On the new Mastodon Content Warning design
The system is what it does and the design is what it does.
In this case, the new Mastodon content warning design is explicitly designed to discourage use of the content warning functionality.
It puts big glaring warning colours on what most of the time is a tag or descriptor of the post itself. Like it is in this thread.
I'm not warning about anything, its just a tag/subject line.
The phrase/terminology "Content Warning" has always been flawed.
As per Merriam-Webster:
the act of warning : the state of being warned
something that warns or serves to warn
especially : a notice or bulletin that alerts the public to an imminent hazard (such as a tornado, thunderstorm, or flood)"
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/warning
A lot of the time, a so called Content Warning is not a warning at all.
So functionally what this terminology and design does is discourage its own use.
People using Mastodon especially newcomers are unlikely to use it because they think "well I'm not warning people of anything, why would I use a Content Warning for this post?" and they are not incorrect in thinking that.
On "CW Discourse"
I am of the opinion that "CW discourse" as a Mastodon specific phenomenon wouldn't exist if they were called "Subject(s)" like they are in e-mail.
But it isn't and here we are.
re: On the new Mastodon Content Warning design
@packetcat yeah the interface design is doing the featuyre dirty
