Thanks for your points @Dimity.  There’s a lot to unpack here, so my response will also be a bit long. I will respond to each point and also include some additional questions for further discussion.

Firstly, the forums are indeed for people with lived experience of mental health issues and their carers, and this is primarily who posts. Supporters and allies are also valued members of our community, as long as their participation is supportive and respects the experiences of others. Should the guidelines reference supporters and allies specifically?

Regarding your concern about discussions on suicidal ideation, self-harm, or family violence: we aim to ensure that the forums are safe for all members. While we cannot provide crisis support, as I’ve said previously we do encourage members to share their feelings and seek peer support. Our goal is to manage the level of detail in posts to prevent potential triggers for others, not to silence any member’s experiences. How can we make this intent clearer whilst not making the guidelines overly lengthy?

Our guideline against detailed descriptions of trauma or abuse aims to protect our community from potential harm. Members are welcome to discuss their experiences and emotions but should avoid explicit details that might inadvertently distress others – this is not a new guideline, it is already in place. How can we make this intent clearer?

The "Avoid Rumination" guideline encourages recovery-oriented discussion, which can indeed include introspective reflection. This guideline is not meant to discourage sharing but to promote conversations that can help members move forward and find support. How can we make this intent clearer?

We take moderation very seriously and strive to monitor posts effectively. However, the community's help in reporting posts allows us to address issues more swiftly and efficiently. Over 10,000 posts per month are made to this community, and we have only a handful of staff.  Much of the responsibility for ensuring a safe and supportive community will always lie with the members – this is true of any forum, anywhere.  How can we clarify this point?

Regarding the mention of services or sharing information about research and inquiries, it's essential that this is done without promoting personal gain. Discussions about public services are welcome when they offer support to other members. Does this need to be specifically clarified?

The "no self-promotion" rule is specifically about preventing commercial promotion or professional solicitation. Sharing helpful resources, including community and government services, is encouraged as long as it doesn't cross into promotional territory. Does this need to be made clearer?

I was really disappointed to read that you feel the guidelines seem discouraging or disparaging of lived experiences. One of our guiding lights at SANE is that “lived experience lives here”. We want to honour and respect the diversity of experiences within our community, not diminish them. Our challenge is to create guidelines that protect all members while fostering a space for open and supportive dialogue.

My final question relates to understanding do your concerns reflect the tone of the guidelines or their existence altogether? Each guideline has been established for specific reasons, primarily focused on safety and support and based on feedback we have received from this community. However, the way we communicate these rules is equally important, and we must ensure they are conveyed in a way that feels supportive rather than restrictive.

Another question for the room might be, how would you write guidelines for this community if you were starting from scratch?