new issue about the connection of using a content warning and getting media automatically marked as sensitive?

This issue here is about the purpose/application of Content Warning and how the name Content Notice may better reflect its use. Thank you!

@trwnh
Copy link
Member

trwnh commented Feb 11, 2023

#4689

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests