The book she claims is about her was authored by one “Shirley Anne Moore” - but nice detective work, Clouseau. 
[Quote=Larry Borgia]
Schizophrenics aren’t mentally retarded. They are quite capable of wit and clever wordplay.
[/quote]
Yes, but my point was that the whole thing feels cooked to me, starting with the too clever username.
You’re assuming that Shirley Anne Moore is her real name. I’m assuming that it’s not and that it was purposefully created.
I could be wrong, but the whole thing seems like a lame attempt to lure people into reading her book.
Normally I would reply to this that someone would have to be mentally ill to publish a book under a coded name so that they could get a cool handle on a message board. But in this case, touche. Anything is possible.
That also seems to be Shirley Anne Moore’s handle at her youtube channel that someone linked to.
It even says in her book that she was committed.
Was Carly Simon one of them.
You conspiracy theorists are crazy!!!
PlainJain, I agree with you in that I do not believe calling people mentally ill is really appropriate on this board. In fact I find many responses on this board to such posts generally insensitive and offensive. If someone posts something that to you is so obviously insane, foolish or even stupid why not just give it the response it deserves and let it die. Insulting or being condescending to someone isn’t helping anybody.
That being said, Dr Fidelius’s response was I believe compassionate and appropriate given the context. There were other posts that were taunting and generally just negative. Pointless.
I have a schizophrenic friend, who I have dealt with through a couple psychotic episodes. Trying to reason with a psychotic schizophrenic is useless. The best you can do is observe and involve the authorities when they become a threat to others or themselves. Baiting and indulging their delusions is not only pointless but cruel.
It would be a weird statistical anomaly if we *didn’t *have the odd mentally ill person here occasionally. I’ve said what **Dr Fidelius **said on a couple of occasions. I didn’t say what I said on those occasions as an insult, I just thought that debating a silly person had turned into mocking a sick person.
Personally I think people got trolled enough to break the “attack the post, not the poster” rule. I read the poster’s name as “sane no more”.
My understanding of this rule is that it overrides even when “everyone can see” the person is what you are calling them.
IMO, unless you can present evidence that you’re a certified practicing clinician, you don’t have a leg to stand on. Given that this is the internet, there’s just not enough there there. And I say this having a BA in Psych and a couple years of grad work therein.
And “everyone agreeing” shouldn’t make it acceptable. If that person is in fact mentally ill, you people dogpiling on them certainly won’t make it better.
The OP’s request is completely legitimate.
So in your learned opinion as a BA in psych, do you consider it irrelevant that the author of the book is named “Shirley Ann Moore” and that she, herself, writes that she has been committed by her family as schizophrenic in the past?
To me there is no question she was either trolling by pretending to be mentally ill, or is mentally ill. Since she is self-publishing a book, hosting youtube channels and personal blogs, etc that repeat her illusions word for word, I don’t think she was trolling.
It’s still the rule here, as I understand it, that you address the content of the posts, not build a case attacking the background of the poster.
It’s interesting that it’s ok to eyeball the evidence and call someone crazy and present “reasonable” evidence justifying it, but if you build a rock solid case against someone that seems to be deliberately misleading, it’s still not ok to call them a liar.
There’s a funny thing about crazy. It’s all about abnormal behavior, but the few perfectly normal people I’ve met don’t seem quite right either.