Yeah, that was me! It's my pet

I haven't gotten an answer whether this is a glitch or intentional or what, but a couple people have said that Helium still showed up for them to review, so I'm not as worried about it as I was at first!

this and everything Past and Lea said. Just adding support to their points.

I also came here to say this. I haven't found a single pet that hasn't used imgur. That ban really did a number on pet profiles, sadly.

I had the same issue, but managed to find that if I turn a vpn on I can see everything again. I just use the free one bundled into my browser, and switch it back off when I'm done.

So I just tried the new judging process and I like it! It's a nice little activity to do to help out. Here are the questions you asked about the process:

• Was the review process clear and easy to follow? Yes, it was simple and didn't take too long to complete.

• Did the criteria make sense? Yes.

• Did the feedback feel useful (for owners)? I think so, they get to see what categories really stood out and which ones flopped. The extra note should really help them to know what to tweak.

• Was the sP reward fair? I'll never say no to more.

• What would you change? Nothing that I've noticed yet?

can you adjust the profiles so anyone can see the images? UK government has banned imgur so users like me can't review pages properly.

thats what ive been doing but other people might not know about VPNs. I dont expect you to take responsibilty of off sitr images. It's just UK government being way to stupid to sort out recycling let alone safety pf people.

Some pet profile issues I'm noticing, which have applied to several of the pets in the review queue, so I figured I could ping you about it here? Sorry if there's an actual topic for this somewhere, I'm really bad at finding things in forums. B')

• Stat bars are wonky, with the colored part of the stat bar showing up as aligned to the center. I updated a few of my pets to fix that before realizing it's off even on the blank/CSS-less pet profiles so I thought I should make sure you knew lol.

• On many layouts with custom CSS that show the pet stats but use absolute/fixed/etc positioning to position the stats so that they're on top of a 'container' div that isn't actually a parent div of column_3 (I really don't know how to word this in a less confusing way haha sorry), the stats overflow the "container". Like this: link I went ahead and fixed that on the profile I took a screenshot of because she's one of my pets that's supposed to be 'presentable' and it was bugging me too much. It seems like there can be some layout issues related to

  HTML elements and line height/padding, and I think it might maybe specifically be with those elements when they're contained within the pet_info div? With some of my pets like Calhan, I ended the pet_info div container and had other profile elements wrapped within a different div instead, and I didn't have any issues with the line heights or padding to fix... whereas with Rua's profile, which has everything wrapped within the pet_info div, I had to adjust some margins to make it display like how I could swear it used to.

  • Some layouts like the one currently on my pet Caquex, which is a really old freebie template I made that people still use (just saw a pet in the spotlight queue using this), have parts borked because they were made waaaaayyy back when most of us weren't super familiar with box-sizing. The tabs on this profile template are off because I didn't know about box-sizing: border-box at the time, so with the size of the tabs (and, like, everything else lol), the padding and border aren't included in the pixel height I set. I believe box-sizing is also the primary issue with another older pet profile template that I still see in use, the one made by the user Piers that has left the site. It also seems to be the biggest issue with 's Ordinemon, posted earlier, displaying on legacy?

    I remembered mentioning their pet profiles being a bit off and I just wanted to point something out that I think might be a potential issue on other profiles: On pet profiles like Past's Andromeda, the pet image now looks cut off. I'm not sure on how many profiles this would be an issue, but it would be a pretty simple fix, and I feel like it might make sense to have the background image for pet_image set to contain by default anyway?

    Anyway, I hope some of my yapping here was helpful!!

Thank you so much for the skip button and the layout has issues checkbox. Both super helpful.

Would it also be possible to maybe have a way to tag some profiles that technically check all the boxes but might need a sensitivity warning for either mature content or things that could be painful triggers to someone who's gone through something? I came across one that discussed a sibling experiencing r()pe and then self-harming and ending their pain forever, and while the rest of the profile was well done, I was a bit unprepared to read that due to my own personal history.

This is not to shame the author in any way. Their story made sense. But for some, that could be a story that they're not prepared to see without any warnings.

tysm for doing all this 🤩 it's so cool to see the user feedback implemented and all the improvements made ^.^ so excited for this new system!

Thank you for implementing our feedback! I feel like some very civil and interesting discussion have happened on this thread!

Most of my pets profiles use Helix's template as a base so they all have similar issues, I've listed some additional stuff here in case it can help troubleshoot further. But I fully trust Lea to be really on top of issues and I knew their post probably contains a lot more useful informations than mine.

On Pollack's profile, the width of column 2 (pet info, pet desc) now seems smaller than it was prior to the update. It used to be the same width as the rest. This is an issue on all of my profiles that use this same base template.

As Lea mentionned, the custom pet image seem to not properly fit now vs. before. Honestly would probably be an easy manual fix according to what Lea said.

Most of my other (older) pet profile that aren't using this template seem to work fine now (incredible that profiles I coded 12 years ago still somehow work today)

First, I'd like to say that I'm sorry you went through this trauma! I hope you are ok!

I know we already discussed this point in this thread, but I wanted to reiterate that I personally feel like it's not really doable to do something like this without going into 'trigger warnings' areas. Where do we draw the line with what needs to be tagged or not? Everyone has different triggers based on their personal history or trauma. What is a trigger to userX might not be a trigger to userY. It's extremely difficult to monitor things like this since triggers are such a personal thing. I'm afraid that such a feature could also create a false sense of security for users with triggers. It's impossible to guarantee that triggers won't be present in a story if you're the first to review a profile, or if a previous reviewer didn't feel like the profile warranted a warning so they didn't flag the profile.

I suggest having a general warning on the judging page that some pet profiles may contain content that is triggering to some and that user discretion is advised. Since this is an optional opt-in only feature, users that are sensitive to triggers don't have to participate.

Obviously, if a story is out of line and contains graphic scenes or if the overall way things are approached is super problematic, that's another thing and something that would warrant flagging in the feedback box as being innapropriate for the spotlight (and potentially the site as a whole).

I put warnings at the beginnings of my pet's stories if there are any touchy subjects, so if someone opens the story, reads the warnings and decides it's not for them to read, that's fine! I feel that it should be up to the creator to handle the responsibility of warning their audience of any sensitive topics, not the site.

Another one of the profiles that actually seems to have more issues on Kumos than it does on Legacy despite the CSS rollbacks, is your Night Mode template, Lea? I tried to figure out what was happening in the inspect part of my browser but my coding reading skills are not up to par. I think the petinfobg is falling out of the pet_desc despite being within those tags? I dunno, I could be making that up, but figured Lea might be better able to explain that I am, just wanted to point out that it isn't just the Legacy css issues making things go haywire. I've seen this profile on a number of pets in the review queue.

Here is a pet with it on Legacy (with tweaks to the stats which do have the same issues as every other profile it seems, I manually adjusted the size and distance between the lines there), and here it is on Kumos

for the people saying the profile images not showing up for them, as far as the uk banning imgur, is there another image loading site we can use for you guys to be able to see the profiles the way it's meant? what site do you guys use?

, I totally get it and don't put that responsibility on you to personally make sure on this. If there's some sort of note for creators to make sure to consider putting a TW if the story may deal with a known traumatic event.

Thank you! I am okay. I thought the story was so engaging, but I just didn't expect it to cover that, so I was a bit startled since I usually have a chance to prepare myself a bit for anything that talks about someone's self-ending.

I do agree that I don't think the site could possibly be responsible for personally ensuring that all the stories aren't graphic. But if it's outlined in the guidelines to consider TW on anything explicit or graphic that is a known "common trigger" like abuse or self-harm, that might be good.

Okay, so just disregard triggers and blatantly ignore anyone else's feelings on the matter, got it. By those remarks, I should be able to drop whatever language I want and imagery too, I have some NSFW things that may work! Yeah, we have zombies, fetus pops, and so forth on here but you have to go looking for those specifically. Like you have to know they exist first, which name they're under and so on and so forth. Kind of a moot point there, should you ask me. The zombies give a fair warning so if you want to block with an image blocker.

Real life is FULL of trigger warnings. To disregard that under the blaise attempt of "Well, we can't coddle everyone because it's a very deep rabbit hole" (which is the gist I got) is just lame and lazy. To have this same inane argument in 2026 is... churlish. To say the very least.

Don't ping me on this, I'm not responding because it's a looping, old argument that pops up as often as houses on here. Either agree or don't, I don't care.

(Oh, and do report this. Someone's going to. Doesn't that mean it's triggering. I thought that wasn't supposed to be a problem here.)

I am absolutely going to ping you since you have pinged me in what is objectively a very rude message that completely disregards my points.

I believe I have been very polite in all of my messages in this thread and I was actually so glad that the pet community was able to have a mature conversation for once. I'm a bit sad to see such an agressive message in what has been a very civil conversation up to this point. I'm not sure how using this tone is helping in any ways to further your argument.

This is a PG-13 site. No one is talking about having NSFW or extreme gore in stories or on site. Like, no one. This isn't AO3 or TH. NSFW or gore or hate speech is agaisnt the rules and doesn't have its place on site. The context of the site being PG-13 is important when having this discussion, as extreme content is a warnable offence.

Anyone could click on any forum thread or pet profile and see images of Zombies, or fetuses or whatever. I'm not sure why you try to use the arguments that these are 'usually predictable' as they simply are not. These elements can be present anywhere on site: in HA, in forum signatures, on user profiles, as item images on any forum thread, in custom ad banners, on the news page when new pets are announced...

The discussion in this thread is about an OPTIONAL OPT-IN ONLY feature that requires people to read and review pet profiles to see if they follow specific rules. No one is forced to participate and expose themselves to triggers. Any user on site is welcome to curate their own experience and if this experience needs to exclude participating in an optional feature to avoid triggers, they absolutely can avoid it! No one is being forced to participate.

My point is that I feel like at this point in Subeta history, introducing mandatory trigger warnings on people's personal pet pages seems difficult to do (how do you regulate it? who decides what is and isn't a mandatory disclaimer trigger? how do you handle the 300+ pets currently in the queue that do not have trigger warnings?)

I believe we are now very far from the original intend of this topic which is the pilot pet spotlight community review project. I appologize in advance to staff for this discussion, which is borderline off topic now.

Huh. Thinking about things like... well, like the battle opponent that has its intestines dangling out, the multiple graveyard pets that can be extremely upsetting to look at, and then all the various disturbing items... I guess I've always had this kind of a 'yeah I guess Subeta just kinda has potentially triggering content sometimes' mentality about things. The potential necessity of trigger warnings on pet profiles just legitimately did not ever really occur to me before because of that (and the fact that I don't really tend to create much potentially triggering content, I guess lol.)

I agree with Past's points. I also want to emphasize their point about how we are reading and reviewing pet profiles here. Reading and reviewing a variety of different creative works is just kind of inherently going to be something where you'll potentially encounter triggers, because a number of stories feature heavy, disturbing topics. That isn't to say that trigger warnings are unnecessary or that we should avoid them or anything, but just that we should probably expect to encounter potentially triggering content in this sort of area, especially given that Subeta is a place that doesn't hide its own disturbing content, that there are no rules about trigger warnings for pet profiles (something that might not have even occurred to people as potentially necessary, especially since triggers can be fairly subjective and people don't always realize when they've written something potentially triggering!), and also just with Subeta being a place that allows more mature themes as long as they don't go past the PG-13 rating.

If we're reviewing a variety of different creative works, we're not always going to be reviewing pets that are within our comfort zones or that we personally like, and clicking onto a pet profile through this doesn't carry any risks that you couldn't potentially encounter by just randomly clicking onto a pet from a user's profile instead. I think the skip option is a great middle ground that keeps anyone from being "stuck" on a profile they're not comfortable with when using this opt-in feature.

I also just kind of... am not sure of the logistics. I do think that it would be pretty reasonable to have trigger warnings as a requirement for pet spotlight, but I feel like part of the problem here is that we have 300+ pets in the queue already. Even if we did update spotlight requirements, some of those pet owners might not be active to see the updated rules and edit their pet profile accordingly, and then we're still the ones that are going through and reviewing things, so wouldn't we be the ones checking for appropriate trigger warnings anyway? Or, like, if we're trying to keep the people who are reviewing pets for spotlight eligibility from potential triggers, does that mean we need a set of people to review pets for potential triggers first?

Oh, also, I forgot to say that I really appreciate the skip button! I wonder, would it be at all possible to have an option to skip a pet but come back to it later? My deep dark secret is that there were a couple of pets that I skipped because I was burnt out on seeing the same layout (with the same issues caused by the recent CSS changes lol) constantly, and then 5 minutes later I felt bad for skipping them and wished I hadn't. I could definitely just take more pauses when I'm reviewing pets instead of being like 'okay I have to review all the pets I can right now immediately!!' though haha, that is definitely a me problem. P:

Okay, now to derail this topic with pet profile CSS stuff again...

Man I just realized I forgot some words and was not clear at all when talking about the pet image thing... and I also finally actually bothered to look through how Helix's profile template is set up and realized that the issue is actually mostly box-sizing again lol. :')

Setting {background-size: contain} would get rid of any cropping issues because it will make sure the image is resized to fit within the size you specify. On Andro's profile and probably the others that use Helix's template, the pet image has a 15px border, which is no longer being calculated outside the total size of the image -- so with the border no longer being outside the box that contains the background, the background now looks cropped. Changing the background size would make it no longer appear cropped, but it will still be smaller than before due to the border.

The thing that's frustrating about the pet profiles being wonky is that they're basically off because now Subeta's CSS styling has been improved to more modern standards. So many of these pet profiles were made to work around CSS from yeeeears ago, and a lot of us people who make pet profiles are just doing this as a hobby and not really... like.. up to professional web design standards... so naturally it's gonna get messed up when things get updated.

(Pollack's profile can be fixed with '#pet_info * {box-sizing: content-box}' which also fixes a lot of the issues on your profiles with the other template. For the template that uses Helix's template as a base, I'm not sure what exactly changed to make column_2 smaller but changing the width from 97% to 98% seemed to work when I was messing around with it.)

Yeah, Kumos pet profiles seem to really not like it when we have the content div's height set to 100%, which unfortunately is pretty common on pet profiles. A lot of mine -- both my ancient freebie profiles and some of the newer ones -- have that issue which is why they look awful on Kumos. /:

While I appreciate your faith in me, I don't actually have the greatest understanding of CSS and why things work or don't work, I am very 'let's try this and see what happens' about everything. I'm just someone who screws around with pet profiles a lot in my free time lol.

The petinfobg thing can be fixed by setting the div to position: relative. The issue is because petinfobg uses position: absolute, and absolutely positioned elements want to position themselves to the nearest ancestor with non-static positioning. I'm too tired to attempt to explain better or think about why it's funky on Kumos profiles aha.

I decided to mess around with that pet profile template on one of my pets and I think I got it looking fine on both legacy and Kumos. https://kumos.subeta.net/pet/lea:nicandros https://subeta.net/pets/Lea/Nicandros Feel free to copypaste the changes I made, they're toward the end of the CSS. (ovo)7