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

[Sa⸸an]

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)

Just because they assume they have a clear idea of what counts and doesn't count doesn't mean. some one will come along and prove them otherwise. I'm trying to point out a potentially abusable loophole.

[Comic Sans]

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)

Just because they assume they have a clear idea of what counts and doesn't count doesn't mean. some one will come along and prove them otherwise. I'm trying to point out a potentially abusable loophole.

Time will tell if it is effective or not. Practically every rule has a loophole so I'm relatively sure this rule may be amended to address any issues that may arise. I'm not affected by this issue very much, I typically use CS to collect pets and occasionally play forum games. So I don't face the same gravity of what this rule may change to your and others' way of navigating the internet. This will be my last response on this topic, thank you /gen

[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.

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.

For real though, I hate offsite rules because it can potentially enable bullying and harrasment. For example, I have a DNI on my Instagram, I don't have it linked, but if a user could prove it was me, than I could get punished onsite for it. It's the issue I have with offsite rules, it's putting a system that enables and rewards users who harrase and bully. If a user really did have it out for me (and I've come across users who may go this far, to say they don't exist on site is a lie) they could try to "cancel" me, and whether they realize it or not, staff would be enabling bullying and harrasment.

I've already been victimized because of this "system" they've accidently set up. I've been targeted by users who reported me for petty reasons and manage to convience staff that what happened was reportable. This is basically bullying, and staff rewarded the behavior by forcing me to censor myself at that other users leisure, but when I report other user for being innapropate and have NSFW language in their username, it gets ignored and never brought up.

Heck, I've heard other users report they've also faced this sort of thing, to the point they feel like CS is just not as safe as they claim, and it really feels that way sometime.

To me they should have actually asked about it first, and this forum being unlocked for conversation doesn't give me the impression they are considering users opinions and hot takes because based on responses they've given thusfar, their set on their mind of this rule, a rule that makes it easier for themselves when

1. They will still get reports if DNI lists, this will not change them and will have to make decesions when a suspicious TW looks like a DNI in disguise or not.

2. It's again, creating a system that can and probably will end up be abused. Similar dynamics have again been created and abused with other rules.

3. Some minors do understand what a DNI is, and use DNIs to attempt to set up a boundery themselves. Some people who are adults use it as a way to set up a boundary. When some one crosses that boundery they then know who to block right away no questions about it.

I'll even bet their not gonna change the rule and or alter the rule with any of the points brought up. It's kinda in line with how they run things anyway. I'll eat some carpet if they actually do

[gothic knight]

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.

normally i would agree, but when it comes to subject matter like this i don't think it's a good idea.

the staff have banned DNI on a basis of keeping the site safe for minors and generally family friendly. when you sign up for chicken smoothie, you agree to follow their rules, and as websites grow those rules are bound to be changed in some way shape or form to accommodate growth and the population's needs. as this is very much a kid-oriented website, the staff need to take the proper steps to ensure minors aren't at risk of seeing things that could potentially harm them.

i don't think anyone is trying to silence you or anyone else in favor of DNIs. i, at least, understand where you are coming from, but for the good of the younger population on this website, their needs should be catered to. as other people have said, some of these DNI lists contain subject matter that younger people shouldn't be looking up, and i think it's dangerous to be teaching younger people that it's safe to put so much of your personal information out there for anyone to find.

at the end of the day, chicken smoothie is a privately run website and as someone else said, they are within their rights to do what they want or need to keep things running smoothly. and it's not fair to the moderators to have to sift through mountains of reports due to DNIs when there is another simple solution readily available.

[Light Bringer]

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.

For real though, I hate offsite rules because it can potentially enable bullying and harrasment. For example, I have a DNI on my Instagram, I don't have it linked, but if a user could prove it was me, than I could get punished onsite for it. It's the issue I have with offsite rules, it's putting a system that enables and rewards users who harrase and bully. If a user really did have it out for me (and I've come across users who may go this far, to say they don't exist on site is a lie) they could try to "cancel" me, and whether they realize it or not, staff would be enabling bullying and harrasment.

Unless I misunderstood what the mods meant, you can't/won't get punished for it if you don't have it linked to your CS or don't refer to it on CS

[Sa⸸an]

Unless I misunderstood what the mods meant, you can't/won't get punished for it if you don't have it linked to your CS or don't refer to it on CS

Again, it's already happened before concerning other rules. I have heard it happened and I've had it happened to me. I've had unlinked stuff targeted before, and CS rewarded the people creepily going out if their way to find a reason to report me by doing what they wanted even though the content/account wasn't linked

[xX_Kiefernholz_Xx]

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.

Edit: Yes, people in these fandoms could still interact with you but part of the idea of a DNI is these people will see your DNI and recognize that you don't want anything to do with them. The only way a DNI really can become a bad thing for you to have is if one of these people interacts with you and rather than blocking them you argue/chase them.

[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.

[xX_Kiefernholz_Xx]

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.

[Michael's Fan.]

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.

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.