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

LadyNTrainer -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 3:13:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucienne Start a thread about them in off-topic. Don't mention the poster's name. Directly engage poster in self-fulfilling prophecy of thread derailment. A reasonable summary. I had no way of knowing which, if any, trolls would actually choose to participate actively on the thread, let alone so clearly illustrate the problem. But yes, it serves a functional purpose that they did.

JstAnotherSub -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 3:22:02 PM)
i just hope the unmentioned poster is not crazy as hell, since reading this to the end could be the thing that made him go off the deep end and do some really stupid shit. i do not get why this thread was even necessary. ignoring someone is so damn easy on here.....hopefully someone feels better about them self now. wow, just fucking wow.

LadyNTrainer -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 3:25:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika Damn. And I thought he might actually have gotten it this time around. I guess that's one way of dealing with it. Yes. It is. I am satisfied; this is probably the best possible outcome since he can still participate, just not randomly and disruptively. I'm sorry it's going to take so much of the moderators' time though, since filtering through the sheer mass of it can't be fun.

LadyPact -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 3:25:39 PM)
Thankfully, Lucienne, it seems that the Mods have put the gag on, for now. Still, it changes little. I have every belief that he still believes that CM is some type of therapeutic charity ward for him. I don't think his moment of clarity is going to happen here. Not as long as the symptoms are fed just enough for the actual problem to be overlooked. If the computer were to fizzle out tomorrow (something I'm sure folks could find less harsh than banning him) I wonder if he would go out and get the real help that he needs. CM has been something of a band-aid. There's been no improvement in his social skills. Even after being here for a year, still no ability to discern fantasy from reality. If anything, I think it may even have a detrimental effect. Not being able to interact here may, metaphorically, push the gun closer to his head. The reality of his world would collide with his lack of internet fantasy and interaction and who knows what might happen? It might be exactly what would solve his problems.

VideoAdminAlpha -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 3:34:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Why are you scening with him, LadyA? The stern teacher bit is hot, don't get me wrong, but I'm curious of your choice of venue and partner. Oh this is not a scene, trust me. And I know that because I'm not getting off on it ;-) What was doing was a technique called the teach-back method. It is a common practice used in education where we get people to keep trying to reformulate things in their own words and "teach it back" to show that they have understood it. I was trying to see if there was a glimmer of hope but I guess he was silenced before this could happen. - LA Sorry, Diva it didn't seem to be working.( I don't think anything would at this point of heightened level of discussion between the two of you). Besides, the thread has gone off topic in that direction long enough. I had to step in. [&:] I would remind everyone what the subject is at the top of the page, it is a very generic topic that DOES NOT name an individual, and there were some good points made between the posters that did not involve site intervention. Please continue.

LadyAngelika -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 3:39:53 PM)
quote: Sorry, Diva it didn't seem to be working. You're absolutely right, Diva! Yanno, sometimes I'm a bitch but sometimes I've got this huge heart and I'm a sucker for trying one last time to get through to them. - LA

LadyNTrainer -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 3:41:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact If the computer were to fizzle out tomorrow (something I'm sure folks could find less harsh than banning him) I wonder if he would go out and get the real help that he needs. CM has been something of a band-aid. There's been no improvement in his social skills. Even after being here for a year, still no ability to discern fantasy from reality. If anything, I think it may even have a detrimental effect. Not being able to interact here may, metaphorically, push the gun closer to his head. The reality of his world would collide with his lack of internet fantasy and interaction and who knows what might happen? It might be exactly what would solve his problems. I don't know what the answer to that is. I don't think we can say for sure what will happen one way or another, so ethically our response can't depend on any conjecture in that area. I did get a bit more concerned when someone who was fed up with the persistent disruptions suggested that he go commit suicide after he mentioned that he was so unlovable that he should have died at birth. I don't think that's an ethical way to respond to a disturbed person, but you can't realistically stop people from saying unkind things to someone who is persistently and repeatedly disruptive. So unless he is prevented from being continually disruptive, he will continue to get that kind of hurtful feedback. And that's definitely not a healthy scenario for anyone. Not for him, not for the site, not for the site's users. So a mod filter is probably the best overall solution, if the site can continue to support it in terms of moderator time and resources. Can participate, can't be randomly disruptive. The only drawback I see is that his behavior is unlikely to change over time or with any number of attempts to explain the rules he must follow in order not to be disruptive. So unless the site has the resources to constructively filter him indefinitely, which is going to be expensive in terms of the sheer amount of people-hours it will take to deal with his posting volume, the problem won't go away. It will just be the staff's problem, which means it's the site's problem, which means in the end it's still a problem.

LadyPact -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 4:06:31 PM)
I'm not going to quote your whole post, LNT. Though I am curious about the comment you referenced. Could you post a link? I suppose I am looking at this in an old fashioned way. In the physical world, if a group feels that an individual is disruptive during the course of a BDSM event, that person is simply ejected. (I've written before that I did this very thing during a demo once.) If a person does not know how to conduct themselves at a club, they are no longer permitted to enter. Most groups in the real world have a code of conduct that is given to members, and if they can't abide by it, they aren't invited back. They are no longer on the email list to be contacted about upcoming events. To get really old about it, when play parties were about to happen, their number was removed from the list. Can this be translated to the net? I don't know.

dovie -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 4:10:32 PM)
I don't like that one of the persons in question was revealed as this thread grew. It may not have been intentional, however, one need not be Sherlock Holmes to glim this one out. A quote was removed as it was not germane to the topic and could quite possibly reveal a person's identity. At post 87 of this thread, a person is identified. This does not sit well with me and had I been exposed as he was, I would take issue with the persons involved. Say what you will, it is what it is. "Just the facts Ma'am." Regards, dovie

laurell3 -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 4:13:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bluefireeyez 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. Answering generically without reference to any paticular poster (other than agreeing with the above quote of course): That is the approach in the majority of the states that I am aware of. If someone is not a danger to themselves or others they are not mentally ill to the point of being comitted. Even then, with all of the cutbacks for mental health treatment over the last decade, they're unlikely to get any real ongoing help without jumping through alot of payment red tape which is difficult for them given their condition. Our mental health system needs a serious overhaul and the number of people seriously needing help continues to grow. Additionally I don't believe the first amendment actually strictly applies here even to US citizens. This is a private board. While they cannot actively harass people based on race, class, creed...etc and they have to adhere to their own contract, they very much can and do have the absolute right and sometimes even an obligation to restrict your speech. It's part of the contract you have agreed to as well. Fortunately, the approach they have taken is to go to painstaking effort to allow us all a voice within reason. And in my opinion, the services and responses have only gotten better in the years I have been here. Yes, it's alot of work for them, you couldn't pay me enough money to read every single one of these threads and I'm not sure they get paid at all. I'm aware of a few occasions where people have, on the boards, threatened harm and rest assured, CM is very aware of how to deal with it and what steps to take. There are MANY posters here that I think are seriously lacking in any sense of reality that concern me. The simple truth is, unless they say I haven't eaten in a week, I'm bleeding to death, I'm going to harm myself or I'm going to kill someone else..etc., in which case you should report it immediately, you cannot assist an adult to find the help they need unless they are willing. Nor can you provide therapy or counsel someone over the internet and attempting to do that may very well make it worse. Simply put, we don't have an obligatory "ethical" response and whatever obligation CM has they seem to follow through with that quite rapidly when something that is actually actionable occurs. Sadly, being batshit crazy and annoying as fuck isn't one of those. Besides, how do you know they aren't just doing it for negative attention? You don't. You can't presume to know what's really on the other side of the screen and if you are reallly concerned about precarious balance, you sure shouldn't attempt to fix it over the internet.

LadyEllen -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 4:59:34 PM)
You have cmail about that comment LP E

zephyroftheNorth -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 5:01:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dovie I don't like that one of the persons in question was revealed as this thread grew. It may not have been intentional, however, one need not be Sherlock Holmes to glim this one out. A quote was removed as it was not germane to the topic and could quite possibly reveal a person's identity. At post 87 of this thread, a person is identified. This does not sit well with me and had I been exposed as he was, I would take issue with the persons involved. Say what you will, it is what it is. "Just the facts Ma'am." Regards, dovie Where has anyone been revealed as the person in question? Mind you it doesn't take a genius to work out who that person is but people have gone to great lengths not to name him. This is however a great thing to discuss in order to prevent threads from being taken over and run by said unnamed person.

frazzle -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 5:03:20 PM)
FR It strikes me as strange that Ladyangelika openly says shes a friend of VAA, and not long after Kevin ends up "awaiting approval". I didnt see him put anything that was against TOS, he just annoyed angelika!!!!!

LadyEllen -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 5:24:20 PM)
You might as well associate it to a bunch of us Frazzle. For what its worth VAA was particularly if privately impressed with my first post on the thread - but I somehow doubt that it should have overly influenced any Moderator decision here, and it ought not to have either - the lunatics running the asylum is no happy state of affairs after all. E

laurell3 -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 5:24:25 PM)
I don't see where you come up with either of those conclusions.

LadyAngelika -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 5:29:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: frazzle FR It strikes me as strange that Ladyangelika openly says shes a friend of VAA, and not long after Kevin ends up "awaiting approval". I didnt see him put anything that was against TOS, he just annoyed angelika!!!!! Honestly, VAA pulled 2 of my posts earlier today on another thread. Even though I've known her for a long time (notice I've been here since 2004 even before she was VAA), let me assure you she does not play favorites at all. Edited to add: the posts he made against the TOS were removed. - LA

RedMagic1 -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 5:39:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: frazzle It strikes me as strange that Ladyangelika openly says shes a friend of VAA, and not long after Kevin ends up "awaiting approval". I didnt see him put anything that was against TOS, he just annoyed angelika!!!!! Hi Frazzle, I last posted on this thread a couple hours ago. At that time, it looked quite different. There were several posts that seemed over the line to me, and they are now gone. I think at least one of the disappeared posts was by LadyAngelika, if that matters to you. So I think you're making a judgment based on a thread that's been heavily sanitized. If the mods played favorites, your post would probably have been removed by now. Instead, I'm the second poster quoting it. Who knows what I missed, but I don't think your concern is warranted here. My two cents.

marie2 -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 5:48:36 PM)
The idea of a single individual ("disturbed" or not) being able to continuously bait, control, affect, and elicit emotion from so many supposedly intelligent people, without their help, is absurd. On edit...this was a general reply to the OP topic. Not to Laurell, personally)

tigreetsa -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 5:48:54 PM)
Is being on some sort of ego trip also a form of mental disturbance because from what I can see this also derails just as many threads as those by who some of us are claiming to be 'loonies'? Is this actually a thread about real and genuine mental illness or more so a thread about the less desirable posters who some wish to stigmatize through accusations of mental illness? You see even clinically trained psychologists and psychiatrists need face to face meetings to establish whether mental illness exists or not, and yet we have what appears to be qualified people who can determine mental illness through someone's postings on the message boards. Is this a concern for that person's wellbeing? No, it would appear that the biggest issue at stake here appears to be the amount of attention paid to certain posters and their posts and the projected flow of the discussion of the threads. This isn't a new problem, but one which has existed for quite a while now. We are all aware of what is required to join this site, of the freedom we have to make use of this site, and that it is a free site. Anyone can join. The way I see it there are three solutions- either put up and shut up, or volunteer to be a moderator yourself, or move onto to another site. I'm sorry but 'mentally disturbed' is way too vague a term for mental illness. This is not a thread about mental illness or even emotional issues, but a thread IMHO about certain posters having issues with other posters. End of.

laurell3 -> RE: Ethical response to a mentally disturbed individual on CM? (5/23/2010 5:50:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika Honestly, VAA pulled 2 of my posts earlier today on another thread. Even though I've known her for a long time (notice I've been here since 2004 even before she was VAA), let me assure you she does not play favorites at all. Edited to add: the posts he made against the TOS were removed. - LA Agreed, I got modslapped also (cries big tears) and as Red pointed out, you can't see what was posted that caused the moderation, so your conclusion is based on limited info.

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0234375