#moderation

I can't do anything about the impending energy catastrophe, apart from being part of a network of mutual aid and political organizing, so it makes sense not to fixate on it. But there are things that upset me – problems my friends and loved ones are having – where there's such a thing as too much compartmentalization. It's one thing to lose myself in work until the heat of emotion cools so I can think rationally about an issue that's got me seeing red, and another to use work as a way to neglect a loved one who needs attention in the hope that the moment will pass before I have to do any difficult emotional labor.

Compartmentalization, in other words, but not too much compartmentalization. During the lockdown years, I transformed myself into a machine for turning Talking Heads bootlegs into science fiction novels and technology criticism, and that was better than spending that time boozing or scrolling or fighting – but in retrospect, there's probably more I could have done during those hard months to support the people around me. In my defense – in all our defenses – that was an unprecedented situation and we all did the best we could.

Creative work takes me away from my pain – both physical and emotional – because creative work takes me into a "flow" state. This useful word comes to us from Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, who coined the term in the 1960s while he was investigating a seeming paradox: how was it that we modern people had mastered so many of the useful arts and sciences, and yet we seemed no happier than the ancients? How could we make so much progress in so many fields, and so little progress in being happy?

In his fieldwork, Csikszentmihalyi found that people reported the most happiness while they were doing difficult things well – when your "body or mind is stretched to its limits in a voluntary effort to accomplish something difficult and worthwhile." He called this state "flow."

As Derek Thompson says, the word "flow" implies an effortlessness, but really, it's the effort – just enough, not too much – that defines flow-states. We aren't happiest in a frictionless world, but rather, in a world of "achievable challenges":

https://www.derekthompson.org/p/how-zombie-flow-took-over-culture

Thompson relates this to "the law of familiar surprises," an idea he developed in his book Hit Makers, which investigated why some media, ideas and people found fame, while others languished. A "familiar surprise" is something that's "familiar but not too familiar."

He thinks that the Hollywood mania for sequels and reboots is the result of media execs chasing "familiar surprises." I think there's something to this, but we shouldn't discount the effect that monopolization has on the media: as companies get larger and larger, they end up committing to larger and larger projects, and you just don't take the kinds of risks with a $500m movie that you can take with a $5m one. If you're spending $500m, you want to hedge that investment with as many safe bets as you can find – big name stars, successful IP, and familiar narrative structures. If the movie still tanks, at least no one will get fired for taking a big, bold risk.

Today, we're living in a world of extremely familiar, and progressively less surprising culture. AI slop is the epitome of familiarity, since by definition, AI tries to make a future that is similar to the past, because all it can do is extrapolate from previous data. That's a fundamentally conservative, uncreative way to think about the world:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/05/14/everybody-poops/#homeostatic-mechanism

The tracks the Spotify algorithm picks out of the catalog are going to be as similar to the ones you've played in the past as it can make them – and the royalty-free slop tracks that Spotify generates with AI or commissions from no-name artists will be even more insipidly unsurprising:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/09/12/streaming-doesnt-pay/#stunt-publishing

Thompson cites Shishi Wu's dissertation on "Passive Flow," a term she coined to describe how teens fall into social media scroll-trances:

https://scholarworks.umb.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2104&context=doctoral_dissertations

Wu says it's a mistake to attribute the regretted hours of scrolling to addiction or a failure of self-control. Rather, the user is falling into "passive flow," a condition arising from three factors:

I. Engagement without a clear goal;

II. A loss of self-awareness – of your body and your mental state;

III. Losing track of time.

I instantly recognize II. and III. – they're the hallmarks of the flow states that abstract me away from my own pain when I'm working. The big difference here is I. – I go to work with the clearest of goals, while "passive flow" is undirected (Thompson also cites psychologist Paul Bloom, who calls the scroll-trance "shitty flow." In shitty flow, you lose track of the world and its sensations – but in a way that you later regret.)

Thompson has his own name for this phenomenon of algorithmically induced, regret-inducing flow: he calls it "zombie flow." It's flow that "recapitulates the goal of flow while evacuating the purpose."

Zombie flow is "progress without pleasure" – it's frictionless, and so it gives us nothing except that sense of the world going away, and when it stops, the world is still there. The trick is to find a way of compartmentalizing that rewards attention with some kind of productive residue that you can look back on with pride and pleasure.

I wouldn't call myself a happy person. I don't think I know any happy people right now. But I'm an extremely hopeful person, because I can see so many ways that we can make things better (an admittedly very low bar), and I have mastered the trick of harnessing my unhappiness to the pursuit of things that might make the world better, and I'm gradually learning when to stop escaping the pain and confront it.

Image: marsupium photography (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2.8_hours_later_-_Zombie_Apocalypse_(14315382305).jpg

1. Toxic Positivity

Toxic Positivity is defined as the pressure to maintain a positive atmosphere by suppressing or dismissing negative emotions, concerns, or criticism, even when those criticisms are valid or necessary. (MedicalNewsToday, 2021; Psychology Today, 2025; Verywell Mind, 2026a) While a positive outlook is considered to be good for mental health in general, it can become harmful by invalidating the individual's genuine emotions, resulting in experiencing guilt and shame, leading to avoidance of authentic emotion (Verywell Mind, 2026a)

[Toxic Positivity in Discord Communities]

Negative opinions about characters, storylines, or community issues are discouraged or shut down.

Difficult topics (e.g., racism, misogyny, harmful behaviour) are avoided to “maintain civility.”

Criticism is reframed as “drama,” “negativity,” or “hurting the feelings of people who are there for fun,” sometimes using cutesy or infantilising language (e.g., “yucking someone’s yum”).

Triggers are sometimes dismissed as mere “squicks,” minimising the seriousness of someone’s trauma response.

Supportive‑sounding or therapeutic language is used to shut down criticism instead of engaging with the concern.

[Why this matters]

This becomes harmful if the fandoms use "positivity" as a shield:

to protect specific characters, narratives, or server members above others

to avoid all forms of conflicts including those that are necessary (discussion) for growth or constructive change

to maintain a curated image of harmony

to silence marginalised voices

to avoid acknowledging harm

2. Gaslighting in Groups

Group gaslighting happens when a community dismisses or reframes someone’s concerns in a way that makes them doubt their own perception or emotional response. (Verywell Mind, 2026b; Healthline, 2024)

[Group Gaslighting in Discord Communities]

Concerns about racism, misogyny, or unsafe dynamics are reframed as “overreacting,” “misinterpreting,” or “being hostile.”

The group insists that “everyone else is fine,” implying the issue lies with the individual.

Moderators demand excessive “proof” while ignoring the context or lived experience behind the concern.

People who raise issues are subtly pressured to apologise, soften their words, or doubt their own interpretation.

[Why this matters]

Group gaslighting can make someone feel isolated, confused, or ashamed for noticing a problem. Over time, it can cause members to:

suppress their own discomfort

stay silent to avoid backlash

internalise blame

leave the community quietly

This is one of the most common early warning signs of an unhealthy server culture.

3. Tone Policing

Tone policing occurs when the focus shifts from the content of a concern to the way it is expressed. The person’s tone becomes the issue instead of the problem they are describing. (Business Insider, 2020; Verywell Mind, 2026c)

[Tone Policing in Discord Communities]

Moderators focusing on the speaker’s tone rather than the behaviour or pattern being raised.

Prioritising group comfort over the validity of the issue raised.

Expecting marginalised members to express concerns in a way that feels “palatable” to the majority.

People who express concerns are told to “assume good faith” in situations where harm or bias is being named. They are labelled as troublemakers, accused of bad faith.

[Why this matters]

Tone policing silences people by shifting responsibility onto them rather than addressing the issue. It discourages honest expression and reinforces existing power dynamics.

4. Derailment Tactics

Derailment refers to conversational strategies that shift attention away from community issues being raised. Instead of engaging with the concern, the discussion is redirected, minimised, or reframed so the original point is never addressed. (Derailing for Dummies, 2010)

[Derailment in Discord Communities]

Questioning the motives of the person raising a concern and suggesting they are acting in bad faith.

Asking for excessive proof in a way that stalls or invalidates lived experiences.

Redirecting the conversation to unrelated topics to avoid addressing the issue.

Focusing on small details instead of the broader concern.

Reframing the concern as a misunderstanding or overreaction.

[Why this matters]

Derailment prevents communities from resolving problems. It can silence people, shift responsibility onto the person harmed, and create an environment where raising concerns feels pointless.

5. Groupthink/Group Behaviour

Groupthink occurs when a community values agreement and harmony more than honest discussion or critical thinking. Members begin to follow the dominant viewpoint, and disagreement becomes uncomfortable or discouraged. (Janis, 1972; Psychology Today, 2026) According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (2019), online environments can intensify groupthink by increasing social pressure and making dissent feel risky.

[Groupthink in Discord Communities]

Moderators or long‑term members consistently reinforcing each other’s views on community behaviour and norms, creating the impression that their perspective is the only acceptable one.

Difficult topics being avoided to preserve a sense of unity or positivity.

A clear divide forming between an “in-group” and everyone else.

Members feeling pressure to agree with the dominant viewpoint, even when they have concerns.

[Why this matters]

Groupthink makes it difficult for communities to address problems. It can silence individuals, reinforce power imbalances, and normalize unhealthy behaviour. In fandom spaces, it often appears when criticism of characters, storylines, or community norms is treated as a threat to the group’s identity.

6. Lack of Transparency

Transparency is essential for trust in any Discord community. When moderation happens behind closed doors or rules are applied inconsistently, members are left confused, anxious, or unsure of what is actually happening.

[Lack of Transparency in Discord Communities]

Inconsistent penalties: similar behaviour receives different consequences, and the reasoning isn’t clear to the community.

Rules enforced unevenly: some members are corrected publicly while others are handled quietly or not at all.

No reliable place to raise concerns openly: channels meant for feedback may be locked, closely monitored, or discouraged, leaving members unsure where they can speak.

Posts or messages about concerns being removed: this makes it hard for others to know an issue was raised at all.

Moderators directing all issues to private channels (e.g., tickets, DMs), which prevents the community from seeing patterns or understanding outcomes.

Members feeling vulnerable in private channels (DMs or tickets), where moderation happens out of sight and they have no safe place to document or share their experience.

Members “going quiet” without explanation: timeouts, strikes, or bans are not communicated, so it appears as if people simply left on their own.

[Why this matters]

When moderation is hidden, members cannot understand what is happening or why. This creates an atmosphere of uncertainty and fear, and it allows harmful behaviour, including from moderators, to go unchallenged.

Conclusion

These signs don’t always mean a server is malicious, but they do mean you should pay attention to how the space makes you feel. Healthy servers make space for concerns, listen when something feels off, and adjust when needed. Unhealthy ones often repeat the same patterns, dismiss feedback, or protect the status quo instead of the people in the community. If you recognize several of these warning signs and attempts to speak up are met with defensiveness or silence, it may be a sign that the environment is not willing to change.

In those situations, the safest and most peaceful option is often to step away without fanfare. You do not need to justify your feelings or convince anyone on your way out. Your well‑being matters, and you deserve to be in spaces where your voice is respected.

Reference (for further reading)

Business Insider. (2020). Tone policing is a little-known microaggression that's common in the workplace: here's how to identify it https://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-identify-and-help-stop-tone-policing-in-workplace-2020-8

Derailing for Dummies. (2010). Derailing for dummies: A guide to derailment tactics. https://www.derailingfordummies.com/

Discord Safety Center. (n.d.). Ban evasion and advanced harassment. https://discord.com/safety/ban-evasion-and-advanced-harassment

Discord Safety Center. (n.d.). Facilitating positive environments. https://discord.com/safety/facilitating-positive-environments

Discord Safety Center. (n.d.). Transparency in moderation. https://discord.com/safety/transparency-in-moderation

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2019). Dangers of groupthink and the internet. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin. https://leb.fbi.gov/articles/featured-articles/dangers-of-groupthink-and-the-internet

Healthline. (2024). Gaslighting: Signs, Examples, and How to Protect Yourself. https://www.healthline.com/health/gaslighting 

Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink: A psychological study of foreign-policy decisions and fiascoes. Houghton Mifflin.

Medical News Today. (2021). What to know about toxic positivity? https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/toxic-positivity

Psychology Today. (2025). Toxic positivity. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/toxic-positivity 

Psychology Today. (2026). Groupthink. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/groupthink 

Verywell Mind. (2026a). Why Toxic Positivity Can Be Harmful https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-toxic-positivity-5093958  

Verywell Mind. (2026b). Is Someone Gaslighting You? Look Out For These Red Flags. https://www.verywellmind.com/is-someone-gaslighting-you-4147470