Calling Troll On New Posters

[Sandstone]

What I'm hearing here, and correct me if I'm wrong... Is that you're looking for some kind of consensus on what people should say, & how they say it?

No, I think that would be terrible. One of the valuable things about his forum is that we approach situations and issues from a different angle. To paraphrase someone on another thread - If a poster says I need a hammer for this problem, they might get three hammers, but also a screwdriver, and someone who dislikes DIY tools.

a new member is just finding their feet, maybe need to get beyond the aggressive barrier installed when coming to this very place for help and support,

There's an emphasis here on being very direct that I have found confrontational more than once.

Yes, I recognise in myself that at the same time I ask for help I put up a barrier to ensure no-one gets close enough to offer that help. If that barrier is in the form of stroppiness or aggression it's all to easy for the recipient to respond from the same place. If they perceive our directness as confrontational, then it's likely that will respond in the same way.

we are not therapists, but we can model best practice, sometimes a few words in chat can direct someone to feel at ease and copy what other members are doing, until they settle in. Saying to people the mods here are great they will send you warnings if you break the rules, so be grateful for that, not reactive, as that takes precious time and energy. Some people get it, some don't.

was actually counseled by a few members when the incident occurred and they offered to follow me. I have tried to do the same if new members seem to have a hard time adjusting. I wonder, @stenni, if this would be something that you could do to 'help' if your heart is being tugged.

These are the two posts I shall take practical application from. I'm aware that I don't do much in the way of responding to mew people, or to many posts for that matter because I'm afraid of saying the wrong thing. And I never use chat and barely PM because both frankly terrify me. Maybe I need to get to grips with them. Any tips?

I have serious doubts as to if and when I'd reveal my deepest and darkest here. And it's not for lack of seeking & wanting real time help for it. I have shyness, I wonder how my past will be received, I have trust issues, & there's times when I myself don't wanna go there.

I figure it would be a given; considering the symptoms of what we're dealing with here; that perhaps it's not just about managing to tell...it's about establishing trust over time, in which to tell.

I think this is a common experience for any of us. It depends partly on the stage we are at in our journey, partly on the way our attempts to tell or ask for help have been responded to in the past, and partly on the sort of people we are. I rarely even name my traumas to myself, let alone anyone else, and when I do tend to think of them by their labels, not by the details. I've had some really bad responses from professionals, which left me battered and defensive. I suspect that if I'd come here after only those experiences, I would have been very closed and revealed virtually nothing. As it was, i used to post, log out in panic and run.

The way it explained to me, was to think of it less like a troll (mythical Scandinavian creature). But more as a trawling simillarly to a fishing boat. The fisherman (troll). Casts out their net (Inflamitory statement or question). Then slowly moves around waiting for the fish to get caught up in the net (drama).

And that is why I think toll is the wrong word. I'm surprised no-one has used "Borderline-ish" either. I think volatile may be nearer - or emotional sensitivity, reactive anger and poor coping responses. I think the disruptive new members I'm think of didn't come here to create drama, they came to look for help.

 

[scout86]

I think the disruptive new members I'm think of didn't come here to create drama, they came to look for help.

You're a much kinder person than I am!

I think MOST of them come with good intentions, even if that gets expressed poorly. There are some, though, that I suspect show up because they enjoy messing with people. Maybe "Ogre" or "Orc" would be a better word that "Troll". But think "Troll" in the "hiding under the bridge" sense of the 3 Billy Goats Gruff fairy tale, rather than the Scandinavian version. (I have one of those in my kitchen and he never causes any trouble at all. :))

 

[Sandstone]

I agree there are some who are genuine trouble making trolls. But not all nebwie trouble is troll-trouble.

I'm not sure about kind - but I do like people to be included and have somewhere to belong.One of my greatest achievements, from years ago was when I was chair of a social club for single people. We'd gone away for a weekend, and one of the quietest, shyest people who had come with us was brave enough ti get up and dance. I'd spent so long putting him at ease and encouraging him, it was a delight to see him actually enjoying himself with the rest of the group.

 

[anonymous]

But what about the EXTREMELY HIGH percentage of people who have a criterion A trauma but don't have ptsd?.....Are they doing themselves any favors by blending into a community like this or are they patologizing part of the normal human experience because self diagnosing makes things sort of fit together? At the end of the day, a diagnosis is vital or else you could waste years of your life seeking the wrong treatment. Sort of makes me wonder why people are willing to waste so much of their lives on a guess when a few hour appointment could put you on the right path. Oh, right, for the same reason that people who have been cheated on claim ptsd! They want a disorder to justify their experience and fear being told it's not ptsd. "Gasp! You mean I don't have a disorder, something to blame my problems on? That means it really IS me!" Oh the horrors, self blame sets in, etc.

Tldr. It's a crutch for denial. Let the damn truth set things straight.

Not sure why anyone who has cancer would want feedback on a cancer board from someone who has no cancer diagnosis but experiences cancer symptoms. I know I don't.

 

[Kintsugi]

I'd just like to take a moment to remind members that this is the Internet. If we found out today that a member here was a fraud, posing as someone who has PTSD to elicit responses from members and toy with our reactivity, compassion, and general emotional vulnerability... It wouldn't be the first time. I think being just a little jaded is healthy on this forum. You never know who you're really talking to. Anthony has said it before, and I'll say it again... This is the internet, albeit a well-moderated, usually genuine corner of the Internet. People who come here masquerading and pushing buttons have some sort of sickness that is far more serious than PTSD. It is not unheard of, although I think this has been very very rarer here.

I think it is natural to see this wonderful community and think, "This is my safe place!" This is not your safe place. This is STILL the Internet. You will encounter things that may be critical. You will read things that are useless or irrelevant but may poke your nerves. You may be triggered. You may meet people who are not what they seem to be.

This is the hard reality of the nature of any Internet forum. You probably noticed the forum doesn't run a background check on you, ask for your passport, and require a note from a verified medical professional. Would you want that? I'm happy to take responsibility for my participation here and the risks associated with being online. I trust the system here, but I also take up for myself, because I am an adult volunteering to participate in a place that I have found immensely helpful and overwhelmingly positive. I just don't let all that positivity blind me to what this forum is. A forum. On the Internet. Where I am responsible for my level of self exposure, emotional vulnerability, and all other choices/actions.

BTW, anyone remember Dr. Phil saying you could get PTSD from a bad break-up/divorce? How about the member who said they had PTSD because their spouse had a porn addiction?

All kinds of emotional/psychological crap can be wrenched up by all kinds of experiences and events. But people who have never been raped can't tell me something is like rape. As Friday said, being raped is like being raped.

@joeylittle was spot-on as usual. PTSD isn't something you reliably get from a CritA experience. It isn't something you get because you have enough symptoms. There is a coincidence (literally--coinciding) between these two factors that points to a biological change in someone's brain that is permanent and not something of "I FEEL like I've been violated by this [non-CritA event]!" ETA: this is why we have post-traumatic stress disorder, not post-traumatic event disorder.

I think everyone can agree most members say they are not minimizing feelings, thoughts, emotions, etc. when they encourage new members to seek an accurate diagnosis from a qualified professional. They are saying... I encourage you to get an accurate diagnosis from a qualified professional. And also, usually, "Here are some great tips to accomplish that mission!"

I don't see an issue with using psychological "jargon." My take: "jargon" is really synonymous with "the formal diction for a very specific and unambiguous thing I want to be on the same page about." If you said "lady parts" as a doctor who is asking a patient about having a hysterectomy, the patient would not get a proper picture of what's being talked about. Are we talking breasts, vagina, uterus? People are fully capable of taking responsibility for their own education. If they found this site, chances are good that they can operate a search engine. They can ignore the jargon, or they can learn it. I get to use whatever words I feel most accurately express my intended meaning, and I like that.

Something fiery new members often neglect to remember are the off-iterated words of our fearless leader, @anthony, not to mention a multitude of others here...

Take what's useful, ignore what isn't--nothing more, nothing less.

A cognitive distortion (correct me if I'm using this improperly) I see from old and new members alike is...
"You're making me angry."
"Your post made me cry!"
"You're making me feel like...[insert anything here]"

Really? Someone is making you do what now? Or, wait, did you choose to read comments/participate on the Internet, which brought on an emotional response within you, and instead of recognizing your own agency in such a circumstance, you've decided that someone is making you do/feel/think something you don't like?

No one "makes" members escalate to personal attacks and such. Sometimes members engage in a discussion to their detriment, and they allow themselves to act on their feelings by escalating to rule-breaking and inflammatory jabs at the community, etc., which will lead to warnings and potentially bans (temporary and otherwise, depending on so many factors), and that sucks, but please don't say "The anonymous people in the Internet MADE me do it!" C'mon.

That is part of why trigger warnings aren't used here. You don't have a crystal ball (as someone smart here likes to say). You can't decide what is an isn't a trigger for people. And you're not making others participate in what you're offering. People can make decisions on their own. There's no use padding the walls and hiding the knives just in case when all people have to do is navigate somewhere else, close the tab, or turn off their computing device.

 

[ms spock]

And that is why I think troll is the wrong word. I'm surprised no-one has used "Borderline-ish" either. I think volatile may be nearer - or emotional sensitivity, reactive anger and poor coping responses.

Troll is a long term label, for that has been used on the internet ever since I have been on it right back in the day when it began.

Borderline-ish is certainly used, and that can get really nasty and is definitely not a way I would encourage people to go. There is a great deal of stigma about the borderline diagnosis, which is traditionally gendered with the best form of treatment being referral onwards. I would suggest that using a term that is embedded with discrimination and prejudice about mental illness is not the way to go, particularly on a forum for mental health.

 

[ms spock]

These are the two posts I shall take practical application from. I'm aware that I don't do much in the way of responding to mew people, or to many posts for that matter because I'm afraid of saying the wrong thing. And I never use chat and barely PM because both frankly terrify me. Maybe I need to get to grips with them. Any tips?

I would suggest making a separate thread @stenni named something like "Welcoming the New Members: Suggestions Please" it could become a good resource for other members when they aren't up for being a moderator, or don't have the time, but would like the contribute generally on the forum.

 

[anthony]

Right now, "they" think they know what kinds of trauma are required to produce the condition.

That isn't true actually. What the panel of 13,000+ psychiatrists have done, is agree that PTSD as a diagnosis, based on giving it a criterion A qualifying event, is reserved for the worst traumatic events, based on specific reactions only, so that we don't have people claiming PTSD for relationship breakups, citing that is the same as being raped, tortured, POW, so forth.

Evolution is not the issue... the issue is that PTSD is the "only" diagnosis in the world that contains a qualifying criterion for diagnosis... as a result, people want it more to feel part of some exclusive club. From a legal context, a PTSD diagnosis medically demonstrates a traumatic event of catastrophic proportion occurred to the person.

If you broke PTSD down into existing diagnoses, you would be diagnosed with anxiety, depression, dissociation, anger, alcoholism, drug disorder, so forth.

All these diagnoses exist and adequately cover every trauma exposure outcome. There is no evolution of fact in this regard. Fact is merely the present known proven by x.

Factually, being present tense, you can only get PTSD based on the current diagnostic criterion. Everything else is another disorder/s, factually speaking.

 

[anthony]

Just check the differing criteria in the iterations of the DSM and ICD to see how ignorant we have been.

I doubt either the APA or WHO are being ignorant... and in fact the WHO is about to make PTSD near impossible to obtain under the ICD 11 criterion. It isn't ignorance, it is simply making a reservation for the one diagnosis that has a criterion requirement for diagnosis, to not be abused as outlined above.

Ignorance is a psychiatrist who doesn't believe in PTSD, complex trauma, so forth, telling their patient they just have some anxiety, or bipolar, or other such issue, treating them unsuccessfully, to discover by another opinion they have PTSD and when treated for PTSD, suddenly success. That is ignorance in relation to diagnosis and treatment.

 

[Recovery4Me]

issue is that PTSD is the "only" diagnosis in the world that contains a qualifying criterion for diagnosis... as a result, people want it more to feel part of some exclusive club

Not challenging, just offering my take...

I never felt I was part of a club within my diagnosis of PTSD...I thought I was part of a living hell. This board literally has salvaged my perspective of myself as well as my understanding of the quality possible, that may be obtained. Thank you, everyone.

 

[StellaBlue]

If you broke PTSD down into existing diagnoses, you would be diagnosed with anxiety, depression, dissociation, anger, alcoholism, drug disorder, so forth.

This. I spent years working on all of these "existing diagnoses" until I finally accepted the PTSD diagnosis (which had been given to me several times over the years, but which I soundly rejected). It wasn't until I was able to recognize that all of these other things (and I had most of the ones you've listed plus a couple more) were symptoms of PTSD that I was able to get the right treatment and start healing.

This forum has been immensely helpful in clarifying things for me and allowing me to hammer out my own thoughts and ideas. Is it a safe place? For me, yes, but I don't generally get involved in threads that "trigger" me and I am well versed in taking what I need and leaving the rest. The safety I've found is being able to find others with similar issues, practice reaching out, finding ideas that resonate with me...while remaining (relatively) anonymous...and the benefit is that I've been able to take what I've learned here out into my "real" life...which makes my world a lot bigger and a lot safer.

 

[anthony]

I never felt I was part of a club within my diagnosis of PTSD...I thought I was part of a living hell.

Me too... and most people I know with PTSD and talk with, same thought. Then all the hypochondriacs and such exist, the "want-2-b's", those who want an excuse and such.