this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2024
156 points (99.4% liked)

chapotraphouse

13594 readers
609 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Cw: discussion of common cw tags and subjects, including violence, sexual violence, animal products, and others.

Bluesky's trust and safety (betrayal and bullshit) team is engaged in high fuckery and we're likely going to get some new folks coming in from bksy.

Now's probably a good time to revisit content warnings and when and how to use them.

Content warnings are just that; a warning about the content of a post or submission. They grew out of the older notion of "trigger warnings" as an acknowledgement that no one could reasonably guess what might be triggering to other people. Instead content warnings are a more general heads up that a discussion contains material that may be upsetting or unwanted by some people.

It's a friendly warning so folks can decide whether or not they'd like to engage with the discussion.

Note on "nsfw". When assessing if something is not safe for work ask yourself if a corporate HR rep who hated you would use it as evidence to get you fired.

Animal products - posts discussion animal products like meat or leather should have cw: animal products or cw: meat in the post title or header. Posts should usually be labelled nsfw and it's courteous to put discussions inside a spoiler tag so people can choose if they want to open it or not.

Sexual violence or sexual assault - posts discussion sexual violence, sexual assault, intimate partner violencen, or sexual violence against kids, all need to be labelled with a cw. Sv is commomly used for sexual violence, sa for sexual assault, csa or csam for violence against children. Posts should always have a nsfw tag or be placed in a spoiler tag.

Violence - posts discussing violence, torture, and related topics should have a cw as such and use spoiler tags and nsfw tags as appropriate.

Graphic images - graphic images of violence, combat footage, severe injusry or death, should be labelled as such and should always have an appropriate cw and be placed in spoiler tags and marked with the nsfw.

Bigotry - sexism, racism, tranphobia, misogyny, ethnic bigotry, ableism, and really any structural violence generally merits a cw. If it's graphic or upsetting putting the material in a spoiler tag is polite.

Some other things that may merit a cw

  • common phobias liek spiders and clowns

  • particularly awful politics

  • notorious or hated political figures

  • Hexbear pop culture enemies - for instance superhero movies are often semi-seriously marked with a "capeshit" warning

  • topics discussing religious trauma

  • sexual topics and general horniness as a courtesy to our ace and otherwise not-interested comrades

  • medical trauma and topics that are frequent sites of medical violence.

If there was a "rule" it'd be; if you think someoen might find your post upsetting it's usually wroth writing a one or two word cw and sticking it at the top of the post. It's a courteous way to give people a heads up on what the discussion is about so if it's content they don't want to engage with they can skip it and keep browsing.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] AssortedBiscuits@hexbear.net 41 points 4 days ago (2 children)

ngl, kinda weird to see the newbies with their actual faces for their pfp. I'm not sure if we ever had an explicit rule against that, but it's something that I've noticed.

[–] SuperZutsuki@hexbear.net 32 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Twitter and its descendants are much more about building a personal brand. This place is more like the old internet where no one felt comfortable doxing themselves. Hopefully, our ways rub off on the newbies a bit. Opsec is going to be especially important in the coming fash wave.

[–] AssortedBiscuits@hexbear.net 29 points 4 days ago (3 children)

I kinda think it should be an explicit rule against having your actual face, but that's just me.

[–] FunkyStuff@hexbear.net 23 points 4 days ago (3 children)

What if you use your actual face, but you're famous, so no one would think it's actually Jerma?

[–] TerribleHands@hexbear.net 16 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I know you're not actually Jerma because I'm actually Jerma

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Antiwork@hexbear.net 13 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] Bureaucrat@hexbear.net 16 points 4 days ago

I was just posting about this in the mega but I didn't want to say it to every new person and scare them unnecessarily. As an explicitly leftist site, we're a bigger target for harassment from external right-wingers and so being able to link you on Hexbear to you on Bluesky and Twitter, or especially to real life, is probably not good. Let alone the amount of ironic memes that would probably look bad out of context to the average person.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Infamousblt@hexbear.net 58 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Not disagreeing with this but I find it funny:

Note on "nsfw". When assessing if something is not safe for work ask yourself if a corporate HR rep who hated you would use it as evidence to get you fired.

Most corporate HR reps would use literally any posting whatsoever in Hexbear as a reason to get you fired.

[–] Alaskaball@hexbear.net 33 points 4 days ago (3 children)

this is gonna sound gross for a second, but imagine hexbear was Reddit.

[–] Parsani@hexbear.net 27 points 4 days ago (5 children)
[–] Alaskaball@hexbear.net 20 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Ban yourself and ban everyone around you!

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Dessa@hexbear.net 28 points 4 days ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Moonworm@hexbear.net 62 points 4 days ago (4 children)

Hexbear pop culture enemies - for instance superhero movies are often semi-seriously marked with a "capeshit" warning

We should actually stop doing this. The function of Content Warnings is to help people avoid upsetting material, not to signal that something is disapproved of. Using them ironically or "semi-seriously" makes them less effective in their actual function.

[–] Sulvor@hexbear.net 31 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

I agree, ironic CWs are kind of a slap in the face to people who need to avoid certain things for whatever reason.

I think we should start tagging drug use as well, my own trigger.

I think there's an additional but related issue here:

If CWs are used to signal disapproval, and if an oppressed population wants to discuss triggering content that is relevant to their situation, then the CWs on their discussions are likely to be interpreted by some as disapproval of the oppressed population itself.

And it this happens, I think some people are likely to push back on CWs in general as opposed to just the cases where they were misused.

I love CWs and how they are normalized on hexbear. I don't want to see their benefits undermined, or to see them weaponized against the people they are supposed to protect.

Maybe we should adopt a new tag to differentiate the uses of CWs? Leave CWs to their original purpose, and perhaps adopt a "BPW" (blood pressure warning) for the semi-serious applications like capeshit.

Or we could just treat CWs and the people they are designed to benefit with proper respect, but that seems like it's asking a lot.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Eve_Rising@hexbear.net 35 points 4 days ago (21 children)

Good stuff, thank you. I'm a BlueSky user, I'm gonna stay there for now but I'll be active here as well. Glad to have found the place!

For those that asked, Bluesky mods let a certain well known "polite transphobe" "journalist" stay on the platform who is already getting around blocks to harass ppl

load more comments (21 replies)
[–] Dessa@hexbear.net 31 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (6 children)

Culturally, we're irony and sarcasm-heavy, but often do not label it with tags like /s or /j. If you're not sure, look for context. I think this aspect of the banter here can really throw people for a loop

[–] FunkyStuff@hexbear.net 21 points 4 days ago (1 children)

this is something about site culture that might end up changing in the future in an effort to be more accommodating to ND users tbh. For now, new users should know that if you ask "is this a bit?" it is generally honored here that you'll be answered truthfully first (and maybe jokingly after someone clears it up).

[–] GalaxyBrain@hexbear.net 15 points 4 days ago

I thrive in the land of 'is this a bit?' And I feel like needing to tell the truth when asked is a fair compromise. Being confusing can often be a valuable part of a joke, it's how you get someone to accidentally tee up your punchline

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] ashinadash@hexbear.net 33 points 4 days ago (6 children)

superhero movies are often semi-seriously marked with a "capeshit" warning

I fuckin love this dumbass website without an ounce of irony. Based.

On the sexual violence subheading though, I thought I recalled a post about how shortforms in CWs are a bad idea since not everyone is familiar?

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Pisha@hexbear.net 39 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Certain discussions of weight and eating habits might also merit a content warning – these might trigger people with eating disorders in some way and so I feel it's better to be on the safe side.

[–] Frank@hexbear.net 27 points 4 days ago
[–] miz@hexbear.net 36 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

the normal focus of content tagging is on helping people avoid things, but I want to highlight another function of content tagging— breaking "default ideology" (bourgeois) conceptions of what's acceptable. having terrible things tagged as such helps those who are bothered by them feel they are not alone

[–] Frank@hexbear.net 22 points 4 days ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] cosecantphi@hexbear.net 23 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Damn, this might be the biggest influx of new users we've had since federation, how many followers did the bluesky account that gave us a shout out have?

[–] ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net 25 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

I'm always happy to have new comrades but at this point I'm also wondering what in god's name is happening at bluesky? This is far more than the slow trickle of newcomers we usually get

Oh okay I just read up, that's fucked

[–] thelastaxolotl@hexbear.net 22 points 4 days ago

also a big account promoted us to their followers so thats another reason for the wave of users

[–] GnastyGnuts@hexbear.net 26 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Why is there a sudden influx of blusky folks? Did they do a lefty-purge over there or something?

[–] SweetAngie@hexbear.net 33 points 4 days ago

Tldr: they failed to ban some fascist releasing screenshots of someones medical records which goes against bluesky ToS (ulness you are a fascist, then you can to do whatever you want apparently)

[–] buckykat@hexbear.net 20 points 4 days ago

Some power poster or something over there linked to us for all the people there who are mad that twitter 2 is also letting transphobes do transphobia

[–] AntifaSuperWombat@hexbear.net 32 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

[CW: sexual stuff]I’m really fucking gay im-fuckin-gay

But jokes beside, it would be a shame if we lost a really good comrade because they were put off by something that is trivial to hide behind a content warning.

[–] IncensedCedar@hexbear.net 20 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I Really appreciate the specific examples, I frequently have trouble interpreting what needs cw/NSFW and what doesn't, partially because I have autism and partially because I have never really worked in a setting with corporate hr reps. Thank you Frank

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] doctor_sociology@hexbear.net 24 points 4 days ago (1 children)

what happened, did bluesky finally do a compaction cycle and start purging leftists?

[–] Florn@hexbear.net 19 points 4 days ago (2 children)

As part of the general Democratic Party turn against trans people, they're allowing transphobes to operate on their site

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Siobhan@hexbear.net 24 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Thank Bast there are CW for spiders. I'm a horrible arachnophobe, and my true dread is scrolling a site and BOOM! unexpected eight legged hell spawn

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Real_User@hexbear.net 22 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Does anyone know if there's a way to filter out posts with cws or specific words? Not really asking for myself but I'd imagine that would be functionally some people would appreciate

[–] Bureaucrat@hexbear.net 18 points 4 days ago (1 children)

It was brought up to the Lemmy devs and they plan to work on it, but have other things they're getting done first, so no ETA. https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/issues/5188

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LisaTrevor@hexbear.net 26 points 4 days ago

Spoiler Testgood post, thanks for clarifying

[–] buckykat@hexbear.net 18 points 4 days ago (2 children)

I will not cw spiders they are cute and my friends

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] miz@hexbear.net 24 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I wanna hear more about Bluesky's fuckery

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] GalaxyBrain@hexbear.net 14 points 4 days ago (4 children)

I didn't know common phobias were a CW thing, fine by me but I didn't know clowns or spiders needed a cw. I'm certain I've seen uncensored clownposting. I'm not arguing against it, just don't remember that being a thing.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Gingerpuss@hexbear.net 19 points 4 days ago (1 children)

One question for clarification: how about makeup tips and suggestions for products? I'm still learning about things and don't know if certain brands include animal products or if they were tested with animals. Would it be too much if I started adding a CW for makeup tips as tangential to animal rights? Thank you!

[–] AntifaSuperWombat@hexbear.net 26 points 4 days ago (1 children)

CWs aren’t that strict. If you just want to talk about makeup then it’s not necessary, only if you want to have a discussion directly about animal abuse in the makeup industry.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›