Psycho-Babble Administration Thread 1086324

Shown: posts 3 to 27 of 29. Go back in thread:

 

Re: disruptions, my take Tabitha

Posted by SLS on February 20, 2016, at 15:02:06

In reply to disruptions, my take, posted by Tabitha on February 20, 2016, at 12:07:57

I do appreciate your thoughts and considerations. Perhaps you are right regarding the presence of mental challenges. Most of us seem to have one.

Mentally ill people can be trolls, too. Should they get a free pass when they know what they are doing, anyway? Lou Pilder has demonstrated that he has the ability to follow rules and exercise self-restraint. Without a moderator, he has learned that he can disregard the FAQ guidelines with each of his posts; posts that would have resulted in posting blocks in the past. He was able to follow the guidelines in the past. Why not now? He absolutely understands that his words are hurtful and upsetting to individual posters, especially when this hurt has been verbalized. He continues to hurt people, anyway.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

"In Internet slang, a troll (/'troll/, /'tr?l/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion,[3] often for their own amusement."

The stumbling block in the use of this definition has to do with intent. How are we to know the intent of someone who is mentally ill, yet acts in every way like a troll? I have considered much in a long history of uncivil posting by Lou Pilder. He is not so innocent. I don't trust that his intentions are benign. He has written things that betray his meanness. He is machiavellian, in my estimation - a component of the troll dark tetrad. I no longer take him at face-value. He is quite clever.

We could discuss this subject quite a bit more in this forum, and I really appreciate your following my request for redirection.

I am not oblivious to the fact that my posts regarding Lou Pilder are themselves uncivil according to the rules that governed this website when it was moderated in the past. However, if we were moderated, there would be no need for me to post in the manner that I have. Lou Pilder wouldn't be here if he continued to post as he does now. I have given much thought to this. I have chosen to ignore the FAQ, just as Lou Pilder has. Our goals are different, though. I still manage to exercise some self-restraint. Walking the line is somewhat difficult.

For reference:

http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil

I would gladly be warned and blocked from posting if it were to result in the equitable treatment of others who are similarly uncivil.

I hope you continue your discourse with Mr. Pilder on the Medication board. I find it insightful and informative. But PLEASE, take Lou's name out of the subject line each time you reply to one of his posts. I hope you understand why I should make this request.


- Scott

 

Re: disruptions, my take SLS

Posted by Tabitha on February 20, 2016, at 16:19:59

In reply to Re: disruptions, my take Tabitha, posted by SLS on February 20, 2016, at 15:02:06

Interesting take, Scott. It's possible to get into trouble by giving too much "benefit of the doubt".

I think the discussion on the medication board is just about at its end. I can understand the benefit of updating the subject line to remove individual poster's names and will try to remember to do that.

Cheers!

 

Disruption and taking flight. Tabitha

Posted by SLS on February 21, 2016, at 4:03:48

In reply to Re: disruptions, my take SLS, posted by Tabitha on February 20, 2016, at 16:19:59

Hi Tabitha.

You gave me reason to give more thought to all of this troll stuff while I ate dinner. I felt that perhaps I was exaggerating out of frustration. One thing is certain, I am frustrated. Otherwise, I wouldn't post these things.

> Interesting take, Scott. It's possible to get into trouble by giving too much "benefit of the doubt".

I was inclined to perhaps give this situation the benefit of the doubt - again. However, I keep coming to the same conclusions. (Not that my conclusions are necessarily valid). I wish things were different.

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/climate_desk/2014/02/internet_troll_personality_study_machiavellianism_narcissism_psychopathy.html

I will leave you with the question you asked on the Psycholoogy board. A bunch of people verbalized that they took flight because of the uncontrolled posting by Lou Pilder. One person, if given the opportunity, can ruin a board. Believe it. Lou Pilder knows this.

I guess that's about all for now.

> I think the discussion on the medication board is just about at its end. I can understand the benefit of updating the subject line to remove individual poster's names and will try to remember to do that.

Thank you. That is appreciated more than you know.

> Cheers!

Ditto.

:-)


- Scott

 

Re: Disruption and taking flight. SLS

Posted by Tabitha on February 22, 2016, at 10:33:41

In reply to Disruption and taking flight. Tabitha, posted by SLS on February 21, 2016, at 4:03:48

> Hi Tabitha.
>
> You gave me reason to give more thought to all of this troll stuff while I ate dinner. I felt that perhaps I was exaggerating out of frustration. One thing is certain, I am frustrated. Otherwise, I wouldn't post these things.

I think I understand. There was a person back around '06 that became the center of controversy on Social. We came to believe she was faking reports of suicide attempts, once going so far as to create an account pretending to be her own mother, reporting that she was hospitalized. Naturally we were angry, but every attempt to call her out on her behavior led to PBC's and blocks. Meanwhile, people who didn't know the history would see a bunch of meanies picking on the poor struggling person, and the board became divided into her defenders and her detractors. Bob just let it continue, despite that the formerly mostly supportive atmosphere was wrecked by the disruption. Those of us most bothered by it even went off and created an alternate group to escape. It was really frustrating.

> I was inclined to perhaps give this situation the benefit of the doubt - again. However, I keep coming to the same conclusions. (Not that my conclusions are necessarily valid). I wish things were different.
>
> http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/climate_desk/2014/02/internet_troll_personality_study_machiavellianism_narcissism_psychopathy.html


Yes, it's impossible to know what's behind the posting behavior we see. I'm sure it's easier for me to be charitable right now since I've been away, and haven't been watching posters driven away by seeing a board with such strange anti-psychiatry posts over and over in every thread.

However, I want to just throw this out there. I had an experience last year where a person was planning (expensive) events associated with one of my hobbies. Ultimately it turned out that it was a sort of Ponzi scheme, where more and more advance ticket sales were being used to fund current and past obligations. Finally it collapsed and over a hundred people were left with worthless (expensive) tickets and unpaid debts. Yet she still had enough good will left in the community that people contributed to a fund-raiser to supposedly keep her out of jail. I was very angry over losing money, and even moreso over feeling that I'd been fooled. Then it went on and on with her promising she would make good on the debts, and the community divided into those that still supported her, and those that felt she was dishing out BS.

I spent a lot of mental energy wondering if she was sincere or had been a con artist all along. Ultimately I went with "never attribute to malice what can be explained with simple incompetence" and I felt a *lot* better with that conclusion. So I just thought you might want to consider an alternative viewpoint, if you're not completely comfortable with viewing the situation here as deliberate trolling.

Regardless, I really appreciate you continuing to do what you can to create a supportive and useful community here.

 

Lou's warning-anti-Semitic hate

Posted by Lou Pilder on February 22, 2016, at 11:17:40

In reply to Re: Disruption and taking flight. SLS, posted by Tabitha on February 22, 2016, at 10:33:41

Friends,
Be not deceived. What is being allowed here by Mr. Hsiung is not new, but an old way to create and develop ant-Semitic hate.
Here, using me as a scapegoat for the real or imagined ills of this community turns my stomach.
Notice that Scott and Tabitha together do not specify what it is that I post about here that causes 'disruption" and people to leave this community. But it is much worse than that, for Mr. Hsiung allows this hate to be seen as being supportive, and worse, that he has some vision that by him allowing the hate to be used against my character, it will be better for the community of his to allow it. The historical record parallels this to the letter. I become the scapegoat for people leaving without myself being given the opportunity to post my response to the hate because both Scott and Tabitha and Mr. Hsiung all together leave out what I could respond to as the accusations against my character are allowed to stand as being supportive where no specification is even posted.
And even worse, I am denied the equal protection of the rules here as my notifications are allowed to be ignored by Mr. Hsiung and all of his deputies of record. Tabitha is correct in that I do not have much to use to defend the Jews here from this creation and development of anti-Semitic hate being allowed to foment here against me. There was a time when this was allowed against the Jews. Never again.
Lou

 

Re: anti-Semitic hate Lou Pilder

Posted by Tabitha on February 22, 2016, at 12:46:34

In reply to Lou's warning-anti-Semitic hate, posted by Lou Pilder on February 22, 2016, at 11:17:40

Lou, I don't feel hate toward you at all. I'm confused about why you continually assert that people are fomenting anti-Semitism, when nobody even knows who is Jewish on an anonymous message board, and the topic being discussed has nothing to do with Jews or Jewish faith or culture.

Regardless of the reason you post continually about anti-Semitism, you can see that it results in threads going off-topic, which is disruptive. Also, I have seen at least one poster so distressed by being accused of anti-Semitism as to leave the board.

Your many posts accusing people of encouraging murder or warning of certain death for using psychiatric medication also result in disruption to the discussion. The mission of this board is to support and educate people who are using psychiatric medication, so posting warnings that medication is likely to kill people using information from non-reputable anti-psychiatry websites is about as off-topic as it's possible to be.

 

Re: frustrations

Posted by Tabitha on February 22, 2016, at 13:21:46

In reply to Re: anti-Semitic hate Lou Pilder, posted by Tabitha on February 22, 2016, at 12:46:34

Wow, it is frustrating to be accused of hate and prejudice, and of encouraging people to do things that will result in their death.

It is also frustrating to try to engage in argument against such accusations with a person who seems impervious to others' perspectives. It is like banging one's head against a brick wall.

It is also frustrating to see anti-psychiatry propaganda on the Medication board, and to feel conflicted over whether to ignore it or to counter it for the sake of other people who may be persuaded by non-trustworthy information.

 

Lou's warning-an anti-Semitic site?

Posted by Lou Pilder on February 22, 2016, at 13:49:40

In reply to Re: frustrations, posted by Tabitha on February 22, 2016, at 13:21:46

> Wow, it is frustrating to be accused of hate and prejudice, and of encouraging people to do things that will result in their death.
>
> It is also frustrating to try to engage in argument against such accusations with a person who seems impervious to others' perspectives. It is like banging one's head against a brick wall.
>
> It is also frustrating to see anti-psychiatry propaganda on the Medication board, and to feel conflicted over whether to ignore it or to counter it for the sake of other people who may be persuaded by non-trustworthy information.
>
Friends,
Be not deceived. I am not anti-psychiatry, I am anti-death and also against the allowing here of anti-Semitic propaganda and the allowing of posters to violate the FDA rules for promoting drugs which by when they do that, the drugs could be thought to be safer than they really are and lead you to addiction, life-ruining conditions and death.
When anti-Semitic propaganda is allowed here to be seen as being supportive by Mr. Hsiung and his deputies of record, that could cause you to discard what I post by decreasing the respect, regard and confidence in which I am held. This also could lead to the suicides of Jewish posters here by them feeling as the outsider and dehumanized as being a Jew by Mr. Hsiung and his followers that go along with him. This is because feelings of unworthiness could be transferred by Mr. Hsiung to bring down Jewish readers here to think of killing themselves as being betrayed by psychiatry that allows a psychiatrist to allow such hate to be seen as civil and worse, that he would like it to stand so in his thinking his community will be bettered by doing so. This turns my stomach.
Here is one such post by Scott that degrades the Jews as being unsaved which popular Christiandom says that the Jews are all going to hell because they have not converted to Christiandom.
Mr. Hsiung refuses to notate the post as not being supportive where it is originally posted. This gives Scott free posting of more hatred toward me without being subject to Mr. Hsiung's enforcement policy. To allow anti-Semitism to be seen as civil, could mean to a subset of jurists, that this site is an anti-Semitic site.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20130903/msgs/1055904.html

 

Re: an anti-Semitic site?

Posted by Tabitha on February 22, 2016, at 14:22:10

In reply to Lou's warning-an anti-Semitic site?, posted by Lou Pilder on February 22, 2016, at 13:49:40

> Be not deceived. I am not anti-psychiatry, I am anti-death and also against the [...] allowing here of posters to violate the FDA rules for promoting drugs which by when they do that,

Can you provide evidence for your claim that FDA rules prohibit sharing personal experience and information about medications in a peer support group?

> the drugs could be thought to be safer than they really are and lead you to addiction, life-ruining conditions and death.

What percentage of users do you think end up with addiction, life-ruining conditions, and death from medications? Can you compare that to the percentage of users who experience life-enhancing or even life-saving relief of symptoms?


> When anti-Semitic propaganda is allowed here to be seen as being supportive by Mr. Hsiung [...]

You are really stuck on this notion.

 

Lou's reply-you will look at him Tabitha

Posted by Lou Pilder on February 22, 2016, at 14:38:52

In reply to Re: an anti-Semitic site?, posted by Tabitha on February 22, 2016, at 14:22:10

> > Be not deceived. I am not anti-psychiatry, I am anti-death and also against the [...] allowing here of posters to violate the FDA rules for promoting drugs which by when they do that,
>
> Can you provide evidence for your claim that FDA rules prohibit sharing personal experience and information about medications in a peer support group?
>
> > the drugs could be thought to be safer than they really are and lead you to addiction, life-ruining conditions and death.
>
> What percentage of users do you think end up with addiction, life-ruining conditions, and death from medications? Can you compare that to the percentage of users who experience life-enhancing or even life-saving relief of symptoms?
>
>
> > When anti-Semitic propaganda is allowed here to be seen as being supportive by Mr. Hsiung [...]
>
> You are really stuck on this notion.

T,
You wrote that I am stuck on this notion (anti-Semitic hate being allowed to stand as being supportive here)..].
It would be supportive of me to eradicate the anti-Semitic hate being allowed to be seen as being supportive here by not only Mr. Hsiung but the posters that could be seen as being in concert with him that post defamation against me here with impunity from him. As long as you and Scott and others are permitted by Mr. Hsiung to post what could decrease the respect, regard and confidence in which I am held as in your case of spreading hatred against me as "disrupting", and causing others to leave, that could make me the scapegoat for the real or imagined ills of this community that could inflict emotional distress upon me and other Jews.
You are right when you say I have limited ways to stop Mr. Hsiung from him allowing you to post such hate here, but it has been revealed to me that someone greater than me will destroy the hate being allowed here. I may not be here when that happens, but it has been revealed to me that it will. And then you will look at him that you defamed.
Lou

 

Lou's reply-FDA rules for promoting drugs on media

Posted by Lou Pilder on February 22, 2016, at 15:44:52

In reply to Lou's reply-you will look at him Tabitha, posted by Lou Pilder on February 22, 2016, at 14:38:52

> > > Be not deceived. I am not anti-psychiatry, I am anti-death and also against the [...] allowing here of posters to violate the FDA rules for promoting drugs which by when they do that,
> >
> > Can you provide evidence for your claim that FDA rules prohibit sharing personal experience and information about medications in a peer support group?
> >
> > > the drugs could be thought to be safer than they really are and lead you to addiction, life-ruining conditions and death.
> >
> > What percentage of users do you think end up with addiction, life-ruining conditions, and death from medications? Can you compare that to the percentage of users who experience life-enhancing or even life-saving relief of symptoms?
> >
> >
> > > When anti-Semitic propaganda is allowed here to be seen as being supportive by Mr. Hsiung [...]
> >
> > You are really stuck on this notion.
>
> T,
> You wrote that I am stuck on this notion (anti-Semitic hate being allowed to stand as being supportive here)..].
> It would be supportive of me to eradicate the anti-Semitic hate being allowed to be seen as being supportive here by not only Mr. Hsiung but the posters that could be seen as being in concert with him that post defamation against me here with impunity from him. As long as you and Scott and others are permitted by Mr. Hsiung to post what could decrease the respect, regard and confidence in which I am held as in your case of spreading hatred against me as "disrupting", and causing others to leave, that could make me the scapegoat for the real or imagined ills of this community that could inflict emotional distress upon me and other Jews.
> You are right when you say I have limited ways to stop Mr. Hsiung from him allowing you to post such hate here, but it has been revealed to me that someone greater than me will destroy the hate being allowed here. I may not be here when that happens, but it has been revealed to me that it will. And then you will look at him that you defamed.
> Lou

T,
You want to know about the FDA rules for promoting these drugs. The rules are not different for social media. I do not know why Mr. Hsiung is exempt from the rules. Let us look at this:
Lou
http://www.drugwatch.com/manufacturer/marketing

 

Re: FDA rules for promoting drugs on media

Posted by Tabitha on February 22, 2016, at 16:27:23

In reply to Lou's reply-FDA rules for promoting drugs on media, posted by Lou Pilder on February 22, 2016, at 15:44:52

> You want to know about the FDA rules for promoting these drugs. The rules are not different for social media. I do not know why Mr. Hsiung is exempt from the rules. Let us look at this:
> Lou
> http://www.drugwatch.com/manufacturer/marketing

The article talks about FDA regulations about advertising by pharmaceutical companies themselves. It also said a celebrity was warned by the FDA for a social media post about a morning-sickness drug. However it left out the key fact that she was actually being *paid by the pharmaceutical company* to promote the drug, which is why her act violated FDA rules. It is because she was acting on behalf of the company, thus her post was considered advertising. I am not paid by any pharmaceutical company, nor is Dr Bob, so I cannot see how any FDA rule is being broken.

For more on the celebrity case http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2015/08/fda_warned_kim_kardashian_for_promoting_diclegis_on_instagram_that_s_wrong.html

 

Re: Lou's reply-you will look at him

Posted by Tabitha on February 22, 2016, at 16:36:16

In reply to Lou's reply-you will look at him Tabitha, posted by Lou Pilder on February 22, 2016, at 14:38:52

> long as you and Scott and others are permitted by Mr. Hsiung to post what could decrease the respect, regard and confidence in which I am held as in your case of spreading hatred against me as "disrupting", and causing others to leave, that could make me the scapegoat for the real or imagined ills of this community that could inflict emotional distress upon me and other Jews.


Lou, I am sorry to say that the number and content of your posts will likely result in you being the target of negative feelings from the group, whether me or Scott or anyone else comments on them or not. I am truly sorry if these comments create distress for you, and I wish you could see that there is no evidence for the idea that people's reaction to you has anything to do with you (presumably) being Jewish. I agree that anti-Semitism is an awful thing and I would not like to promote it.

However I do think we have a right to discuss our own frustration and the impact on the community of any poster's actions, particularly on Admin board. I have tried to be as charitable as possible in my remarks.

> it has been revealed to me that someone greater than me will destroy the hate being allowed here. I may not be here when that happens, but it has been revealed to me that it will. And then you will look at him that you defamed.
> Lou

(((Lou))) that's a symbolic hug. Peace to you.

 

Lou's warning-against the Jew

Posted by Lou Pilder on February 22, 2016, at 16:42:28

In reply to Lou's warning-an anti-Semitic site?, posted by Lou Pilder on February 22, 2016, at 13:49:40

> > Wow, it is frustrating to be accused of hate and prejudice, and of encouraging people to do things that will result in their death.
> >
> > It is also frustrating to try to engage in argument against such accusations with a person who seems impervious to others' perspectives. It is like banging one's head against a brick wall.
> >
> > It is also frustrating to see anti-psychiatry propaganda on the Medication board, and to feel conflicted over whether to ignore it or to counter it for the sake of other people who may be persuaded by non-trustworthy information.
> >
> Friends,
> Be not deceived. I am not anti-psychiatry, I am anti-death and also against the allowing here of anti-Semitic propaganda and the allowing of posters to violate the FDA rules for promoting drugs which by when they do that, the drugs could be thought to be safer than they really are and lead you to addiction, life-ruining conditions and death.
> When anti-Semitic propaganda is allowed here to be seen as being supportive by Mr. Hsiung and his deputies of record, that could cause you to discard what I post by decreasing the respect, regard and confidence in which I am held. This also could lead to the suicides of Jewish posters here by them feeling as the outsider and dehumanized as being a Jew by Mr. Hsiung and his followers that go along with him. This is because feelings of unworthiness could be transferred by Mr. Hsiung to bring down Jewish readers here to think of killing themselves as being betrayed by psychiatry that allows a psychiatrist to allow such hate to be seen as civil and worse, that he would like it to stand so in his thinking his community will be bettered by doing so. This turns my stomach.
> Here is one such post by Scott that degrades the Jews as being unsaved which popular Christiandom says that the Jews are all going to hell because they have not converted to Christiandom.
> Mr. Hsiung refuses to notate the post as not being supportive where it is originally posted. This gives Scott free posting of more hatred toward me without being subject to Mr. Hsiung's enforcement policy. To allow anti-Semitism to be seen as civil, could mean to a subset of jurists, that this site is an anti-Semitic site.
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20130903/msgs/1055904.html
>
Friends,
The anti-Semitism being allowed to be seen here as being civil and supportive could plant into your mind a (false) feeling of superiority that could be destructive to you when you find out that Jefferson was right when he penned, [...We hold these truths self-evident, that all men are created equal...].
The horrors of the discrimination toward the Jews by those overseeing countries, schools, universities, work places and other communities is well-documented in the historical literature. They that did such atrocities all claimed that they were exempt from any wrong doing because they justified mass-murder on the grounds that they were doing what would be good for their country as a whole. Here, Mr. Hsiung says that what he does is in his mind that his doing it will be better for his community. I say that Jews do not have to be defamed here so that Mr. Hsiung's vision is satisfied.
Here, Mr. Hsiung makes it uncivil to post the foundation of Judaism as revealed to me, while he allows the foundation of anti-Semitic hate to abound. This is against the Jew which is the definition of anti-Semitism. And I can not stop him, but it has been revealed to me that whatever is being done to me here will be done to those that do it to me. For it has been revealed to me that those that post hatred toward me here also post hatred to the God that the Jews give service and worship to. And Mr. Hsiung posts the swastika and refuses to take it down. He has posted to me a prohibition to post his link, but allows a former deputy to do so. Look at the link inside the poster's text to bring this up.
You serpents, you vipers, how can you escape the damnation of hell.
Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20140902/msgs/1076922.html

 

Re: religious obsession

Posted by Tabitha on February 22, 2016, at 18:05:23

In reply to Lou's warning-against the Jew, posted by Lou Pilder on February 22, 2016, at 16:42:28


> You serpents, you vipers, how can you escape the damnation of hell.

Did you know that religious obsession is a symptom of bipolar disorder?

 

Lou's reply-few there be

Posted by Lou Pilder on February 22, 2016, at 18:36:57

In reply to Re: religious obsession, posted by Tabitha on February 22, 2016, at 18:05:23

>
> > You serpents, you vipers, how can you escape the damnation of hell.
>
> Did you know that religious obsession is a symptom of bipolar disorder?
>
> Tabitha,
I know that psychiatry labels me is being obsessed and have bipolar disorder. But look at this Jesus of Nazareth. They say he was obsessed also, saying "Repent, for the Kingdom of heaven is at hand." They said he was mashoogah. They said he had a devil and He was obsessed. And then he said, "Man shall not live by bread alone." And also, "Seek first the Kingdom of God and all these things will be added to you." What obsession!!!
Psychiatry will lead you down a road. And look at those here that have found destruction from following the road of psychiatry. I have come here to lead you to another road, and few there be that find it.
Lou

 

Re: few there be

Posted by Tabitha on February 22, 2016, at 19:16:28

In reply to Lou's reply-few there be, posted by Lou Pilder on February 22, 2016, at 18:36:57

> I know that psychiatry labels me is being obsessed and have bipolar disorder. But look at this Jesus of Nazareth. [...]

I don't see how things turned out so well for Jesus.

> Psychiatry will lead you down a road. And look at those here that have found destruction from following the road of psychiatry. I have come here to lead you to another road, and few there be that find it.

A close family member found that road. She told me "psychiatrists aren't the answer", then she started going to church. She loved going to church so much that it was the last thing she did right before she killed herself. So you see, I'm probably the very last person you will be able to convince that religion offers a better path than medical care for mental illness.

But I do hope your obsessions offer you some comfort!

 

Re: few there be Tabitha

Posted by SLS on February 23, 2016, at 4:43:46

In reply to Re: few there be, posted by Tabitha on February 22, 2016, at 19:16:28

Well done, Tabitha. I genuinely liked how you interacted with Lou in such a respectful, kind, and gentle way. I admire you greatly for this, and wish that I could be more like you.


- Scott

 

Re: reflections Lou Pilder

Posted by SLS on February 23, 2016, at 4:52:14

In reply to Lou's reply-few there be, posted by Lou Pilder on February 22, 2016, at 18:36:57

Lou, I do hope that you reflect on the things Tabitha observed and suggested.

Perhaps you can help clarify your position by listing those things about medications that you didn't like when you were taking them.


- Scott

 

Re: few there be SLS

Posted by Tabitha on February 23, 2016, at 10:27:39

In reply to Re: few there be Tabitha, posted by SLS on February 23, 2016, at 4:43:46

> Well done, Tabitha. I genuinely liked how you interacted with Lou in such a respectful, kind, and gentle way. I admire you greatly for this, and wish that I could be more like you.
>

Thank you for saying so :-)

However I suspect that there are several points where I would have been sanctioned under the old civility guidelines.

 

Lou's response-hatred against the Jews and others Tabitha

Posted by Lou Pilder on February 23, 2016, at 10:50:10

In reply to Re: few there be SLS, posted by Tabitha on February 23, 2016, at 10:27:39

> > Well done, Tabitha. I genuinely liked how you interacted with Lou in such a respectful, kind, and gentle way. I admire you greatly for this, and wish that I could be more like you.
> >
>
> Thank you for saying so :-)
>
> However I suspect that there are several points where I would have been sanctioned under the old civility guidelines.
>
> Friends,
Be not deceived by what Scott has posted here concerning the conduct of Tabitha. There is a lot of hatred toward Jews and Christiandom people in her post. I intend to show this is allowed by Mr. Hsiung to defame the Jews and others as being allowed by him for the statements to be seen as being supportive. If allowed to stand, anti-Semitic hate could be furthered here which I am trying to stop. But be not deceived that Scott and Tabitha have exemption from the enforcement rules of Mr. Hsiung. This alone is against the Jew because the anti-Semitic statements could harm Jews. And this harm according to Mr. Hsiung is to be allowed to stand so that his community will be bettered in the whole, so he thinks. I will show you that this is false according to the historical record and could bring harm not only to Jews, but Christiandom people as well and also others that embrace such hate.
Lou

 

Re: hatred against the Jews and others Lou Pilder

Posted by Tabitha on February 23, 2016, at 12:05:30

In reply to Lou's response-hatred against the Jews and others Tabitha, posted by Lou Pilder on February 23, 2016, at 10:50:10

> Be not deceived by what Scott has posted here concerning the conduct of Tabitha. There is a lot of hatred toward Jews and Christiandom people in her post.

OK, Lou, I understand that you hear hatred for Jews and Christiandom in my post. I don't see it that way, and I don't feel hatred toward Jews or Christians. I don't agree that religious faith is a good alternative to medical care for mental illness, but I don't think that is the same as encouraging hatred. I do agree that hatred toward a religious group is a bad thing.

Thanks for the exchange. I think I learned some things about your views on the dangers of psychiatric medications and your belief that this board violates FDA regulations. The discussion made me think more about these topics and clarify my own thinking, so I appreciate it.

 

Lou's reply-defame Christians allowed Tabitha

Posted by Lou Pilder on February 23, 2016, at 18:01:08

In reply to Re: few there be, posted by Tabitha on February 22, 2016, at 19:16:28

> > I know that psychiatry labels me is being obsessed and have bipolar disorder. But look at this Jesus of Nazareth. [...]
>
> I don't see how things turned out so well for Jesus.
>
> > Psychiatry will lead you down a road. And look at those here that have found destruction from following the road of psychiatry. I have come here to lead you to another road, and few there be that find it.
>
> A close family member found that road. She told me "psychiatrists aren't the answer", then she started going to church. She loved going to church so much that it was the last thing she did right before she killed herself. So you see, I'm probably the very last person you will be able to convince that religion offers a better path than medical care for mental illness.
>
> But I do hope your obsessions offer you some comfort!

Friends,
It is allowed by Mr. Hsiung for Tabitha to post,[...your obsessions...].
The obsessions could be thought by a subset of readers to be related to my efforts here to stop Mr. Hsiung from allowing anti-Semitism to be seen as being supportive by him where such posts are originally posted and my efforts to educate readers concerning psychotropic drugs that could cause addiction, life-ruining conditions and death.
I used this Jesus of Nazareth as an example of that people called him names and could be classified by psychiatry as being obsessed. Tabitha's statement,[...I don't see how things turned out so well for Jesus...] degrades and insults those that give service and worship to him. For her statement could be thought by a subset of Christiandom people as that Jesus was stupid and suffered a horrible death for no reason and that His bringing the news to repent for the kingdom of heaven was at hand was an obsession that led to his death.
But the Christiasndom people could see that as an insult or even a perversion of their faith and feel put down. For their scriptures say that,[...It pleased the Lord to bruise Him...].
And to say that things did not turn out so well for Jesus contradicts the foundation of Christianity. For they see His death as the completion of a mission and their scriptures state,[...For God so loved the world that he GAVE his only begotten son...].emphasis mine.
That the Christians include that Jesus was resurrected from the dead contradicts and insults Christianity when anyone says that his death was in vain and things did not turn out so well for Him.
Tabitha's post is allowed to be seen here as being supportive by Mr. Hsiung. It is hatred against the Christians as it insults their faith and can be seen as being validated by Mr. Hsiung as he allows it to be exempt from his enforcement policy. This will in no wise help here to overcome depression or addiction, for hate can cause your death from the drugs being allowed to be promoted here as "medicines".
Lou

 

Re: defame Christians allowed Lou Pilder

Posted by Tabitha on February 23, 2016, at 19:51:27

In reply to Lou's reply-defame Christians allowed Tabitha, posted by Lou Pilder on February 23, 2016, at 18:01:08

Sigh. I should have known I would not get to have the last word.


> > But I do hope your obsessions offer you some comfort!
>
> Friends,
> It is allowed by Mr. Hsiung for Tabitha to post,[...your obsessions...].


If it makes you feel better, I expect Mr. Hsiung probably would say that referring to someone's posts as "your obsessions" is unsuportive. He might even consider it uncivil. Perhaps he will come back and sanction me. I miss him. What about you? Do you miss Dr. Bob?

> I used this Jesus of Nazareth as an example of that people called him names and could be classified by psychiatry as being obsessed.

What do you think psychiatry would have to say about Jesus if he showed up today? How do people tell the difference between a healthy obsession and an unhealthy one?


> Tabitha's statement,[...I don't see how things turned out so well for Jesus...] degrades and insults those that give service and worship to him. For her statement could be thought by a subset of Christiandom people as that Jesus was stupid and suffered a horrible death for no reason and that His bringing the news to repent for the kingdom of heaven was at hand was an obsession that led to his death.

Huh. I can see how you could infer that from what I said, but it's way harsher than anything I think. I recognize that Jesus' death has a huge meaning for at least a billion people. But a person lacking Christian belief might see a man who agitated the authorities of his time so much that he ultimately died a horrible death, and might think that is not such a good role model for a person struggling to attain moderation in their life and mental health.

Admittedly it was a flip remark. Unsupportive as well, probably. Sometimes I like to say something that seems witty to me without fully considering the result. It probably stings people some time, but I don't think it's fair to call it hate.

 

Lou's reply-the transferrence of hate Tabitha

Posted by Lou Pilder on February 23, 2016, at 20:05:41

In reply to Re: defame Christians allowed Lou Pilder, posted by Tabitha on February 23, 2016, at 19:51:27

> Sigh. I should have known I would not get to have the last word.
>
>
> > > But I do hope your obsessions offer you some comfort!
> >
> > Friends,
> > It is allowed by Mr. Hsiung for Tabitha to post,[...your obsessions...].
>
>
> If it makes you feel better, I expect Mr. Hsiung probably would say that referring to someone's posts as "your obsessions" is unsuportive. He might even consider it uncivil. Perhaps he will come back and sanction me. I miss him. What about you? Do you miss Dr. Bob?
>
> > I used this Jesus of Nazareth as an example of that people called him names and could be classified by psychiatry as being obsessed.
>
> What do you think psychiatry would have to say about Jesus if he showed up today? How do people tell the difference between a healthy obsession and an unhealthy one?
>
>
> > Tabitha's statement,[...I don't see how things turned out so well for Jesus...] degrades and insults those that give service and worship to him. For her statement could be thought by a subset of Christiandom people as that Jesus was stupid and suffered a horrible death for no reason and that His bringing the news to repent for the kingdom of heaven was at hand was an obsession that led to his death.
>
> Huh. I can see how you could infer that from what I said, but it's way harsher than anything I think. I recognize that Jesus' death has a huge meaning for at least a billion people. But a person lacking Christian belief might see a man who agitated the authorities of his time so much that he ultimately died a horrible death, and might think that is not such a good role model for a person struggling to attain moderation in their life and mental health.
>
> Admittedly it was a flip remark. Unsupportive as well, probably. Sometimes I like to say something that seems witty to me without fully considering the result. It probably stings people some time, but I don't think it's fair to call it hate.

T,
The statement could be thought to be disrespectful to Christians and to be ridiculing them as followers of the Way that He prescribed to live. That could degrade the Christian and could lead them to feel put down. To lead someone to feel put down could show a lack of respect for the ones that you are putting down, which could be hate. This type of hate allowed by Mr. Hsiung here against the Christians turns my stomach and children that read here could be seriously misled to accept the degrading of Christians in your post as being good for his community as a whole. That could lead to transfer of the hate to others and to themselves, which could cause them to commit suicide as the drugs here can induce that type of thinking. Oh, the horrors of this site.
Lou


Go forward in thread:


Show another thread

URL of post in thread:


Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ


[dr. bob] Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD, bob@dr-bob.org

Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.