Posted by Llurpsie_Noodle on January 25, 2007, at 8:57:09
In reply to Re: what about blocks resulting in PTSD...possible? » zenhussy, posted by zazenduckie on January 24, 2007, at 16:39:13
> I think so.
>
> Don't people say Babble saved their lives and was a lifeline , a family etc? The loss of a safe haven and a community would be pretty traumatic I think. I think many people effected by Katrina could testify to the devastating effect of loss of community.I have written once or twice that I think that babble saves lives.
>
> Perhaps complex PTSD since blocking is usually a series of events rather than a single event. As well as blocks of an individual it would be terribly stressful to see others blocked. I think Bob underestimates this factor. Witnessing trauma causes PTSD as well as experiencing personally. And the helplessness...the absolute helplessness to control the blocking. How many years of archives of people protesting the loss of people they cared about and to what effect? All the power belongs to Bob. And he asks people to trust him rather than giving them power to influence the rules.Yes, Zazenduckie I have to agree with you here. I do my very best to be a good LlurpsieNoodle. Civil and friendly and supportive. I know that sometimes I am triggered to act self-destructively. One of those self-destructive urges is to get myself blocked on babble. Yes, my psyche views getting myself blocked as a self-injurious behavior.
I am also triggered and very upset and saddened when one of the community is forced out because of an infraction that seems trivial. I think that the punishment rarely fits the crime on this site. I have also given up trying to change things on babble. I am only writing about this because I find that it helps me understand my own reactions to blocks and I am very much interested in your suggestion that PTSD/InternetAddiction/Psycho-Babble may cause certain posters to react in an extremely maladaptive fashion to a block.
> I don't understand the rules. I know some people say they do. But some don't. Those who don't are in an impossible situation when Bob overrides their own knowledge of what their post is meant to say. They are powerless even to define the meaning of their own posts.
Yes, that's one of the problems with this place, and perhaps with communication in general. Certain statement intended to be interpreted quite literally is civil; when interpreted in the larger context of preceding thread is somewhat uncivil, and when interpreted in light of some heated argument taking place on another board altogether is decidedly uncivil. The original poster might not be given a chance to rephrase. That's terrible, in my opinion.
>
> There is no way to influence whether or not a poster is blocked. It is not predictable. Sometimes people are blocked sometimes they aren't-for exactly the same action.
>
> Complex PTSD features a tendency towards re-victimisation and people do return year after year some of them even after very painful experiences here...and every time the block is longer and so presumably the trauma is even more severe. Maybe it is this more than an internet addiction.
>
I've been diagnosed with this form of PTSD. I've found that I am triggered by certain happenings, and I *DO* tend to return to the scene of the crime, perhaps to see if the abusers will treat me better "this time". It's futile. They haven't changed; I haven't changed. We fall into the same patterns: I make myself vulnerable and elicit their abuse. I can EASILY see how blocks can initiate this pattern. A block happens. The poster is stunned, furious. The poster returns, hoping for a different outcome ("THIS time Dr. Bob is going to give me a chance to express myself"). Another block. It escalates. So does the sense of trauma in the blocked person (or so I would imagine, having never been blocked).> I don't know. This is just speculation. I know you know a lot more than I do about PTSD. What do you think?
>
> Experiencing trauma, the loss of friends , family, community, witnessing the trauma of others, being powerless to control what is happening....yep sounds like PTSD to me.
>There is recent neuroimaging research on how humans perceive social isolation and being excluded from a group. In one study, the subject is inside an MRI scanner, and is playing a virtual videogame with 2 other people. They are supposed to toss a ball back and forth. After a while, the subject is excluded from the game, and the other two just toss the ball back and forth between the two of them. The part of the brain that shows more activity during exclusion is the same part of the brain that shows increased activity when sensing physical pain (such as a pin-prick, or holding a too-hot mug of coffee). Thus, social ostracism is a real punishment, in the sense that it causes the brain to activate (some) of the network associated with perception of physical pain.
I don't think it would be appropriate for a pdoc to administer physical punishment to uncivil members of a support group.
We need to reconsider what the meaning of a block is. How does a block affect the blocked, the innocent bystander, the target of the incivility, the administration?
Does it make us feel "better" when someone is punished who has offended us? If so, is this feeling a pro-social feeling (i.e. of safety in our community), or merely a wish for revenge (outlet for anger) in a just world?
Does it make us feel "better" when someone is punished who has targeted an incivility towards us, but we were never offended? In my experience, no. I feel guilty because somehow my post may have elicited the other poster to post something that got them into trouble. Survivor's guilt, also.
Does the blocked person feel "better" once they understand their incivility. Do they feel that they have been given a learning opportunity, a chance to reflect and learn how to be a better community member? Does the blocked person feel pain or anguish at being cut off from his/her support network? Do these feelings vary as a function of whether the rule infraction was blatant vs. subtle? Do these feelings vary as a function of current mental health status? Do these feelings vary as a function of history of being abused or traumatized? Do these feelings vary as a function of the individuals addiction to psycho-babble?
Finally, what meaning do blocks have for the administration? Is there the sense of relief for having gotten someone "off the streets" who threatened the safety of community members? Is there a sense of regret for being forced to apply rules, even though the infraction was not serious? Is there any sense of guilt at being forced to punish a member of the community who has done many supportive acts? Is there a sense of pleasure at administering a punishment to someone who is clearly "guilty"? Is there a sense of resentment towards the rules in general, and Dr. Bob in particular who have set up a system that forces them to make unpopular and seemingly unfair decisions against their friends? Is there a sense of hopelessness from having to enforce escalating blocks on a babbler who is clearly trying to elicit punishment for some self-destructive reason? Is there a sense of hopelessness at being forced to apply blocks towards those that genuinely are trying hard, but just don't "get it"
>
> > how does that affect the person's Internet addiction? whether or not they had PTSD before the addiction or after? or do you think it matters when?
>
>
> I really don't know. I guess if the addiction was a way to cope with the PTSD it would get worse after the block. On the other side I guess someone with a preexisting addiction might be more likely to become involved enough in Babble to develop a relationship that would result in trauma if it was disrupted.
>
>
>
> Thanks for taking me seriously and answering my post!
>Duckie, I always take you seriously. You are very welcome.
-Ll
poster:Llurpsie_Noodle
thread:723332
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20070123/msgs/726283.html