Infraction Discussion on Content

[A-RON]

Awesome, Anthony!

-A

 

[fin]

works for me anthony...

 

[anthony]

I want to reinterate to members that excuses such as I have read previously are not cause or justification to not comply with the rules here, such as having flashbacks at the computer, having an anxiety attack, panic attack, anger, etc. You are in control of yourself, and regardless of these symptoms they are not an excuse to dismiss a rule here, to not comply because you felt you shouldn't have to at a given time, etc etc.

The only correct answer for such circumstances is to leave your computer or this website immediately and DO NOT post under such circumstances. This is not the first time this has been said, and maybe this is what newer members have failed to read previously. I DO NOT tolerate symptomatic excuses upon this forum as this forum is to teach you the exact opposite, being PTSD is not an excuse for your personal behaviour, PTSD is not an excuse for an outburst here, PTSD is not an excuse period regardless of symptoms.

Yes, I understand PTSD as I have it, though that doesn't mean any person is worst off than another and deserves special consideration here. All are created equal. Compassion is one thing, but attempting to use PTSD as an excuse to justify any poor behaviour or outburst here is just bullshit and will not be tolerated at any period. I nor any other editor or member should ever enable anothers PTSD by giving compassion, sympathy or empathy to bad behaviour or poor attitude. Such a thing is considered negative behaviours which are negative towards helping any PTSD sufferer.

 

[Nicolette]

I nor any other editor or member should ever enable anothers PTSD by giving compassion, sympathy or empathy to bad behaviour or poor attitude. Such a thing is considered negative behaviours which are negative towards helping any PTSD sufferer.

I hope that those of you who have been quick to judge me recently now understand that I follow the rules implemented for editors. I do not come here thinking I'm having a bad day so I'm going to unleash it upon forum members but instead to do a job and then interact as a Carer. As I have become friends with some people here it is very difficult at times and put the editorial hat on and give an infraction to a member who is a friend. I do have to do it as it is part of the commitment I made to Anthony and the forum in my role here. I really hope that members start to understand that an infraction or warning is not in the least bit personal.

 

[Grama-Herc]

Anthony

I think you have finally hit on a fabulous "group of words".

I must also say that I am impressed with the way you approached this issue.

I have gained a new respect for both you and Nicolette.

I thank you for your willingness to open this to the forum for a group discussion and accepting our suggestions.

 

[anthony]

I am glad that this newer framework suits now. Herc... you should know me by now... in that anything that becomes an issue goes to the members. Take care.

 

[Shamstalat]

I do understand I am a new member, and I'm not just criticizing you, Anthony. I hope you understand I am just trying to shed some light on why people react the way they do.

I think a lot of it may lie in the language. Using words like "infraction" and "warning" makes it sound like we are criminals. I think if maybe we changed the terminology then people wouldn't react so defensively. I have to admit I personally had a hard time focusing on the content after coming across the word "infraction." For example if it was framed as "in consideration of other members."

Just to give you an idea, terminology really can affect how people frame the same thing. For example, there's a fish company that is based in Norway and the U.S. In Norway, they use terms such as "gutting the fish" to describe the processes of going from the live fish in the ocean to the fish filet on your plate. But when they started doing business in the U.S., the first thing the U.S. associates said is that they have to replace terms like "gutting" with nicer terms such as "eviscerate." It may seem stupid, but they actually had a better time explaining processes to American employees when using terms such as "eviscerate" and not "gut."

I think the same thing may apply here. Part of the defensiveness lies in the specific words chosen to describe various actions. So I think with a change in terminology, you may actually see people respond to the content of the warnings and not just the fact they received a warning.

Hope that helps.

-shamstalat

 

[Mahtalat]

I have been studying psychology for a while, and one thing I came across in one of my books was, study showed that when people used different phrasings/words for the same thing, different people interpreted/came across it differently. Much like what Shamstalat mentioned. (I would run and get an example, but its on the floor and its dark) But basically different words that mean the same thing make you feel/respond/react a certain way.

 

[brokenchild]

Well, I've read through the thread at least twice and these are my comments (in general) to what I read.

Anthony - While I do think it was very inappropriate to use words such as "bullshit," "bitch," and "whine" in your first post, I do appreciated you opening the discussion up like this. If more than one person was/is complaining about getting warnings/infractions, my first thought would have been, "What can I change since it's obviously affecting people"" And not that they were "bullshitting" "whining" or "bitching." I don't think the latter reaction is productive, and my be overreacting, and is just the type of thing many of us have heard for years from people around us when we are struggling.

I have never received and warning or infraction and cannot honestly say how I would have reacted to them when I was really struggling. I doubt it would have been in a constructive way though, because that's just how it was when I struggled.

I actually find thread titles being capitalized like they are harder to read, which is another reason I don't frequent this forum often. They all seem to blend together and a title loses its distinctiveness because they all look the same. In a sentence, the words are not all (or amost all) capitalized. If I hadn't read the editorial policy, I would never have guessed at the rules for writing a tital simply because I think of the title as a mini-sentence, with only the first work (and proper nouns) capitalized.

Nicolette - PTSD tends to lead to "way over the top reactions" about many things. I'm sure the people on the receiving end, who one again feel rejected and like they can't do anything right wish they could "get over it" too. I really think those two statements do more harm than good at in a forum for PTSD, where yes, self esteem needs to be worked on. That's part of the disorder, which is what this forum is supposed to support, not tell it's members that their reactions are "way over the top," or "get over it." If the members of the forum had a penny for every time we've been told to "get over it", we'd be rich.

And yes, it could very well be the members who have "bitched" and "whined" are defensive because they did something (else) wrong. During my struggle with PTSD, if I did something wrong, it really did negatively effect me. Not because I did something wrong, but because it lead to thinking I couldn't do anything right. "Gee I can't even write a thread title right. There's no way I'm ever going to X."

I do not think members should be abusive or attacking when stating their opinions about the warning/infraction they get, but stating their opinion should be encouraged, not discouraged. Dialogue is always a good thing.

I'm not having a "hard time in life generally" and I take issues with the editorial policy and warnings that people get because of it. If English wasn't my native language, I would have a hard time getting support here.

fin - While I understand waiting to post until you are "more together" isn't the forum supposed to help when you're not all that together? I usually wouldn't post if I'm together because I don't need the support.

I'm part of many forums so I did probably post here pretty quicly one I joined. Yes, there are rules on the other forums I visit so I had a good idea how it all works. None of them have an editorial policy. None. That was a new one for me.

Claire - That's a good point about being in a vulnerable position when you pit yourself out there in a thread and then getting a warning for some grammatical error. I can see why that would make things difficult.

All in all, I think this was a (rather) productive thread and some good changes came out of it.

 

[fin]

I am so sorry I thought I could walk away because this thread has been worked through.
But on a personal note I cant.....
I want to go on at length but I wont....broken...I believe that you have misconstrued what I have said....and quoted me out of context also.

I didnt suggest anyone should get themselves more together. I said I wasnt actually able to post a thread when that distraught....I couldnt have figured out how to when I first came here.

And I do believe the forum is here when people arent "more together", writing and posting and reading.
I dont believe the PTSD can be used as an excuse to be personally abusive through PMs....and if someone can get it together enough to be abusive in a PM then........


I need to stop now.
I am sorry to add to this again but i just couldnt walk away....someone could read this just from the post above and think I had said something I hadn't.

 

[Nicolette]

I DO NOT tolerate symptomatic excuses upon this forum as this forum is to teach you the exact opposite, being PTSD is not an excuse for your personal behaviour, PTSD is not an excuse for an outburst here, PTSD is not an excuse period regardless of symptoms

I nor any other editor or member should ever enable anothers PTSD by giving compassion, sympathy or empathy to bad behaviour or poor attitude. Such a thing is considered negative behaviours which are negative towards helping any PTSD sufferer.

That's part of the disorder, which is what this forum is supposed to support,

Brokenchild, let me again clarify that my role her on the forum at present is one of an editor which means I follow Anthony's direction. So, accordingly PTSD is not an excuse for accepting attacks from members for a warning or infraction as part of the disorder. Therefore, the forum is not supposed to support what you say it does...it is supposed to support healing and growth - not "acceptance" of negative behaviours.

Why also is it ok for members to vent their frustrations yet when I make a comment about members attacking me and that "I wish they would get over it" does it get twisted and analysed as being something which it is not? I will now say that I have had enough of people taking this comment out of context. If you want clarification please ask thank you.

 

[brokenchild]

fin - I didn't think you meant people should get themselves more together and never said that. I'm sorry if that's how you read what I wrote.

I said I understood why people may wait until they are more together to post, but that posting when they are not more together (when they need support the most) should also be supported, even if that means the posting isn't perfect.

And I did say "I do not think members should be abusive or attacking when stating their opinions about the warning/infraction they get, but stating their opinion should be encouraged, not discouraged. Dialogue is always a good thing." So yes, I agree that attacking isn't right, no matter what the circumstance.

Nicolette - As I quoted above, yes, attacks are not to be tolerated. I never said the forum is to support negative behaviors. I said low self esteem is part of PTSD, and this forum is here to support PTSD, and in doing so, also give support to those with low self esteem, not just tell them to work on it.

I took your "get over it" comment the only way it made sense to me. I thought the "it" was the infraction/warning and since PTSD was causing the reaction, then the only way to get over the infraction/warning was to get over the PTSD. I apologize if that's not what you meant but that is how I read/interpretted it.
~~~~~
As an aside, there are "reasons" and "excuses" and they are not the same. I don't think most people on here make excuses for their behaviors. If anything, I think they take the "blame" (sort to speak) fr thoeir actions or more than they have to.

PTSD, and the changes that occur, are not only mental but PHYSICAL changes in the brain. Just like if someone scared you and you screamed, so some people react when they see what they perceive to be an attacking infraction/warning. It's HARDWIRED in the brain and it takes some time to undo it, if it can be undone.

If this was as simple as just keeping tabs on our thoughts and emotions all the time, a lot of this wouldn't happen. But it does happen because the brains of those with PTSD are different from those without it.

So I agree. PTSD is NOT an excuse for behavior but is some cases may be the reason for it.