hs_olympics | Announcement

Entry tags:

mod post

Announcement

Here is what the list of requested trigger warnings is:
A guide to assist you in not hurting your fellow participants in the HSO.
That post is not a list of rules, it is information.

It is not in any way appropriate for you to decide what other people can or cannot be triggered by. You do not get to decide that, and we will brook no argument on that topic. Furthermore, there is no hard and fast rule for triggers, because they do not follow a logical structure. There is no line we can point to, saying 'ten years is a significant age difference, but nine years is not.' Asking us for those numbers does not constitute asking us for clarification.

Practically speaking, a good rule of thumb is to consider whether the potential trigger is a significant theme in the work. When in doubt, warn and specify.
And finally, nobody is getting points taken away if they forget to add trigger warnings. Nobody is getting disqualified, nobody is getting punished in any way. We have spent the past week reworking the schedule so that we have enough time to read through the entries and add trigger warnings where necessary before posting them to the main HSO comm. We know you are going to miss stuff. We are going to miss stuff ourselves.
Nevertheless, we are committed to providing trigger warnings for all of the main round entries, and we have no intention of giving up on that commitment.
If you do not feel that you can agree with this mission in word and in spirit, the HSO may not be the right event for you.

Because of the reactions to the trigger warnings post, we are postponing the bonus round 0 for 24 hours (until May 20 11:59PM EDT) so that we can be sure everyone here is on the same page before we open the main comm to content creation that might potentially endanger HSO participants.

Edit: comments have now been unscreened.
Please be advised that there is a flashing gif about halfway down the page.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

god people are rude/dumb/annoying/etc

why can't we just simply mention that there's something from the trigger list in the work and leave it at that

why must things like this be a big deal to do

honestly

wait who even tries to argue about people's triggers like no??? that's not a thing you can do??????? if it hurts someone it hurts someone!!
ugh. :\

No one's arguing that. People are trying to have a discussion and raise legitimate questions, only to be shut down by the mods. See here.

However, it is quite clear that the mods themselves have no idea what to do concerning triggers and are basically making fuck ups.

I would say it is especially clear considering some of the things submitted by people as 'triggers' are trolling attempts, something the mods have *also* not considered.

saying "I am offended at the idea that someone could be triggered by this" is not trying to have a legitimate discussion.

the mods said repeatedly that their list of warnings is comprised of things people specifically asked for. "trolling" or not, the HSO's formal stance is that all of these requests should be honored.

Yes, let us ignore the highly unprofessional reaction of the mod. Let's do that.

If someone specifically asked for a trigger against 'swearing', well, I really don't think they're in the right fandom.

There's also the fact that a lot of people don't know what the good god damn hell a trigger really is. They think that anything that "squicks" them is a trigger. Anything that makes them a "little uncomfortable". By throwing any old mundane thing onto the list (like fucking couch cushions), they're trivializing the whole matter, and making things worse for people who are legitimately thrown into panic attacks by triggers. They're making the word mean less and less.

This is a delicate subject, and as someone who more than one of those triggers could apply to? This is offensive to me, and I know a hell lot of other people.

yes, quark responded unprofessionally, but the mods are people too! they are not perfect.

and you're right, a lot of people requested to be warned for things that are not common or expected triggers. but you have no idea what those people have gone through. i'm not the couch cushion person but i can imagine several scenarios in which that might come to be a trigger for someone.

i acknowledge that i'm coming from a privileged position where my only 'triggers' are minor or extremely uncommon, but i don't understand how being requested to warn in fanworks for a variety of things is offensive to people with "legitimate triggers".

That's how I feel. I might be a little uncomfortable with things like body horror, but I'm not going to have a full fledged panic attack. One thing that really struck me was that about third of the list was included in the actual comic. I legitimately wonder how they read through the comic, as Hussie sure doesn't tag anything.

Many things, I wasn't even sure how to approach: I have French in my actual team name, and I can't tag the team name. Do I tag the couch cushions in a header image? I don't consider Alpha!Dave and Alpha!Rose to be related, but should I still tag it as incest? Thinking about what fics and drawings my team will produce, it would actually be easier to include the tags that wouldn't be seen.

Setting aside the difference between warning and trigger (because that is an entirely different issue), one reason I can think of for wanting to be warned for profanity, as well as other things in the comic, is that some people might be looking to read the submissions in a place where such a thing might not be acceptable. For example, someone who works in a conservative workplace might not want their co-workers to see a Karkat fanfic with the word 'fuck' iterated about twenty times, or someone in a library might wish for nudity to be clarified in the OOC comments so that they don't accidentally get themselves kicked out for indecency. People might have read the comic when they weren't somewhere like this, but for some reason or another may not get enough time during the day to read the submissions in a private place.

Thank you so much for this comment. People are conflating 'squick' with 'trigger', and seeing this mistake defended is offensive.

I think what's actually happening is a bit in between. While I do believe those questions were asked in good faith, I'd imagine it's pretty tough for those who submitted their triggers to see them pulled out and dissected like that. Nothing against the people who asked, but in my opinion freezing comments was the better decision.

(And even if they are trolling attempts, which I don't believe, there's no way to tell, so it's better to let someone have the amusement than risk hurting someone like that. It's not like adding a tag, or having a tag added, is a huge inconvenience of some sort.)

In my opinion, the mod should have shut their mouth before making an ass of themselves because only after they were called out was the thread frozen. But maybe that's just me.

In my personal opinion, I think the mods are honestly in a 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' situation, but they definitely could have handled this a lot better, starting with not writing such a condescending post on how they're not here to teach Triggers 101, or how they're the only ones who know what a trigger is (which is the impression I got). They also could have just kept things listed to a general set of things that need to have a content warning for (gore, rape, etc) and then asked if there was anything else that needed to be added, with a possible reason why.

For example, I would like to know *why* a warning is needed for things like swearing and reality bending when those are core staples of the whole bloody canon and have been obvious from the beginning. (For the curious, the first swear, 'smartass', appears in the very second 'page' of Homestuck. 'Fuck' is on John's desktop.) You say they don't believe they're trolling attempts, and those are the reasons why I believe that's not true.

I'd rather take someone's request seriously when they're trolling than assume they're trolling and have it turn out to be a legitimate request. Way I figure it, that saves me from being a douche in either situation. And if comes out later that they are trolling, I come off fine and they come off like jerks.

HSO is a very specific space, too. Expecting tumblr at large to tag really unusual phobias is unreasonable, for instance, but asking that your friends do it isn't. The HSO mods have decided that they want this space to be a certain level of safe, and this is something that falls pretty easily under 'their contest, their rules', I'd think.

The last time the subject of adding trigger warnings came up on a community I was on (TVTropes, incidentally) the mods said it was stupid and maybe they would do it if they were a mental health community. Which is like a business saying "maybe we would add wheelchair ramps if we were a hospital".

It's refreshing to see a more reasonable take on the issue. Thank you.

Instead of calling it a trigger list, maybe just call it a content warning list?

Content warnings are just letting you know what is in the entry, so if anyone doesn't like the content they won't read it whether they get triggered by it or not.

Someone brought this up in the previous post and the mod response was that "trigger warning" is the commonly accepted term in fandom and most likely to be recognized?

I second this. I have legitimate triggers which I appreciate being warned about, and if I stumble across it by accident I have a violent physical reaction. Last time it happened I was vomiting, crying and all but having a complete mental breakdown. Some people may have triggers like this to simple things, but calling everything a trigger is confusing and in some cases invalidating.

I think calling it a 'content warning' is a lot more appropriate than 'trigger warning'. Severe things such as epilepsy warnings and abuse, assault, etc. can be and are triggers for many people, but I think calling it a content warning eliminates the debate about whether it's legitimate or not.

There is a huge difference between triggers and being offended by something.

The problem is though, there's no right answer. There are going to be people infuriated that their triggers are being downgraded to 'content warning' if they make that change, because that's how people just are.

Precisely, I agree completely. It is actually pretty offensive when I'm around different sites and see people talking about their "triggers" when they really aren't triggered by it, they just go "eww." I've spent quite a lot of time around people with PTSD and many do have triggers, and sometimes their reactions can be horrifying (it gets hard when you know ex-marines that don't want to admit hearing a spoken language can reduce them to a sobbing heap). I don't honestly understand why people would think their triggers being put under "content warning" is depreciating; most people don't like to admit that they could break down at the sight or touch of something. I guess I understand that the term trigger is more severe and more fitting for cases like yours, but why shouldn't we just call it a content warning? A triggers list is the same as a content warning; it's there to WARN about CONTENT.

Calling it a content warning seems less offensive to me. At least then, when avoiding things that just make me uncomfortable, I don't have to feel like a heel because someone else might be avoiding that same thing for more serious reasons (it's a weird sort of guilt, and I can't rationalize it well).

Admin here, responding in a personal capacity: you are absolutely right, and we will be putting up a post in a little while announcing our change to 'tag'-based language (in part because it is more familiar to people than 'content notes' etc).

Y'all I have a lot of straight-up "ridiculous" fears that remind me of some very bad times in my life. We are talking grade-school, every day god damn staples.

I get embarrassed by people insisting that I need not worry about such things. But it bothers me! A lot!

Whether you think it's valid or not does everything to me and nothing to you. Clarification is nice but please just consider that the presence of an item on the list is not Oppressing You, but it's bothering somebody else.

Future comments to this post have been set to screened, as all five of the mods have gone to bed and we don't want this conversation to go out of hand while none of us are here to watch it.

This will be changed, and comments made in the interim unscreened, in the morning. In the meantime, feel free to comment to this post or email us (homestuck.shipping at gmail). Thank you.

I'm out.

I was looking forward to making some fun stuff and meeting new people, but I can do that on my own time. It's not worth the hassle of having to deal with all this, or the shaking I get when I see you guys downplaying the seriousness of triggers for self harm because you decided you would, probably without thinking, put up on the list "swearing" and "reality bending".

You know.

The two main things of this entire canon.

Not to mention I'm kind of doubting, as I often due when it comes to these things, if you (or some of the people who suggested some things) understand the difference between a 'trigger' and something that squicks them or makes them uncomfortable. Hell, the whole line between phobias and triggers is apparently a bit blurred and there are indeed uncommon triggers! But...

For people who yet write out the condescending words 'We're not here to teach you Triggers 101', I feel like you guys could use a class yourselves because this whole thing was handled far less than impressively.

So... Yeah. Take me off the Psiioniic<3Dualscar team. I'll still ship it to my heart's content, and chat with my old teammates, but I'd rather not take part in something that is honestly making me shake up due to ignorance, trivialization, and stifling of conversation.

I'd like to respectfully withdraw my participation from HSO on account of the way languages have been dealt with. That originally the inclusion of a language to specifically a trigger list was not at least examined as being discriminatory before being added, to me shows a lack of thought from the moderators, and I'm not confident in the mod team's ability to handle similar issues in the future, should they arise.

Even to me, someone entirely English-speaking in an officially bilingual country, this is really quite obvious from the get-go. It's nice that it's now been called an accessibility issue (as it is) but the fact that it had to be mentioned multiple times from outside the mod team that labeling "other languages" as triggering is extremely ethnocentric... come on guys. One person's trigger does not make linguistic prejudice okay, it's potentially a very short hop from that to other more widespread -ist issues, if you catch my drift.

I'm just one person in a very very large event, but personally I feel withdrawing myself is the right thing to do.

I apologize to my team.

er... i feel like you're trying too hard to accommodate everyone, which is sort of impossible in a group this large. while i understand warnings for things like incest, gore, vore, sex, rape, racism and other things not usually socially acceptable...

...forcing people to give warnings for every little thing that might make them twitch not only limits the teams' creativity but also just doesn't make this very fun.

i think just a general blanket rule of "give content warnings for heavy or questionable material" will suffice. everyone knows what that means and everyone can easily follow it. realistically we just can't accommodate every teeny, tiny thing for each individual in a group this effing big. or just implement the movie system of rating and have us rate our fanworks as G - NC-17 and then maybe state what to watch out for. plus that could give people a general idea as to what the tone and feel for the fanwork might be thus they'll probably know what to expect.

for example, if you don't like swearing and something is rated R, you probably know to avoid it even if language isn't specifically warned for because the team forgot or something.

Another way to think about a trigger warning for stuff that doesn't seem personally, to you, like A Bad Thing, might be like this:

Say when you were twelve years old and at your first Middle School Dance Oh My Gosh you were secretly wanting to ask this girl to dance the entire night. And you are sort of v v subtly following her around, looking for an in. Finally, there's more space nearby her so you sidle up super-cool like and start jammin to "Stacy's Mom," which is blasting from the speakers. She's smiling a little, and you're like yes, okay, awesome, when suddenly you slip on a wet patch on the floor and fall and your pants/skirt/what have you rips in the most humiliating way possible.

Now, every time you hear "Stacy's Mom," you cringe and remember that incident with terrifying clarity. You're like fifty years old and you're still wincing and rubbing your tailbone every time you hear "Stacy's mom has got it goin' on."

Okay, so now imagine that something much worse had happened to you while the same song was playing. And, just like if you tripped and embarrassed yourself while the song was playing, you flash back to that event every time you hear the song.

To everyone else, asking for there to be a tw for a shitty 00's pop song might seem really silly. Or like trolling. But for you, every time you hear it or think about it, you remember a horrible accident or incident or abuse that you suffered. So you ask people to warn for it, so that you don't have that happen.

Some trigger warnings are for things that people find scary or triggering in general, like spiders or eating disorders! But other things can be super specific, and might seem strange to you, but definitely don't to the person who's triggered. After I was in a car accident I couldn't be in a car whilst taking a left turn without flinching for months and months. There was nothing inherently dangerous or bad or scary about these turns, they just reminded me of this thing that had happened.

So, I mean, if someone has a trigger they just have a trigger and they're trying to be proactive about protecting themselves from mental and emotional harm by letting the mods know and that's a good thing! And it's great that the mods care so much about this too!

Okay, that's my two cents, now I have to get "Stacy's Mom" out of my head.

Why are couch pilows a trigger?

Only the individual with that trigger has any idea. And it's kind of unfair to expect them to break it down with strangers, since it's the result of a traumatic experience.

This is absolutely ridiculous, and I am pissed beyond belief that mods can't differentiate between triggers and content warning, and then would be so disrespectful and condescending to its their members.

Please remove

3dog from the roster, sorry team jade/kanaya/rose.

hey, thanks for this. i'm not signed up yet -- i've been considering hopping in with team english -- but i feel more enthusiastic about the whole thing when the mods are sensible about things like this.

I'm going to very neutrally state that you should have participants label these as "content warnings" and not "trigger warnings". It's essentially the same thing, but it really does take the sting off when you see "content warning: couch cushions" rather than "trigger warning: couch cushions".

Content warning is a neutral term that, by in large, most of the things on that list should probably have anyway. Trigger warning is not.

Either way you are warning people about things that could make them uncomfortable and also not appropriating the use of a word that once had a severe meaning but is rapidly devolving into a buzz word for things that make people uncomfortable. I'm not saying that the above list is in any way, shape, or form, but it's becoming more and more widespread and that is not okay. Words evolve but this is taking a massive step backward.

Admin here, responding in a personal capacity: you are absolutely right, and we will be putting up a post in a little while announcing our change to a 'tag'-based language (in part because it is more familiar to people than 'content notes' etc).

Firstly, the mods have already stated that they are going to be going over each main round submission and adding triggers they feel that should be added, which means if you *do* miss a trigger, it will be taken care of, so all of the fretting people are doing about possibly missing appropriate triggers is ungrounded.

Secondly, the mods have already stated clearly that if a trigger is missed on a submission there will be NO PENALTIES for it. So missing a trigger, again, is not a cause for concern.

Thirdly, adding all the appropriate triggers to your work does what exactly to the work? Does it destroy it? Erase it? Change it? All it will do is mean someone who is triggered by something you've written knows to avoid it. Will this mean your work will POSSIBLY have less viewers? Well, yes.

But tell me this, what would you want more?: One less person reading your fic or viewing your image, or a person reading it who was not properly warned, and becoming triggered? I have always decided to err on the side of caution.

Frankly, most of the complaints are personal opinions that have nothing to do with the *contest* itself, which is what these triggers are for. That is the ONLY thing we should be concerned with, frankly, not whether we feel anyone else's triggers are legitimate or not.

This post contains discussion about the legitimacy of triggers, misogyny, racism, and a lot of my personal opinions and views. I tried very hard to avoid being insensitive or offensive while writing this, but if something makes you feel uncomfortable, please tell me!

Hello, HSO mods! I’m not sure if comments are still being screened at this point, but I’m posting this because I have a lot of ~feelings about the way this idea was implemented and the mod response to everything, and, well, few of them are positive. Quite frankly, I’m upset by the way this situation was approached.

First off, the positives. I really love the idea behind this- a way for people to avoid their rare triggers and an acknowledgement that there are more triggers than the simple gore+noncon+underage+character death that are commonly warned for (an idea much of fandom often seems not to understand.) So up to that point I genuinely, sincerely thank you all. It’s an attempt to put into the spotlight something that is rarely talked about in fandom.

The first problem, though, comes in at your original post. As I mentioned before, there’s a lot of false information going around about what triggers even are. Most of fandom’s anti-triggering efforts (as evidenced by AO3’s standard list of trigger warnings) have been to warn for things like rape and gore; things that are often upsetting to people even without that trigger and things that are easily recognized and warned for. However, this has had the unfortunate side effect of giving many fandom-goers a misunderstanding about triggers- basically, many if not most people I talk to through fandom* believe that a trigger really is defined as ‘something objectively bad that bothers or horrifies people, especially people who have been exposed to it in real life’. And, well, it isn’t. It really isn’t.

This is what takes us to our first problem- there is nothing in that original post anywhere to tell people what a trigger really is, and why it’s being warned for. You don’t need an essay or anything- a simple link to Wikipedia’s Trauma Trigger page- A trauma trigger is an experience that triggers a traumatic memory in someone who has experienced trauma. A trigger is thus a troubling reminder of a traumatic event, although the trigger itself need not be frightening or traumatic. Triggers can be quite diverse, appearing in the form of individual people, places, noises, images, smells, tastes, emotions, animals, films, scenes within films, dates of the year, tones of voice, body positions, bodily sensations, weather conditions, time factors, or combinations thereof. Triggers can be subtle and difficult to anticipate, and can sometimes exacerbate post-traumatic stress disorder, a condition in which trauma survivors cannot control the recurrence of emotional or physical symptoms, or of repressed memory- would have been an excellent first step to avoid all those sarcastic “couch cushions?” comments. (And for the record, fandom: yes, couch cushions. Triggers are strange things sometimes- I’ve also encountered people (mostly on anon memes, because in this kind of fandom atmosphere can you really blame people for not wanting to admit they have such triggers?) who are triggered by math, a certain fruit, a specific pattern of curtain blowing in the wind, and drinking soda.)

The next problem is how you chose to deal with labeling triggers on fics. I can think of a few different ways to go about it, each with their own pros and cons, but none of them are as terrible as the idea of listing them all, telling people to warn for them with no explanation why or what any of them mean (what exactly does reality-bending entail? Are we talking use of profanity or the idea of profaning something religious? Does the presence of the Sufferer in itself count as blasphemy? None of these were explained in the original post, which could have been avoided if you’d contacted the anons in question for clarification before making the post public) and then leaving comments opened and unscreened. I’m not trying to be nasty, mods, especially about something I’m sure you’ve already realized, but doing that was a really bad idea. It’s no good trying to support people with triggers if the way you do it amounts to turning them into a circus sideshow. The mod response in this situation was also quite inappropriate, and to be honest is the biggest reason I’ve been debating the idea of pulling my participation this year. I do appreciate that you’ve apologized for posting a link to Eugenics to the Jewish person, but the very fact that it happened is indicative of serious flaws in this process and the attitude of the mods towards the people in this contest.

My next issue is best illuminated by Please note that warnings for any/all of these elements (including both headers and subcategories) are required in the main rounds. Quite frankly, I’m seriously uncomfortable with this, as (unless I’m missing something huge) it indicates that there will be no ‘Choose Not to Warn’ option in this fest, something that is totally unheard of to me. To be clear, I don’t wish for a choose not to warn option because I’m lazy or I’m the sort of person who enjoys harming others, but because I’m really uncomfortable with not being able to decide that a.) I don’t know how to classify this and so would rather be safe than risk triggering someone, or b.) that warning for this legitimate trigger makes me uncomfortable due to my personal experience and so I would rather chose not to warn than harm myself or another person. I do have a personal example for B, and it’s warning for lactation, one of the triggers listed. I completely believe lactation is a genuine trigger, I would never do anything to say it isn’t (and I really hope I’m not making the anon who requested a lactation warning uncomfortable by discussing this), but the fact of the matter is that I live in a culture that shames women for having the capability to have children, that considers breastfeeding a dirtybadwrong thing that should be done in private where no one can see it and acts like this natural body function (which unlike the other two warnings on the list, blood and vomit, is not an automatic sign of sickness or injury) is something women should be shamed for. And I just… I know that’s not why the anon asked for it, and lactation isn’t such a big deal that I can’t just avoid writing about it for the duration of this fest. But I can’t be comfortable warning for that, because of my personal experiences, and no ‘Choose Not to Warn’ means that I can’t write about it here without one of us getting hurt. It makes me uncomfortable that I have no way to choose not to warn for it, and it’s not the only thing that has potentially unfortunate implications. Namely, last night’s French debate.**

Here’s the thing: I consider warning people for the presence of non-English languages (especially historically marginalized languages) to be an action uncomfortably akin to racism, the same way I consider warning for homosexuality to be a homophobic action. This empathetically does not mean that I believe everyone else should feel as I do or that French or any other language is not a completely legitimate trigger; it just means that I personally would be uncomfortable doing such a thing. But because the mod team does not offer a ‘Choose Not to Warn’ option and refuses to have a more neutral ‘content notes’ section, there were a few hours last night before the policy was changed where my options were literally either to engage in an action I consider racist or not to participate in this fest at all. Can you see why this makes me uncomfortable? (The language-notice idea that is now implemented is fantastic, for the record, and I’m very glad you have it! Thank you for listening to the people who were uncomfortable on that point.)

(And as a side note, another thing that is making me uncomfortable is the fact that, as the rules stand, if someone lists 'homosexuality' as a trigger you are obligated to force me to warn for it.)

So, TL;DR version: Mods, I’m incredibly grateful for what you’re trying to do here! It’s awesome, and something no fest I’ve seen has tried to do before. But the way you’re going about doing it makes me feel marginalized and silenced and the way the discussion has been going makes me feel as though my being uncomfortable somehow makes me an insensitive bully (See comments such as the ones here, here, and here, both by mods and non-mods) rather than a genuinely conflicted person who loves the concept but not the way it’s being implemented. I want this fest to be safe space, but that takes discussion and education and carefully moderated discussion spaces, not things like giving inadequate information, allowing people with rare triggers to get mocked and doubted for upwards of a hundred comments before shutting it down, being dismissive of legitimate discussion, and assuming anyone who sees problems with the implementation is doing it out ignorance or desire to harm.

*YMMV, I suppose. I’m sure many people have a different experience than me in this regard.

**I understand and greatly appreciate that this policy has been replaced by a far, far better one, and I’m really grateful for your fast assessment of the situation. However, it still happened, and I feel it’s a really important discussion point.

Thank you for taking the time to share your perspective! I'm one of the admins but I'm going to reply to this in a non-official capacity; the other mods are not around yet, but I did want to address some of the issues you raise from a personal standpoint. I am responding out of order, and I hope that you will forgive my disorganization.

First, the issue of shutting down discussion: frankly, we didn't anticipate the post exploding like this (which was poor foresight on our part), and given that there are five mods actively dealing with the comments and poor communication among us as to what the official stance is on several points, we decided we needed to put a pause on the threads so as to not exacerbate the issue. We are still reading the comments and discussing them, and will re-open/un-screen them as soon as we work some solutions out to the very real and meaningful problems with our system that people like you have brought up.

Second, regarding the 'trigger warning' terminology: yes, you're completely right, and we'll be moving to a 'tag'-based language in the future.

Third, regarding the way we handled posting the triggers: it was completely inappropriate and poorly thought-out. I am personally sorry for that, as I was the one who wrote the post and it was my irredeemable carelessness that led to not seeking a better solution or at least providing more information instead of assuming that everyone knew what a trigger was.

Fourth, with regards to the eugenics issue: the mod in question has been reprimanded and taken off comment duty. That was not in any way okay, and we do not condone those actions. Yes, it happened, and yes, it's important that it happened (as did the initial mistake in re-labeling the language warning, which was 100% my fault). I am personally and deeply sorry for our hurtful actions, and can only ask the patience and forgiveness of you and other HSO participants.

Fifth, in terms of clarity: for the more unusual ones that only one person requested, we did seek clarification via email. However, when numerous people requested a warning (as for blasphemy), we did not follow up, primarily because of time constraints. I know it's difficult that there is no hard and fast rule, but we just ask that people use their best judgment and mention specifics when appropriate. While this is by no means intended to be a perfect solution, it is our hope that it will strike a balance between that which is helpful to affected persons and that which is possible for creators to manage.

And finally, I don't know why we overlooked it, but I agree that we do need a 'chose not to use warnings' option. Thank you for pointing that out, and we'll definitely implement it.

Again, thank you so much for your thoughtful response, and I want to emphasize that I and the rest of the mod team do take your concerns seriously. If you have any further input or suggestions, we would be glad to hear them.

Hey, I just wanted to say thank you very much! It means a lot to me that you've been doing things to address a lot of the criticisms, and especially the knowledge that there's going to be a 'Choose Not to Warn' option. :) It's really nice to get a thought-out response like this, and it goes a long way towards calming the worries I had about this fest.

However, when numerous people requested a warning (as for blasphemy), we did not follow up, primarily because of time constraints.

Ah, that makes sense. It hadn't occurred to me that multiple people might have requested the same thing, though in hindsight it seems obvious. That would make it rather impossible to define all the triggers, and I definitely agree with the 'best judgement' guideline.

So yeah! I haven't agreed with every decision made, but it means a whole lot to me that your team is willing to be flexible and accept criticism, and I really appreciate this reply. :) Thanks!

Did you tell people in their signup that any triggers they listed would be publicly posted in a huge list and made mandatory warnings?

Having submitted something to the trigger list, I did imagine that the list would be posted somewhere: what would be the point of collecting all that information and then just sitting on it? But I don't remember thinking "mandatory warnings" were going to happen.

Honestly, since the mods seemed to be implying they would be looking at each submission in detail, I thought they intended to contact a participant privately if their listed trigger came up.

Truth be told, I think posting the list was a mistake.

I don't want to cast blame on the mods here in particular, because this is a group of people in a size that they hadn't anticipated (and frankly I hadn't either) and there's no generally agreed-upon method of handling triggers as a whole, or even a general public understanding of what triggers are. While it would be really nice if triggers were as understood as food allergies and we had a way of handling them as common as corrective lenses, things aren't that way. There are things that could have been handled much better here, but inexperience on both sides of the equation is the direct cause of this whole mess. The huge crowd of people complaining about couch cushions might have never existed if triggers and how they work was part of common knowledge, and quite frankly, they were at least as abhorrent to me as the actions of the mods.

There's an inherent tension here between the size of the community, one of 1500+ people, and the desire to maintain accessibility for everyone in a group where just by the sheer size it's likely some people will have highly specialized needs and it's absolutely inevitable that people will have conflicting needs. The need for pregnancy to be listed as a trigger and the need for it not to be listed as one is an example I've seen in the comments here, and both are completely legitimate. It sounds as if there may have been people making this process more complicated than it had to have been by listing things that were only squicks, or were things that they thought might trigger other people but are not triggers for them, or were things they thought their boss might not like them looking at when browsing in the workplace. If the shipping olympics wants to consider itself a closed space where the needs of its members are taken into account, we have to be able to trust users not to do this. It's not just taking language meant to describe something people need to describe something people want, it's also making it more difficult for the people who do have needs to get them met as the situation gets more and more complex. *

I think some of this could have been averted if the post linking to the google form discussed accessibility issues that come up with this process. I would suggest mentioning not just trigger warnings, but also things like flashing images or text transcriptions if text is used extensively in an image, with some basic mentions of why these things are encouraged and links to more information.

* I have also seen some people use "I don't feel safe" language when referring to submitting things to the rounds. I am a little worried about that because just as some people have come to use trigger terminology to describe things that only squick them, it feels as if these people might be using this language to mean "I am uncomfortable submitting entries because of the potential reaction" rather than "I worry that the reaction to me submitting entries will make me violently ill." Having an anxiety disorder makes it very easy for me to imagine the latter happening, but I've seen the former use case far too often. If the latter case is you, please, please don't do that.

I've seen a couple of comments where people have expressed serious nervousness about accidentally failing to tag something. Would it be helpful to have a list of people who are willing to, for lack of a better term, beta for it?

Obviously that wouldn't be an absolute guarantee -accidents happen no matter what -but having someone go over the finished version at the end with a specific eye to the (admittedly rather lengthy) list could go a long way to settling those fears.

I realise that might end up being a logistical nightmare in its own way, or inappropriate for reasons of technically-a-competition or whatever, but I'm sure I'm not the only person with a bunch of spare time and no issue reviewing things for that purpose if there are people who would appreciate it, so I figured it was worth suggesting :?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Announcement

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Question

Re: Question

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Well here's the issue as I see it

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject