Posted by Lou Pilder on January 11, 2011, at 17:48:37
In reply to Lou's response-, posted by Lou Pilder on January 11, 2011, at 17:46:24
> > > > > the problems which have been plaguing Babble. It's heartbreaking to see so many posters, ones who have meant so much, finally deciding that it's better for them to leave. A forum like this, devoted to mental health, should not be causing posters to have a flare-up in their symptoms, like Dinah, or blame themselves excessively, like Maxime..Not only is our community now not providing support, it is apparently causing distress and harm.
> > > > >
> > > > > It appears that there is just too heavy a burden of unsolved problems. For several years, we have had difficulty with issues of degrees of privacy (FB/Twitter) and excessively long blocks. Now,there is the added problem of posters causing distress to other posters via Babblemail. Painful as it is, if it is happening, it needs to be brought out into the open and faced. And it is pretty clear that the present notification system is not solving this problem.
> > > > >
> > > > > Despite this overload, many of us who have been here a long time cherish the memory of Babble as it once was (for me, it was 2003-3007). We will do a lot in the hope of restoring it. I would love to be able to participate openly on Psychology the way I once did. I left a few months ago because it seemed as though I was facing a year's block if I so much as mentioned what I considered to be injustices in how the blocks were applied. Then when it appeared that we might get a community council. I began posting again in support of that. It would help my particular situation tremendously.
> > > > >
> > > > > WHAT HAPPENED TO THE PLANS FOR A COMMUNITY COUNCIL????
> > > > >
> > > > > The Council could have made an excellent start by shortening blocks, and could well have eventually proved useful in handling situations like inappropriate Babblemail communications and perhaps even enabling the community to have a say in how relatively easy or difficult disseminating information from Babble throughout the internet should be. Even if just blocking issues are addressed, it is a move towards a more democratic and mutually respectful relationship with Bob.
> > > > >
> > > > > This seems like the closest we have come to having Babble end in a catastrophe. I thought almost all of the initial plans for the Council had been worked out, and that we were about to start, Is there something I missed?
> > > >
> > > > twinleaf,
> > > > You wrote,[...better for them to leave...a forum like this..causing posters to...not providing support...causing distress and harm...].[...the present notification system is not solving...].[....What happened to ..council...?]
> > > > When there are known and obviouus risks to people's mental health and safety, one that disregards or is indifferent to the consequences of their not acting when the known and obvious risks to another's health or safety is in question, can be held responsible for injuries or deaths as a result of their {negligence} to act. It does not matter if one intended for the injuries or deaths to happen. An example that is used to describe negligence is when a parent leaves a loaded gun on a table with small children there. The parent does not intend for one child to take the gun and point it at another child and pull the trigger resulting in the death of another in the house, but the result is the same. The parent leaving the loaded gun on the table was negligent. It would not matter if the parent fell asleep. That parent would be charged with a crime where the jurisdiction defines criminal negligence as disregarding the knowwn and obvious risks of leaving a loaded gun on the table where children are. Another popular example is a person driving drunk and slams into another car killing an occupant. The drunk driver did not intend to kill the other occupant but in my jurisdiction this happend and women was sentenced to 10 years in prison for criminal negligence, even though she did not intend to kill the other person.
> > > > You see, the people that are leaving may think that there is a danger for them to be here. What is plainly visible can be seen. Everybodys talking about a new way by council but it's still (redacted by respondent) to me.
> > > > Lou
> > >
> > > tl,
> > > You wrote what you see, and I also see it. And one can know it when it can be seen.
> > > But there is a much greater responsibility for those that have a duty to act. Who has a duty to act here? Is it the owner that operates the site, or the members, or someone else?
> > > If one is to be responsible to act, that person must have knowledge of the danger to the health or saftey of the members here. The members here may not have that knowledge. But if I have that knowledge, I use the notification system provided to accomplish the heading off of any harm to another by alerting the administration of what I see as a danger to another's health or safety. Then I use the reminder provision if there is no response. Then there is the provision to keep reminding the administration of outstanding notifications and requests. I think that members that also have that kind of knowledge to stay here to help protect others from harm.
> > > What can be seen here is the numerous outstanding notifications at the same time as people leaving here. Is there a connection? I do not think that could be known unless others post comments here in regards to that. But if people feel unsafe here due to the administration leaving notifications outstanding, then is that not a ligitimate reason to leave? And is it any member's fault if that is the case here? But if you have to leave here to be safe, don't think twice, it's alright.
> > > Lou
> > >
> > Friends,
> > When some people see posts here that give them some type of feeling of superiority, be it true or a false superiority, some can get a gun and shoot people that are in the post as the ones that the statement could give them this (false) feeling of superiority. They then could think to target the ones in the post {if the statement is allowed to stand}.
> > There are kids carrying bookbags peeking through the portals of this website after school. They can see this:
> > http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20100321/msgs/949618.html
> > And they could think what the post purports is true because a psychiatrist allows it. And they could have feelings (false) of superiority. And they could follow out the historical (redacted by respondent) toward the Jews, or target a Jew with a pistol in the delusional mind that they think that they are doing what will be good for the country as a whole. But are not the members also responsible for allowing it to stand?
> > Lou
>
> Friends,
> Here is another post that I think could offer more clarification concerning outstanding notifications that is related to the post above this.
> I am requesting that if you are concerned that there could be people that belong to a supremist group that reads this, that they could have support to carry out murder in regards that the psychiatrist here is saying that it is {OK} for one to post the post here in question. Now {OK] does not have to mean that the statement in question is supportive here, and I am requesting that Mr. Hsiung post here to tell those that read it that he either considers the statement in question supportive or not.
> If you are concerned that my request is outstanding, and that a significant time lag could give any encouragement to one that reads the statement in question to target a Jewish person or any other person that does not accept the claim that is in the post concerning that only those that {redacted by respondent} have forgiveness and Eternal Life, I am asking for you to post your thoughts about this here.
> Lou
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babbble/admin/20100321/msgs/951879.htmlhttp://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20100321/msgs/951879.html
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:976438
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20101201/msgs/976546.html