97% Hair & 27% Lies

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

For context: I do not regularly participate in the Murderbot fandom on Tumblr, but I have been a regular on The Murderbot Diaries 2.0 discord server under my chosen name, Prism, since December 2020. You may also be familiar with my fanfiction under the pen name "mensah" (formerly "lick") on AO3. I joined NT shortly after it was founded in 2022, but never posted more than a handful of messages there. I was peripherally aware of Gamebird because of her presence in 2.0, and we had mutual friends. However, we had no relationship prior to this incident.

Although I was not an active member on NT, I would occasionally search my name and the names of some of my fics there, as I do on other servers including 2.0. I would do this because I would sometimes find conversations where people had discussed my fics, and I always liked reading those conversations. While doing this in late December 2024, I found a message Gamebird had sent in NT which included a word document in which she had collected various timelines of the series.

When I saw this, I remembered that a few days previously, I had seen Gamebird promoting a reference she published on AO3 attempting to construct a timeline of The Murderbot Diaries books. When I looked at it, I discovered that the A/N credited me as Prism, among a handful of other individuals. I was initially miffed because while Prism is my chosen name, it cannot be used to locate me on AO3 or Tumblr, so it was not an appropriate way to credit whatever contribution I had made to the work.

Upon closer investigation, however, I discovered that the section of the timeline covering books 1-4 was largely directly copy-pasted from a timeline published here on tumblr by another fan, and a timeline that I had posted on 2.0 in 2023 (1, 2). The extent of the copy-pasting can be seen in these images:

I confronted Gamebird in the comments at the time, and she expressed that she was glad that she had "found me". In light of the message that I had originally seen on NT, I realized that she had essentially been copy-pasting various fandom resources into a private document on her computer with only minimal notes about the sources. It appeared that when she decided to collate the sources into a single timeline on AO3 she made no effort to trace the original source or contact the creators before publishing on AO3.

I ended up demanding co-author status on the work, since I had literally written a part of it. I did not receive an apology from her for her behavior until over a month later, when I disclosed to the 2.0 server mod who had mediated the conflict that she had not apologized to me.

Ever since this happened, whenever she promoted or talked about this timeline, she talks about the timeline as if it was a collaborative effort rather than plagiarized work she was forced to give co-credit for. When I called her out for doing this in the past on tumblr, she asked me to keep things private.

Towards the end of 2025, Gamebird started being kind of weird about the fact that I have different usernames while talking about me on NT, including using me as an example of an individual on 2.0 who "change[s] their name[] often" (1, 2). This pissed me off because I interpreted it as an attempt to justify her failure to appropriately credit me. It was also not true: I have not changed my tumblr URL since 2018. I have consistently used the display name Prism or Pris (a nickname) on 2.0. I changed my AO3 username exactly once since joining the fandom, in May 2025. Also, even outside of our personal history, I thought it was just an inappropriate way for her to talk about another member of the fandom.

When I opened a ticket to try to talk to the other NT moderators about my concerns regarding her ongoing behavior around this conflict, I was completely dismissed. I was told that in the future I should "self-regulate" and settle personal grievances outside of the server, which is very funny in light of NT's recent policy change, in which they have started disciplining fans for behavior in interpersonal disputes occurring outside of the server.

My entire dispute with Gamebird could have been avoided if she had simply respected other members of the fandom enough to reach out to me privately about my timeline before publishing it on AO3. If she had, I probably would've told her that it was okay, or possibly asked to lightly edit the writing because what I had posted on 2.0 was a rough personal reference, and I probably would not have requested co-author status. Instead, she barreled forward without even trying to figure out who I was, tried to cover it up, and continuously promoted the timeline despite me being very clear that I wanted to forget its existence.