Posted by Lou Pilder on November 13, 2006, at 6:18:28
In reply to Re: Lou » Glydin, posted by ClearSkies on November 13, 2006, at 3:39:05
> I think it's a fair request you have made Glydin. Some posters who participate on threads that go off on tangents will take the initiative and state that they are starting a new thread themselves further down. I haven't seen anything in the FAQs that address this.
>
> ClearSkies (just me)Friends,
ClearSkies has written here,[...a >fair< request..posters {that participate} on threads {that go off on >tangents<}..state that they are starting a new thread...nothing in the FAQ is seen about this...].
The FAQ writes that different points of view are in fact encouraged.The thread in question here is about >me< and Glydin has posted directly to me, Jost has posted directly to me and zazenducky has posted his/her point of view.I have posted my responses to glydin's post, posts by Josh and zazenducky's posts and if I am not allowed to post my response to aspects of posts here that are about my dialog with DR. Hsiung, then could others?
I have posted my responses to aspects of the posts directed to me. My responses may not be what those that directed posts to me expected or wanted, but in a discussion forum different points of view are to be expected and respected.
I respect all points of view and my perspective here is only {another point of view} in a mental health community. It may not be what another thinks,it may not be what another wanted others to see, it may not be what others consider to be orthodox. But in a discussion forum, there will be others that think differently and post their perspective to the aspects of what is posted by another and different points of view are what makes a discussion forum what it is. If only one point of view was permitted in a thread, then we could not have a discussion with different points of view, which the FAQ writes as to be encouraged.
If the thread {went off in a tangent}, then could the tangent be innitiated by other discussants? There are other discussant's posts >to me< titled "Lou PIlder" and "Lou". Then there are posts that are my response to aspects of the posts directed to me by other participants in the discussion.
Then there are posts by Jost directed to me. Then there are posts by me responding to aspects of what was directed to me about me.
I am only responding to others that innitiated a discussion with me, about me, and my posts in dialog with Dr. Hsiung and others about DR. Hsiung's rules and policy which is what this administrative board is for the express purpose of. In an administrative discussion, there will be aspects discussed that others could have a differnt perspective or point of view concerning what is being discussed. These differences is what makes a vibrant discussion. These differences are what can bring out support and education for others. These differences are what makes a pluristic community with diversity and acceptance of others point of view to be allowed to be heard.
I am responding to ClearSkies statement,[...I think it is a fair request...]. Well, who will make that determination as to if Glydin's request to me to start another thread is {fair}?
If it is fair, then would not also it mean that only those with one point of view be allowed to post to only that one point of view, or not? If not, then what does the request mean?
If it is fair to request that I start another thread, then could not the forum then be for >indoctrination< rather than for {support and education}? If not, could you the reader here post why not, and I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly?
Lou
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:702458
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061018/msgs/703053.html