Title:
Content warning cuts on reading list
Area:
Adult content warnings
Summary:
The lj-cut text that shows up on a reading list and journal pages for entries in journals and communities with adult content filters is misleading.
Description:
When someone logged out (or otherwise having adult content filters set) is looking at a reading page containing entries from journals and communities that have set adult content warnings, the entries are replaced with cuts with a preset text.
All entries flagged 18+/adult content get the text "You're about to view content that a community administrator has marked as possibly inappropriate for anyone under the age of 18." - referencing a community administrator - even when the entry is in a private journal, which makes it appear that the flag could have been set by somebody other than the journal owner.
Conversely, all entries with the viewer discretion flag set get the text "You're about to view content which the journal owner has advised should be viewed with discretion. " - even if they're entries in communities, which is also confusing, though less so.
ETA: This problem seems to only appear when the entire journal is set to adult content, not when individual entries are marked. When individual entries are marked, the text is correct.
The language in the cuts should be changed so that references to community maintainers and journal owners are either removed, or match the type of the journal.
It would be very nice if the cut text was in general re-written to be more informative - more like the text you get if you click through to the warning page, giving a reason, who did the marking, and the fact that the whole journal is marked, not just the one entry* - but at the very least, the misleading language about community administrators needs to be fixed.
*yes, clicking on "You're about to view content which the journal owner has advised should be viewed with discretion" to get to pictures of a kitten playing with string *is* amusing, but also very odd to anyone who isn't already familiar with how the filters work.
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 33
This suggestion:
View AnswersShould be implemented as-is.
22 (66.7%)
Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
1 (3.0%)
Shouldn't be implemented.
0 (0.0%)
(I have no opinion)
9 (27.3%)
(Other: please comment)
1 (3.0%)