It's also nice that all the conclusions in the paper are wrong because they start with a mistaken premise that content warnings mean that a post is "inappropriate".
@jaranta Thanks for the actual paper link, let's see it. :P I'll look at the ethics once I see it, but that title and its "inappropriate" is hilarious in itself from a methods perspective - this is why you don't rely on automated data collection without actually having a living human enter the context and look around first.
@werekat It's as if you need to understand the topic your researching.
@ansugeisler Doesn't really smell like "we needed to get this result" to me - at the very least I can't imagine a practical goal for that particular result. So my money's on "people who know how to write data crawlers, but not do social science".
@werekat Well, an article that says "That strange social network that grabbed some headlines a while ago but isn't Commercial is bad, actually" is an article that will likely get some headlines, which in turn is what some researchers think will help them in their moribund careers (because they have no scruples and don't understand science).
@jaranta Yes. I only read the abstract but this is painfully clear.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!