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

[Sa⸸an]

I think completely banning DNI lists as a whole isn't the way to go. I do agree people shouldn't be listing their triggers publicly, but as for listing fandoms which one doesn't want to interact with, I don't see an issue with that.

I personally have some fandoms I'd prefer people didn't talk to me about/talk to me if they are in simply due to the reputation of the fandom as a whole. There's for sure toxic fandoms out there, and I don't think it's a bad thing to not want anything to do with them and make it publicly known.

Why would you not want to interact with a fandom as a whole? That seems pretty toxic, as grouping a large chunk of people as bad, when not all of them are bad, is harmful.
There will always be weirdos in a fandom, but not wanting to interact with an ENTIRE fandom doesn't make sense.

Some people just don't have good history with a fandom and some fandoms are VERY notorious. For example, the Daganropa, I rarely find a chill fan who wouldn't literally fight me in McDonald's parking lot over a headcanon that didn't allign with theirs, or me asking not to force their headcanon onto me.

Warrior Cats while seemingly has a chill fandom, the books themselves have been underfire and and fans are rightfully pointing out the ablest, sexist, canonically question age gaps in relationships etc. stuff in the books, and some people may not want to discus those topics in general and avoid them, it's very hard to discus certain characters in warrior cats with out addressing these issues... eventually. Some may not even want to and that's fine, cause I don't want to either. It's possible to be involved in the fandom without discussing it, but the source material very much has a lot of potential triggers.

[Purgatory K9]

I completely agree on banning the “DNI” list thing all together. It’s more harmful than good to CS users; especially minors who don’t understand some of the possibly triggering adult topics that are often on DNI lists.

There’s going to be kids out there that click on the link that has a DNI list, get curious, and Google what said adult topic term is. This is a big safety thing, as stated, Chicken Smoothie is a family friendly website.

Do I also understand where some users are coming from with the whole “well, I have a DNI list because of my [insert mental health issue here]”, yes, I do. As someone who has multiple mental illnesses, I see where you’re coming from, but, you’re risking your mental health everytime you get on the internet. Not everyone is going to cater to your triggers, as harsh as that is, it’s the ugly truth. If you’re extremely triggered over something, I suggest that you may not want to be on the internet as much for your own health.

I understand that DNI lists act as a safety blanket for users on here but at the same time, this said safety blanket isn’t exactly safe for you and other users. There’s (sadly) malicious CS users on here who will use your triggers against you.

Do I ever mention my triggers? No, not really because I don’t want anyone to use it against me; I feel safer that way than I do using a DNI list. I suggest trying this and seeing how you feel about it.

Didn’t read, too long, summary:
I agree with this rule because in the end, it’s safer for Chicken Smoothie users.

[Michael's Fan.]

I think completely banning DNI lists as a whole isn't the way to go. I do agree people shouldn't be listing their triggers publicly, but as for listing fandoms which one doesn't want to interact with, I don't see an issue with that.

I personally have some fandoms I'd prefer people didn't talk to me about/talk to me if they are in simply due to the reputation of the fandom as a whole. There's for sure toxic fandoms out there, and I don't think it's a bad thing to not want anything to do with them and make it publicly known.

Why would you not want to interact with a fandom as a whole? That seems pretty toxic, as grouping a large chunk of people as bad, when not all of them are bad, is harmful.
There will always be weirdos in a fandom, but not wanting to interact with an ENTIRE fandom doesn't make sense.

Some people just don't have good history with a fandom and some fandoms are VERY notorious. For example, the Daganropa, I rarely find a chill fan who wouldn't literally fight me in McDonald's parking lot over a headcanon that didn't allign with theirs, or me asking not to force their headcanon onto me.

Warrior Cats while seemingly has a chill fandom, the books themselves have been underfire and and fans are rightfully pointing out the ablest, sexist, canonically question age gaps in relationships etc. stuff in the books, and some people may not want to discus those topics in general and avoid them, it's very hard to discus certain characters in warrior cats with out addressing these issues... eventually. Some may not even want to and that's fine, cause I don't want to either. It's possible to be involved in the fandom without discussing it, but the source material very much has a lot of potential triggers.

But most of the people on CS are children and don't understand problematic creators/etc.
They are just happy kids enjoying warriors or whatever.
It's easy to separate content from creators for people who are older and wiser, but to say something like DNI if you like warriors, would leave a young one confused, "why can't I comment on this person's oekaki bc i like the cat book??"

getting rid of dnis as a whole is the easier route in my humble opinion


and if someone liking daganrompa or however you spell it bothers you, just block them or ignore them. im sure theres some civil fans of it.

[xX_Kiefernholz_Xx]

But, you can like something and it not be your entire personality.
Like me, I like guns n' roses, and rock. But if someone genuinely dislikes that kind of conversation, we just won't talk about it.
I have friends with all different interests and we get along well.
I mean heck, yeah a lot of people in the DSMP fandom are toxic, doesn't mean every single one is, which is why I have friends who enjoy them.


This applies to religion, fandoms/interests, politics and hobbies.

And I get that but some people simply just don't want to interact with certain groups at all. It doesn't matter if it's someone's whole personality or not if it makes someone uncomfortable or they don't like it. The case with DSMP is that most of the creators aren't amazing people if you put aside the fact the fandom is largely toxic, so you really can't blame people for not wanting to interact with fans or the fandom as a whole imo.

This whole DNI list thing has been people arguing over opinions so I'll just end my bit with my whole opinion: You can't fault people for not wanting to interact with things they dislike/are uncomfortable with, but they definitely shouldn't be listing triggers publicly. Not everybody is out to harm people on the internet however so thinking DNI lists are inherently dangerous for people to have is a rather old-fashioned view. Of course there are people who seek to harm but depending on what communities you run in, it's unlikely you'll run into those people, especially if you actively try to surround yourself with close friends. Most of the people that seek to harm people anyways are the reason DNI lists exist because they're genuinely bad people who hate it when someone doesn't think what they're doing is ok.

[stormy tom]

Why would you not want to interact with a fandom as a whole? That seems pretty toxic, as grouping a large chunk of people as bad, when not all of them are bad, is harmful.
There will always be weirdos in a fandom, but not wanting to interact with an ENTIRE fandom doesn't make sense.

There's also a thing called genuinely not having an interest in or liking something! I understand it can appear harmful but I'd rather just tell somebody to back away than continually talk down about their interest to their face if I don't know they have it.

Then that would happen amidst a conversation, and there would be no need for a DNI. If this were to come up in conversation, and someone brought up that subject, you could just say you don't want to talk about it, as you would in a face-to-face convo.
And if you happened to express dislike about something, and the other user takes issue with that, then they could say that, hey, I like that thing. And you could agree not to talk about it if having a discussion about your differing opinions isn't an option. Otherwise, it could lead to some interesting conversation! A DNI shouldn't be a substitute for engaging in reasonable disagreement. (of course unreasonable disagreement is already something worth blocking someone over, possibly reporting if it's harassment)

[Sa⸸an]

But most of the people on CS are children and don't understand problematic creators/etc.
They are just happy kids enjoying warriors or whatever.
It's easy to separate content from creators for people who are older and wiser, but to say something like DNI if you like warriors, would leave a young one confused, "why can't I comment on this person's oekaki bc i like the cat book??"

getting rid of dnis as a whole is the easier route in my humble opinion

nonono, Im using that as example why someone would want to avoid a fandom period. You asked, I provided an example.

Also, that's... underestimating kids. Most of the time DNI are being used I see them used by minor heavy communities. When I see someone being canceled, it's mostly minors who do know better even if a bit extremest?? To assume minors don't know better... is kinda agest? Like in my experience the party that cares the most about this stuff and get upset their triggers aren't being respected... are "children" I don't think that's a valid point in why DNIs should be banned.

Why I do consider them to be banned at all: Most DNIs generally mention triggers/things that shouldn't be discussed on CS anyways, often being considered NSFW or are already banned topics or topics restricted to very specific forums. By talking about those triggers you are usually default breaking CS rules based on common knowledge of common place triggers. Their kinda pointless in that regards.

Like CS shouldn't be a place you'd encounter most triggers, when discussion of various forms of abuse and LGBTQA+ issues two topics that vaguely cover most triggers, and those topics are very heavily moderated and or banned outright from CS. So a DNI could just be a pointless warning anyways, because if someone does go a DNI, they arent not only going against your DNI but also CS guidelines.

Again, my concerns about the rules are mostly loop holes and potential abuse of offsite policing.

[.:Scruffy:.]

I understand and respect the use of DNI lists, but I agree with the rule because DNI lists only sometimes protect you - not everyone you interact with will be interacting with you in good faith, and if you make an enemy they have an entire list of things to upset you with. It can be quite dangerous. This trend of minors oversharing online right on their profiles or trade rules is a little unsettling.

[Purgatory K9]

I understand and respect the use of DNI lists, but I agree with the rule because DNI lists only sometimes protect you - not everyone you interact with will be interacting with you in good faith, and if you make an enemy they have an entire list of things to upset you with. It can be quite dangerous. This trend of minors oversharing online right on their profiles or trade rules is a little unsettling.

Very well said! Much shorter than what I had said lol. I 100% agree with you! Thank you for the response. :)

[Michael's Fan.]

But most of the people on CS are children and don't understand problematic creators/etc.
They are just happy kids enjoying warriors or whatever.
It's easy to separate content from creators for people who are older and wiser, but to say something like DNI if you like warriors, would leave a young one confused, "why can't I comment on this person's oekaki bc i like the cat book??"

getting rid of dnis as a whole is the easier route in my humble opinion

nonono, Im using that as example why someone would want to avoid a fandom period. You asked, I provided an example.

Also, that's... underestimating kids. Most of the time DNI are being used I see them used by minor heavy communities. When I see someone being canceled, it's mostly minors who do know better even if a bit extremest?? To assume minors don't know better... is kinda agest? Like in my experience the party that cares the most about this stuff and get upset their triggers aren't being respected... are "children" I don't think that's a valid point in why DNIs should be banned.

Why I do consider them to be banned at all: Most DNIs generally mention triggers/things that shouldn't be discussed on CS anyways, often being considered NSFW or are already banned topics or topics restricted to very specific forums. By talking about those triggers you are usually default breaking CS rules based on common knowledge of common place triggers. Their kinda pointless in that regards.

Like CS shouldn't be a place you'd encounter most triggers, when discussion of various forms of abuse and LGBTQA+ issues two topics that vaguely cover most triggers, and those topics are very heavily moderated and or banned outright from CS. So a DNI could just be a pointless warning anyways, because if someone does go a DNI, they arent not only going against your DNI but also CS guidelines.

Again, my concerns about the rules are mostly loop holes and potential abuse of offsite policing.

How can I be agest if I've literally been a minor... i understand how minors work...

[Startedraining]

Tbh great rule addition. Kinda loving the arguments I’m reading. They’re bringing up a lot of new/modern/non-forum internet rules that we’ve really strayed away from. If some admins posted this 10 years ago on a forum, people would not be making such a fuss.
This site is MODERATED ACTIVELY. Twitter and Tumblr and Facebook and Instagram ARE NOT moderated and it is under the USERS responsibility to keep themselves safe. That ISNT the case on CS, these are not bots, they’re real people who are going through reports. This isn’t modern social media. I literally cannot stress that enough.
(And I don’t think DNIs keep you safe, personally, and if I’m being honest, I don’t even read people’s DNIs on other sites, because it doesn’t matter and its imo performative at best especially for fandom drama.)
The bottom line is that CS staff is right, protecting minors on a site primarily based with minors with strict rules about personal identification onsite is justified. DNIs of any kind divulge personal information, and the exceptions people keep bringing up like “flashing images” is already against the rules and not only justifies a block, but also a report of the user.

The rules they make to protect minors is their right and a moral obligation, and someone reading a DNI before even replying indirectly to someone on a forum is neither a requirement nor a moral obligation for any involved party and doesn’t warrant a report (but a block if you can prove they somehow didn’t read your list).