Alright, so we're basically on the same page with this. I know Route's meant as a more lighthearted setting, but we have and almost always will allow those kinds of characters in the game. When it comes to characters who are just more negative than others, people can always find a reason for them to be or to not be in the game. The challenge with Route, and with just about every game, is seeing how the player chooses to take the character and have them adapt or react to the setting. Whether they are "fitting" or not, that's the player's decision upon apping. So fitting or not, triggering or not (to whomever is upset by the presence), the decision to play them in the game is up to the player who wants to bring them in. Some characters may be redeemable, some may not; some may not seem redeemable but may be in the end. So none of them are really seen as inappropriate. It would only be an issue if someone had problems with it and spoke from the get-go. But seeing as that's not the issue, I won't try to make it one.
For the post in question, we were hoping the many warnings and locks would be enough to keep it from the attention of those who don't want to play. That was our mistake, and we'll find a way to fix it. But honestly, it's okay to bend characterization and have your character just not see a post than to put yourself in a situation where you'll be upset. You don't need to read or respond to situations that will upset or trigger you. When they're marked or labeled, don't touch it. We would much rather have a player bend characterization to avoid an issue or a plot that upsets them than try to force them to be 100% in character and set off their internal triggers. And if you're protecting yourself by avoiding an issue, you're fine. Being in character is not worth putting yourself in danger. (This isn't directed just at you but at everyone who remarked and those reading as well. I just want to stress this fact.)
Don't worry too much about this issue, though. It's being worked around, and there's a high chance we'll be changing the plot and probably future rules so everyone's comfortable. The last thing we want is more people being upset over problems like that. That's why we're willing to work with everyone on this: it is fixable and it will be fixed.
no subject
For the post in question, we were hoping the many warnings and locks would be enough to keep it from the attention of those who don't want to play. That was our mistake, and we'll find a way to fix it. But honestly, it's okay to bend characterization and have your character just not see a post than to put yourself in a situation where you'll be upset. You don't need to read or respond to situations that will upset or trigger you. When they're marked or labeled, don't touch it. We would much rather have a player bend characterization to avoid an issue or a plot that upsets them than try to force them to be 100% in character and set off their internal triggers. And if you're protecting yourself by avoiding an issue, you're fine. Being in character is not worth putting yourself in danger. (This isn't directed just at you but at everyone who remarked and those reading as well. I just want to stress this fact.)
Don't worry too much about this issue, though. It's being worked around, and there's a high chance we'll be changing the plot and probably future rules so everyone's comfortable. The last thing we want is more people being upset over problems like that. That's why we're willing to work with everyone on this: it is fixable and it will be fixed.