@UhuhSheSaid: As Jessica said in a earlier post, it is Gawker's determination that it's not up to editors to decide what is and isn't triggering. For people with ED, it could be images like the one in question. It could also be food images shown in the "Stick a fork in it" posts. For people who have lost children, it…

@mangotastic: This is a business. A media business, at that. There are rules for writers and editors to adhere to, and there are rules for commenters who want to continue to enjoy the privilege of commenting to follow. They don't have to be the same rules at all. It's not a democracy; it's a business.

@mangotastic: No. I was using the phrase in a tongue-in-cheek manner. There is a loose community of commenters who have certainly formed friendships, but the goal is not an intentional community in the same way a message board is. It's a highly successful blog empire with a number of loyal customers.

@mangotastic: Message boards are intentional communities. Jezebel is one site of Gawker Media's blog network and, as such, has editorial policies and procedures in place.

@Anilisha: Life is full of disturbing images. It's your responsibility to protect yourself or, preferably, seek treatment to deal with triggers that exist everywhere.

@kitsa961: Because who is to say what someone's trigger is? It's not up to the editors to make that choice. For some, that trigger could be anything eating disorder related. For others, it might be connected to abuse or violence. Someone else might be triggered by images of cats, and then they're well and truly…

@suck_it_monkeys: The point it to have clicks. When you're an editor, you have to not only provide good text, but a strong lede, header and photo that will encourage clicks.

@UmpteenthSarah: I believe that Jezebel and Gawker, as a rule, don't do trigger warnings. It's up to the viewer to take responsibility for what they do and don't read/view. That's a reasonable stance, especially since there is no standard of what is and isn't triggering.

@pyrrhic: Does the title of the post not count?

@Penny: No argument here on his douchiness and level thereof.

@knitwitnancy: Where are you getting your information from? I'm checking through Canadian statistics right now that indicate that the incidence of re-conviction drops significantly after the first incident, and that one in three will reoffend. That's quite different from your results.

@twenora86: Nope. It's the first step of many, and he's taken that step. I hope he keeps going.

@BeckySharper: So, you're suggesting that because he's not on script, his attempts to address his wrongs are insincere? What inside knowledge of him do you have that we lack?

Brown apparently tweeted this as well: "im done with class. i have enough self respect and decency to be proud of accomplishing this DV class. Boyz run from mistakes. Men learn from them!!!"

@BeckySharper: Statistics show that completion of the program makes an abuser much less likely to reoffend. Support for the offender increases the likelihood of success in this regard.

@BeckySharper: Regardless of his motives, he should not be mocked in his attempt to do the right thing. He should be supported. Be cynical if it pleases you, but if we cast stones, are we undermining the process? The success of others?

@LadyChatterley: Let's make sure we're looking beyond personal anecdotes and find statistics that also detail how many of those repeatedly violent men ever went through a program to address underlying issues. I'd be interested in knowing that before throwing babies and bathwater all at once.

@BeckySharper: He's drawing attention to his original actions, as well as his attempts to do better. He's not letting himself off the hook.

@Penny: I've been hit before too.

@katknits: Why not? He's actually showing that he takes what he did seriously enough to be proud of his success at overcoming his issues. He himself is keeping the focus on what he did, as well as the steps he's taking to address what what he did.