Continuing the discussion from Do you believe in demons and is pornography sinful?:

About This Message Board
1

Continuing the discussion from Do you believe in demons and is pornography sinful?:

I think I’m doing this right in regards to forum.
I flagged this comment:

because I felt this went against the rules and was an attempt of this poster to gate keep and limit interaction. I was told by a mod that he disagrees with my assessment. Even though I accept that he gets to make such calls I do want this noted that I feel here, on the record so to speak, and also in the past, I have been subject to such attempts. I am requesting that the mods take note that I am stating this is not the first time I have received such comment, which I do feel belong in the pit, not in the other forums.

2

I read that as a straightforward attack on another poster; I’m surprised to hear it wasn’t modded.

3

I’m not sure a suggestion that someone is mentally ill, especially when they’re demonstrating clear signs of mental illness, can be a personal attack. Unless you believe mental illness if a sign of bad character, which is wrong.

Of course telling someone who is mentally ill that they are mentally ill is often a pointless endeavor.

4

If someone posted that they twisted their ankle and it had swollen up badly, would it be an insult to say they needed to see a doctor…even if that person said a doctor wasn’t needed?

5

Here’s how I see it:

As a poster, @kanicbird, you are free to share – or not share – what you choose to post.

In the IMHO forum, others are free to express their opinions about what you post. This may include an assessment that you are suffering from mental issues, so long as they don’t do it in a rude or dismissive way.

Theirs may or may not be a legitimate concern. You are free to accept their judgments as true or not, and you are free to refute those judgments or not. As you choose. Bear in mind that no one posting has personally assessed you and they are probably not qualified to do so. Nonetheless, we all make judgments about others based on what they say on the board.

We’re not “gate keeping” when we permit others to express their opinions about what someone else has posted. We’d be gate keeping if we didn’t permit it.

The comment that appears to have caused you offense was not directed to you. It was directed to another poster and made in a general way. You chose to take it as referring specifically to you. That’s not an unreasonable interpretation, but it’s equally reasonable to say the comment was meant as a generalization. Also, such a comment may be made out of genuine concern and not meant as a personal attack.

This is only my perspective. I am not a moderator of ATMB. @engineer_comp_geek is, and he always has the final say in this forum. But I hope my comments are helpful to you.

6

This. They are apparently both seeing things that aren’t real, and are distressed by it; that sounds like illness to me. And this board isn’t a doctor. They need to see one, somebody actually qualified to make a diagnosis instead of speculating on a message board.

If anything the problem with the thread is not enough emphasis on that; maybe (probably) they won’t take the advice, but refusing to point out that they have a problem is doing them no favors whatsoever.

7

I thought kanicbird has said here in the past that he has been diagnosed with schizophrenia. If that is not the case, then I retract my statement. I did not mean it as an attack on kanicbird but was directed towards Czarcasm because it seemed he was arguing against someone suffering from an illness and I did not see the point in his constant goading.

8

I don’t think suggesting to someone that they might have a mental illness and should get that checked out would be a personal attack, assuming it’s done in a way to help, rather than mock or insult them. But something doesn’t have to be a sign of bad character to be used as a insult. Being less intelligent isn’t a sign of bad character either, but if you posted “you can’t reason someone out of stupidity” in similar circumstances, I’m confident it would draw at least a mod note.

Though I see @Eyebrows_0f_Doom has replied saying he didn’t mean it as an attack and just wanted to stop @Czarcasm’s goading, a motive I very much sympathise with.

9

Thank you for your detailed reply, it is appreciated.

I want to clarify what I mean by gatekeeping:

I’m not saying the mods are gatekeeping, but when a poster’s reply tends along the lines to discourage others from engaging with another poster, that poster to me can be said to be gatekeeping.

Or to put it another way , are you indicating is this a fair tactic to use if I feel that they other poster has such a condition? Particularly referring to the discouraging of others from engaging with them?

No, no such condition or anything in that general category. I was diagnosed with mild ADD which I have shared on this board.

Thank you for clarifying, though I did express my desire to Czarcasm to end that tangent later in the posting.

10

I think the biggest problem I have with this line of argument is that it’s clearly not applicable in all cases.

We wouldn’t let someone say, to someone who believes in X, “the only way you can believe X is if you are mentally ill” in any other context than religious discussions.

If someone posted a thread to talk about how they saw Bigfoot, I’m sure it would be fine to say “you couldn’t have possibly seen Bigfoot because there is no scientific evidence for his existence”, but it would not be fine to tell said poster that they must be clinically insane, right?

11

This.

And also this:

Saying someone needs to see a doctor because you disagree with them is one thing. Saying someone needs to see a doctor because they’re reporting seeing hallucinations is something else entirely.

If what reads to us as hallucinations is actually real, there should be evidence of this that can convince a reasonable doctor, therapist, etc.

And it is not an insult, or shouldn’t be, to say someone might have a mental illness and should investigate that possibility, any more than to say they might have a physical illness and should investigate that possibility.

If they said that Bigfoot was showing up repeatedly inside their house but it appeared that nobody else could see them, I’d recommend they see a doctor, yes.

Which is not the same thing as saying they “must be clinically insane.” A doctor might say no, it really is just heartburn; but that doesn’t mean a recommendation to see a doctor about those chest pains would be out of line.

The specific case doesn’t strike me as a religious discussion. Yes, some religions talk about demons; but I think the thread would have gone very much the same way if the person in question had reported that some major political figure who clearly wasn’t doing so, or extraterrestials, or whoever, kept showing up in their bedroom and harassing them in a similar fashion.

12

There is a big difference between giving what could be called a professional opinion, and saying that someone needs to go get a professional opinion.

13

Either that poster is trolling or has had well formed hallucinations and compulsive behaviors that caused significant distress. Within that forum any interaction has to pretend that the possibility of trolling or trocking does not exist. No I do not consider actual demons as a result of a porn addiction as a possibility.

Trying to rationally convince a real person with delusions and hallucinations that they are mentally ill, let alone goading them about it, is going to be unhelpful. It is not doing them any favors. If they are suffering focus on that. Or let them be.

I imagine that some posters here view any religious belief as “crazy”, as delusional, but this, if real, is not simple dislike of religion. It is not insulting religious belief as insane.

14

I think you are reading more into the mod’s action than is actually there. You’ve decided that if we allow posters to suggest someone seek professional assistance, then that is intended to discourage others from interacting with you. That’s your interpretation, but it’s not our intention. We’re simply allowing posters to respectfully comment that another poster, who freely posted whatever they chose to post, might solicit professional help based on what was said. When you post in a public forum, that’s a risk you take.

We won’t allow posters to personally attack another poster. If someone says, “You’re a crazy fucker, aren’t you?” That would draw a mod note or worse. But someone merely suggesting that based on what another poster said, they might consider seeking the help of a professional, doesn’t violate any board rules that I could find.

I think what @thorny_locust and @Czarcasm said draw the distinctions. Context matters, and that’s why we don’t employ bright line rules. In some instances, such a comment can be used as a personal attack. In others, there is simply a sincere concern for another’s mental welfare.

Goading would draw a mod note, if someone flags it. Accusing others of trolling or trocking is not permitted in the IMHO forum.

As ever, I stand to be corrected by the moderator of this forum. I’m simply stating how I would approach this.

And with that, I’m out.

15

Thank you again. I will try one more time as direct as I can, and let it go. I am not taking issue with that ‘mentally ill’ part of the comment, but this part specifically:

“You can’t reason someone”

16

Do you believe it is possible to “reason someone out of mental illness”? Referencing psychoses specifically. If only someone helpfully pointed out to them how their psychotic beliefs and experiences made no rational sense, then they’d recognize that they had a mental illness and seek professional help?

17

I might be wrong, but I believe the quote is

“It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

― Jonathan Swift
Is this an actual insult?

18

Just for the record, I’m not a ATMB or IMHO mod, so this is reflecting my viewpoints mostly as a poster and follower of board culture.

I tend to think that Kanicbird is caught in the grip of how the OP was framed. The OP mentioned near-addictive nature of their obsession with porn: “Honestly I was a porn fiend.” and then went on to explicitly ask the following:

Do you believe in demons?

Taking those in turn, we long have a board culture of advising those with addictions to see medical/psychological advice, sometimes given our natures in a slightly snarky nature, but normally from a place of at least casual concern.

For the second section, which not framed as a debate, it is opening the door too one. By my read, kanicbird shared theirs, which is their right, but that (likely unintentionally from the comments here) opens them up the same sort of possible debate the OP has.

The second point is more about general board culture. We tend to want verifiable, repeatable evidence. The number of times where a poster has said “the plural of anecdote is not data” is beyond the point of casual counting! Between that, and the near-universal love of Occam’s Razor, suggesting seeking medical advice is nearly a given.

That said, I personally would be uncomfortable (as a non-medical professional) of jumping to a straight diagnosis. It shouldn’t be insulting to need help with physical or mental issue, but all-to-often it is in USAian culture. I don’t believe any of the posters responding were intentionally using it as such, though there may have been a minor feeling of “this is the obvious first step, not asking a bunch of internet randos!”.

What I was really impressed with was @GIGObuster’s anecdote about his experiences, how easily it could be terrifying, but the resolution to identify and verify the problem without dismissing the very real concerns of the person having the problem regardless of the source.

So, TLDR: the OP directly or tacticly invited discussion of such beliefs. Given the board’s nature, we are aggressive on fighting perceived ignorance. Lastly, the response of suggesting medical or mental treatment isn’t wrong, but IMHO (!) the perceived insult was from a lack of tact - i.e. not a direct insult.

19

Given the kind of writing Jonathan Swift did (he was a very famous satirist; that’s why we’re still quoting the guy) I expect that was intended as a witty insult.

There’s also an underlying truth to it, as there is to much of what Swift wrote. His writing was often a commentary on human behavior and the quirks of society. It can be both an insult, and something true to keep in mind.

All that being said, you can also say that a person reached a conclusion without using proper reasoning without that being a personal insult. I don’t see why pointing that out should be forbidden on this board. It’s not any worse than saying a person made a mistake, which even the smartest people are going to do now and then. It’s not the same as saying a person lacks the capacity for reason. Now, that would be an insult.

20

This. The comments, while reasonable in content, sounded rude and dismissive.

That’s my guess, too, although i certainly haven’t researched it.