Posted by Lou Pilder on February 26, 2012, at 11:24:05
In reply to Lou's reply-kubah » Solstice, posted by Lou Pilder on February 26, 2012, at 11:04:39
> > Lou
> >
> > > E. If the administration does not attend to a notification, could that allow one to... have other emotional distress inflicted upon them?
> >
> > That certainly was my experience when the notifications I sent regarding my thread being hijacked were not attended to.
> >
> > Solstice
> >
> > Solstice,
> You wrote the above.
> Now it is my understanding that the concept of "hijacking a thread" is not a part of the TOS here. Instead, the forum allows the freedom to respond to posts here in what the poster wants to post about whatever it is that they are responding to. That freedom is provided to all the members here. If the response posted belongs somewhere else like on another board, the administartion {redirects} it. Sometimes a member can post and not know if it is going to be redirected until after the fact. There is a way in my unnderstanding for a member to redirect a post?
> But what is done on other forums about "hijacking a thread", I have never seen invoked here by the administraion, not that because that I have no recolection of such that it has not been done by the administartion.
> I do not consider a response posted to a post in the thread to ever be "hijacking" a thread because it could be redirected by the administration here. And if not, it is what it is and other responders could know that what it is ,is what it is. Members could still reply to other members regardless if there is a post that could be redirected but is not done so by the administration.
> There is also the concept here of telling another that they can not post in a thread, or dictate the content that the poster can post in the thread. The question is if telling another not to post {whatever} is or is not supportive, for support takes precedence.
> Now support is not the same as reinforcement. If a member here wants to advocate that one can drink vodka while taking a benzodiazepine, that does not mean that if a member posts that the combining of those two could cause death is not to be posted in that thread. The warning of death by combining the drugs is supportive in my understnding. Now if one came here and started a thread that the earth is flat, that does not mean that others have to post to reinforce that concept. You see, hijacking a thread does not exist here because support takes precedence which could mean that there could be posts that do not reinforce the initiator's premise, which could be good for the community as a whole because by not supporting the premis, lives could be saved or people could avoid a life-ruining condition or addiction or death.
> Lou
>
> Friends,
The concept of telling others not to post was made here by the owner to be prohibited. I came here on the basis that I thoght that the site was under thhe umbrella of the U of Chicago which meant to me that I would have freedom of speech as others in the forum had and would not be discriminated on as that I would be an equal member here.
Many of you already know of that there are outstending notifications from me here that go back day, weeks, months and years. IMHHO, lives could be saved if the notifications were attended to. And there is much more to this.
But as to "hijacking" a thread, the concept here has been to me that no one here can tell me or anyone else, what I can or can not post. I took Mr. Hsiung at his word at the start of this forum.
Lou
Here is a post by Mr. Hsiung that exemplfies that no one is to tell another to not post, which in my understsnding negates any concept here of "hijacking" a thread for the admin could redirect posts.
Lou
To see this post:
A. Go to the search box at the bottom of this page
B. Type in:
[Dr bob, faith, 338]
usually first
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:1011298
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20110117/msgs/1011647.html