Jeffrey Fox4, look, to get things moving, you might want to check out this thread—though I'd suggest ignoring any of those gender-focused interpretations if they don't resonate with you 😁—and I think this particular post could be especially useful for you. Edit: actually, I see now that memorizing specific details isn't really working for you. Personally, when it comes to learning or remembering things, I’ve always found that making associations helps quite a bit. In this situation, it would be something like: "newsstand" —> my favorite newspaper. So, if your favorite paper is xy, then the clue for a certain location becomes xy, which basically means: turn left at the newsstand. I wonder if that kind of logic might work for you?
Since the situation—both the topic and the user involved—is part of a PDF I moderate over in the Psychology section, there is one part here that warrants my own response and comment. To be honest, I don't really know what's bothering you. Death-of-Art started this thread because she believes certain people—or "patients," as she calls them—are following her around the forum, reading her posts, and even registering accounts solely for that purpose. The whole topic feels a bit paranoid, though I suppose everyone has a right to their own perception of things on the forum. It doesn't seem to serve much purpose other than having users debate her specific case and express shock regarding these alleged stalkers, which most of the community hasn't really noticed (at least not with such intensity). Alex Lopez5 makes a valid point—he’s commenting on how the thread has evolved—though perhaps labeling people as "groupies" or the "star of the evening" might be a bit much. Even so, calling someone the star of the evening isn't inherently an insult, especially given the nature of this thread.
Does the forum rulebook need a rewrite regarding clone accounts? Or maybe we need to rethink how users perceive insults in posts? Generally speaking, from a technical standpoint, just because someone rarely posts doesn't mean they can't suddenly jump into a thread after a long hiatus. If a user is deemed to be breaking the rules, those rules apply regardless of whether they are a clone or the "original" account. Any posts that contain insults or otherwise violate our guidelines should be reported using the triangle icon next to the post, which displays the text report offensive post when you hover over it. When reporting, you just provide a reason. A moderator then decides whether to uphold the report, and if necessary, the matter can always be discussed via private message (not in the public thread) or right here in this PDF. We didn't receive a report from you regarding that specific post. In fact, we haven't received any reports at all, for that matter. Actually, you even replied to that user directly in the thread, which isn't really what you're supposed to do if you feel a post violates the rules.
Troublemakers who cause issues through clone accounts, as well as original users who drop spammy posts, pick fights with members and moderators, or participate in threads solely to stir the pot without adding anything meaningful—all of them are unwelcome. This has been the standard for a long time; you don't really need a rule revision to establish that.
hollowtrucker77 said:So you’ve got a chef's knife sitting in your kitchen drawer, right? The thing is sharp, and its whole purpose in life is to slice through stuff. I mean, if you aren't using it to cut things in the kitchen, then what is the point of having a kitchen or a sharp knife in the first place? It just doesn't make sense. 🙂
Furthermore, I suppose it’s also fine to cook them or put them over a fire while you're already in the kitchen. 😳
A few impressions and potential ratings (based on contexts I've seen):
☕ is often used when someone is just trolling through topics—sending a message to provoke or being somewhat authoritarian, though less frequently; it can be quite irritating in that sense
🤦 is perhaps the greatest evil among emojis because it's so often (wrongly) used to automatically belittle or discredit an interlocutor—it's highly debatable in itself
😵 feels like an unnecessary display of disagreement, especially if the argument is already clear enough
🙂 directed at someone else, it's like a tiny death for dialogue; in certain contexts, it really doesn't require any further communication
🙂 this one is, unfortunately, a signature for some people, even though it can actually be quite charming
🙂 this one comes off as very arrogant, though maybe tolerable
🙂 is quite controversial, particularly among intellectuals of the opposite sex
I've mentioned some of these just in jest, since I've had my fair share of pleasant situations involving them. Determining whether an emoji-heavy post deserves a trip to the ban corner really depends on the overall meaning of the post regarding the topic at hand. I guess malice and the destruction of a discussion are usually visible through more data than just a single emoji. That said, jumping into a thread primarily with emoji-only posts is probably enough to qualify for a ban on its own. An Asshole emoji should, by rule, only be used in chat with someone you know well enough on the forum; that would be the easiest type to ban. The "gunshot" emojis we have here are actually quite benign, and they seem harder to misuse for actual vendettas against people with different opinions.
And honestly, I think it’s about time we established our own little theory of trolling right here on this forum. To be perfectly clear, I don't particularly enjoy trolls—not that I really need to point that out—and I rarely find myself entertained by anyone's specific brand of online mischief—it's all just a bit much, isn't it? A bit tedious, maybe...
Megan Reyes26 said:😂👍 A parafraza of a conversation from my college days: "Why wouldn't everyone love gossiping? I love it. End of story." I love trolling. Unfortunately, I don't do it enough. I get stopped by the thought of all the inevitable, moronic (oops, sorry) replies that follow. Life is just too short to deal with that level of stupidity.
I dig this part: "Similarly, a post can technically be considered trolling by certain definitions, when it's actually just an outlet for someone's creativity. But let's say the rare ones who can maintain a reputation as a quality troll—or at least a tolerable one—usually have good intentions aside from being smart and literate. Their contribution to the topic (keeping things lively or provoking high-quality responses) outweighs the damage (like someone getting accidentally offended by a harmless joke)." Aren't trolls basically revolutionaries then? As far as I know, history moves forward precisely because someone refused to think like everyone else (and actually did something about it). Okay, fine, there have been bad versions, but overall...
redmarlin3 said:But those so-called high-quality trolls (we have one right here on the forum that we all pretty much adore 🙂 ) aren't actually offering what you claimed—that "alternative way of thinking." I wouldn't go so far as to call them revolutionaries, because they aren't actually providing any unique perspectives... they just wrap the same old ideas in different packaging. 😁
High-quality trolls often have this knack for spinning a story in a way that keeps the discussion from sinking entirely. There are certain charming, enlightened types of trolls—like that specific user mentioned earlier—who, I suspect, truly know what they're doing. They understand how to troll, and they seem to have a sense of where the line of good taste lies. Perhaps that’s why people in their circle tend to sympathize with them. In a way, I think they act as a sort of social glue—from a psychological or sociological standpoint, at least—keeping a small community together within an online chat or a casual discussion group.
Then again, I know plenty of trolls who aren't particularly likable, aside from a select few they've befriended and whose posts they support. To everyone else, they can be quite malicious. They generally don't give a second thought to the forum they're on or the community structure; they just drop comments that make others feel terrible or engage in blatant fake-out tactics. And the worst part is, after they chime in, nobody is actually any smarter regarding the topic at hand. Their comments usually end up being nothing more than mindless heckling or complaining, lacking even a shred of the constructive engagement we usually aim for.
The idea of being revolutionary or pushing boundaries is usually more prevalent among the more detailed contributors, whereas "quality" trolls—while perhaps more articulate than they are thorough—tend to display an enviable level of anticipatory thinking, predicting situations or psyching out the room. For that alone, if nothing else, I suppose you have to tip your hat to them.
I’m going to share a few beautiful—and perhaps not entirely "buttoned-up"—definitions of what trolling actually is. There are quite a few versions out there, and I suppose it's clear that different people recognize trolling in different ways, much like how everyone’s tolerance for it varies. When trying to define whether something qualifies as trolling, I think it’s important to try and identify the (bad) intentions of the person involved—though, to be fair, that can sometimes be hard to distinguish from someone just being ignorant or having a somewhat warped sense of humor and contributing to the topic. Sometimes, what is intended as trolling ends up just becoming off-topic chatter or spam, which basically just ruins the readability of a thread.
In the same vein, a post might technically fit a definition of trolling, but in reality, it could just be an expression of someone's unique creativity. But let's say—though it's rare—that a few people can maintain a reputation as high-quality trolls, or at least tolerable ones. Generally speaking, aside from being clever and well-spoken, they usually have good intentions, and their contributions to the discussion (in terms of keeping things lively or provoking others into providing quality responses, etc.) tend to outweigh any harm caused (like someone accidentally feeling insulted by what was actually a benign joke, for instance).
Definitions and examples (the troll in general): /1/ Being a jerk on the internet simply because you have the opportunity. Usually involving throwing one or more cynical or sarcastic remarks at an innocent bystander, because it's the internet and, well, you can. Guy: "I just found the coolest ninja pencil in existence." Other Guy: "I just found the most idiotic thread in existence."
/2/ Trolling is the attempt to get a rise out of someone. It involves forcing them to react to you, whether through wisecracks, posting incorrect info, asking blatantly stupid questions, or other nonsense. That said, trolling statements are never actually true, nor are they ever meant to be taken as such. Almost all trolling statements are intended to be funny to certain people, so it does carry some level of social or entertainment value.
"Trolling" isn't quite the same thing as "harmful statements." Intentionally insulting or libelous comments are actually considered "flaming."
Just as problematic as trolling itself is "Feeding The Trolls." This happens when people say things they know will trigger a trolling response, or when they reply to comments that are obviously from a troll. This is especially common when a troll makes their initial comment and then (usually many) people jump in, either attempting to correct them or expressing anger at the statement. At that specific moment, the trolling has succeeded and has been fed. Once encouraged by that success and the attention, trolls often find their way back.
feraltrucker5 said:Stop whining for no reason, you're actually doing a pretty decent job of dodging those bans so far. 😁
Nah. I do way more trolling in other sections; I'd feel too awkward causing a scene in my own backyard.🤷😳
Yeah, I suppose that's pretty much it.
feraltrucker5 said:He’s been around before, but the Mods probably wiped his posts because he was being a total troll. 😁
So, to wrap this all up—if we were looking at Zoran K. as he truly is, he probably should be an Alternative Moderator. And if that were the case, maybe we could finally lock this... what do you call it? This regenerative, defensive, fear-looking corner of a topic? Sorry. 😁
Aaron Anderson72 said:Oh, he isn't worried about you, he's worried about those moderators over on the alternative board! 😁
I'm not entirely sure, but it feels like the thread everyone was complaining about didn't even pop up until after this one started—now I guess I have to go back and dig through his post history just to see where else he might be trolling. What a headache. 🙄
Ryan Wood98 said:I happened to come across the thread. I won't specify which one or where it was located.
The moment I read the headline, I knew I would end up trolling.
It seemed inevitable that the thread would attract a crowd of irrational people posting complete nonsense, and I suspected I wouldn't be able to resist telling them all they were fools, or something to that effect.
Regardless, I clicked on it.
As expected, my assessment regarding the idiots and their posts was correct.
And, of course, I was also right about my own weakness and inability to resist the urge to troll.
I suppose one has to wonder what is in a person that drives them to react that way.
Now, I am just sitting here quietly, waiting for an infraction that will likely arrive in the form of a suspension, if not something worse.
Why on earth did I do that? It isn't even the first time.
When a thread is this much of a spectacle, an infraction feels almost inevitable. I’m talking about the topic itself, obviously. Congrats. This is likely your path toward self-improvement—I went ahead and renamed the thread slightly in honor of that, if you don't mind. Bye.
Honestly, regarding the honor aspect—it isn't even that unrealistic when you consider how vague the topic and the underlying issues are. 🤷 😁 It’s just one of those things that happens when people run out of things to say.
I suppose I don't really know how one kills off attraction or infatuation, other than—if the situation is truly unsolvable—simply deciding to move on. Maybe you make certain life changes, like moving to a new city, or throwing yourself into school or work, just to make that second, more personal and emotional decision a little easier to manage. You can do this—and arguably, you should do it multiple times throughout your life—but I guess you have the privilege and the pleasure of this being your first time dealing with it. Good luck.
James Bailey said:Well, I'm actually bisexual if you really want to get into the specifics, though I suppose most people already know that. But, I should probably reiterate that our gender being the same isn't even the primary issue here; in fact, I'd say it's not particularly relevant at all in this context.
Oh, perhaps it’s best if we just move past all of that, as I don't think I can quite find the right way to explain it...
I'm honestly a bit confused as to why you can't explain it. 😕
Is this like one of those things on Meta, where they ask for your relationship status and the answer is just "it's complicated"? If that's the case, maybe it works for social media, but it's not really helpful for this discussion. 😁
crimsonhound80 said:I’ve been scrolling through some of your posts just now, and I honestly feel—look, I really think—that all these recent threads about suicide over on the psychology subforum are totally out of line. It’s just dragging anyone who happens to stumble onto Reddit into this dark headspace.
I mean, seriously, what has the internet even become today?!
I’m not one for long-winded debates—unless it’s actually part of my job, of course—but imagine this: you’re just sitting there in a room, and someone walks in and says, "I want to kill myself," or "I'm going to end it tomorrow,"
or maybe
you're dealing with someone who was just saved from a suicide attempt.
And they look you right in the eye and say;
"Screw you guys, I'm still going to do it anyway. You didn't save me, you just delayed the inevitable..." blah, blah, blah...
For most people, stuff like that feels abstract—it's just something you read about.
But what if you think these things are just happening to you at least once a month? And YOU are the one the person who actually has to step up, save them, and then—before a psychiatrist even shows up—you have to be the one to calm them down, comfort them, and deal with the fallout...
I don't quite agree with your general point here. I suppose I don't see why discussing suicide—in a theoretical sense, or even looking at it as a broader phenomenon—would be problematic. It’s similar to how we might discuss other self-destructive behaviors in general. In fact, I think the whole point of having these discussions is to: a) debunk certain myths, b) stay grounded and rational, and c) offer whatever support we can to one another. That doesn't mean we're encouraging anyone to engage in harmful acts; rather, it allows us to talk about these issues as human beings. The person who started this thread is simply interested in hearing different perspectives on a specific issue. So far, the responses—whether they are more analytical or motivational in nature—seem to be heading toward stripping away that overly tragic lens through which people often view mental illness and life's hardships.
Could you please walk me through this? On one hand:
James Bailey said:Actually, not really. I’m making a very conscious effort to make sure I don't bother her more than absolutely necessary, I guess.
That sounds perfectly doable, so thank you so much for the helpful advice.
You really never know who might pop up on here, I suppose, especially since this has become the most active online community in the States, with thousands of us joining the conversation.
I feel this sense of something very close approaching, though I can't quite put my finger on what it might be. It feels like she wants to lend me a hand, much like she has helped me through so many other things in the past, and I find myself wondering if she would offer "something" to me if only there weren't such obstacles in the way. Then again, I suppose it’s all just so incredibly hypothetical that it might not even be worth dwelling on.
sqrt(a) + b/2 + c/3 + d/4 + e/5 + f/sqrt2 + g/sqrt3 ~= (hx)/n, n-->∞ 😁 It feels like quite a bit of guesswork.
There have been plenty of major opportunities for things to surface, but somehow, well, they haven't, so maybe they just won't. And we have tried to deal with it as best we can—and I would say we still are, quite frequently—but it seems almost impossible to reach some kind of "final confrontation."
I imagine either path would lead to some pretty heavy consequences for various parts of our lives, and for those around us too.
In a way, yes. It would certainly provide some distance, though probably not enough to be completely removed from the situation (since I won't be, and I really couldn't, moving to a different state or something for university).
That is certainly possible.
I sometimes wonder if there are certain situations where love winning isn't necessarily the right outcome? And as for showing your true face... well, I guess it's not always easy to even know your own.
And then on the other hand:
There have been plenty of massive opportunities for it to come to light, but somehow—well, it just hasn't, so I suppose it won't. And we've dealt with how we could make it happen, and I guess we still do, almost constantly, but it seems impossible to reach some kind of "final confrontation."
So, on one hand, nothing has happened—you honestly can't tell if she'd even want anything if the path were clear—but then again, you mentioned facing those challenges, both past and present. When you talk about "facing" them, what exactly do you mean?
Well, look, it’s completely understandable—or at least, I suppose it makes sense—to think this way when you're facing certain death and all the complications that come before it.
But I think I would always find myself asking question after question (just like you do, really). I don't think I could ever say with absolute certainty that a reason was "good enough," or even pinpoint the exact right moment to end things. My uncle passed away from cancer; though, to be fair, he wasn't exactly thinking about his illness with such clarity—he kept hoping he’d pull through until the very end. That hope wasn't exactly realistic, but something kept him going, probably my mom's care—his sister—who just kept him afloat by looking after him, feeding him, and staying by his side. Maybe it was also the hope that he might see his son one last time before he died, since they had been estranged for quite a while due to some family drama, and unfortunately, his son didn't make it to see him. Not that, as it turned out, he even thought that part was important.
From what I can tell, it sounds like you have a family that loves you and is actually there for you. Their support might play a huge role in whatever decisions you make next. Plus, medicine can be unpredictable, much like people can. Responses to treatments and surgeries aren't universal—people pass away from seemingly minor issues, yet others recover from truly incredible circumstances.
Personally, I think the mere possibility of things getting better—even if it seems objectively impossible—would keep me hanging on until the end (or at least as long as I'm still able to think clearly). I don't think I would ever feel like I had enough evidence to say, "I'm dying anyway, so it's better to get it over with now on my own terms"—well, except perhaps in a war zone, or in cases involving humiliation, torture, or some kind of inhumanity. It makes me think of 9/11, when people were jumping from the Empire State Building holding hands. I honestly don't know how I would have ended up if I had been there. I don't know which death I would have chosen. Jumping feels almost too rational to me, even if it's brave and dignified in its own way.
@briskskipper71: It isn't that I'm particularly conservative 🤣 (though I suppose my upbringing might have made me that way), but since I'm not even nineteen yet, I feel like there's just too much to explain to everyone, from my parents to my friends. I'd be risking my entire future, like finishing college and all that... I do meet new people, of course, but honestly, everyone else seems to fall short compared to her, at least for the time being. In the meantime, she's come up with some silly little temporary fixes—I won't go into detail because it would be too obvious—which will probably prevent me from "stumbling" into things quite as quickly as I thought I might when I first started this thread... but a permanent solution still seems nowhere in sight.
@Walter Grant33: I'm not going to get into the specifics of the situation. Let's just say things are actually a bit more complicated than if the two of them were together.
Well, if the important people in your circle aren't here reading this forum, I think you could probably be a little more specific about everything. I'm not quite following what she actually feels for you? (You mentioned in your opening post that she knows how you feel, but she can't act on it.) So, does she definitely want something, but simply can't? And is it because: a) her social circle doesn't support same-sex relationships b) because she's your stepmother c) because she's your biological sister d) because she's your stepsister e) because she's your cousin f) because she works for your dad or mom g) because she's your brother's girlfriend h) or... what? 😁
I mean, regardless of the reason, things will eventually come to light anyway. The people around you aren't oblivious. You're going to have to face this sooner or later. It might be better to decide now, before any real damage is done: a) whether you both just go your separate ways b) or if you decide to go all the way with this.
If you choose to go separate ways, maybe heading off to college could really help with that transition. Besides, maybe you're just fixated because this is your first experience with this kind of attraction, and perhaps it might pass once you get some distance.
If you are deciding to be together, then, well, we all know the old saying that love conquers all. Most people around you probably don't want a messy situation—and they might even be grateful one day if you both show your true selves. That is, assuming you both are certain about who your true self actually is.
Well, actually, your current health situation grants you a certain amount of agency. You’ve had enough options to be sitting here tonight, starting this thread and waiting to see what people think. You have the freedom to think—because, well, that's just being human—about various paths that aren't really solutions (at least not pleasant ones, especially this far in advance), such as ending things prematurely due to an incurable illness. You have the choice to simply reflect on it, perhaps deciding to revisit those thoughts later as your treatment progresses. You also have the option to decide that, regardless of how long this lasts, you will focus on bringing as much happiness as possible to those around you. This means choosing not to make a decision on their behalf—whether they would find it easier to cope with a natural passing from illness or a sudden suicide, which involves complex layers regarding the perception of death or even their feelings toward you.
And yes, despite how certain you seem in your post's P.S.—perhaps feeling like you've already grasped everything there is to know—there are endless nuances. There may even be people right here on this forum who could offer a clearer perspective on the reality of what lies ahead.
The dilemma you're presenting is quite abstract, really; one might even view it through a purely philosophical or ethical lens rather than a psychological one. This is largely because you feel you have "total clarity," and you seem to be treating those around you—including the members here—as categories to be managed in your pursuit of even greater certainty.
If you were to open up just a little more, maybe you might discover entirely new ways to look at what's weighing on you.
Thanks, placidjackal36. The thread has been renamed. Personally, I feel this topic would fit pretty much anywhere you discuss linguistics, communication, cognition, neuroscience, neurology, or learning—it honestly sits right at the intersection of Social Science, Natural science, and Psychology. For now, I’ll leave it here, just waiting for someone to drop by who might have encountered a real-world example of this... though, I suppose we have a better chance of finding that here than anywhere else.
If anyone is looking for a good read on this, check out: Oliver Sacks - Seeing Voices.