Petition for Structural Reform, Accountability, and Safety at Submit
The Issue
I am writing this petition because I want Submit to become a space where people can participate without having to compromise their physical safety, sexual autonomy, emotional well-being, or trust in community leadership. I believe that meaningful change is possible. However, returning to Submit requires more than verbal assurances that things will be different. It requires concrete, written, transparent, and enforceable changes to the way Submit is organized, governed, and responds to harm. For me, and for others who have experienced or witnessed harm within the community, safety cannot depend on personal relationships with organizers, informal understandings, or the assumption that leadership will “do the right thing.” There must be systems in place that continue to function even when the people involved are friends, partners, organizers, or otherwise personally connected.
I am therefore asking Submit to adopt the following reforms.
1. Publicly identify who actually runs Submit
Submit should maintain a clear, easily accessible page identifying:
- All current owners, organizers, administrators, and leadership members.
Each person’s specific role and responsibilities.
- Who has authority to make decisions regarding membership, events, discipline, and safety.
- Who is responsible for responding to reports of misconduct.
- Who has authority to remove or suspend someone from the community.
- Who supervises or reviews the people responsible for handling reports.
- How leadership transitions occur.
- How leadership can be removed or replaced.
-Any relevant conflicts of interest involving leadership.
Members should never have to guess who is ultimately responsible for the decisions being made in the community.
2. Publish a complete and updated set of community rules
Submit should publish a comprehensive, publicly accessible code of conduct covering:
Consent.
Sexual boundaries.
BDSM and kink practices.
Safewords and other negotiated safety mechanisms.
Physical restraint.
Impact play.
Sexual contact.
Penetration.
Recording and photography.
Intoxication.
Harassment.
Coercion.
Retaliation.
Stalking.
Bullying.
Discrimination.
Abuse of power.
Online conduct.
Conduct between members outside official Submit events when it directly affects community safety.
The rules should clearly state that consent must be freely given, informed, specific, ongoing, and revocable.
The rules should also explicitly state that freezing, dissociation, silence, lack of physical resistance, intoxication, previous sexual activity, previous consent, a submissive role, a BDSM dynamic, or participation in a scene do not constitute permission to continue an activity after consent has been withdrawn or a boundary has been established.
3. Create a specific leadership code of conduct
Leadership should be subject to standards that are at least as stringent as those expected of ordinary members. These rules should protect members from toxic power imbalances and power dynamics. Leadership should be allowed to play with members of community; however because of their roles in the community they need to understand that there is going to be obvious power imbalances. Leadership should be given a code of conduct to mitigate these power imbalances.
This code should also address:
Conflicts of interest.
Favoritism.
Romantic and sexual relationships between leadership and members.
Retaliation against people who report misconduct.
Confidentiality.
Abuse of authority.
Handling allegations involving friends, partners, organizers, or other leadership members.
Appropriate communication with survivors.
Preservation of evidence.
Transparency in disciplinary decisions.
Recusal requirements.
A leader who has a personal relationship with someone involved in a complaint should be required to recuse themselves from investigating or deciding the matter.
4. Establish an independent harm-response task force
Submit should create a dedicated Harm Response and Accountability Task Force whose sole responsibility is responding to reports of serious misconduct. This task force should not consist exclusively of the people who currently organize Submit.
Ideally, it should include individuals with demonstrated experience in:
Consent education.
BDSM community safety.
Sexual violence response.
Trauma-informed practices.
Conflict resolution.
Community accountability.
Members of Submit should be aware of who these individuals are, what their training is, and have reasonable access to them.
Members of the task force should receive appropriate training and should have clearly defined authority. The task force should also have procedures for handling complaints against members of Submit leadership themselves.
5. Establish a formal reporting procedure
There should be a written reporting process that explains:
Where reports can be submitted.
Who receives them.
Whether anonymous reports are permitted.
What information a survivor may provide.
What happens after a report is submitted.
Expected response timelines.
How evidence is preserved.
How the reporter is kept informed.
What protections exist against retaliation.
How conflicts of interest are handled.
How appeals work.
Expulsion policies
Remedial training policies
A person reporting harm should not have to repeatedly explain their experience to multiple members of leadership simply to have their complaint taken seriously.
6. Create survivor-centered protections
Submit should establish protections for people who report harm, including:
Protection from retaliation.
Protection from harassment.
Protection from being publicly identified without consent.
The ability to request communication through a specific representative.
The ability to request that a particular leader not contact them.
The ability to provide information in formal email correspondence rather than verbally or over text messages.
Access to referrals for appropriate support resources.
Clear explanations of what Submit can and cannot do with a report.
Survivors should not be required to confront the person accused of harming them in order for their report to be considered legitimate.
7. Establish clear consequences for violations
The rules should include a transparent disciplinary framework.
Depending on the circumstances, consequences could include:
Warnings.
Mandatory education.
Temporary suspension.
Event bans.
Permanent removal.
Removal from leadership.
Restrictions on contact with specific members.
Referral to appropriate outside authorities when legally or ethically appropriate.
The severity of a consequence should correspond to the severity and circumstances of the conduct.There should also be a clear statement that leadership status does not provide immunity from consequences.
8. Establish a specific policy for allegations against leadership
If an organizer, administrator, moderator, or other person in authority is accused of serious misconduct:
They should immediately recuse themselves from handling the complaint.
The matter should be transferred to an independent person or task force.
They should not control the evidence or investigation.
They should not select the person responsible for investigating them.
They should not retaliate against the complainant.
The community should have a defined process for temporary removal from leadership while the matter is reviewed when appropriate.
The final decision should be documented.
A system cannot reasonably be considered independent if the person accused of wrongdoing controls the investigation into themselves.
9. Create an evidence-preservation policy
When serious misconduct is reported, Submit should have procedures for preserving:
Relevant Discord messages.
Screenshots.
Event records.
Witness statements.
Reports.
Moderator actions.
Relevant communications.
Evidence should not be deleted, altered, concealed, or selectively presented in order to protect an individual or the reputation of the organization.
10. Create an appeals process
Members should have a mechanism to challenge:
Disciplinary decisions.
Dismissed complaints.
Conflicts of interest.
Procedural failures.
Decisions made by leadership.
Appeals should be reviewed by someone who was not responsible for the original decision.
11. Create a transparent incident-response timeline
Submit should establish reasonable deadlines for responding to reports.
For example:
Acknowledge receipt of a report within a defined period.
Inform the reporter of the next steps.
Provide periodic updates.
Communicate when an investigation has concluded.
Explain the outcome to the extent that privacy allows.
Silence should not be the default response to a serious report.
12. Establish a community-wide consent and safety education requirement
Before participating in Submit events, members should have access to education covering:
Consent.
Negotiation.
Safewords.
Boundary setting.
Recognizing withdrawal of consent.
Sexual assault and coercion.
Aftercare.
Alcohol and drug-related impairment.
Bystander intervention.
Reporting procedures.
Members could also demonstrate that they are aware of these topics to bypass the education requirement.
Leadership and moderators should receive additional, specialized training.
13. Create a bystander-intervention policy
Members should be explicitly encouraged and empowered to intervene when they see:
A boundary being ignored.
Someone appearing distressed.
Someone being pressured.
Someone who appears too intoxicated to consent.
A scene continuing after a safeword or clear withdrawal of consent.
Someone being isolated or targeted.
Members should not be punished for making a good-faith safety intervention.
14. Create an anti-retaliation policy
Submit should explicitly prohibit retaliation against anyone who:
Reports misconduct.
Supports a survivor.
Participates in an investigation.
Provides evidence.
Serves as a witness.
Raises concerns about leadership.
Requests safety accommodations.
Retaliation should itself constitute a violation subject to disciplinary action.
15. Establish protections against conflicts of interest
No person should investigate or adjudicate a complaint involving:
Their partner.
Their close friend.
Their family member.
Their business associate.
Someone they have a significant personal conflict with.
Someone whose removal or discipline could materially affect their own position.
When a conflict exists, the person should recuse themselves.
16. Create a formal leadership succession process
Leadership should not have unilateral authority to simply appoint whoever they personally prefer as the next person in charge.
Submit should establish a documented process for:
Selecting leadership.
Removing leadership.
Replacing leadership.
Evaluating leadership.
Addressing leadership misconduct.
Allowing community members to raise concerns about leadership.
Significant leadership changes should involve community input.
17. Establish regular community safety reviews
Submit should conduct periodic reviews of its safety policies rather than waiting for another serious incident to expose weaknesses.
These reviews should examine:
Reports received.
How quickly they were addressed.
Whether policies were followed.
Recurring safety concerns.
Whether members feel safe reporting.
Community members should be allowed to provide input as well.
18. Provide an annual transparency report
Without identifying survivors or revealing confidential information, Submit should publish an annual summary containing information such as:
Number of serious reports received.
Categories of concerns reported.
Number of investigations conducted.
Number of disciplinary actions taken.
Number of leadership-related complaints.
Major policy changes.
Safety initiatives implemented.
The purpose would not be to expose individual survivors or accused people. It would be to demonstrate that the organization is actually functioning. As this gets established we want to see the number of serious reports decrease.
19. Establish a victim/survivor compensation and support policy
Submit should create a written policy addressing circumstances in which the organization determines that its own negligence, policy failures, or leadership misconduct contributed to harm.
The policy should explain what forms of support may be available, which could include:
Reimbursement for certain documented expenses.
Counseling or trauma-support resources.
Transportation assistance.
Event-related refunds.
Other appropriate forms of restitution.
There should be a transparent process for requesting such support rather than requiring survivors to negotiate individually with leadership.
20. Acknowledge the harm that has already occurred
Before asking people to return, Submit should publicly acknowledge that members have experienced harm within the community and that existing systems were not sufficient to prevent or appropriately respond to that harm.
That acknowledgment should not be performative.
It should include:
Recognition that harm occurred.
Recognition of failures in leadership or community systems where applicable.
Recognition of the impact on affected members.
A commitment to specific reforms.
A commitment to accountability.
People should not have to pretend that nothing happened in order for the community to move forward. Multiple genuine apologies should be issued.
21. Establish a meaningful mechanism for community feedback
Members should have a way to propose changes to Submit policies and raise concerns without having to personally confront leadership.
This could include:
Anonymous feedback forms.
Regular community meetings.
Member surveys.
Safety committees.
Public policy-review periods.
Major safety policies should not be written entirely behind closed doors.
22. Publish all safety policies in one easily accessible location
This is one of the most important clauses There should be a clearly labeled Safety & Accountability section that contains:
Community rules.
Code of conduct.
Leadership code of conduct.
Reporting procedures.
Harm-response procedures.
Anti-retaliation policy.
Appeals process.
Disciplinary framework.
Conflict-of-interest policy.
Leadership structure.
Emergency contacts/resources.
Members should be able to find this information without searching through years of Discord messages.
Conditions for My Return & The Return of Members Who Stand By Me
For me personally, returning to Submit requires evidence that these concerns are being addressed through actual structural change I am asking for accountability, transparency, meaningful safeguards, and a system that does not depend entirely on whether the people currently holding power happen to make good decisions.
I want Submit to be a community where people can participate in kink, BDSM, sexuality, and social connection without having to wonder whether reporting harm will make them a target, whether their boundaries will be believed, or whether leadership will protect its own interests before protecting its members.
I also believe that these changes would benefit everyone not only people who have already experienced harm. Clear rules protect people from misunderstandings. Independent reporting structures protect both survivors and accused individuals. Transparent leadership creates trust. Training creates competence. Accountability creates a healthier community.
I am therefore asking Submit to commit publicly to these reforms, establish a reasonable implementation timeline, and communicate the progress of each reform to the community. I am willing to provide my assistance and education where need be.
I would like to see these changes implemented before being asked to return or participate as though the underlying problems have been resolved.I am willing to return when Submit demonstrates that it has changed. By signing this petition you agree that Submit needs reform.
32
The Issue
I am writing this petition because I want Submit to become a space where people can participate without having to compromise their physical safety, sexual autonomy, emotional well-being, or trust in community leadership. I believe that meaningful change is possible. However, returning to Submit requires more than verbal assurances that things will be different. It requires concrete, written, transparent, and enforceable changes to the way Submit is organized, governed, and responds to harm. For me, and for others who have experienced or witnessed harm within the community, safety cannot depend on personal relationships with organizers, informal understandings, or the assumption that leadership will “do the right thing.” There must be systems in place that continue to function even when the people involved are friends, partners, organizers, or otherwise personally connected.
I am therefore asking Submit to adopt the following reforms.
1. Publicly identify who actually runs Submit
Submit should maintain a clear, easily accessible page identifying:
- All current owners, organizers, administrators, and leadership members.
Each person’s specific role and responsibilities.
- Who has authority to make decisions regarding membership, events, discipline, and safety.
- Who is responsible for responding to reports of misconduct.
- Who has authority to remove or suspend someone from the community.
- Who supervises or reviews the people responsible for handling reports.
- How leadership transitions occur.
- How leadership can be removed or replaced.
-Any relevant conflicts of interest involving leadership.
Members should never have to guess who is ultimately responsible for the decisions being made in the community.
2. Publish a complete and updated set of community rules
Submit should publish a comprehensive, publicly accessible code of conduct covering:
Consent.
Sexual boundaries.
BDSM and kink practices.
Safewords and other negotiated safety mechanisms.
Physical restraint.
Impact play.
Sexual contact.
Penetration.
Recording and photography.
Intoxication.
Harassment.
Coercion.
Retaliation.
Stalking.
Bullying.
Discrimination.
Abuse of power.
Online conduct.
Conduct between members outside official Submit events when it directly affects community safety.
The rules should clearly state that consent must be freely given, informed, specific, ongoing, and revocable.
The rules should also explicitly state that freezing, dissociation, silence, lack of physical resistance, intoxication, previous sexual activity, previous consent, a submissive role, a BDSM dynamic, or participation in a scene do not constitute permission to continue an activity after consent has been withdrawn or a boundary has been established.
3. Create a specific leadership code of conduct
Leadership should be subject to standards that are at least as stringent as those expected of ordinary members. These rules should protect members from toxic power imbalances and power dynamics. Leadership should be allowed to play with members of community; however because of their roles in the community they need to understand that there is going to be obvious power imbalances. Leadership should be given a code of conduct to mitigate these power imbalances.
This code should also address:
Conflicts of interest.
Favoritism.
Romantic and sexual relationships between leadership and members.
Retaliation against people who report misconduct.
Confidentiality.
Abuse of authority.
Handling allegations involving friends, partners, organizers, or other leadership members.
Appropriate communication with survivors.
Preservation of evidence.
Transparency in disciplinary decisions.
Recusal requirements.
A leader who has a personal relationship with someone involved in a complaint should be required to recuse themselves from investigating or deciding the matter.
4. Establish an independent harm-response task force
Submit should create a dedicated Harm Response and Accountability Task Force whose sole responsibility is responding to reports of serious misconduct. This task force should not consist exclusively of the people who currently organize Submit.
Ideally, it should include individuals with demonstrated experience in:
Consent education.
BDSM community safety.
Sexual violence response.
Trauma-informed practices.
Conflict resolution.
Community accountability.
Members of Submit should be aware of who these individuals are, what their training is, and have reasonable access to them.
Members of the task force should receive appropriate training and should have clearly defined authority. The task force should also have procedures for handling complaints against members of Submit leadership themselves.
5. Establish a formal reporting procedure
There should be a written reporting process that explains:
Where reports can be submitted.
Who receives them.
Whether anonymous reports are permitted.
What information a survivor may provide.
What happens after a report is submitted.
Expected response timelines.
How evidence is preserved.
How the reporter is kept informed.
What protections exist against retaliation.
How conflicts of interest are handled.
How appeals work.
Expulsion policies
Remedial training policies
A person reporting harm should not have to repeatedly explain their experience to multiple members of leadership simply to have their complaint taken seriously.
6. Create survivor-centered protections
Submit should establish protections for people who report harm, including:
Protection from retaliation.
Protection from harassment.
Protection from being publicly identified without consent.
The ability to request communication through a specific representative.
The ability to request that a particular leader not contact them.
The ability to provide information in formal email correspondence rather than verbally or over text messages.
Access to referrals for appropriate support resources.
Clear explanations of what Submit can and cannot do with a report.
Survivors should not be required to confront the person accused of harming them in order for their report to be considered legitimate.
7. Establish clear consequences for violations
The rules should include a transparent disciplinary framework.
Depending on the circumstances, consequences could include:
Warnings.
Mandatory education.
Temporary suspension.
Event bans.
Permanent removal.
Removal from leadership.
Restrictions on contact with specific members.
Referral to appropriate outside authorities when legally or ethically appropriate.
The severity of a consequence should correspond to the severity and circumstances of the conduct.There should also be a clear statement that leadership status does not provide immunity from consequences.
8. Establish a specific policy for allegations against leadership
If an organizer, administrator, moderator, or other person in authority is accused of serious misconduct:
They should immediately recuse themselves from handling the complaint.
The matter should be transferred to an independent person or task force.
They should not control the evidence or investigation.
They should not select the person responsible for investigating them.
They should not retaliate against the complainant.
The community should have a defined process for temporary removal from leadership while the matter is reviewed when appropriate.
The final decision should be documented.
A system cannot reasonably be considered independent if the person accused of wrongdoing controls the investigation into themselves.
9. Create an evidence-preservation policy
When serious misconduct is reported, Submit should have procedures for preserving:
Relevant Discord messages.
Screenshots.
Event records.
Witness statements.
Reports.
Moderator actions.
Relevant communications.
Evidence should not be deleted, altered, concealed, or selectively presented in order to protect an individual or the reputation of the organization.
10. Create an appeals process
Members should have a mechanism to challenge:
Disciplinary decisions.
Dismissed complaints.
Conflicts of interest.
Procedural failures.
Decisions made by leadership.
Appeals should be reviewed by someone who was not responsible for the original decision.
11. Create a transparent incident-response timeline
Submit should establish reasonable deadlines for responding to reports.
For example:
Acknowledge receipt of a report within a defined period.
Inform the reporter of the next steps.
Provide periodic updates.
Communicate when an investigation has concluded.
Explain the outcome to the extent that privacy allows.
Silence should not be the default response to a serious report.
12. Establish a community-wide consent and safety education requirement
Before participating in Submit events, members should have access to education covering:
Consent.
Negotiation.
Safewords.
Boundary setting.
Recognizing withdrawal of consent.
Sexual assault and coercion.
Aftercare.
Alcohol and drug-related impairment.
Bystander intervention.
Reporting procedures.
Members could also demonstrate that they are aware of these topics to bypass the education requirement.
Leadership and moderators should receive additional, specialized training.
13. Create a bystander-intervention policy
Members should be explicitly encouraged and empowered to intervene when they see:
A boundary being ignored.
Someone appearing distressed.
Someone being pressured.
Someone who appears too intoxicated to consent.
A scene continuing after a safeword or clear withdrawal of consent.
Someone being isolated or targeted.
Members should not be punished for making a good-faith safety intervention.
14. Create an anti-retaliation policy
Submit should explicitly prohibit retaliation against anyone who:
Reports misconduct.
Supports a survivor.
Participates in an investigation.
Provides evidence.
Serves as a witness.
Raises concerns about leadership.
Requests safety accommodations.
Retaliation should itself constitute a violation subject to disciplinary action.
15. Establish protections against conflicts of interest
No person should investigate or adjudicate a complaint involving:
Their partner.
Their close friend.
Their family member.
Their business associate.
Someone they have a significant personal conflict with.
Someone whose removal or discipline could materially affect their own position.
When a conflict exists, the person should recuse themselves.
16. Create a formal leadership succession process
Leadership should not have unilateral authority to simply appoint whoever they personally prefer as the next person in charge.
Submit should establish a documented process for:
Selecting leadership.
Removing leadership.
Replacing leadership.
Evaluating leadership.
Addressing leadership misconduct.
Allowing community members to raise concerns about leadership.
Significant leadership changes should involve community input.
17. Establish regular community safety reviews
Submit should conduct periodic reviews of its safety policies rather than waiting for another serious incident to expose weaknesses.
These reviews should examine:
Reports received.
How quickly they were addressed.
Whether policies were followed.
Recurring safety concerns.
Whether members feel safe reporting.
Community members should be allowed to provide input as well.
18. Provide an annual transparency report
Without identifying survivors or revealing confidential information, Submit should publish an annual summary containing information such as:
Number of serious reports received.
Categories of concerns reported.
Number of investigations conducted.
Number of disciplinary actions taken.
Number of leadership-related complaints.
Major policy changes.
Safety initiatives implemented.
The purpose would not be to expose individual survivors or accused people. It would be to demonstrate that the organization is actually functioning. As this gets established we want to see the number of serious reports decrease.
19. Establish a victim/survivor compensation and support policy
Submit should create a written policy addressing circumstances in which the organization determines that its own negligence, policy failures, or leadership misconduct contributed to harm.
The policy should explain what forms of support may be available, which could include:
Reimbursement for certain documented expenses.
Counseling or trauma-support resources.
Transportation assistance.
Event-related refunds.
Other appropriate forms of restitution.
There should be a transparent process for requesting such support rather than requiring survivors to negotiate individually with leadership.
20. Acknowledge the harm that has already occurred
Before asking people to return, Submit should publicly acknowledge that members have experienced harm within the community and that existing systems were not sufficient to prevent or appropriately respond to that harm.
That acknowledgment should not be performative.
It should include:
Recognition that harm occurred.
Recognition of failures in leadership or community systems where applicable.
Recognition of the impact on affected members.
A commitment to specific reforms.
A commitment to accountability.
People should not have to pretend that nothing happened in order for the community to move forward. Multiple genuine apologies should be issued.
21. Establish a meaningful mechanism for community feedback
Members should have a way to propose changes to Submit policies and raise concerns without having to personally confront leadership.
This could include:
Anonymous feedback forms.
Regular community meetings.
Member surveys.
Safety committees.
Public policy-review periods.
Major safety policies should not be written entirely behind closed doors.
22. Publish all safety policies in one easily accessible location
This is one of the most important clauses There should be a clearly labeled Safety & Accountability section that contains:
Community rules.
Code of conduct.
Leadership code of conduct.
Reporting procedures.
Harm-response procedures.
Anti-retaliation policy.
Appeals process.
Disciplinary framework.
Conflict-of-interest policy.
Leadership structure.
Emergency contacts/resources.
Members should be able to find this information without searching through years of Discord messages.
Conditions for My Return & The Return of Members Who Stand By Me
For me personally, returning to Submit requires evidence that these concerns are being addressed through actual structural change I am asking for accountability, transparency, meaningful safeguards, and a system that does not depend entirely on whether the people currently holding power happen to make good decisions.
I want Submit to be a community where people can participate in kink, BDSM, sexuality, and social connection without having to wonder whether reporting harm will make them a target, whether their boundaries will be believed, or whether leadership will protect its own interests before protecting its members.
I also believe that these changes would benefit everyone not only people who have already experienced harm. Clear rules protect people from misunderstandings. Independent reporting structures protect both survivors and accused individuals. Transparent leadership creates trust. Training creates competence. Accountability creates a healthier community.
I am therefore asking Submit to commit publicly to these reforms, establish a reasonable implementation timeline, and communicate the progress of each reform to the community. I am willing to provide my assistance and education where need be.
I would like to see these changes implemented before being asked to return or participate as though the underlying problems have been resolved.I am willing to return when Submit demonstrates that it has changed. By signing this petition you agree that Submit needs reform.
Petition Updates
Share this petition
Petition created on September 5, 2026