you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 7 points 9 hours ago (21 children)

Question is, why are we marking videos NSFW when there's nothing to it. I've seen many.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 9 hours ago (20 children)

    Not everyone enjoys watching others die.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 9 hours ago (17 children)

    But you didn't actually see anyone die. You know it from news reports. Also I'm not referring to this video. I just think the NSFW label is overused and abused in terms of click-baiting.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 9 hours ago (16 children)

    Fine, then throw a CW at least.

    You don't need to dig your heels in on insisting people should watch this death video.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 hours ago

    insisting people should watch this death video.

    In fairness, I don't see anyone making such assertions.

    On the general topic, I don't disagree with your sentiment per se, but I will also note that most news will show footage of fatal plane crashes, so I humbly suggest your view is a minority one on this. I would normally suggest there's no harm in marking it NSFW, but others noted that would censor it from some places, and so I don't think that's a great solution; otherwise I'd lend my voice in support to you anyway, even though I don't thnk it's necessary. But I appreciate you speaking up on it, even if I happen to disagree in this instance.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 8 hours ago (12 children)

    The title saying it's a video of a plane crashing isn't a warning enough?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 8 hours ago (10 children)

    And the rules request a CW when applicable.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 8 hours ago (9 children)

    And that's not what you asked for.

    I conceded CW is fair enough and you continued to argue.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 8 hours ago* (8 children)

    And I thanked you at the end of our back and forth, upvoted you, and now you're back here nagging at me? What the fuck?

    Ah that was another user who was much more polite than you were. Nevermind.

    My original point still stands - this should have a CW or NSFW because it is a death video.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 hours ago (7 children)
  • [–] -3 points 8 hours ago (6 children)
  • [–] 3 points 8 hours ago (5 children)
  • [+] -8 points 8 hours ago (4 children)

    I wasn't arguing back about the CW when I maintained that, in my opinion, death videos shouldn't be pushed into people's timelines. You are arguing that people should be forced to watch this death video because the BBC shows a censored version of it.

    That you are digging in your heels and arguing that people should have death videos pushed into their social media feeds without a warning is at the very least impolite.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 8 hours ago (3 children)

    Where did I say anybody should be forced to watch anything? I said NSFW blocks content from being visible to many servers, implying it should only be used when the content truly fits the definition of NSFW. This is a distressing video, but not NSFW.

    If you don't want to risk seeing videos of this nature I think it's probably best you block this community.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

    Where did I say anybody should be forced to watch anything?

    Well the BBC showed an edited version, so it's totally okay to allow this on people's feeds without any warning at all /s

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments