The Arחivist (Posts tagged Ask)

1.5M ratings
277k ratings

See, that’s what the app is perfect for.

Sounds perfect Wahhhh, I don’t wanna

Anonymous asked:

https://www.tumblr.com/radiomogai/817538743998267392/another-poll-to-run-interests-thoughts-checking-on

the wording doesn't matter, if the coiner asks you not to tag something as such then you don't.

I am worried in then that case that a total lack of warning for it would be risking a triggering people is that to concern here, though appreciate also input and to take into consideration also.

Ask Anon

Anonymous asked:

responding to the hypothetical - for the first one, i would keep both tags. regardless of anyone's personal beliefs, it's a reasonable assumption and widely known that certain imagery like crosses, rosaries, etc are christian. even if their specific usage of that imagery or those items is unrelated to christianity, it's reasonable to expect you to tag it.

for the second term as well, it's also reasonable to assume that you would tag places of worship as such, even if the term isn't directly related to worshipping.

i think that some people might not realize that archival tagging is typically broad-strokes on purpose and is often applied to things that are only tangentially or barely related to the tag, just for organizational purposes and because you can only keep track of so many tags.

imo the only time a tag should be changed is if the term is genuinely misunderstood. for example, at one point an archival blog tagged one of my terms as aspec when it was actually a neuro orientation that wasn't related to the aspec or allospec umbrellas (i know this is unrelated, just my best example of what i mean).

I have too concern of what is done in a matter of, insistence? Then that is the answer for deletion? Suppose that yes I suppose so. Appreciate response also.

Ask Anon

Anonymous asked:

Hi, I wanted to recommend something regarding your tagging system, since you want certain terms to be easier to find (and feel free to correct me on this if I'm some level wrong or you already do this).

But if you remove say a religion or mythology tag, maybe you can tag with what the item or symbol was in question? Not like a "Theme: [Thing]" but like if someone had a rosary gender that they perceive as non-religious, you can tag it with "Rosary"? (and applicable TW tags if needed.)

Or maybe an "Associated with Religion" tag? (if that's not too long.) I feel like "Associated with Religion" would probably land better than just "Religion", if that makes sense? Or at least to me as a non-religious angel because I can understand how it's ASSOCIATED with religion, but isn't necessarily religious? Or maybe "Stems from Religion"? Like how some folklore does?

I think the mythology tag is a good middle ground, though! It feels a bit more specific while also incorporating that it can be religious, but not necessarily! And maybe a generalized folklore tag for things like vampires and werewolves? Since so much folklore stems from religion too?

Either way, I hope the new tagging system goes well for you! (And I hope I was more helpful than stressful!)

I think perhaps to work, yes, though confess that it is very that I feel at still very firmly against, but I will sit with it and so for my own stubbornness fade, to allow, if that is supported an idea others a good path walking for the situation of doing it.

Associated with religion tag also, I like, a lot, and I think I will poll on that one specifically also. Add stems from religion as to options poll so for see if there there is a words-preference, though my own thoughts in regards is that not all which is associated with religion stems from it, but would that be semantics or? I do not know, so hence poll.

Am very likely yes an implement a mythology tag, poll supports heavily. Would yes a require more that sense of… There would need further discussion for, where are the soft parameters here? The expectations of what gets what tag? Folklore tag been considering also, yes. I will need, when my frazzle fades more, to read on studies to define difference folklore mythology, so as for a guiding candle to the where is a beginning decisions.

Thank you, helpful.

Ask Anon long post

singer-savior asked:

hi, its @faggot-tyler-joseph, specifically nathaniel (he/him) and aurora (he/him). we are going to do this in a bulleted list becuse we think better that way/have a better time streamlining our thoughts. we are responding to this comment.

  • first and foremost, i hope youre okay and end up feeling better as you mentioned you were unstable. im sure this is stressful and im very sorry this has gotten so out of hand. many people appreciate your& work, so thank you and feel better :)
  • addressing your first point, i think that there is absolutely no need for that since this is YOUR& blog. this blog is a PRIVELEDGE, not a right, and people seem to forget that. personally, even when blogs are public resources, the way they are run is still up to the owner completely. this isnt a for-profit resource, this isnt an obligation. as we always say do whatever you want forever
  • furthermore, a while back when we were starting out with our archives, we came to you& and asked your opinion on weather or not we should archive a term we were very uncomfortable with. you& (i dont remember if it was someone specific) said no, and that an archive doesnt have an obligation to do anything it doesnt want to as an entity. i hope this doesnt come off condescending, but i think you should try and hold yourself to that same standard.
  • on the tw tag list: if thats an undertaking you want to pursue, then more power to you. my personal opinion is general tags are best, and that everyone is responsible for themself.
  • continuing with the "everyone is responsible for themselves" idea, i think that this should really be an idea that is reexamined in the mogai community, and the internet in general. this is YOUR (general you) SPACE, yes, but you have got to understand that when interacting in public spaces, people are going to interact back, and it WILL be in ways you dont like. i am a mental and physical health advocate, always, but i do think that a huge part of that is advocating for yourself, and if you are someone who is easily triggered by common topics, some spaces may not always be for you. no space fits everyone.
  • on point two, again, i implore you to encourage yourselves and not think to harshly on the decision to take down the archival post. imo, that was very mature and the best way to handle it. i reiterate for everyone reading: this blog is a privilege, not a right. radio is NOT obligated to archive your posts.
  • point three: unfortunately you cant stop people from being strange on the internet, and i dont understand why people are blaming you& for the decision of others to harass someone. that is NOT your fault and you actively were very vocally against it. i am sorry people are so parasocial towards you.
  • ON THE ANGEL TOPIC: hi, its nathaniel completely for this one. for some context (no i do not feel obligated to share this as this is safe information for me to share), i am a religion-related anp and i handle all general talk and discourse about it. we come from a deeply christianity-alligned family, so everything i say is from that standpoint. my very hard stance is that angels cannot be separted from religion and do not exist outside of religion as a concept. avians? yes. figures with many eyes or unknowable forms? pretty sure! other angel-like features, yep totally! but angels as a concept are something inextricably tied to religion and trying to say that they arent is disrespectful in every direction, both to people practicing the faith, and people who are triggered by it. if you dont want your angel terms tagged with religion, then radio is not obligated to archive your term.

TLDR: i personally think all of this is, to put it lightly, stupid on the community's part and i apologize on the behalf of myself and anyone who agrees with me.

I don’t want my& own emotional state to be much a factor in this, we have frequent mood swings even medicated and that is normal for us, thank you for the concern but we are alright.

Still, is there not some social responsibility? I don’t, think that’s quite the right pairing of words I’m going for, but… With the priority we& try to give to the community, the collective over the individual, I would find it incongruent with these values to decide to simply comandeer and to dismiss something that is harming people. And the OCPD it’s surely important that we learn how to cope with situations we cannot control.

Yes but. I mean, I know I am being frankly ridiculous in protesting that. I know our& responsibilities and obligations are self-imposed, but they are what keeps us doing anything at all. I don’t know.

We’ve thought about it many times. And I mean, there was that thing with the spiritine, so and then we can it’s more accessible, to know, outright. We forget not everyone has the same thoughts and processes of such that we do, does not know our tagging system inside and out as we do. It’s safer to make those I think the lists.

I think I agree but I am worried also of that it could be taken a personal attack, it is not an easy thing to hear for anyone regardless of extent of truth or lack thereof, I do not want for to… I’m not my words right, I’m sorry, I cannot find to how to express that which is that’s inner.

I do not think it was mature the response of just “K.” and while I think it was right that we took it down I think the things that we said were harmful, and I am immensely sorry.

Though that still they would not harass if we were not giving fuel wouldn’t? I never know what to do here. I don’t know if parasocial is the right word, I’ve seen so many debates arguments on it and I am not knowing myself on how really that it’s held in to mean.

I still do not think that the “are angels inherently religious” thing should be the focus of the discussion going forward, to more instead focus on, how is it these situations are handled, what is appropriate, what is not? When there are such disagreements. What happens when someone disagrees with us tagging something alterhunanity and we are truly bewildered at to how it could be anything but? In my own introspection self-working beyond the gaze of wider people that I to figure out how is it we would handle for someone asking us to remove the alternate spelling tags we add at times for finding? Or if someone just… wants us to not archive things coined their coining at all with or without reasons given? Soul-searching and to try to find I think, is the more priority, importance in it.

Ask singer-savior faggot-tyler-joseph f slur cw long post very long post Recordkeeping Light of PV though words at now frazzling and hotwire sparking to it.

Anonymous asked:

Hello for your hypotheticals for the first one I think using the Christian imagery tag for it would be okay but I also think the original religious and Christian culture tag is perfectly acceptable The second one i think keeping the religion tag is perfectly reasonable as the places described have a heavy connection to religion and for the safety/access needs of people who may need those things filtered would be good

- @charichoardfag4

Posting without comment.

Ask Anon f slur cw charichoardfag4

Anonymous asked:

Responding to this (https://www.tumblr.com/radiomogai/817531237494407168), and for context we need religious tags to stay safe, despite having religious/spiritual members, including christian members


I think that it comes to a case of intention vs impact. While the intention is meant to be non-religious, there is still a religious impact that can't be separated due to a greater societal influence.

I feel like people would get mad if you start replacing one christian or religious tag for another. In your first example (and you do mention it) the coiner can probably argue it's not christian imagery cause their community is using it and they aren't christian. Despite the majority of peoples opinions when they hear "rosary" is "christian artifact" (or, however to word it over artifact).

I think there needs to be a better understanding that concepts and objects cannot exist in a vaccumn.


If someone were to coin a gender related to abandoned chruches, we would need that tagged as religious, because it still has religious (and christian in this case, which would also need to be tagged for us) connections. Even if that's not "active".

Not tagging it as such would actively harm us. And I'm sure we're far from alone in this.


Again I think it always comes down to impact over intent. If the impact is putting (an honestly considerable amount of) people at risk of harm, that's more important than coiner intent.

I suppose then I wonder, if then in the rosary example, would the best example be to simply delete it from our& archive? I have had others though say that deleting it makes it *less* accessible, in that, it is at greater risk of being lost, people cannot find it, and such. What if we start a secondary project which tags by term name, *maybe* coiner, and nothing else? So as to prevent things from being lost outright and having a space for those who, for whatever reasons at all, we are unable to reach an agreement with about proper tagging. A sort of, by request we will put things on there instead, instead of on radiomogai. Harder to find things, yes, but more accessible than simply passing the post over.

You are not alone in it, no. There is an ask we did not answer as I worried it could be taken in some way an indictment of those who refuse religion tags presence in tags on, of saying they panic with too non-religious angels (we try to avoid answering asks which are support without addition and/or criticism also so as to avoid deterring people from sharing concerns out of fear of being the odd one out, or being dogpiled in some form).

Again I grapple here with… say we do not come to an agreement with a coiner. What then?

Ask Anon long post We should surely have a tag for all this whole discussion and I've tried to think of one but have not thought of how to title.

Anonymous asked:

If asked directly I think you should remove the theme:religion and replace it with christian imagery or even an entirely new tag of religious imagery for the more general religious posts or even ask the coiner themself what they think would be a more appropriate tag if you're not sure.

Doll's stance was to remove the tag and replace it with things such as " "TW: Angels", "Theme: Angels", "TW: Angel Numbers", "Theme: Angel Numbers"

While these specific tags may not have worked for you in particular, I think it's the whole 'working with' instead of 'working against'. How often do people reach out to you about wanting a tag changed or removed? If it were every day all the time then sure it wouldn't be viable to constantly speak with the coiner about a better-suited tag, but I've followed you for a very long time and I haven't seen this happen very often.

I understand your stance of a coiner not inherently owning a term, but again, if it's a boundary then its a boundary and you can politely tell them this is how your blog functions and delete the terms and direct them towards a better-suited archive that can respect their boundaries without putting you in a position where you have to mess up your tagging system. That way, both of you win.

Basically, just..Work with the coiner. Discuss maturely and politely and if you can't come to an agreement that satisfies you both then there's other archive blogs. There ISN'T a set answer for what you should do, because its a case by case basis. Your npd and ocpd probably make it hard for this to fully be grasped, but there's simply some things you can't just. have an answer for something that varies with each coiner and assume it's going to work in every situation. People are not a predictable variable and just, can't be put in those boxes, you know?

~Same avpd anon that sent the really long ask before

Nodding, nodding. I think this is helpful. I do not have as long an answer to this as I did the last ask, but I appreciate it all the same. I want to have plans for what to do in advance, but I do not want to say that they must always fit those boxes, it is more that… if my instinctual way of handling something is one which is largely disregarded as being the wrong way of handling it, I would rather hear that in the context of a hypothetical than in a real scenario where there is someone to harm. People do not reach out to us asking for it changed removed often, no. I think your idea is good. Thank you.

Ask Anon long post

Anonymous asked:

Hi, we're scared of speaking up due to avpd and you have anon asks off on your main so I hope you don't mind us responding to this post
https://www.tumblr.com/transoccuine/817516595091013632/would-anyone-happen-to-know-of-any-place-where-i?source=share .

As a fellow non-religious angel with religious trauma that was groomed into being an angel this does. sort of hit home for me?

I am usually on your side to preface, and I don't think you're wrong for your original stance; I would also tag it religion unless the coiner asked otherwise. Your first response wasn't very passive aggressive, just explaining the thought process, but by Doll's second ask Shimon got a bit more defensive, especially with
"and quite frankly if I'd been more biased with it I wouldn't have reblogged them at all because *we* have had traumatic religious experiences around angel numbers."

All things considering, it does come across like Doll described; that "Your triggers are the correct ones, not my own."

That's how the tone comes across, not what you said, but how it was said. I know that wasn't the intent, the tone just implied that, you know?

Especially when your 3rd response was just "K."

Doll's stance the entire time is "I chose to reclaim being an angel and make it my own, despite the fact it was initially forced onto me. Our boundaries should be respected."

Shimon mostly doubled down and focused on your own personal belief that angels are inherently religion-based, rather than understanding Doll is a person with boundaries and that even if you don't understand a trigger or boundary you should respect it, yeah?

Like. Very similar to your view that 'guys' is a gendered term despite the western popularization of using 'guys' in reference to multiple people. it's a boundary that a lot of people just..Don't get, because it's a fact of nature to them, just like how angels = religion is a fact of nature to you, you know? But it's still a boundary worth respecting. If someone argued with you about the historical nature of the term 'guys' instead of just saying 'oh okay! we won't use that for you!' or like. a similar more niche boundary im sure you have. im sure you'd get pretty upset.

I know your blog means a lot to you, and you guys have ocpd so messing with the tagging system may mess you up a bit. I understand. But if the coiner of a term has a boundary then you either follow it or don't reblog / delete the reblogs if your blog can't safely house those terms in a way that leaves both you and the coiner comfortable.

This could've been handled a *lot* better. Is what I mean. Doll and the others weren't in the wrong here, and I know you probably had your reasons for reacting the way you did, but. Yeah.

As for if you should try to contact Doll, "Please. Do not contact me further unless you intend to respect my boundaries."

Srry i keep switching between you/shimon my brain can't decide which one to use ack.

No worries, and thank you for reminding us also to turn on anons on our main again, we forgot. I really appreciate you sending this in.

After having reviewed those first three asks, I definitely believe that Shimon was really rude in how she responded to things. I think she was in the wrong for how she responded with the second and third especially (and to say explicitly, though I’m speaking of Shimon in third person and am not Shimon myself, we do consider the actions of one alter to reflect on us& overall and that we are responsible for the actions of what other alters do). I know Shimon was complaining about feeling like what she said was being taken more personally than it was intended to be, but I think she did not realize that she was doing the same thing. I think she displayed entitlement, that she was passive-aggressive, and that she could (and should) have said what she wanted to say in a *much* kinder and more understanding manner. I understand what she was trying to do in mentioning our& own issues around angel numbers, in that she was trying to express how someone may not need angels blocked but may need religion blocked, but not only did she express this poorly but I think it was inappropriate of her to bring up at all. We are sorry for how we behaved in those ask responses, sorry to both lobotomized–doll and to others reading who were harmed by our actions.

Part of what I have been grappling with today as I try to review and reflect on what happened is… who gets priority over how a post is tagged? We& have a firm belief that terms are not the property of those who coined them and that those who coined them do not have authority over them. I have also realized today that our& own sense of superiority and the value we ascribe to archival work is… well, we do not have it under control as we like to think we do. You are correct in that our OCPD is a factor here, and I’ll note our NPD also (and I note these not to say they make our actions acceptable, but because recognizing the disordered nature of our behaviour has been helping me to dig through our comforting anger and better understand the underlying motivations of what we did, so I can thus address and prevent them at the source). We are afraid that allowing the discomfort of individuals to dictate how we may tag a specific post means we will lose control, that it will make the archive more difficult to navigate. We worry that conceding to the concept of non-religious angels discredits our concerns and conversations around cultural Christianity. I’m having trouble grappling with it. I’m concerned about my own falling to the slippery slope fallacy. I… had a neat conclusion to this whole paragraph and then I lost it, such is life. I guess it’s… I’m grappling with, which is correct to prioritise, individual comfort or accuracy in our work? Does the discomfort of an individual coiner warrant making something more difficult to find and/or avoid for others in the community? If we do choose to prioritise individual comfort, where do we draw the line? Because we know we can’t please everyone, and not everyone approaches us in good faith.

I think we focused too much on “are angels inherently tied to religion” and not enough on “how do we& respond to people who request things of us that we disagree with or which anger us”. I think we handled this poorly. I think we fucked up. I think we hurt people. And I am *immensely* appreciative of you sending this ask. I have much to continue thinking about.

Ask Anon long post very long post Recordkeeping: Light of PV. TL;DR: We fucked up and we hurt people and we are sorry. I explained thought processes as well because we& find it wonderfully helpful to hear the thought processes of people who hurt us.