I get the impression some folks think that butts are there to like... personally attack them, as if I know what hellsite is and have control over how they display our content.
The woof.group content-warning norms are already a carefully-chosen compromise in deference to a fediverse which is--let's be honest--conservative beyond the wildest dreams of Anita Bryant. Of course local norms and personal expectations vary, and that's okay! What I don't know is how to handle those subculture boundaries
Like as an admin here I could suspend federation with hellsite, but that feels silly: some of them *want* our posts! Hellsite's admins can mark woof.group content as sensitive--which is IMO entirely reasonable--but users who file remote reports like this are explicitly asking for more than that: they want our participation in enforcing their norms. Is that reasonable? Probably for some classes of content, but like... you can see people wearing only jockstraps on public sidewalks in SF and Berlin
@aphyr In other words, the point I'm trying to make is that I think it's the responsbility of the person publishing to be more or less consistent and stay within the lanes of their instance, but for everything else... “Curate your feeds, people!” Or, in other words, the rest is the reader's responsibility. Then again, that's just my two slightly bored and tired centicredits.
@aphyr And, yes, I'm perfectly aware I'm not on woof.group and on a very different instance, that's why I felt my perspective was sort of relevant. The Fediverse is global.
@Steinar You know, I generally agree that curating feeds is everyone's responsibility, but it's also true that the federated tab shows you content from people you *didn't* choose to follow. Which... eh, I personally treat it as a public space--I'm gonna see stuff I don't necessarily want to see, but not everyone feels that way!
Ein norsk heimstad for den desentraliserte mikroblogge-plattformen Mastodon.