25 GOOD REASONS WHY PSYCHIATRY MUST BE ABOLISHED

by **jims** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 4:46 pm

Thanks for picking up on that. I often do cause most of my own mental pain. As a moderator, I am supposed to read over the posts to make sure people are not saying nasty things to others on the web.
Jim S

well, if someone upsets you more than once in the future, have another moderator review their posts. also, you shouldn't let someone's post bother you. this is a forum. one of the great things about a forum is the debates which accompany them. if you don't like what someone's saying, research the topic, get factual information, and post an opposing argument. you'd be supprised how gratifying it can be.

by **Butterfly Faerie** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 9:46 pm

We all review eachothers posts.
Some posts upset us, some posts do not.

We all look after one another and the well fare of everyone on here.

If a post is not right we edit it, or the worse case scenerio we ban them from psychforums.

There is stuff you cannot post about, that's why we ask people to read the guidelines before posting on here.

We allow debates, if it's too heated we close it. Or remove it all together.

Jims has been here for a long time and he is a great moderator.

As well as the others and our admin.

We all look out for eachothers forums when we need too.

The reason why Jims made a comment about staying away from this post is because with this particular poster we have had problems with, not with just this post but with others in the past that we have had to remove.

by **needless_havok** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 7:55 am

i didn't say or imply that he was a bad moderator. i just know that forums which target mental cases are naturally gonna have some disturbing posts.

by **Butterfly Faerie** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 3:19 pm

needless_havok wrote:i didn't say or imply that he was a bad moderator. i just know that forums which target mental cases are naturally gonna have some disturbing posts.

Of course needless havok.
We've dealt with many people like this on the psychforums, and we deal with them as we need too.

I didn't imply that you called jims a bad moderator...:)

by **fomori4hire** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 2:05 am

sadgurl wrote:Of course needless havok.
We've dealt with many people like this on the psychforums, and we deal with them as we need too.

I didn't imply that you called jims a bad moderator...:)

What's really annoying about that is that it was almost an interesting thread, but failed to be so due to a lot of the same dogmatic limitations he was supposedly railing against.

by **needless_havok** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 2:54 am

right, but at least he had good intentions? anti-psychiatry's always a fun topic, especially in these forums. from what i've gathered, lat. has had some personal experiences which have influenced his posts. i think you can make your point better when this is not the case. it's like the concept of seperating church from state.

by **Butterfly Faerie** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 2:50 pm

needless_havok wrote:right, but at least he had good intentions? anti-psychiatry's always a fun topic, especially in these forums. from what i've gathered, lat. has had some personal experiences which have influenced his posts. i think you can make your point better when this is not the case. it's like the concept of seperating church from state.

In my opinon he didn't have good intentions hon.
He was posting things that we had to delete. And he continued to post things to bother people just for the hell of it.

Since then he has stopped...He was bothering alot of people here and we've decided to ban him. But it is almost impossible to ban guests as sometimes their IP #'s are different everytime.

What's really annoying about that is that it was almost an interesting thread, but failed to be so due to a lot of the same dogmatic limitations he was supposedly railing against.

fomori4hire, For me personally I was quite bothered by his posts. I found them all to be very negative, therefore it wasn't good for other people to be constantly reading stuff like that. I think that alot of what he was posting from was false, as i've never heard some of the stuff that he was posting about before. That's my opinon. I thought it was interesting at first, but it just got out of hand.

by **needless_havok** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 6:59 pm

good intentions for an "interesting thread". i'm not refering to his intent to bother people. it's quite obvious that he was trying to do that.

by **Butterfly Faerie** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 7:27 pm

needless_havok wrote:good intentions for an "interesting thread". i'm not refering to his intent to bother people. it's quite obvious that he was trying to do that.

Exactly...

25 GOOD REASONS WHY PSYCHIATRY MUST BE ABOLISHED

ADVERTISEMENT

Who is online