Same reason we entertain all manner of eccentrics, loons and weirdos. No need to list them. We all know who they are. Nobody is forcing anybody to engage with people that annoy them. Personally, I think **Machinaforce **finds value in his interactions here, else he would not return. As long as he chooses to engage in these conversations and share his thoughts, reciprocal engagement is not enabling.
I’m not a Buddhist (I’m Christian actually) and I’ve meditated many times. I find it extremely helpful now and then. He didn’t mention anything about Buddhism in his thread so I don’t see how this would be a violation.
Your opinion is very much the minority and probably harmful to anyone who takes your nonsense seriously.
Oops this was for Ahunter’s post.
Your opinion is very much the majority and is definitely harmful to the people who take it seriously.
Search the current thread. Search a previous thread for the mod note. ETA: Not the “homosexuality” thread, the other one currently in play. Though I don’t see how Buddhism won’t creep into the “homosexuality” thread soon.
Alcoholics find value in alcohol. That doesn’t mean it’s good for them. I think people engaging with him as though he was practicing actual dialog are just encouraging and strengthening the obsessions that are causing him distress. As** Susan **said, anything anyone says to him will just be met by “Yes, but they say that…” and demands that people prove them wrong, as though someone could prove a negative.
Had not considered it from this point of view. You really think that engaging him is doing more harm than good? I thought that giving him a different point of view at least gives him something new to consider, rather than fixating on the thought du jour. He does tend to argue reflexively, but every now and then he seems to change his mind, or let something go in lieu of being unable to come up with a better argument.
I honestly don’t know. I think as long as you go in gently and realize you’re probably not going to get anywhere, it’s not that bad. Obviously I can’t tell anyone what to do. If he doesn’t find what he’s looking for here, he’ll just go somewhere else. I can’t say if engaging with him helps or hurts. Maybe one of these threads will cause him to have a moment of clarity.
I see how.
I suggested he go to an actual Buddhist temple and talk to the monks there. He said he had some kind of horrible experience with the Buddhists, but was vague about the details. I’m guessing he was referring to the definition of Buddhism he discovered that somehow crippled his psyche. I kept asking if he physically went to a Buddhist temple, but got no answer. He’s an alleged shut-in, so maybe the interwebs is the only social interaction he’s willing to use. He’s never going to get his answers if he doesn’t go out into that BIG BAD WORLD out there, and he’s reluctant to believe anybody online who has real-life experience.
I don’t find his conversations pleasant, but I don’t think he’s deliberately trolling.
I mean, it’s locked, so even insidious Buddhism is unlikely to infect it now.
I don’t think **Machinaforce **is trolling - I think he is 100% genuine about his posts. He is fixated a whole lot more on spirituality/philosophy and other such questions that he finds nagging than most people, and that nagging need to know/understand prompts him to start threads asking this or that. It may be annoying to many, but to many folks with autism/Asperger’s or some related condition, their tolerance for topics that others dislike, or internal demand to know the whys, may be so pressing they just can’t help it.
As long as the mods clamp down on him starting too many threads on the same topic, and combine/blend them as need be, I think he’s OK.
It’s been several years, and he hasn’t changed one iota in his message. I don’t think engaging him has had any impact.
If he is a troll, he’s a pretty boring one.
Yes, he has a right. However, said he’s obviously unhappy with his situation, unlike yourself.
And I don’t believe anyone here said he’s a “fucking danger to anybody on this planet”, nor are we “in a hurry to diagnose and medicalize every difference that we don’t like.”
Mental illness does not necessarily make someone dangerous. It’s not about “differences we don’t like.” IF THAT is what you think mental illness is about, you should probably refrain from speaking about it.
I think what you went through sucked, and I’m sorry about that. But it’s not universal. Some people had just the opposite experience. Not to mention that you’re doing exactly what you’re accusing others of doing, if you stop and think about it.
No one is saying he’s schizo, and he needs to be medicated and locked away. Just that he should probably talk to a professional.
Guin, I agree with two of the things you posted on the other thread:
Someone upthread DID say he needed intervention because he was a danger. the OP.
Guin, my experiences are different from yours, and so when confronted with a context, my reactions are different from yours. But I’ll reciprocate what you’ve kindly said of me: you are not a bad person, and in fact I think you’re a fundamentally compassionate caring person (with edges and thorns and shit, but even so).
Lots of folks who go into psychiatry are compassionate and caring. Some of them stay. Many don’t. I may paint an overly-dark picture of what goes on within institutional psychiatry. I admit that. But the things I’ve described do happen to people, not just me but enough people to form a movement. I think both of us would like a compassionate systemic response to people’s anguish and misery and need for help. It needs to be fully consensual though.
So because you had a bad experience, it’s bad in general for all others? That is nonsense.
You come across as someone who desperately wants to be special and unique but you aren’t. You are just a regular slob like the rest of us.
I’m a regular slob like the rest of the people here but my bad experience with psychiatry isn’t relevant because I can’t extrapolate to the other regular slobs?
But I can. Because I’ve been in a huge auditorium packed with other people who had been badly mistreated by unwanted psychiatric intervention and misrepresentation of what they know or what they can do. And all those folks attending were — by definition — people willing to show up and out themselves as people who had been incarcerated in psychiatric facilitities, people with psychiatric diagnoses, and able to afford the cost of transportation and lodging to get there. Which made them the tip of the iceberg.
The issue is coercion and misuse of authority. Saying “oh but some people have perfectly fine experiences when they’ve consulted psychiatrists” is like saying “who cares if a few people get molested by priests, lots of other folks have noting but good things to say about their church experiences”. And you need to recognize that.
Was this a group therapy session? Did it take place in a courtroom? Jail? When you say “huge auditorium,” do you mean 20,000? 2,000? 200? 20? Why were all these mental cases gathered together in one location? What do you mean by “unwanted psychiatric intervention”? How does that happen? Did somebody suggest they needed counseling and it embarrassed them?
You’re using some vague hyperbole here, much in machinaforce’s style, and it doesn’t look good on you.
I can’t believe posters I would otherwise class as pretty intelligent are actually still being taken in by this troll.
Wait until he starts PMing *you *with the “suicide” threats.
I do love how our “overworked” mods are happy to just silently close his threads and not actually *warn *the whiny motherfucker.
Even in a pit thread about another poster, you manage to make this all about you. And YOU need to recognize that.