[ ARC forum 2 ]

Re: Groups...

Written by Anonymous at 23 May 2003 23:56:45:

As an answer to: Groups... written by AJ at 23 May 2003 23:52:47:

>>You seem to think that those of us who want to help guys protect their bodily integrity are some organized group, like a wolf pack.
>NORM, UNCIRC, DOC etc. They're organized groups. hehe.
>>Nothing could be further from the truth. I know I have never contacted any of them - or you - outside discussion boards.
>I think I get your meaning. I didn’t mean to insinuate that there is meeting to discuss strategy held by the AC folks of the board before posting to the original message. You should contact me though, Ivan (or anyone else.) Just so we can discuss this type of thing away from the forum. That way we could better understand and if necessary explain what we actually mean when we post something as opposed to allowing something to be over-analyzed and taken out of context.
>>I also do not see much of a feeding frenzy response (I think the disorganized approach of sharks is more to the imagery you intended), except when someone appears to be trolling (trawling?).
>I suppose sharks are a better image. Maybe Chimpanzees too. Those guys can be real vicious, what with throwing their feces and all.
>>When someone makes posts that are self-contradictory, not grounded in reality, or otherwise has a funny smell to it, it does tend to stir up people wanting to point out to others that someone is trying to put one over. It elicits a very quick and thorough response - perhaps overkill at times - because the regulars here (including you?) take these issues very seriously, and would not want to see someone making a life-altering mistake on the basis of someone's goofing around.
>I do take very seriously the issues discussed here. You’re right too. Some posts really stink and are mighty suspect. Oh, interesting use of the word “mistake”, btw. I think “decision” or “change” would be a little less bias and accurate.
>>I get a bit concerned at times that we can be too quick to treat someone as a troll, or accuse regulars of using pseudonyms, when someone is notr expressing himself well, particularly when terms are thrown in which show SOME sophistication, but the wording and the level of understanding seem to belie that.
>I have that same concern too. I also, as Ralesk can vouch from ICQ conversations, have the same helpful servings of paranoia about who is who etc.
>>Sometimes, I believe, it is just a matter of a little knowledge being a dangerous thing.
>I agree with you again! That’s why everyone here should be allowed to voice his or her views and experiences to help the individual accumulate that knowledge. Then it’s up to the individual to take on board what he wants to and decide from there. It’s their decision after all. Heck, perhaps with better communication and understanding between regular contributors we can work towards this more functional troll-free environment and nip this bitchiness and nastiness in the ass. I honestly think that if we could just appreciate each other’s views (regardless of how different they are from each others) and educate from our experience and perspectives without all the abuse, it’d better help the individual looking for help. I certainly appreciate I have a ways to go to achieve that, but it’s not something I can do alone.
>All the best.

Why are you so scared shitless about discussing things right here? AJ you are afraid of so many things. LOL


Answers: