But why wouldn't someone want to read the letter b? Especially when the letter is used so commonly in English. Again, people who don't understand will see this which will feed the fire of not taking content warnings seriously.

i mean if you're not interested in reading smth with the topic being the letter b ig it would make sense (not totally sure tho)

You're reading too much into it, it's just how the crossposter formats the topic

Then it's the crossposter's fault. In my opinion the crossposter shouldn't be using CW's like that if they mean an entirely different thing?

i mean it says "read more" instead of "cw" accorfding to cochu so i see how that could be interpreted differently (like i initially did)

No one is uncomfortable by the letter b, "CW: b" isn't assuming that. It is by definition warning you of the content

But why would you need a warning for the letter b in the first place?

There's no need, it's just there

I get what you're saying, but titling it "CW" just doesn't sound right. Maybe instead of that, they could transfer it over to how you would tweet normally, or maybe like a, "content ahead:" But CW's should be used for like violence, nsfw, etc

CW: violence and CW: anything else are both correct usages of a content warning, by definition