Okay, but that actually is a problem I have. I can theoretically understand the distinction but, reactions-wise, it's strictly the same thing.
I agree with this, sorry for the confusion. So far, the song gets wiggled when posted without context in the middle of a conflict.
get your fighting hands ready because im on the hunt for more banned songs i want a whole playlist's worth >:)
I agree, but that being said, please spoiler triggery stuff. I'm pretty sure that's actually a thing I forgot to do when posting that song.
ping code removed bc i think bel has me on ignore but i'm correcting this for everyone-that's-not-bel
that is a bit more reasonable. i would also suggest adding the criteria: - not posted in a thread about music or bo burnham 'cause if you post it in a thread about music or bo burnham, the thread itself is the context. spoilering triggery stuff is entirely reasonable and is something i try to do. what i'm opposed to is pear wiggling posts consisting of media/fiction and/or discussing media/fiction.
Again, many apologies for the confusion. Songs like that ought to be spoilered and trigger tagged in general chats, like the current music thread, but given that and context it's perfectly fine to post and talk about.
serious forum discussion about getting wiggled can't stop thinking "pwease no wiggle" grateful to know the context of some things without having to dumpster dive sift through many threads to find it
i am glad we could work this out. now i know why it was wiggled and that you aren't going to wiggle posts with fiction/media like that again, i am no longer worried about it.
Context is absolutely a thing. Thing is, fiction and media can absolutely be used as personal attacks, or they could be just-quoting, and sometimes it's hard to tell which is which. And sometimes it matters more how something's being taken than how it's intended, and so on. It's not an exact science, and it really can't be.
Would you actually argue for the claim "resolved: that there can be no possible circumstance in which presenting a song called Kill Yourself to a person could be suicide-baiting"? I wouldn't. On the other hand, would I argue for the claim "resolved: that in every possible circumstance, presenting a song called Kill Yourself to a person could be suicide-baiting"? I wouldn't. But the mere fact that it was presented as a video with title and artist is... not enough to really tell you about intent. The "in current music" thing maybe.
yeah, i wouldn't argue for either of those claims. but in current music and as a video with title and artist together would suggest that it was posted as music, not a personal attack. how far does that go? like, is there a line when you see someone interpreting a post as a personal attack as no longer reasonable, or can anyone report any post saying that it is a personal attack and have it removed?
So, one thing that I think will make things a heck of a lot better in most cases: If something gets pear-wiggled, and you want to know why, ask rather than speculating. Try not to be especially insulting ("what kind of fucking idiot would you have to be to..." is not gonna help), but if you do that, and ask... Like, we know judgment calls are gonna have problems, we know we don't always get the context right or whatever. I'm not saying "trust us, what we do is always right". But, say, what if you started with assuming possible good faith and asking questions, rather than starting out with nailing your 95 shitposts to the forum? You think a mod misread a post? Ask why they thought it was a thing, and if you disagree, explain why. People are usually pretty willing to talk if you're not being overtly hostile to them.
