This is not a pitting. Rubberneckers please carry on.
About this thread:
As much as I see where you are coming from, is that really necessary? Everybody was happily volunteering the info. Several recent threads have done their job to keep your concern current in everybody’s mind, I think. And isn’t every post we submit equally likely to be held against us here or elsewhere?
Is there a precedent for this kind of closing? Won’t this be an edge of the wedge kinda deal? It just looked a bit nannyish to me and I am curious. I really have no dog on this fight.
I read the title and figured all the posts would be flaming the OP, but was pleasantly surprised to see it was all good responses to it. Which made the locking a puzzle to me.
askeptic, I have to say I see both your point, and Sapo’s.
You and Czarcasm are both correct that people can be stigmatized for admitting to using psych meds. And that some people on the Dope have had problems before for admitting their mental health problems.
On the other hand, I strongly believe that until people choose to make stands to emphasize that not all psych meds are being used like Mother’s Little Helper, it’s not going to change.
I’m not saying that I think Czarcasm was wrong to close the thread. I’m just very saddened to think he may have been right.
It has happened in the past, creating very ugly incidents(please don’t ask me for links because that would just defeat the purpose). Please believe me when I say that I wish it wasn’t necessary.
Czarcasm, I don’t doubt you. Nor did I mean any criticism of your decision. The conditions that informed your decision, yes. But that’s a very different thing.
**Czar ** is, unfortunately, right, Sapo. There are people on the board who will and do use such information against others. In fact, it happened to me just yesterday.
People’s psychiatric diagnoses and along with them any psych meds that they may be taking is, in my opinion, something people need to be free to talk about.
“Psychiatrizing” someone —treating them as if their arguments are dismissable and the energy and intensity behind any of their concerns are just consequences of their fucked-up brain or the drugs they are on or that they aren’t on a high enough dosage, etc etc etc, THAT should be against board rules.
People with psychiatric diagnoses are part of this community. We participate and our posts are addressed as those of anyone else, or should be. Neither owning a bottle of shrink meds nor possessing a dx from the DSM-IV should be considered permission to act like a jerk, nor should it require others to treat such a person with kid gloves within the rough-and-tumble params of what is otherwise considered legitimate debate & interplay in here.
But “Ooh, are we in our ‘manic phase’? Come back and post when you’re back down” or “I think UserName forgot to take his Prolixin again” are arguments ad hominem and in my opinion should be barred as a form of personal attack. They’re a coded appeal to “hey everyone, let’s not forget that this person is a mental fruitcake”, or at least such posts often appear to be.
Therefore if it were my call I would not have closed the thread for the future protection of the people taking psych meds; I might have posted to remind them that they can’t expect future privacy after posting such info on public msg boards but I’d leave it at that; and then if someone’s psych dx or the meds that they take (refuse to take, dose they are taking, etc etc) is thrown at them as a nonsequitur in a future thread, I’d step in and issue a warning.
I feel like we’re being babysat here. When I saw the thread, my first thought was “yup this is going to be fucked up”. Of course that information is going to be held against the posters. In fact, I’d probably be one of the ones teasing them. But it’s their choice to post that information about themselves. Psychiatric medication host a great number of side effects and I bet it would be useful to be allowed to discuss them here with others going through the same things. I would enjoy getting in on that convo.
I thought threads were closed for violations of the rules set up for us. How can we predict what is out of line when threads are being closed because they MAY hurt someone’s feelings in the future.
Umm, Lib? That’s a pretty standard joke and just presented like that appears to be self-same joke. In fact when I read it, that’s what I thought.
However, some dudes here have long memories and carry a grudge, and so they *will *hark back to confession posts like that. Good idea to close that thread, in fact erasing it might not be a terrible idea.
Oh yes, thank you Czarcasm for running in and saving all those full grown adults from their own foolishness. God forbid some meany find that thread and call them a name a year from now. Braaaaavo!
No, this was a completely stupid Nanny decision. There was a “Who’s OCD” thread a couple of weeks ago that went unclosed. Like AHunter brought up, if the knowledge is “abused” then Mods should step in. But Czarcasm telling all the Dopers that there are certain things they are not allowed to reveal for fear of ridicule is simply bullshit.
And I’m sorry, but many people on drugs for mental issues ARE fucked up with over- or under-reacting*, even when taking the right dosage and especially if they’re not. To whine about that observation is akin to getting mad at the notion that quadriplegics aren’t good dancers.
*eta: in case Lib’s paranoid centers are flashing and he’s not sure: yes, you fall in the group I’m talking about.
I think the mods should come down swiftly and harshly on those who use someone’s previous mention of physical and psychological issues as a weapon to offend or diminish them. Trying to preempt this by preventing people from mentioning their issues is a bit of a stretch.
Not only that, but we have a good number of threads going at any given time with people commenting on their issues, from the hardcore psychological to the “I can’t get a date with this girl”. Everybody here has at least a dozen posts that could be dug up and used against them. If there is a real need to stop that, we are way too late for it.
So, in the end, I do understand the need Czarcasm saw of closing the thread, but I don’t think this is the right way to fight the problem. The problem should be addressed by hitting those who misuse the information, when they do it.
And, of course, people who are still to wary of the whole thing, should play their cards closer to their chest and not volunteer information about their meds, or whatever it is they don’t want to have brought up next time around.
I don’t think the closed thread should be treated differently from “What’s in your DVD collection?”.
How would this work, exactly? In the Pit, we let people accuse each other of having sex with animals, of having severely sub-average intelligence, of having any manner of undesirable personal or physical traits. Would insults only be allowed that are demonstrably false? What about relatively mild comments, e.g. “You’re nuts.”?
I’m not saying we’ll never find some personal attacks over the line even in the Pit, but if you’re proposing a general rule change about what type of insults are allowed, I think there would need to be more details on how to write the rule that wouldn’t completely neuter the Pit or have people unwittingly walk into traps by calling someone crazy who it turns out had previously posted about being on medication.
Oh no, I am just saying that whenever a situation arises such as the ones Czarcasm was thinking of when he chose to lock that thread, then you deal with them.
Sometimes I forget that there are members who keep track of others’ bios (or even know them in person). I keep waiting for someone to pair up all the women here who’ve had abortions with the people who’d like to explain to them why their decision was wrong.
