Post #2879464

2026-02-05 10:33 UTC

@scy@chaos.social i want to give you a cookie and a bonk. "CN: nsfw" and nothing else is pretty useless as it's a generalisation. Yes, you should >generally< be more specific with content notes. However as a generalisation, it's a good one in my opinion. Because in my opinion it pretty much means: this is nothing I'd share with a co-worker that is paid to spend time with me, but i might share it with a friend because they voluntarily spend time with me and we know each others quirks and boundaries.

Replies (3)

@scy@chaos.social 2026-02-05 10:39

@betalars@chaos.social So, what you're saying is "'NSFW' is too broad to be a useful content note on its own, but it's still good to _include_ it because it covers all sorts of things you wouldn't want to see in a workplace setting"? In that case, yeah, I get what you mean, but I still disagree because it's still an anti-sexwork term and should be avoided.

Open ##2879465
@betalars@chaos.social 2026-02-05 10:44

@scy@chaos.social btw I do find that very non-specific content notes do have an advantage: some content notes are so disturbing in and if itself that most people would want to read up on it anyway just to know the specifics. I'll give an example in reply. So purposefully putting something vague like "content note: alles" or "awful shit" can in rate instances be a good thing. But as I'm writing this i also realise; because it has such a sexual connotation, i think it's not very useful for this.

Open ##2879468
@trisschen@zug.network 2026-05-06 07:02

@betalars@chaos.social @scy@chaos.social > nothing I'd share with a co-worker hmm so for me that would be like >99.9% of my timeline. And that’s on my train account, where there’s not that much queer stuff even

Open ##2879470