New Rule: DNI (Do Not Interact) Lists are Banned

[nickjr]

Please note I wrote this like 4 hours ago and didn't send it until now. If someone addressed this just reply with what's was said pls, don't tell me someone already addressed or assume I know about that what was already addressed...

...Some people literally use TW as a DNI with ME list, and some will strait up say DNI Interact if my content triggers you. You can't really ban one and punish offsite actions without addressing the other.

I think there’s a huge difference here, and it’s obvious even in your own explanation; a TW is a warning. A DNI is a demand. It’s the difference between “hey, just a heads up, there’s [thing] on this page!” And “don’t talk to me if you don’t like [thing.]”

The problem is you can pass off a DNI as trigger list. A DNI is also a warning because of all the reasons CS is giving why their banning them.

As someone else said with the right wording a DNI can be passed off as anything else but a DNI, including a TW and even not seem so demanding. Also assuming all DNI are demands are ignoring that some people are not trying to make themselves seem like their DEMANDING to left alone, but rather suggesting it, and will acknowledge not everyone will read or even give their DNI the time of day.

Not everyone uses a DNI the same way, some do use them as TW for viewers and vice versa. I'm included as one of those people because I rather not be given flack, hustle or trouble because a person read it and assumed they'd be able to handle the content anyways.

A lot of circles I'm apart of dislike certain things like reclaiming slurs, usage of those slurs even if reclaimed, gore, bag of pigeon do not eat stuff, etc. I rather not have people interacting with me if they gonna get iffy and triggered about, one because I don't want to be held responsible for someone reading a TW/DNI warning of my content and then throwing a fit, and I don't want people unaware of that stuff in my content at all. I use my TW/DNI like advisory disclaimers sure, and I'm not the only one.

Not to mention just because you consider it to not be a TW doesn't mean someone will and probably can convince a mod that a TW is actually a DNI being passed off as a TW, it's possible, trust me.

This is interesting to read. I dunno Toyhouse or similar communities, so I wasn't aware that DNIs are used as an extension of TWs.

Assuming that all is well on your end when you put TWs, I would think that people who go on to complain that your TW isn't enough are acting in bad faith and therefore shouldn't be part of the equation. But since they exist in large enough numbers that they can't simply be disregarded and have even influenced the use of DNIs in Toyhouse... huh. I don't know what the solution here is.

However, if you're linking your Toyhouse on CS, then it must be CS-appropriate, which means TWs are mostly dealing with "lesser" triggers or, like, character histories. So I think TWs should be sufficient? this sounded better in my head and did not come out right... something about how running into spiders after TWs is, on average, less likely to prompt raging bad faith responses than running into really bad content after TWs, so using DNIs as an extension of TWs shouldn't be a thing on CS? idk

[נוריאל]

I just kind of wish you ( staff ) would allow your members to participate in discussion before giving out rulings like this. We give you money & have for years, and then you turn around and hurt large portions of your site & then silence us for trying to, like, talk about it. It's extremely frustrating. I've played many pet sites for many years & none of them punish players for having a voice more than chickensmoothie does.

[nickjr]

I just kind of wish you ( staff ) would allow your members to participate in discussion before giving out rulings like this. We give you money & have for years, and then you turn around and hurt large portions of your site & then silence us for trying to, like, talk about it. It's extremely frustrating. I've played many pet sites for many years & none of them punish players for having a voice more than chickensmoothie does.

DNI lists (the way most people use them) are a false sense of security and perpetuate the idea that you can protect yourself by assuming good faith on the Internet. This is an especially dangerous idea to perpetuate on a site like CS, which is relatively safe and also full of kids who are active on websites other than CS...

I'm sorry, but unless you're using DNI lists the way the Toyhouse community is (as an extension of TWs) or in some other specialized way... There's nothing to discuss.

I'm just amazed the staff discussed it for so long before they came to this conclusion.

[CanisCoyote]

Awesome, I'm glad to see this new rule! It was weirdly discriminatory/judgmental to tell people not to talk to you cause they like something you don't... And I totally agree with how it just paints a target on your back with a list of things that you are vulnerable to. It's divisive to put blanket statements on people for arbitrary reasons and only leads to hostility.

Part of posting on this site is interacting with various people in the community... if you need a very restricted community in order to interact with anyone then I would not post on a forum that is not dedicated restricting to whatever it is you have an issue with. I certainly don't like or agree with everyone's opinions on here... but on a site about trading virtual pets and a community based on pretty colored dogs and artwork, that's what I'm here for, here to talk about. Not here to discourse or talk about social issues! You don't have to talk about things you aren't comfortable talking about.

Internet safety has seriously changed over time and people are WAY oversharing personal info freely available for anyone to read... listing your mental illnesses and triggers for the world to see makes it easy for people to take advantage of you. Age has thankfully been banned on here for a long time (though sometimes, yes, I would like to share my age I understand why its a thing), but for real, I would take that off of other sites too. I certainly also discourage people listing all their mental illnesses out too, that is private information that no one is entitled to and can be used to manipulate you.

[[dys]functional]

I just kind of wish you ( staff ) would allow your members to participate in discussion before giving out rulings like this. We give you money & have for years, and then you turn around and hurt large portions of your site & then silence us for trying to, like, talk about it. It's extremely frustrating. I've played many pet sites for many years & none of them punish players for having a voice more than chickensmoothie does.

I believe the reason for open topics such as these are to allow conversation about said new changes or rules. This thread isn't locked, and I'm certain that there have been many insightful views that have come from allowing open discussion. That may not mean a sudden take back in the new rule (as mentioned in the first post; this was an issue that has been building for a while and something had to be done about it), but it does mean that we are able to share concerns, questions, and have an open conversation about things that are affecting us here.

Please note that this is a free site; you are not required to pay for anything. Should you choose to pay for some chicken dollars, that is entirely your choice.

I don't think it's fair to say the staff here are trying to punish, or otherwise bring harm to cs players. I've been here for quite some time now, and I've seen much happen. I truly believe the changes that have happened here have been for good reason; with the best interest of their userbase in mind.

[Michael's Fan.]

I just kind of wish you ( staff ) would allow your members to participate in discussion before giving out rulings like this. We give you money & have for years, and then you turn around and hurt large portions of your site & then silence us for trying to, like, talk about it. It's extremely frustrating. I've played many pet sites for many years & none of them punish players for having a voice more than chickensmoothie does.

they own the site and can literally do what they want with it, regardless of giving money to them or not. they could delete it. yeah it'd suck but they CAN.

THey know what is best, and if you cannot thrive without DNI's, even though they do more harm then good, there are multitudes of other sites that don't care about it.

It's a divisive, false sense of security and only makes mean people target you more.

[Omiyage]

This makes me feel relieved.
I too, have anxiety and other diagnosis, I am thankful this will no longer be allowed.
Thanks from me

[Comic Sans]

Please note I wrote this like 4 hours ago and didn't send it until now. If someone addressed this just reply with what's was said pls, don't tell me someone already addressed or assume I know about that what was already addressed.

What about Toyhouse TW feature that's basically a DNI if you have this trigger because this character and or account may have triggering stuff on it? Many users use it as a DNI list in a sort of way even if not for themselves for potential veiwers to decide if they want to interact with that account and or OC or not.

Like Toyhouse encourages users to do this heavily, it's literally against their rules not to do this. If an account or character has NSFW or triggering topics mentioned or focused you HAVE to have this "DNI if you have these triggers", if not you can get reported and potentially banned from the site.

And by encourage, you need to have your stuff tagged as NSFW as well as some explanation why, even stuff like has a weapon or self harm or something simialr HAS to be tagged and it's often encouraged to further state why in a pop up TW/DNI if you are triggered by... thing.

A TW warning list can also be with the right wording, be twisted into a DNI, as a DNI can be as simple as "Do Not Interact if You have these Triggers" or as complex as "Do Not Interact if Your Homophobic, Ani-Xenogenders, Talk about this NSFW or potentially triggering topic a lot etc"

No wait, they are literally the same thing. A DNI list doesn't have to include the acronym "DNI" or the words "Do Not Interact" A trigger warning list is literally a don't not interact I don't want YOU getting triggered. Not all DNIs are about the person who made them own triggers, a DNI can be used as warning for people who want to avoid controversial topics that often reek of drama or triggering mentions, or just triggering subjects in general.

To exclude trigger warning lists as a form of DNI list is literally giving a way to scoot of around the rules and technically break them with out breaking them, or just something that logic wise is gonna get brought up later. I rather CS be strict and rigid about what is and isn't rule breaking.

I wanted to bring this up because it's a site often linked to CS for OC trading and selling. Users will often sell/buy characters for art for characters for CS pets, items and c$. And whether or not CS mods realized it when they coined the rule, there is a very important rule clash to bring attention to. Something that not doing can get you punished, is considered a punishable offense for doing.

I think before the rule is fully implemented, this needs to be addressed if it hasn't be addressed already. And asap, because I have TW/DNI on my Toyhouse, I have reclaimed slurs on my Toyhouse, I would like to warn people they might be better off not interacting with me if they triggered by anything mentioned or dislike I used reclaimed slurs I myself can claim. I do not want to be punished two for one because it was deemed against the CS rules for a connected account to have a DNI of any kind, only to just punished for complying to CS rules.

Some people literally use TW as a DNI with ME list, and some will strait up say DNI Interact if my content triggers you. You can't really ban one and punish offsite actions without addressing the other.

I think there's a tad misunderstanding. I defiantly agree that people do use DNI as a content warning but it's important to note the staff are not referring to that type of DNI. They are referring to the ones directed at other people's interests and or the list maker's own triggers. The type of DNI staff are banning are: If you are ___, if you support ___, if you are in this fandom and or DNI trading wise (depending on the way you phrase it). I understand the way you're using DNI's (kind of like "DNI if ____ triggers you"). I think a simple fix to this is changing it to "CW: ___ is on this page" or "TW: ____" is on this page which equates to the way you are using it.

(note this does not indicate my opinion on whether I support or do not support. I have my opinion but I do not wish to share :] I do not wish to involve myself in drama; moreover, this is a clarification from what I've interpreted the Staff's standing on what type of DNI they are referring to. This does not inherently mean that I know what the Staff is thinking and I will delete it if I am informed otherwise. Stay safe)

[Sa⸸an]

I just kind of wish you ( staff ) would allow your members to participate in discussion before giving out rulings like this. We give you money & have for years, and then you turn around and hurt large portions of your site & then silence us for trying to, like, talk about it. It's extremely frustrating. I've played many pet sites for many years & none of them punish players for having a voice more than chickensmoothie does.

This. I've seen a lot of users complain staff come across as strict, and unfriendly, going so far as advising potential new users to avoid the site entirely BECAUSE of staff. It doesn't help their quick to silence critism and complaints of situations offsite, even if their valid critism, and just punish offsite actions in general even if it had nothing to do with CS.

The argument is it's their site they can do whatever they want makes they come across as clicque and cultist when they are willing to attempt to police users offsite, and it could be argued that this is infact bullying, whether if it's the staff bullying, or people who reported the behavior being the bullies, as going out of your way to make offsite drama or actions and dragging it on site as a form of harrasment and bullying.

But even without that mindset it personally makes me uncomfortable and I'm kinda creeped out about the idea someone would do that at all. Because in theory, if a user can confirm that an off site account is your own, even if it's not linked or connected in anyways to CS, it can be reported upon as if it was, and the idea anyone would dig into that or go that far and CS is basically rewarding that behavior by basically giving into what the bully wants.

Not to mention their argument for this is 'its easier" than finding... literally any other solution. It's a rule that potentially clashes with Toyhouse censorship and labeling rules, and I'm trying to bring up a potential VERY valid loop hole, and their just insisting that loop hole doesn't exist giving me the impression they didn't think out the rule at all, or do secretly acknowledge the loop hole, but are trying to fix the solution with the minium about if effort needed, as if their still not going have to keep an eye out for anything resembling a DNI even if not at first glance.

Black lists are a form of DNI list. You are asking a using to not interact with your digital business.

TW are a form of DNI list, you asking users to be cautious if not to just avoid your content because it has potential even if still site friendly triggers. You can also word a TW to comes across as very DNI like.

They act like its black and white, but when the rule finally comes to place (which it is) their gonna find it isn't, it's most certainly not their gonna find people who are gonna make them have to tweak the rule.

[Erwin Smith]

I just kind of wish you ( staff ) would allow your members to participate in discussion before giving out rulings like this. We give you money & have for years, and then you turn around and hurt large portions of your site & then silence us for trying to, like, talk about it. It's extremely frustrating. I've played many pet sites for many years & none of them punish players for having a voice more than chickensmoothie does.

I asked this on page 9 or so. I agree with this; I think considering things like this the users should be asked to make a discussion about the topic before it was made a rule.