Profile post discussion [split]

Discussion in 'The Undercity' started by AbsenteeLandlady123, May 31, 2016.

  1. AbsenteeLandlady123

    AbsenteeLandlady123 Chronically screaming

    I don't know if this is a request for a guideline, or just an observation of a distressing thing I've noticed - I really don't like coming online and seeing triggering stuff in the status box. Abuse talk has a forum for it, and there's been a few times where I've had to shut down for the rest of the day because of sudden exposure to triggering topic that I cannot avoid. Unless there is a way to make the status box go away completely, in which case I would hugely appreciate being pointed at it :c
  2. Wiwaxia

    Wiwaxia problematic taxon

    I don't think that there's an existing option to hide kintwitter, but that could be a useful thing to add, if possible.
  3. seebs

    seebs Benevolent Dictator

    I don't know of a way to hide the status box thing, and you have a point there.
  4. Beldaran

    Beldaran 70% abuse and 30% ramen

    The abuse forum has posted trigger warnings; having the same kind of content in an area that cannot have warnings seems like a bad idea. I think that your sort of standard triggering content (abuse, suicide, rape, etc.) ought to be kept in areas where trigger warnings can be applied and not be put in the status box as a courtesy.
    Last edited: May 31, 2016
    • Like x 1
  5. swirlingflight

    swirlingflight inane analysis and story spinning is my passion

    Adblock can hide the profile box.

    One way to post things in the profile post woud be to comment on our own status.

    To put the content so the unable-to-deal are unilike to stumble on it: Make the top level say TW, then comment to that with the things that are upsetting.

    To make the content avoidable for people using the profile posts view: follow up by commenting again, three times, with 3 short filler posts like "ugh" "ughh" "ughhhhh"

    Eta, my most recent status shows what I mean.

    If at all plausible, I'd rather not discourage the option to post status in the profile posts area based on topic. The proposal for people to simply put all likely triggers in forum posts with warnings is an option, but not one I prefer. Making some of us more comfortable by making others of us less comfortable is not ideal.

    Can we brainstorm other methods of achieving the goals? My thoughts so far:

    The adblock thing lets those of us (including me) who are upset and harmed by unexpected exposure to a lot of triggery things control our own exposure... provided we know it's an option.

    The thing I suggested is difficult due to the post delay thing; adding the filler posts takes successful attention span and executive function checks whick may not be possible when they're needed most. Is ot possible to reduce the cooldown, or are there other reasons to keep it as is?


    Now that I'm fed and awake and whatnot, lemme add a screenshot of what I mean:

    What sorts of ways would this idea not work for people, and what sorts of problems do you anticipate with it? (General you, invitation to all people reading this thread.)
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2016
    • Like x 5
  6. Kaylotta

    Kaylotta Writer Trash

    the first problem that leaps to mind is pretty much exactly what you mentioned - not everyone has the presence of mind to hide the triggery stuff, especially if they happen to be posting in a meltdown mode. (on the other hand, having that 20s cooldown time could be useful for making that presence of mind happen? dunno. i'm not a meltdowny person, some of this is assumption/observation.)

    i'd tend to think that the meltdown/complaining/potentially triggering status updates could be posted in a vent thread, but again, presence of mind, and immediate need to relieve emotional pressure and hopefully get some eyes on the problem. which is important! threads are obviously not immediately visible, and I know how invalidating it can feel to post a request for/cry for help/attention/panic (etc etc don't assume any negativity here, I'm generalizing) and not have anyone reply to the thread - or even look at it. it's totally not intentional, I get that, but brainweasels are nasty creatures. so I've really appreciated when people post a "hey could anyone who can lend a hand check out this topic" and then a link ... but again we're back to presence of mind/overcoming brainweasels/etc.

    I kind of feel like the 'safest' option is a request not to post potentially triggering stuff in kintwitter, but I do appreciate the need for immediacy, so i'm a little torn. I think the 'best' idea is the filler option swirl mentioned, but that has its flaws as discussed.

    p.s. - @KathyGaele, if I contributed to your distress at all w/ my mentions of stuff when I was talking to palindrome the other day, i'm really sorry. I could have phrased less triggeringly. :( hope you are doing okay.
    • Like x 4
  7. Mala

    Mala Well-Known Member

    Yeah, the filler idea seems a bit complicated. I think "don't post triggery things here where there's not really tools to warn for/hide it" is perfectly reasonable. And people can always make a vent thread and post there, then link it in the box if it's a "need help/responses" type situation
    • Like x 3
  8. Lib

    Lib Well-Known Member

    I think the biggest potential problem with 'make a thread and post there' would be issues of feeling like it's not important enough - both in the sense that things can be triggery to other people and mundane for you to the point where a thread might not be appropriate, you just want to bitch and be heard briefly, and in the sense that, well, everyone has brainweasels, brainweasels about 'but I'm not important enough for a thread' aren't that unusual.
    • Like x 3
  9. Beldaran

    Beldaran 70% abuse and 30% ramen

    I think that actions taken that directly affect the health and safety of users on the front page should be the things being checked here. Telling people to hide the whole update box just in case others want to post triggery stuff on the front page without warnings does not seem reasonable.

    I think that the post and comment on own post thing could work, but it's kind of labor intensive and even less likely to be read/paid attention to than a simple link to a vent/crisis/triggery topic thread. Also, people seem to be under the impression that meltdowns are the main issue. I've seen calm (if disgusted) mention of triggery topics in the status box more than a few times. I cannot see much reason for that.
    • Like x 5
  10. Wiwaxia

    Wiwaxia problematic taxon

    Yeah, seconding this.

    Also I am very :/ about characterizing this as "people want to post triggery stuff on the front page without warnings." Maybe I missed something big, but mostly what I've seen is just people expressing badfeels which can certainly be triggery, but nothing explicitly discussing the "sort of standard triggering content" except insofar as is inherent to this forum.

    I'm having a hard time expressing why this is freaking me out so much, but it certainly is, as a data point.
    • Like x 2
  11. Aondeug

    Aondeug Cringe Annoying Ass Female Lobster

    Is it because it's pinging you as victim blaming or something like it maybe? Which isn't to say that is what it is, but it could be you reading it that way. Brains are silly things that way.
  12. Beldaran

    Beldaran 70% abuse and 30% ramen

    @Wiwaxia we're seeing different posts then. I think the most recent triggery topic I've seen had to do with the sexualization of children, for example. And of course, there isn't any kind of guideline against posting that sort of thing now, so I'm not particularly critical of people who do it, but it would be better if front page, unwarned discussion of such topics were avoided in my opinion.
    • Like x 2
  13. seebs

    seebs Benevolent Dictator

    The software does not innately have the ability to hide the update box, I don't think? I might be able to make a version which does. But it seems to me that the front page visible stuff should probably not be stuff which would usually need trigger warnings, since you're likely to see it without any easy way to avoid it.
    • Like x 2
  14. seebs

    seebs Benevolent Dictator

    That's a good point. I'm not sure how to address it, apart from explicitly stating "everyone is important enough for threads".

    To put it another way: I totally have the ability to remove the "make new threads" option from users. If you can make new threads, presumably I think you are important enough to be able to make new threads. (And no, this isn't some kind of "threat". It's an observation about the design of the forum; it is a design choice I've made that users can make new threads.)
    • Like x 2
  15. BlackholeKG

    BlackholeKG I saw you making fire

    What would be ideal would seem to be some sort of tumblr saviour style blacklist post-hiding feature for the status box based on keywords, but that's probably way beyond the scope of what is possible with the software at the moment.
  16. Wiwaxia

    Wiwaxia problematic taxon

    More like "please confine all Unpleasant Stuff or feeling bad to designated Unpleasant Stuff areas and if you complain about feeling stifled you get hit with the 'well you can do anything you want we'll just be Very Disappointed in you if you do' until you shut up"

    I obviously don't want to trigger anybody, and i'm gonna make a personal effort not to, but if this accepted as official policy/expectation, that pings me as Trying To Be A Safe Space in a frankly scary and suffocating way. (yes, even if it's unenforced)
    • Like x 2
  17. BlackholeKG

    BlackholeKG I saw you making fire

    Yeah, I am sort of torn. I mean, "this is not a safe space" has always been a fairly important tenet of this forum, but it would be nice to have some sort of solution for people inadvertently being triggered if that were possible with the software, i.e. some sort of content blocker or filter which could be turned on. I suppose adblocking out the status window is indeed such a solution, but a method that is less of a proverbial sledgehammer would be ideal.
    • Like x 3
  18. Mala

    Mala Well-Known Member

    I'm really not seeing how "put triggery stuff in places where you can warn for or hide triggery stuff" is "stifiling" or in any way not a perfectly reasonable request
    • Like x 2
  19. Beldaran

    Beldaran 70% abuse and 30% ramen

    Warning for landmines does not negate the existence of landmines or lessen their significance. There's a reason that "tag your shit" has become a baseline for decency in posting habits.

    If everything was meant to be everywhere without any topical grouping then subforums would not exist. Some of these things exist for the health and safety of all users. I don't see the problem with an organizational system that keeps triggering content off the front page.
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2016
    • Like x 2
  20. Wiwaxia

    Wiwaxia problematic taxon

    Triggery is an impossibly broad category, the forum is full of anxious people.

    Well that's a major difference of opinion here then. I am still very firmly on the "tagging is a courtesy, it's unreasonable to make it an obligation or 'baseline for decency'" train.
    • Like x 1
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice