For those who don't know the context:

CW CSAVivek Ramaswamy has leaked an attack ad against his Democratic opponent, Amy Acton, featuring Acton's mother. Acton cut off contact with her mother fifty years ago for siding with her step father, who molested her, against her.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 15 hours ago* (4 children)

I am not accusing you of anything. I wrote in my first comment that your post is part of a trend, meaning that the blame is not placed on you. I'm sure that you don't have malicious intent.

I love that you invoke "why don't you post it?" (my tone: sincere, not sarcastic) This is something I love to say myself when my posts receive criticism. It's a great response to people who have 0 posts and a bunch of comments. It also encourages other people to post. Also, it's non-confrontational.

Why haven't I posted it? My answer is simply "I was posting other things". I admit that I saw the Vivek Ramaswamy ad story yesterday and I simply did not post it because I was fixated on news stories about the white powder mailings.

I have reposted things that I felt were wrongly marked as NSFW in the past. For example, a news story about a cop shooting a person was marked as NSFW. Why shouldn't a news story about a cop shooting a person be marked NSFW? Because children deserve to know that cops are violent murderers, for the safety of children. The news article that I posted did not have images of the shooting.

The site rules says "Triggering content should be placed inside a spoiler tag. Post images that depict triggering content should be marked NSFW. Post titles should contain warnings at the beginning. Use established abbreviations where possible." The rule says "images" and "depict", both of these words means picture. This is the only time that the site rules mentions using NSFW tag. This should mean that images of a shooting would be marked NSFW but a news story describing a shooting without images doesn't need to be marked NSFW, but could still be prefaced with a content warning.

I wrote my comment out of frustration at the trend of overly censoring things that are happening outside. This is a trend that I've been frustrated about for years and I've commented about before. The intention of my comment was not to criticize you but to draw attention to the trend of overly censoring events that are happening outside.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] [S] 14 points 14 hours ago (1 child)

    I'm going to be honest, this story made me so angry I could hardly think straight for a few hours, and that plus my concerns around the site's policies meant that I found it difficult to think of a good title or a way to present this, and I probably bungled it. Your criticisms were probably somewhat warranted, but I get very annoyed when I see criticisms of my posts in my messages, and I might have reacted more strongly than I should have .

    The site rules says "Triggering content should be placed inside a spoiler tag. Post images that depict triggering content should be marked NSFW. Post titles should contain warnings at the beginning. Use established abbreviations where possible." The rule says "images" and "depict", both of these words means picture. This is the only time that the site rules mentions using NSFW tag. This should mean that images of a shooting would be marked NSFW but a news story describing a shooting without images doesn't need to be marked NSFW, but could still be prefaced with a content warning.

    I'll note this for the future

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment