Proposal: Self denigration is the best way to receive a positive reaction to your question, but I suspect there is a line beyond which one becomes ’emotionally unstable’ and then is afforded less understanding, advice and community support.

Sub hypotheses to prove? That the poly community is generally triggered by certain forms of processing and issues that pertain specifically to people new to engaging poly. This results in a tragically bullshit response to genuine questions and emotional outpouring (WHICH THE COMMUNITY ATTEMPTS TO ENCOURAGE) wherein the unknown triggerer is approached with veiled or direct hostility when they couldn’t reasonably know or understand their error.

How will I study this?
I will; using my own account, join multiple poly connection groups and post variations on the same problem and chart my response. I will then either create a proxy account and begin crossposting, or find another way to give different variations of the same problem to different groups. Hopefully in this way I will get a variety of responses.

Time: People responding to the same issue with some variations may become aware or may refine their stance over time as discussion is.

Demographics: Whether or not I chose an information group that is or is not local to me, I know and am friends with a number of people that are well connected in the poly community. I may get a substantially different response from that given to a throwaway account. This states I should probably use myself as a control and attempting to post at least some of the different variations myself.

Dual intentions: Trigger words/issues are a completely different subject than ‘self denigration’ … or perhaps they are the wider subject in that self denigration is a way that people in the poly community attempt to preempt the response of triggered parties.

‘Legality’ and ‘Ethics’: The rules of these groups … baaaaasically explicitly forbid what I would like to do here. There’s also a host of ethical issues that involve not telling the subjects their response will be used in the method I plan to use them… but the inherent nature of the information I would like to achieve is unconscious.

Perhaps a better version of this study would be to create a survey that attempts to yield information about ‘poly’ but is specifically intended to reveal subconscious methods in poly rhetoric and the bones of poly rhetoric itself.

In order to preserve the anonymity of unsuspecting participants if I were to do this, I would have transcribed quotes from my image capture files from the original discussion (to prevent edited comments) and those quotes would be removed from the blacked out face and name as well as the time associated with the comments. Additionally I would not address comments in a temporally consistent manner similar to when they were posted.
At this point still leaning hard onto the survey within a survey idea… I could publish those results. I still believe I would garner better responses to a variety of the same issue expressed different ways.

When will I do this?
Probably never.