Posts by Michelle Evans

Kenneth Ross8 said:Dear Admins,
since we haven't been able to get a response from the moderators regarding...
/cut/

Even though this was directed at the admins, specific questions about whether someone is responding or not should be handled by the PPDF moderators.

I have notified the moderators about this, and they will reply as soon as they are able. Please bear with us until then...

electricstag16 said:And I still haven't received an answer regarding why the thread was locked, which was my original question...

I don't see any actual reason to assume the worst just yet. It all comes down to when you posted and how quickly I noticed it and reached out to the moderators to step in.

If we don't hear anything within 24 hours, then your assumption might be right. Please just bear with us for a moment...

I’ve let the moderators know about your questions here. They’ll get back to you as soon as they have a moment...

Could you clarify what exactly your grievance is?

Are you upset because you weren't banned? Or maybe because someone's argument with a moderator was removed—which is standard procedure anyway? It was deleted just an hour ago, even though it was posted yesterday at 10:30 PM. I get the urge for a little drama, but let’s stick to the facts...

Paul Newman5 said:Sorry, but I don't get it. You say anxiolytics are for anxiety, but I'm anxious and terrified, and I've never really dealt with major depression. You told me before to stop taking Helix. If anxiolytics are for anxiety, why am I suffering through Citram or any other antidepressant? Am I supposed to just vomit up my Helix and call it a day? Sorry if I misunderstood, but that's how it sounded.🤷

I just have to remind you that if you decide to stop or change a prescribed treatment based on advice from someone on a forum, you're doing so at your own risk...

No offense intended, but using a forum as a substitute for a real doctor or a clinic is truly irresponsible.

EDIT: My apologies, I misread and thought you had stopped Helix because of forum advice.

Kenneth Scott41 said:I’m honestly relieved the Administrator finally stepped in. It looks like Blizzard has stopped the constant gossiping and personal attacks.🙂

Seriously, everyone, why are you all so intimidated by him? I mean, can't you see he’s clearly dealing with some kind of issue? He feels this compulsive need to overanalyze every single post, and in his mind, he's always right, I suppose.☕

As for me, I’m doing alright. I’m staying consistent with my medication, but more importantly, I’ve started getting out more. You really shouldn't spend your entire life glued to a computer screen. Every day, I take a walk along the Mississippi, or I'll grab a coffee with a friend, and I try to maintain a positive mindset—it seems like when you do, things just tend to fall into place around you.
That whole law of attraction thing actually seems to hold some weight, because people can sense when someone is depressed; they pick up on that negative energy. Personally, I head into town every day with a smile on my face, and I can assure you, it isn't forced. I genuinely feel good. 😁

redcrane22... please take care of yourself, and you too, Ana... where have you been hiding lately?😁

I hope everyone has a pleasant day!

Kenneth Scott41, that really wasn't a kind thing to say. Is Kevin Nguyen3 the only person on this forum dealing with mental health struggles? Is that really necessary to point out? Psychology is a community where plenty of people deal with various conditions. Kevin Nguyen3 has always been very upfront about his own situation.
This should be the last place where someone's diagnosis is used to discredit them through the worst kind of ad hominem attacks.

Let's not go there. Consider this a moderator's warning, even if it isn't highlighted in color.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand. Psychotropic medications...

If you want to solve the mystery, my advice is to just ask him why he enjoys shaking hands...

It might be worth reviewing the forum guidelines before starting a new thread. 🙂

5) The following types of threads are subject to automatic locking:

- Threads attempting to psychoanalyze people in your personal life by searching for hidden motives or meanings behind their actions. For instance: "What is driving my husband's behavior?", "What are my boss's true motivations?", "What did my friend mean by saying that?", etc.

- Threads focused on psychoanalyzing or diagnosing public figures.

- Threads centered around speculative psychoanalysis regarding individuals currently under investigation by law enforcement, or topics designed to provoke discussion about active criminal cases.

Elizabeth Davis said:It’s always smarter to just drop a direct link to the post instead of trying to describe which one you mean... smart move:🙂

Exactly. You either use a direct link or just hit the report button. Both take you right to the source.
The problem is that in the window between when a comment is made and when the mods actually see it, some overachiever might decide to tidy up the thread. If posts get deleted, the numbering shifts automatically, so post #101 suddenly becomes post #98... it gets messy.

@Rebecca Edwards87/">@@Rebecca Edwards87, could you clarify what exactly you think needs moderating? I don't see anything problematic in post #101 or the one quoting it...

I assume you're referring to the post... #100 Who’s using those 'rigo' emojis and what’s their quote in the post... #101?

Rebecca Edwards87 said:Sure, the OP technically broke the rules by not adding something like "I agree" or whatever, but looking at last night's comments, most people don't see much difference between 👍 and simply saying "I agree 👍." It's basically the same thing...

Both fall under the same category. It's all spam. Some moderators just delete posts, while others hand out harsher penalties. On the Foodie forums, we just delete them. Anything left behind wasn't a choice—it was just an oversight...

I understand there were reasons for the deep clean, but it would have been better if you had kept the parts of the posts that didn't violate the rules...

We don't edit posts just to strip out the rule violations and leave the clean parts behind. That’s against our policy...

How exactly does an answer here help you navigate this... Any response at all (yes—it’s normal, or no—it isn't) doesn't change your actual life. If their dynamic is considered normal by a son or a father, regardless of whether some stranger online offers expert or amateur advice, the reality remains the same: their relationship is what it is, and they aren't going to change just because it bothers you. This seems to be your burden to carry, and it's something you need to work through with your fiancé and within yourself... seeking validation from strangers won't solve it.

We can't really know what those people were thinking. It was probably nothing at all, or perhaps nothing that truly matters, but since you felt embarrassed, you interpreted their looks that way...

If you'd like, we can move this thread over to the PDF Parents and Kids section. You might find more relatable stories there, along with advice from other moms on how they handle similar situations and how they carry themselves through them...

granitecyclist99, is this thread open because I mentioned earlier today that we didn't revoke your access to the PDF file?
It stays revoked, so you'll just have to accept that... regardless of how much drama you try to stir up here. Next time you're warned about losing PDF access, just take it gracefully and stop trolling the thread...

I am the Psychology supermoderator. For any formal appeals, please contact the administrators directly. As the supermoderator, I've already addressed everything in the relevant threads or via private messages. I have no intention of repeating myself or rehashing the same points over and over... Furthermore, I won't be commenting on your vague assumptions regarding how moderation decisions for the PDF were made. That isn't my responsibility to explain, and frankly, it doesn't concern you...

Best regards!

The end result is that I voided the assigned card. I believe it was an error on the part of the system.
To prevent any debate over whether Sacreus should be removed from moderation because of this mistake, I want to emphasize that Sacreus generally does a fantastic job moderating the PDF section, and even moderators make mistakes sometimes. That’s why we have supermoderators (or admins) to step in when things go wrong. That is exactly what I did.

Posts that were appealed can remain deleted. These instances involve users repeatedly asking questions that have already been answered. They serve no purpose and just clutter the thread.

That covers Sacreus's moderation regarding this thread.

Regarding the sanctioning of this specific post—since no other posts were mentioned—the complaints seem to be quite general:

Nicole Turner35 said:/cut/
and being told directly that I'm just rambling and that I'm slow. And coming from a moderator, no less. 🤦

Nicole Turner35 said:In response to being systematically ignored and subsequently belittled for asking questions, I responded with an insult, basically saying, "Why are you all rambling"... "I have experience working with people with disabilities, so I can repeat myself a hundred times if I have to..."

Next time you appeal a post, please refrain from adding your own interpretations of what was actually written. A direct copy-paste will work perfectly fine.

The controversial entry reads:

Given everything discussed, I can only repeat what I've already said... since I have experience working with individuals with special needs, I have patience for it...

Let's address this "everything discussed" part first.

Moderators participating in discussions as regular users are allowed to communicate without sounding like a stuffy academic journal from the Smithsonian, and they don't need to act like they're walking on eggshells at all times. If someone chooses to sound overly rigid, that's their prerogative.

And let's not forget—this thread has been lightly moderated. There was no grand fanfare or red carpet treatment for how this was handled in the opening post.
Please, read the first post again. If anything is unclear, look back at the old thread to see the comparison of what used to get sanctioned there. I assure you, language like this wouldn't have been flagged then, nor would it be flagged anywhere else on the entire PDF.

As for the second half of the sentence:

since I have experience working with individuals with special needs, I have patience for it

He provided some clarification on what he meant a few posts down...

No, my point was that I have plenty of pedagogical patience—or didactic patience, if you prefer the term. I'm used to the constant repetition required to explain the same concept through different lenses... so, because of that, I don't mind trying to approach things from various angles...

Just because you don't want to accept it doesn't mean it isn't true...
I don't see any reason to sanction this post. I'll leave that call to the administrators...

I just need to clarify one thing here. It was mentioned that his expertise carries extra weight because of the color of his handle...

casualwolf39 said:It’s even more dangerous when someone in a moderator role—someone whose word actually carries weight—promotes a quick two-month fix. It trivializes the years of hard work everyone puts into PT and gives a false sense of hope to those who are only just starting their journey...

A person's username doesn't carry any weight when we're talking about actual expertise. It doesn't suddenly cancel out, say, sheer stupidity. If it did, some of my own posts—which rank pretty high on the idiocy scale—would be perfectly acceptable... while every single one of the admin's posts would be a masterclass in genius. Unfortunately, that just isn't how it works... 😢
True expertise is proven through debate. There really is no other way...

That’s all I have to say regarding the appeals. The administrators can review the PDF version of the thread along with this one, and feel free to adjust my decisions if necessary...

Warm greetings to you...

Daniel Diaz79 said:Has this thread just vanished into some digital void, or what? 🤔

No, it’s just temporarily hidden from view.

@Nicole Turner35/">@@Nicole Turner35, ambercyclist50

I'll take a look through the whole thread. I find myself agreeing with casualwolf39 regarding moderators participating in discussions—it’s perfectly fine. When a moderator joins in, they're just engaging as a regular user, which should be entirely separate from their mod duties... Any posts that break the rules are subject to the same sanctions as anyone else on the forum.

casualwolf39 said:Please release us from the moderation of @Sacreus. Through constant ignoring, belittling, ignorance, dodging questions, mockery, insults, manipulation, and baseless self-promotion—not to mention the lack of literacy—they insult the intelligence of everyone who has lived through or is currently enduring the struggle with borderline personality disorder...

Hi there!

Are you filing a complaint against the moderator @Sacreus or just the user Sacreus? Based on what you wrote, it sounds like the latter...

If this is about a moderator, please include specific links regarding their moderation actions. I will review the entire thread, but if there is a particular disciplinary step you feel was unfair, please link it so I can look closer...

If this is about a regular user, I have to say that no one can be restricted from a thread simply because they ignore people, dodge questions, lack knowledge, self-promote, or write poorly. If a user is being belittling or insulting, those posts should be reported using the flag icon and sanctioned accordingly. However, the user still maintains the right to participate in the discussion, unless their behavior leads to sanctions or an eventual ban from the forum...

I see that some posts have been flagged, but as I mentioned in the announcement, I need a little more time to read through the whole thread to understand the context...

Best,

necunecu said:I wasn't sure if this was allowed here, but there was a case that got quite a bit of national media coverage.
/cut/

No. We close threads like this because they inevitably devolve into amateur psychology regarding people currently under investigation.

Per the forum rules:

5) Threads involving the following topics are subject to automatic closure:

/cut/

- threads centered on armchair psychoanalysis or speculating about individuals involved in active criminal investigations, whether by nature of the topic or because the thread was opened specifically to discuss a certain case.