Louis Ingenthron @LouisIngenthron@social.cleverlibre.org

@Decad3nce Given the other tools offered on this platform to mute words and hashtags, I think at some point, there are limits to how much harm the speaker can prevent (or is responsible for preventing), and it becomes incumbent on the listener to avoid spaces they know will trigger their issues.

So, I think it comes down to moderation. You do what you can (in this case, content warnings), and the listener chooses whether they want to engage with your speech (muting/blocking).

If you want the broadest possible appeal, you try to go with subjects that don't trigger anything. If you don't care about broad appeal, you can post more about what you want, with appropriate content warnings for discoverability.

That seems to be about as happy a medium as the human condition allows.

@taz Not cool.

@freemo @taz @Pat Yeah, I don't think this needs moderation. It very much falls under the category in the rules for "Anything that can be solved by a personal block"

@taz They posted a fresh toot and tagged you, so it was considered a new conversation by the system.

@freemo Thanks for the clarification.

@taz Yeah, I was wondering if that just didn't appear in my notifications or if it actually came out of nowhere.

@freemo Correct. If I was wrong about that being frowned-upon, please let me know.

@Pat @taz Reproducing others' posts without their consent is generally frowned-upon here.

There's a reason Mastadon doesn't normally implement quote tweeting.

@Pat @taz Only when you ignore manufacturing and disposal costs.

@Pat @taz To some folks' egos, sure. It does not, however, matter to the environment. Not yet.