RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM?

RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

LadyAngelika -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 1:53:38 PM)
In a mad world only the mad are sane. - Akira Kurosawa

kdsub -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 1:55:44 PM)
You're nuts too and that's what makes this board interesting...how boring it would be if we were all sane. I say down with the panties and pass the tinfoil. Butch PS..aah the panties part is metaphorically speaking of course

LadyNTrainer -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 1:55:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika I get what she is saying now and I fully agree. And I for one will make a more conscious effort to ignore those posts. But there will always be new people who will fall into the trap of answering them and proceed in an exercise of chasing their tail and derailing the thread. It can actually be hard to tell whether addressing them concisely or ignoring them is likely to end the disruption sooner, particularly when they involve provoking conjectures, and the inevitability of new people responding. Human nature is what it is, and it's not going to change. Ergo, the disruption will continue. You can't actually stop people in a public place from yelling, "Look! It's an elephant!" by telling them one by one to ignore the elephant. Even if all of them agree, which is unlikely, it simply doesn't work. You can get silence for a short time while the original crowd is still in the forefront, but as soon as it shifts enough to let new people see, you are predictably going to start hearing choruses of, "Oh my god! It's an elephant!" I can think of absolutely no way to stop it or fix it as long as the elephant keeps on being an elephant, and keeps on being publicly visible. If you can, I'm listening. But as long as there's an elephant in the room, or more to the point on the thread, the majority of discussions on any topic are very likely to be run off topic by his appearance. Maybe that's just one of the consequences of free speech that cannot be avoided, but is a consequence.

TheHeretic -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 1:57:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyNTrainer How would you like us to respond when we feel there is good reason to believe that someone who is posting crazy-talk on a regular basis is actually mentally disturbed and needs professional help? Block, and move on. You have no idea what the reality of the person on the other end might be, including it being a garden variety asshole who is laughing his ass off at this thread right now, or someone already under professional care who has been medicated DOWN to this point.

LadyNTrainer -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 1:58:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub I don't know how this relates to this thread though. It doesn't. It got derailed by the same guy who said that murderers go to heaven because they don't know that what they're doing is wrong. That's the kind of thing that tends to provoke a direct response whether it is on topic for the thread or not, and he's remarkably consistent in throwing this kind of stuff out on all kinds of threads. The moderators don't seem to have an issue with him making statements like this more or less at random on various threads, perhaps because they are simply a free (if disturbingly bizarre) expression of his beliefs, and insufficient cause for censure by themselves. You begin to see a small glimmer of the problem, perhaps?

kdsub -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 2:05:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika quote: Well if you see the posts.. then ignore them and move on perhaps others would too. Butch, LNT explained that it's not a question of her ignoring them as she will do that. It is more a question of others not ignoring them and derailing threads. I get what she is saying now and I fully agree. And I for one will make a more conscious effort to ignore those posts. But there will always be new people who will fall into the trap of answering them and proceed in an exercise of chasing their tail and derailing the thread. As far as there being a solution, I've had posts of mine pulled for being mildly off-topic before. I've recently had a post pulled where I warned people about feeding trolls because the troll reported it as an insult to him, which I clearly admit it was. I can deal with it, but really, go figure. So that said, I agree with LNT that there probably is no single solution, not until every poster here is willing to take ownership and responsibility for what they post. - LA I agree as well.. that is why I have been saying only the Administrators hold the solution. Butch

LadyPact -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 2:05:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub I'm not sure if you are addressing me...in fact I have not mentioned any rights. BUT...lol... I believe in human rights and luckily I think The US has done a pretty good job over the years defining them in their laws. So should not all people on this earth have these basic rights? I don't know how this relates to this thread though. Butch Perhaps you should read all of the responses to the thread. It would show you that it was brought up, even though it wasn't by you. As to human rights, I'm not especially sure that freedom of speech is one of those. In many places, freedom of speech isn't a right, as dictated by where a person lives. A question that the answer is certainly bigger than Me. Rights are funny things. I'm not even sure that what we're discussing is a question of rights at all. For example, every child is entitled to an education, but not every child has the right to disrupt the education of others by constantly annoying and interrupting the rest of the class.

kdsub -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 2:09:47 PM)
I did not believe it applied to the thread when addressed to me. So you do not believe, on a personal level, that freedom to talk is a human right? Butch

Loki45 -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 2:10:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyNTrainer I'm talking about having long term reasons to believe that there is actual mental illness going on, and being as much concerned as annoyed. A better question is what do you do when you realize the number of those people is actually growing. Redact all you like...a large number of us here know exactly the ones you mean (or at least the ones we think are mentally disturbed). They often start threads in the political forums and make the wildest claims you can imagine.

LadyAngelika -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 2:13:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub I agree as well.. that is why I have been saying only the Administrators hold the solution. If they held the solution, they would have enforced it. I know VAA, and I know her and her team do their best. But CM is a public forum where all are welcome to voice their opinion so long as they are mindful of the TOS. Because they have chosen this formula, to censure a few is to go against the principles of the site. I actually think it is the opposite and I think it's up to users to make this site what they want it to be by showing by example how to avoid idiotic posts. I've fallen into the trap myself a few times, but perhaps it's time we all make a conscious effort to avoid the traps? - LA

LadyPact -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 2:16:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub I did not believe it applied to the thread when addressed to me. So you do not believe, on a personal level, that freedom to talk is a human right? Butch Generally, if I'm addressing someone, I'm either addressing them by name or I quote what they have written. The "in response to" feature really only has anything to do with when a person has chronologically posted, unless person has specifically used the "in reply to" option. As to whether I believe a person has the right to talk, I can promise you that, whatever I think either way, is not especially what is dictated in some countries.

LadyAngelika -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 2:16:53 PM)
quote: QED. Emphasis mine. Maybe, just maybe, he's an evil sadistic mastermind that comes here to fuck with us, one and all? ;-) - LA

kdsub -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 2:16:53 PM)
They write the TOS they could change it in any way they please...In fact how simple it would be to say they reserve the right to ban any member for any reason they see fit. Butch

lobodomslavery -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 2:17:07 PM)
With respect Lady Pact , Your not really comparing like with like. We are all grown adults not kids. You dont patrol an adult forum like you do a kids classroom, it s not about silence please, it s about live and let live. As long as the person is not saying disturbing things or threatening to do disturbing things to himself/herself, i dont see the problem kevin

kdsub -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 2:21:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub I did not believe it applied to the thread when addressed to me. So you do not believe, on a personal level, that freedom to talk is a human right? Butch Generally, if I'm addressing someone, I'm either addressing them by name or I quote what they have written. The "in response to" feature really only has anything to do with when a person has chronologically posted, unless person has specifically used the "in reply to" option. As to whether I believe a person has the right to talk, I can promise you that, whatever I think either way, is not especially what is dictated in some countries. I often make the same mistake when posting...in fact I wish they would make the default the OP rather than the last poster unless otherwise stated. Freedom of speech to me is a human right even if not allowed in many nations... and my point it is should be a right on CM. If we are to be enlightened. Butch

LadyEllen -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 2:30:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyNTrainer How would you like us to respond when we feel there is good reason to believe that someone who is posting crazy-talk on a regular basis is actually mentally disturbed and needs professional help? I don't see that reasonably passing by without comment, and I'm not even sure it's ethical to either ignore him or encourage him. What do we do? Is there really a good answer? There is no doubt in my mind that the person in question is disturbed and could well do with help. Not that I am qualified to say so except by way of frequent acquaintance with similar conduct in the context of a psychiatric unit - where I was a visitor I might hasten to add, though that could be what I thought at the time of course. What do we do is really a question as to what can we do I feel, and in that regard the answer is not a great deal except to ignore or to engage. But before making that decision I would suppose we should need to know exactly what we are dealing with. Is engagement serving to prevent a deterioration that should be accelerated if he were ignored? In truth we have no means of knowing. That there is a question as to whether any special treatment is required at all is true enough - it is after all none of our business except in as much as we permit it to affect us by not using the block button, and one must say it is also somewhat unusual for any form of concern to be shown for anyone who disrupts affairs here. That this member appears to attract such feelings is interesting. There is a question as to whether the member represents a danger to others. That he may represent a danger to himself may be true, but there is little we can do about that but to recommend he see someone - which of course he is free to do or not do as he chooses - as has been recommended many times. I am not convinced he is a danger to others at this time, though not entirely convinced this should be an enduring situation. Either way as Lucienne has indicated we cannot and do not owe a duty of care to the world at large but this is hardly satisfactory should the worst happen, to him or by him, for whomever is on the receiving end of what I see as a simmering volcano of mental confusion, and the investigatory trail lead to this site as being in any way involved or implicated in tipping him over the edge. Ultimately it is a matter for those with the power to act if they see a need to act. In the meantime we users can only make our own decisions according to what we feel and the nature of the conduct from time to time. I dont believe it should be wise to adopt any sort of members' party line in this except to say that perhaps engagement should be maintained but kept under control as to what may well be going on in the mind of the member concerned. And yes, I say that as one of the offenders against this principle perhaps. E

LadyPact -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 2:32:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub I often make the same mistake when posting...in fact I wish they would make the default the OP rather than the last poster unless otherwise stated. Freedom of speech to me is a human right even if not allowed in many nations... and my point it is should be a right on CM. If we are to be enlightened. Butch Yes. If I recall, we have had this very confusion before. LOL. It is a trivial matter, Butch. I'm sure neither of us will take it to heart. I'm not especially sure it has anything to do with being 'enlighted'. Not something that I claim in the first place. However, I do tend to think, in certain examples, the world might have just been better off if certain individuals had not had free speech. Of course, I'm thinking of extreme cases, such as Stalin or Hitler. What a different world we might be living in had they just stfu.

bluefireeyez -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 2:34:54 PM)
LNT, thank you for posting this thread...I enjoyed reading it (and was wondering about it a little myself). LNT, LA, and LP, as usual you guys have attempted to stay on topic and I think have done well with what you have had to work with. I don't know if there is an ethical response that the vast majority of the people on this forum would agree to for a mentally disturbed individual. If it is simply comments being made that are completely outrageous and off topic, perhaps ignoring it would be best. However, this person(s) have obviously been getting some need filled by coming to the boards and making these statements. As such, simply ignoring them (even if everyone did so) would not work. They would simply find a way to get back on the boards in a visible way and stir the pot again. While I do not have a law degree, I do have my Master's in Psychology and work in the mental health field. Only when one feels someone is a direct threat to themselves or others can that person be forced to seek medical help. Even then, it is usually only a temporary hospitalization until the person is able to say they no longer wish to hurt themselves or another. I do not envy the Mods, they have a rough job. Unfortunately, they cannot keep everyone happy. Equally unfortunately, there are no good solutions to how to respond (or not) to some of the consistently crazy comments made on this forum.

RedMagic1 -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 2:35:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub They write the TOS they could change it in any way they please...In fact how simple it would be to say they reserve the right to ban any member for any reason they see fit. What is to stop the possiblity of Moderators doing the "unthinkable" and banning someone without true cause then? That would be blacklisting. Also, here's a link to the Free Speech Coalition. http://www.freespeechcoalition.com/

LadyNTrainer -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 2:36:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lobodomslavery Lets stick with the American Constitution shall we. Let's not, because participation here is not limited to America, and constitutional issues have nothing to do with the topic under discussion. The topic is how to ethically deal with mentally disturbed people who spout bizarre, off topic comments on a regular basis, and the disruptions and thread derailments this causes. If you want to talk about Chinese dictators, take it to the Politics forum. Like the vast majority of what you post on other people's threads, this stuff does not belong here. Have all the free speech you are allowed by the TOS, but post it in the right place. Off topic derailments are not a good thing, and they are why this thread exists in the first place.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625