[ SECRET POST #5497 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5497 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 33 secrets from Secret Submission Post #787.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

04. https://i.imgur.com/EZ2ORHv.png

Transcript by OP

[fscom]

I'm part of a hobby group. Which is great.
It bills itself as open and inclusive, and is. Which is great.
It's attracted a whole lot of non-neurotypical people who are having fun in it. Which is great.

It's also on the brink of collapsing because all said non-neurotypical people's dysfunctions do not play well with each other. Don't get me wrong: the people are great. But their collective disorders are hitting a critical mass and are starting to be unable to function as a team with each other. There is, in practical truth, a limit to how many people with BPD, PTSD, ASD, anxiety, depression, and so on that you can put into a group without everyone melting each other down into a mess.

Pointing this out would have people call me an ableist, however. And what solution could there be, to close the doors to people with disorders? I wouldn't and couldn't suggest that.

Maybe it's time to quietly find a new group. I know I wouldn't be the only one leaving.

Re: Transcript by OP

[(Anonymous)]

Batten down the hatches, OP. Incoming.

Re: Transcript by OP

[(Anonymous)]

It kind of sounds like the solution is just... having rules and standards of behaviour and moderators able to enforce them? You can't and don't want to outlaw "being" a thing, but you can absolutely outlaw "doing" a thing if the thing hurts other people. Yes, a lot of time time peoples' bad behaviour (in the world, not just in this hobby group) can be attributed to a diagnosis, dysfunction or trauma that is not their "fault." That doesn't mean being a dick is allowed. And allowing behaviour that would be unacceptable from presumed-neurotypical people because someone has disclosed that they have a particular diagnosis is basically like saying that people with that diagnosis are just assholes and can't help their behaviour. Which is neither true nor fair.

I get that it's hard to be like "well, there were no rules before, but now there are rules and you'll be booted if you break them" all of a sudden, especially when things have been getting out of control for a while with no consequences for anyone. But... maybe something to look for wherever you end up next.

Re: Transcript by OP

[(Anonymous)]

On the one hand I agree, but I also think that online moderation is really, really hard even under the absolute best circumstances. And implementing rules where (a) there haven't been rules before (b) there's a lot of existing conflict and (c) there's no broad-based consensus for those rules - that's definitely not the best possible circumstances.

Re: Transcript by OP

[(Anonymous)]

Agree. The worst thing that happened to fan groups was reimagining mods as content providers/managers and not rule/behavior enforcers. A bad mod can kill a community, but a good mod (better yet, a good mod team!) can also keep a community healthy.

Mods are there to step in when things are too heated, to remind everyone of the rules and send them to their corners to calm down, and to ban when someone is operating in bad faith. People are people, and there's going to be disagreements. The important thing is everyone knows where the lines are, how to end things before lines get crossed, and how to make nice afterwards.

The other worst thing was a trend where claiming to be part of a certain group means that it's up to everyone else around you to make sure you never feel uncomfy at all costs and that they *have* to indulge you when you want to do things/approach things in a certain way, or give you a free pass for bad behavior. While I'm loathe to reference Big Bang Theory--all the show's jokes towards Sheldon's clear autism was not okay. It made his autism a joke, and they ridiculed him for it. In the same token, his repeated sexism, racism, and classism (which often caused real pain to others, particularly the women around him) was also routinely laughed off as "he's just like that!" and that's also not okay. Both things could be true at the same time, and accommodating him in one way would not be the same as giving him a free pass in others.

[(Anonymous)]

I read this in a different way that wasn't about 'being an asshole' at all.

Like for example... someone with ADHD completely forgets about an event. Then people with anxiety who were waiting for them for that event, suffering from anxiety wondering if it's them that caused this and if the person with ADHD just hates them or something. Then that in turn triggering someone else with a trauma and causing them to slide into a depressive swing. The person with ASD is seeing all this happen and trying to calm things down but can't seem to find the right words and everybody else is now already in a mood to read more into what they're saying than they meant, making it even harder. Avoidant people are watching people fight and being quietly upset in a corner... etc.

It doesn't even have to be 'people behaving badly' for one snowball to potentially roll into a snowstorm of issues. None of the things listed above are things that can or should be 'stopped' by mods because none of it was meant to hurt people or anything wrong. You can't solve that kind of thing by wading in and ordering everyone to calm down and banning people who are upset.

When OP stated 'their disorders don't play well with each other' I assumed the above was what they meant, especially since the people themselves are all presumably friends

Re: Transcript by OP

[(Anonymous)]

This is why I say gatekeeping is good, actually. The more "inclusive" a group gets, the more likely it is to collapse in drama. Then those still interested in it will congregate in little ring fenced private communities, which will gradually open up as memories fade, until someone agitates for it to be completely open, and the whole cycle of drama will repeat until it reaches the "Chris Chan" threshold again.

Re: Transcript by OP

[feotakahari]

I don’t trust the phrase “gatekeeping,” because it tends to be used less “we won’t allow you onto our forum” and more “if you create or join any forum with the same interests as us, we’ll harass you until you delete your account.”

Re: Transcript by OP

[(Anonymous)]

As someone who is multiply diagnosed with Brain Problems, I've long accepted that people are not responsible for my own mental health The only person responsible for my triggers, reactions, intrusive thoughts, etc. is me.

Re: Transcript by OP

[(Anonymous)]

Having watched this go down in real life geek friendship groups several times, you're not wrong nonny. But the people involved tend to learn from it, at least in my experience. Ten years on from those implosion, everyone's much more well rounded and chilled out.

[(Anonymous)]

Not saying neurotypical people don't have their own share of drama and bullshit, they 100% do, but I've been in situations where the main mod of a community would disappear for weeks at a time due to depression. The sub-mod who was supposed to organize events and collabs had/has severe ADHD and could not help dropping everything and anything. The latter was and still is a friend and an extremely wonderful and kind person but it was not a good time at all for anyone, that mod included. She said it was such a huge relief to step down and be replaced. And that's just two! I can't imagine a the chaos of a situation in which a large part of some kind of organized team project has similar issues. IDK what the solution is, though.

[feotakahari]

I can’t say I’ve ever seen this. My experience is that the people who cause forum-ending drama cause it regardless of whether the people they’re fighting with are neurodivergent.

[(Anonymous)]

Most people who claim to be non neurotypical are just neurotypical assholes looking for a way to silence criticism of them being a jerk. Real non neurotypical people keep quiet and try to improve their interactions.

[(Anonymous)]

Dangerous assumptions there.

[(Anonymous)]

Really? Hmm.

[feotakahari]

They’re neurodivergent, just not always in the way they claim to be. Like that one guy who claims he has DID and schizophrenia, but seems to think they’re the same thing. He’s definitely got something going on there.

[(Anonymous)]

while I don't doubt this happens, I doubt it happens as much as you'd think. my money is on the difference between having a disorder vs making said disorder their entire identity. the former understand that they have to adjust a bit to be able to function, the latter are so consumed with being all the things OP listed that they make it their identity and thus use it as their excuse to be an asshole because no one will call out the neurodivergent for being an asshole for fear of looking like they're prejudiced.

[(Anonymous)]

Nah, I'm not embarrassed about my anxiety. Better to own up to it myself than make it a big secret so people will do the "Oh poor you, you must be so ashamed" act if they find out about it.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, start looking for a new group. One with an enforced code of behavior. Or one that's a little bigger so people aren't so worried about everyone else. Or, honestly, one that's 18+ because then you don't have to worry that another member is 12 and you can treat people like adults and hope that the group mods will enforce that expectation of adult behavior.

You can't rule on people, but you can absolutely rule on behavior.

Or stay for as long as it's fun and take pride in your tumblresq perseverance. I'm not your boss.

[meadowphoenix]

Well, does this have to be a whole team sport? Is there a way to split the team into multiple teams and provide standards for how each team operates that mostly work with various functionings (a team for people who can't commit to regular participation!, a team for people who hyperfocus for ages which moves quick!, a team for people with trouble with deadlines!, etc), and then have people self-select? And then have quiet conversations regarding fit in a team, and make it so exiting teams and adding new members is as painless of possible? There may not be, but I would consider specific accommodations that people can select for themselves if possible.

I think there's also the problem in inclusive groups where everyone confuses "inclusive" with "no one is ever discomfited" and....that's not going to happen.

[(Anonymous)]

It doesn't have to be about non-neurotypical people at all. This is Geek Social Fallacies 101. Unless you have a clear code of conduct which is enforced neutrally, people will be like this to each other. There are options, but someone has to be willing and able to take them.

[(Anonymous)]

https://fandomsecrets.dreamwidth.org/2549447.html?thread=1079351751#cmt1079351751

Untrue. Things like the example in this comment can and do happen without anyone violating "codes of conduct" or being rude in any way.

Good people can try their best and still be unsuitable and unhealthy for each other due to having disorders that build on each other in terrible ways without it being anyone's fault. That's just a reality, and you can't expect fandom organizers or community mods to be mental health professionals about this kind of thing.

[(Anonymous)]

How big is this group, and how well do the members know each other? Where is it coalesced; is it local/irl, a Facebook group, a discord, an Instagram hashtag? Like, there is a whole range of group dynamics that could be encompassed here.

[(Anonymous)]

I feel you. I belong to a number of hobby/skill groups within a certain fandom (think Twilight fans who also like to knit, or Marvel fans who like to garden). The larger groups are great and have a ton of activity. But in some of the smaller/more niche groups, it seems like they're now turning into the most active members' personal support groups. Or losing focus on what they are supposed to be about in favor of a general theme of self-care.

To give some fake examples, posts like, "I was too overwhelmed to garden today, so here's a cute picture of me and my cat". Or "It's okay if you don't knit every single day. Take time to rest." Which is fine, and I guess they are also social groups. But I didn't join hobby groups to talk about not doing the hobby, or to help people feel better about not doing the hobby.

Like you, OP, I feel kind of mean in thinking this way and would never voice these things. But it does bother me and make the groups less fun.