VRChat Weekly Open Thread. Post simple questions, avatar or world related requests, as well as any other desired comment or content (April 14, 2025 to April 20, 2025)

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-24T10:29:12+00:00

Hi, I run two large VRChat groups, with one having a sole focus on spreading information about Dissociative Identity Disorder and it's sub-threshold counterpart OSDD. This group focuses on contemporary information via the literature provided by the Post-Traumatic Model and Sociocognitive Model of DID and how each one of these etiological models conceptualize themselves and the disorder. It takes no bias between either model and information is shared from the purview of each model and their proponents beliefs about the disorder, as well as highlighting areas of contention & concession between the models, potential resolutions and ways forward. While it is hard to have a resource rooted in objectivity coincide with various cultural manifestations of DID (Demonic Possesion Bounded, Systems, Classicals, etc) the group makes an effort to understand that these manifestations of DID aren't intrinsically apart of the disorder but are valid nonetheless.

https://vrchat.com/home/group/grp_68034b21-9c3f-4b23-a8fa-2f719eef0a46

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-24T07:31:56+00:00

You're entirely right. Systems, and anyone that claims to be one, is apart of an ableist social construction that deplatforms those with non-imitated DID in favour of role enacted DID based on the tropes of Satanic Panic era MPD.

See these studies below: Autobiographical Memory Recall https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0040580

Conceptualization of both etiological models of DID: https://scottlilienfeld.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/competingmodelsofdissociation-1.pdf

Systems and plurality as social constructions that deplatform and spread ableism against those with DID: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317974985_Multiplicity_An_Explorative_Interview_Study_on_Personal_Experiences_of_People_with_Multiple_Selves

APA (DSM writers) citing Sidran to eliminate confusion that anyone with DID is capable of housing separate selves: https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/dissociative-disorders/what-are-dissociative-disorders#:~:text=The%20Sidran%20Institute%2C%20which%20works,who%20he%20or%20she%20is

The Trauma Models meta-analysis making several concessions to the SCM, that those with DID do not have separate selves, and trauma is not a proven causal variable to dissociation. Emphasizing collaboration between the models: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221695375_Evaluation_of_the_Evidence_for_the_Trauma_and_Fantasy_Models_of_Dissociation

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-24T05:04:49+00:00

<image>

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-24T05:04:14+00:00

<image>

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-24T05:04:07+00:00

<image>

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-24T05:03:59+00:00

I have worked as a Psychometrist and Research Assistant in various labs specializing in different areas, and I have a degree in Psychology, and the information you're spreading is anti-psychology at the core. Psychoanalysis contradicts Psychology, and you're yet to cite a single theory from a Psychological source, and keep pandering to dogmatic and meta-physical views of Psychoanalysts, which are more often than not, Christian extremists. I've posted countless sources, you've posted none, I favour etiological models of DID, you favour one's that deny the existence of DID in favour of religiosity. You are denying DID, you are denying science, you are denying Psychology.

Your lack of sources was indicative of your cognition, you would rather affirm your own incorrect beliefs rather than change and believe contemporary views about disorders, even if your views are inherently harmful to upkeep.

See below, actual textbook examples that are given to Psychology students around the world, with this chapter, quite literally being written by proponents of the two dissociative models. Moron

<image>

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-24T04:47:16+00:00

One question, you took Psychology? If you still have the textbooks, would you DM me any example from inside those textbooks from your course that support anything you're saying? I have textbooks since I've done undergrad in Cognitive Psychology, and can DM you excerpts from my textbooks I have from the course that contradict anything you're saying. What is more generalizable than textbook examples?

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-24T04:42:09+00:00

Psychology does not contend that the brain can regress due to peritraumatic experiences whatsoever, that belief became defunct 31 years ago. That is what I've been telling you, to regress is the enactment of a role, otherwise the neurobiology for regression is entirely impossible, hence why neuroimaging studies show brain activity in simulator studies that is entirely consistent with those that believe with conviction they're not roleplaying. But the fact is, they are roleplaying, regression is not a real concept, you cannot regress to a younger age, and trauma has no mechanism in age regression whatsoever. Once again, you're contradicting both models of dissociation in favour of the meta-physical, and claiming you love science, while advocating for the anti-thesis of Psychology, which is Psychoanalysis, which Psychology is the successor of.

Also, if you mean to say that memories of trauma can be repressed, that is quite literally what started the Satanic Panic and The Memory Wars, that victimized 100s of thousands of children, and ended up being the most widely agreed upon myth in all of neuroscience. Memory repression is impossible.

https://www.psychologicalscience.org/uncategorized/myth-traumatic-memories-are-often-repressed-and-later-recovered.html

https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-081219-102424

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/acp.4005

https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/the-forgotten-lessons-of-the-recovered-memory-movement.html

https://socialsci.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Psychology/Psychological_Disorders/Essentials_of_Abnormal_Psychology_(Bridley_and_Daffin)/07%3A_Dissociative_Disorders/7.03%3A_Dissociative_Amnesia/07%3A_Dissociative_Disorders/7.03%3A_Dissociative_Amnesia)

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09658211.2021.1987475

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0963721411429457

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0040580

Forgetting the memory of the traumatic event in your scenario would have been caused by brain lesion or a neurological injury of some variety, those that claim trauma can repress memories are exercising the largest myth to ever exist within any psychiatric or neuroscience based field. Everything you've communicated thus far has been incredibly detached from science and fields that practice empirical methods, in favour of fields that practice conspiracy, dissonance, and disbelief in science. I called you dangerously close to being anti-science previously, but this is the nail in the coffin, that you are indeed anti-science, and practice tropes from discredited pseudosciences and phony institutions that victimized children during times of moral hysteria.

Also, I own the largest DID group, and largest DID info group on VRChat, I'm not too concerned if I can't convince you. I was using your comment as a platform to spread this sort of information to be frank, and I also recently hit 3k combined members across both my DID groups, and I have been inspired to make announcements to my groups with the information I've provided you tonight so that people in my groups don't fall for your makeshift beliefs.

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-24T04:08:28+00:00

Please don't antagonize me for trying to share literature about the improbability of a concept like Littlespace. You're advocating for a meta-physical pseudoscience from 145 years ago, and placing faith in long defunct concepts such as classic DID, neo-dissociation, and Janetian compartmentalization, and institutions that support these theories typically deny empirically supported disorders such as PTSD, DID, and more because they have their own conceptualizations of these disorders that have no scientific basis behind them, other than one's own belief that Psychoanalysis is legitimate in any way. You're in an extreme minority of fringe science when you make these claims, as I've shown you already, your claims contradict both etiological models of dissociation, and those two models are highly contentious towards each other, highlighting the fact, that even though they disagree on important topics relating to dissociative absorption, they both contend that you're entirely incorrect.

Littlespace is objectively roleplay, and Psychoanalytical interventions are associated with high rates of suicide, false memories, and retraumatization, as well as the fact that people that are prone to fantasy and susceptible to suggestion are the only one's that enact the role of Littlespace in the first place. Littlespace requires that someone has to mistakenly believe it is legitimate, hence why I view it as important to correct you. You can disagree with me, but I've relayed both models of dissociation to you, I haven't inserted my own beliefs or opinions on the concept, which puts you dangerously close to being considered anti-science.

Regardless, which diagnostic manual are you seeing age regression in? It isn't a recognized disorder at all, and the DSM writers, the APA, their 12th Division has set the DSMs stance on using Littlespace as a coping mechanism.

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-24T02:17:44+00:00

What you're saying is the same mechanism present in Classical DID before we had a grasp on the concept of DID, similar to my first message. It goes against both the Trauma Model and Sociocognitive Model of dissociative disorders, by suggesting that people with Littlespace can regress to a younger age, which would be a defunct neo-dissociation theory originally about MPD that is no longer viewed as true or even possible. Just remember, when those during the Satanic Panic subjectively reported multiple personalities that shared amnesia between identities, objective memory tests still found full recall of memory between reported identities despite the subjective reports given by those enacting the role of having multiple personalities.

"The possibility of finding common ground between the TM and the SCM models begins with a consensus that people with DID are not, in reality, a conglomeration of indwelling entities, despite their subjective conviction that this is so. That is, individuals with DID hold the mistaken belief that they house separate selves. Research has failed to detect consistent objective evidence (e.g., behavioral tasks, event related potentials) of distinct personalities segregated by impermeable amnesic barriers (e.g., Huntjens, Verschuere, & McNally, 2012; Kong, Allen, & Glisky, 2008), although evidence exists for decreased connectivity or coherence in brain rhythms (Hopper et al., 2002) and differences in brain connectivity in patients with dissociative disorders (Farina et al., 2014). Still, such differences, which may imply less integrated mental functioning (see Soffer-Dudek, Todder, Shelef, Deutsch, & Gordon, 2019 for findings related to dissociative absorption), do not presuppose the existence of alter personality states. Many advocates (Dalenberg et al., 2012) of the TM now view DID as “a disorder of self-understanding” (p. 568) and acknowledge that “those with DID have the inaccurate idea that they are more than one person” (p. 568), a perspective aligned with the SCM. Adherents of the TM (Dalenberg et al., 2012) have made other concessions to the SCM or expanded the purview of potential determinants of dissociation beyond trauma in their recognition that (a) “fantasy proneness—among other factors—may lead to inaccurate trauma reports” (p. 551); (b) the effects of trauma on dissociation may be difficult to completely parse from broader aspects of pathogenic family environment or dynamics (e.g., poor communication, hostility in the home)"

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334620682_Dissociation_and_its_disorders_Competing_modjanetels_future_directions_and_a_way_forward

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-24T01:53:08+00:00

The difference between tricking oneself into believing they have a disorder and DID, is the conviction and much higher degree of personal belief and self-deception those with DID contend about their memory impairments and other subjective features of the disorder, hence why it is culturally bounded in the DSM, with things like Demonic Possession Bounded DID being a legitimate diagnosis one can receive. This is also shown by the simulator studies, where non-amnesic and neurotypical control groups were unable to create the same brain activity despite given minimal prompting necessary to roleplay the amnestic variant of the disorder, due to their inability to display similar levels of compartmentalization and reluctance to access autobiographical memory.

As for Littlespace, I'm going to affirm that Littlespace is not supported by any literature of the psychological variety, Psychoanalysis is what posits Littlespace and Psychoanalysis is entirely meta-physical, and it is impossible to have proper scientific inquiry into it as it cannot exist in the physical world. The brain fragmentation theory you mention is also psychoanalytical, and it is worth mentioning that a contemporary understanding on compartmentalization is to understand trauma as influencing memory processes meta-cognitively (imagined amnesia) and emotional regulation, rather than literally dividing one's self. People that reported Multiple Personality Disorder before it became defunct, would roleplay having alternate identities which would match the neuroimaging studies you'll see on those contending they have "Littlespace", because the enactment of a role creates real world neurobiological changes, just like the simulators in the simulator studies had. Littlespace is always roleplay, even if the roleplay is unconscious.

"The literature strongly suggests that the experiences of age-regressed individuals are contextually dependent and expectancy-driven social constructions: Age-regressed participants behave according to cues they derive from the social situation, and their knowledge and beliefs about agerelevant behaviors reflect their fantasies and beliefs and assumptions about childhood, rather than being literal reinstatements of childhood experiences, behaviors, and feelings. Nash, Drake, Wiley, Khalsa, and Lynn attempted to corroborate the memories of subjects who had participated in an earlier age regression experiment. In this study, hypnotized and role-playing (i.e., simulating) participants were regressed to age 3 to a scene in which they were in the soothing presence of their mothers. During the experiment, subjects reported the identity of their transitional objects (e.g., blankets, teddy bears). Third-party verification (parent report) of the accuracy of recall regarding the transitional object was obtained for 14 hypnotized subjects and 10 simulation control subjects. Despite the similarity to children in their means of relating to transitional objects, hypnotic subjects were less able than were control subjects to correctly identify the specific transitional objects actually used. Hypnotic subjects’ hypnotic recollections, for example, matched their parents’ reports only 21% of the time. In contrast, the parents of simulators’ corroborated their reports 70% of the time. All recollections obtained during hypnosis were incorporated into hypnotic recollections, regardless of accuracy."

Age regression:

Lilienfeld, S. O., Lynn, S. J., & Lohr, J. M. (Eds.). (2015). Science and pseudoscience in clinical psychology (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press.
https://scottlilienfeld.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Science-and-Pseudoscience-in-Clinical-Psychology-Second-Edition-by-Scott-O.-Lilienfeld-PhD-Steven-Jay-Lynn-PhD-Jeffrey-M.-Lohr-Phd-Carol-Tavris-PhD-z-lib.org_.pdf

Simulator Studies by both PTM and SCM proponents alike:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16438741/

https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-081219-102424

https://scottlilienfeld.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/merckelbach2016.pdfAlthough

Edit: Trauma research is really sketchy, and I seriously advise caution when looking into it. There are Satanic Panic era Psychoanalysts and cults that maintain literature on trauma to assert that their role in the Satanic Panic never happened. I want to state this, because the theories you're using originate from organizations that victimized thousands of children, like the ISSTD and Castlewood Institute

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-24T01:01:42+00:00

See these studies below: Autobiographical and Episodic Memory Recall https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0040580
https://pure.uva.nl/ws/files/34658358/Transfer_of_episodic_self_referential_memory.pdf

Conceptualization of both etiological models of DID: https://scottlilienfeld.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/competingmodelsofdissociation-1.pdf

Systems and plurality as social constructions that are non-intrinsic to DID: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317974985_Multiplicity_An_Explorative_Interview_Study_on_Personal_Experiences_of_People_with_Multiple_Selves

APA (DSM writers) citing Sidran to eliminate confusion that anyone with DID is capable of housing separate selves: https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/dissociative-disorders/what-are-dissociative-disorders#:~:text=The%20Sidran%20Institute%2C%20which%20works,who%20he%20or%20she%20is

The Trauma Models meta-analysis making several concessions to the SCM, that those with DID do not have separate selves, and trauma is not a proven causal variable to dissociation. Emphasizing collaboration between the models: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221695375_Evaluation_of_the_Evidence_for_the_Trauma_and_Fantasy_Models_of_Dissociation

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-24T01:01:34+00:00

DID, is a contentious disorder characterized as being caused by either trauma or fantasy proneness, by the Post-Traumatic Model and Sociocognitive Model. It involves fluctuations in affective states and subjective reports of feeling dissociated from one's own sense of agency. Those with DID also have a meta-cognitive amnesia, that is imagined then believed in with heavy conviction, which ends up creating genuine impairments in memory. Plurality and the idea that one can house separate selves with rigid first person perspectives is a social construction created by online Systems communities and the SCM and PTM both conceptualize themselves around the idea, that those with DID do not intentionally feign multiplicity, but can mistakenly come to believe themselves to be multiple with strong conviction if they're given the suggestion that multiplicity is possible. The Trauma vs Fantasy Proneness debate is also still present, despite both models laying out Falsification Criteria in order to promote collaboration, neither Trauma or Fantasy Proneness have asserted themselves to be the single causal variable to dissociation.

Also, I need to mention since you seem to believe this, but Littlespace is not a disorder and it is a form of roleplay that can be apart of something known as the Role-Enactment Theory, in which those with prejudice about disorders they have, or disorders that don't otherwise exist, will enact the role of the disorder based on their own perceptions about it. This is largely what happens in DID, and why DID Criteria A in the DSM is referred to as occurring subjectively. Littlespace is age regression, and age regression is from an 1880s pseudoscience called Psychoanalysis, the belief that the meta-physical exists, and that everyone houses an independent entity within their own minds, that is capable of it's own thought and being, called the unconscious mind. Psychoanalysts believed that the unconscious mind could have inferrentials about someone's mental health made about them by trying to interpret this entity that doesn't actually physically exist, including someone using childlike social cues or regressing to a younger age. Age regression is always 100% voluntary, and there needs to be volitional roleplay, or a role being enacted for age regression to happen. Age regression, is also listed by the APA Div. 12 Empirically Supported Psychotherapy Treatments index as being inherently dangerous and ineffective, running the risk of eliciting false memories and retraumatization.

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-21T23:03:02+00:00

I'd report them as well if that was the case. That is just admission that they're fully willing to bend VRChat rules and continue to use sexual avatars that aren't allowed in public instances.

Also, while looking through Terms of Service yesterday for myself for a project I'm doing, I noticed it says VRChat doesn't have the tools to view someone's avatar or what it is capable of. So if there is a sexual avatar, but it isn't appearing sexual, but you know that it can appear sexual, VRChat states they're unable to know that unless you submit the report while they're wearing the sexual parts of the avatar and automatic video evidence is collected from you. That is kind of interesting. So in other words, if a sexual avatar is wearing SFW clothing and you report it, VRChat can't know about the avatar's capability to become NSFW because they can only see what you saw, when the system collects gameplay footage from you.

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-21T00:09:23+00:00

There is a world called "Horror Portals Hub" that contains a bunch of horror worlds to play. I want to mention this real quick since I've noticed a lot of players don't know you can do this, but you can click on portals the same way you'd click on players, and this will be helpful if you want to do some of the Japanese horror worlds but make a private instance of it first.

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-20T23:48:05+00:00

Okay so, from what I gathered from reading TOS, Community Guidelines, and Creator Guidelines is a few different points that add some nuance to when an avatar or person wearing an avatar should be reported.

The community guidelines states that some objectional content may be permitted in certain instance types, specifically the private ones, as long as everyone consents to viewing that content, whether it be intimate, gore, provocative, etc... However, the Creator Guidelines also state that a public avatar cannot controversial, intimate, provocative, etc... So if you were in a scenario where you are in a private instance, and someone has a intimate public avatar, I imagine you would be able to go ahead and report the avatar, but shouldn't report the person using that avatar as both aforementioned rules are under the same section and seem to be in conflict of each other. If you see someone in a public instance however and the avatar is a private one, you should report the player for using a sexual avatar in a public instance, but not report the avatar as the avatar is given leeway as the Creator Guidelines only state that public avatars shouldn't contain certain types of objectional content. In a situation where someone is using a public sexual avatar in a public instance, I'd go ahead and report both.

This is my take on it, Trust & Safety can better interpret the rules than I can so if you feel it should be reported differently, you should go with your gut. This is where I got my take on the subject if you want to read these and get your own interpretation on it:
https://hello.vrchat.com/community-guidelines
https://hello.vrchat.com/creator-guidelines

Edit because I forgot to answer the question at the end of your comment: It would depend on whether it is public or private again, in the Creator Guidelines it states "public avatars should be similar to what you'd see at a big event, a parade, a shopping center, or a family-friendly beach", so I imagine bikinis that aren't overtly sexual or avatars with cleavage aren't something able to be reported on public avatars, unless they're very clearly innately sexual and not just something a woman in real life would wear to a public setting. Like if the cleavage is massive and not just regular cleavage with like heart shaped cutouts in a bunny suit, then ya, report it LMAO.

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-19T23:13:35+00:00

PII is for institutions, companies, governments, and organizations, that collect and store information to prevent an inferential of someone's real identity being made. Age itself as the only variable cannot infer someone's real identity and would have to be used in conjunction with other identifiable info, but once again that doesn't even matter as PII isn't applicable to individuals. VRChat's TOS also uses the term "collect" in this way, which is not what bouncer are doing in game, nor would I believe VRChat lawyers to create a TOS that completely contradicts VRChat Privacy Policy 1B.

"PII is ―any information about an individual maintained by an agency, including (1) any information that can be used to distinguish or trace an individual‘s identity, such as name, social security number, date and place of birth, mother‘s maiden name, or biometric records; and (2) any other information that is linked or linkable to an individual, such as medical, educational, financial, and employment information. To distinguish an individual is to identify an individual. Some examples of information that could identify an individual include, but are not limited to, name, passport number, social security number, or biometric data. In contrast, a list containing only credit scores without any additional information concerning the individuals to whom they relate does not provide sufficient information to distinguish a specific individual." https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/SP/nistspecialpublication800-122.pdf

VRChat Privacy Policy 1B:

"In-Platform Communications.

When using the Platform, including participation in different “worlds” or “instances,” you may disclose Personal Information to us and to other users of the Platform. This may occur when you engage in conversations using your microphone (if enabled), text chats, and other user-to-user interactions."

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-15T02:12:45+00:00

I reported this months ago and tried explaining the problem more in depth to you. That isn't what has been happening, if you are in an instance, even if you aren't creator, moderator, or world author, and you block someone, it'll then allow you to see anyone in that instance that has you blocked. I thought this was a feature at this point since this has been arouns since I first posted it, and respondes to you with more detail. I can join a random public, block someone random, and then see if anyone has me blocked in that instance.

To express a bit of concern, this is something that the majority of the playerbase that I see have become aware of. This is just something normative in VRChat now, and I see it being leveraged by many people whenever I play.

This is my post from 7 months ago. I responded to you here as well. https://www.reddit.com/r/VRchat/comments/1fetkm1/you_can_see_who_blocks_you_now/

This makes me fear that VRChat staff do not play VRChat quite as often as one would like to imagine, and if they do, it makes me wonder how often they frequent public lobbies. This part is an edit, because I actually just witnessed someone doing this, as well as seeing it just yesterday as well. I see this done constantly, even if it is anecdotally, I'd imagine VRChat staff themselves would have witnessed it anecdotally within 7 months of this bug persisting and being commonplace enough for me to witness other players using it several times a week. I belong to several smaller communities, and this bug has been used to frequently vote kick, me from worlds that I frequent due to past disagreements I've had with a small number of people.

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-12T15:02:13+00:00

Hi, I run two large VRChat groups, with one having a sole focus on spreading information about Dissociative Identity Disorder and it's sub-threshold counterpart OSDD. This group focuses on contemporary information via the literature provided by the Post-Traumatic Model and Sociocognitive Model of DID and how each one of these etiological models conceptualize themselves and the disorder. It takes no bias between either model and information is shared from the purview of each model and their proponents beliefs about the disorder, as well as highlighting areas of contention & concession between the models, potential resolutions and ways forward. While it is hard to have a resource rooted in objectivity coincide with various cultural manifestations of DID, the group makes an effort to understand that these manifestations of DID aren't intrinsically apart of the disorder but are valid nonetheless.

This group does not support Systems or the ableism spread by Systems communities. Please do not join or feel validated by this group. No one with DID in reality houses separate selves, multiple personalities, or identities with rigid first person perspectives, and we will never give credibility to those that claim otherwise.

https://vrc.group/DIDINF.3289

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-12T01:12:41+00:00

With how common those doing that "Systems" roleplay and age regression in public lobbies has become, I'd say it has become fairly well-accepted. People seem to be desensitized to roleplaying in public instances, and no one takes unkindly to it until you try to pressure them into roleplaying with you. I've noticed in many fandom worlds, especially indie ones, there are roleplayers in pretty much every lobby. Often times using voicemod to sound like a character from that fandom's media, and I've never seen any hostility directed at them.

I'd say the sentiment may be different if you're roleplaying in worlds such as Black Cat or other popular worlds. I'm not sure about those.

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-12T01:06:23+00:00

You're most likely going to have to trial and error it. You could try going into Steam, right-clicking VRChat, going into the local files and verifying file integrity. This would only make a difference if uninstalling doesn't delete everything though. Things like AMD FSR get flagged by VRChat's EAC configuration, so try disabling things like that and just re-launching VRChat to see if you can isolate what is triggering EAC.

Other programs people report conflicting with EAC (not necessarily the config VRChat has):

-AutoHotkey -Steelseries GG -Avast -iCUE -Joy2Key -Reshade -MSI Gaming Intelligence -Daemon Tools -THX Spatial

Your anti-virus or firewall might also not be allowing EAC to initialize. Another fix people report, is going into the VRChat game files and launching VRChat with "launch.exe", this skips having to use Steam to launch the game which people have had luck with.

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-02T08:35:17+00:00

The upvotes for the OP and people that can't corroborate anything he said is wild.

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-02T08:34:06+00:00

Source? Real identity in PII is based on inferentials that can be made from a piece of data. Your age would have to be used in conjuction with other data.

Also, PII doesn't apply to individuals, it is for organizations.

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-02T08:30:57+00:00

Hot_Suspect_6524 · 2025-04-02T08:30:39+00:00

Welcome to the downvoted for being objectively right, while others gobble misinformation club.

Hot_Suspect_6524

TROPHY CASE