@sjw @alyx I don't share nearly as much as you do but whenever I want to boost something, I click the hide media button just to make sure it's marked as nsfw first

@beardalaxy @alyx
>I click the hide media button just to make sure it's marked as nsfw first

What are you talking about?

@sjw @beardalaxy
Difference in how Mastodon and Pleroma work. In Mastodon, even if you have display nsfw by default, you can still hide any image post, and if the image was originally marked as sensitive by the poster, you can see it.
Sensitive content vs non-sensitive content:

@alyx @beardalaxy oh yeah pleroma has that too. That's literally only a frontend local only thing (same goes for mastodon). If it's unmarked and you boost it then it's still unmarked. If you hide the media before boosting it then the media is hidden for your but you're the only person on the fediverse they're hidden for.

@sjw @alyx oh i know that i can't change the original post by doing that. but i make sure it's marked as nsfw before i share it, otherwise i just open it in mod menu and make it sensitive there first.

@sjw @beardalaxy
I know I'm only hiding on my timeline, and has no effect anywhere else. That's not the point. The point is this is a way I can check if someone's posted media was marked as sensitive or not by OP, and if it's clearly nsfw, but not marked as such, I can avoid reboosting to people who might not want to see that.

You say "pleroma has that too", but checking on my kiwi account, I don't seem to find a way to toggle media to be hidden or visible on posts that weren't marked nsfw. And if I disable "hide sensitive posts", I can't seem to toggle nsfw posts either. So unless we're talking past each other, from what I can see there is indeed a difference in how these things are implemented.

@alyx @beardalaxy
>The point is this is a way I can check if someone's posted media was marked as sensitive or not by OP, and if it's clearly nsfw, but not marked as such, I can avoid reboosting to people who might not want to see that.

No, actually the point of that feature is in case you come across something that wasn't marked and it's triggering you, you can easily hide it.

It's intended use case is for things that weren't marked as sensitive but that you're sensitive to.

I'm not sure what you think you're doing exactly since literally anything will be marked as nsfw for you when you click that, not just things that are marked as NSFW.

@sjw @beardalaxy @alyx No in this case they have a good point. The purpose is "find out if it is nsfw flagged". The way of achieving that is to hide it, because they have different messages when hidden based on whether it's flagged.

I'm actually intending to add a marker for nsfw flag to thedesk that's always visible on a post with it set, if you don't hide those images by default, for this exact reason - I want to know what is and isn't flagged before boosting stuff.

@sjw @beardalaxy
Again, you still miss my point. I get that this is not the intended purpose of the feature. But I can still use this to see if the author of the post marked it as sensitive or not, as the text displayed between a post that was marked as sensitive and one that wasn't will be different (as seen in the attachments, one says "media hidden", the other "sensitive content". The latter was marked as sensitive when it was posted, the former wasn't). So even if I were to have "display nsfw posts by default" in my settings, I can still double check if the OP tagged the media as NSFW.

I've checked your instance too, but I don't have an account so I don't know if having one changes anything, but I simply do not see a way to hide a post that wasn't marked as NSFW. A post that was marked as NSFW can be displayed by clicking on it, and hidden back by clicking the X button, reverting thus to the edited neckbeard pleroma-tan. But posts with safe media don't have a X button to hide the image as far as I can see.

@alyx @beardalaxy
>"media hidden", the other "sensitive content".

I've literally never noticed that before...

@sjw @beardalaxy
I guess I was a bit right, in that we were talking past each other. I noticed this "feature" a long time ago and thought it was quite smart.
I'm guessing it has it's origin in the way Mastodon does the "hide all media by default" thing.

Anyway, to conclude the thread: I thought you could have checked if a post was marked as sensitive by the author in the same way I can, but from what I can tell you can't.
So it was wrong of me for accusing you of not paying attention to what you were boosting, cause it was not something you could have checked in an easy fashion.

@alyx @sjw @beardalaxy My Love Live Bot only posts SFW content and as such is not marked NSFW.

@redneonglow @sjw @beardalaxy
I was not accusing you of doing something wrong. I was using your post as an example of how a post that is marked SFW looks like if I hide on my end, in a Mastodon instance, versus what a NSFW looks like if I hide it on my end.

@alyx @beardalaxy kiwifarms isn't known for being up to date.

Use better examples. That's like me telling you about a new htop feature on Arch that came out a few months ago and you telling me you booted up your Debian machine and installed htop and it wasn't there so therefore I lied out I dreamt that feature.