Issues with discussions regarding cancer treatment

hollowtrucker77 said:Look, I'll be blunt, but people have every right to decide what works for them, even if they end up making a mess of things personally.
The only thing you shouldn't be doing is trying to steer someone away from legitimate medical science.

And yet, if you look at certain obscure corners of this forum, that kind of behavior is practically encouraged everywhere.

Rachel Phillips3 said:But what happens when a licensed professional—an actual doctor—is the one doing exactly that?

Look, they aren't practicing here in the States, and they certainly aren't operating on this forum.
Out in the real world, there are certain beauties to life: you have freedom of speech, sure, but you also have accountability for what you say.
Around here, that second part tends to get a little blurry sometimes.
🙂

silverpuma542, I didn't quite catch your drift there.
Could you elaborate a bit?

hollowtrucker77 said:Look, they aren't practicing here in the States, and they certainly aren't operating on this forum.
Out in the real world, there are certain beauties to life: you have freedom of speech, sure, but you also have accountability for what you say.
Around here, that second part tends to get a little blurry sometimes.
🙂

silverpuma542, I didn't quite catch your drift there.
Could you elaborate a bit?

So, if I'm following you correctly, you're saying the only hard line is that we shouldn't discourage people from seeking official medical care.

Well, that kind of content is all over the Alternative forums, and it used to pop up on RiD too. I actually remember this one thread about being against vaccinations—the moderator ended up shutting the whole thing down simply because the posts from the common-sense and alternative medicine side were blowing up so fast she just couldn't control the circus anymore.

I think we need a rule. And Jose White18, you're being rude. People who start an initiative that actually makes sense aren't just starting petty arguments; maybe they just want to make this place better.
I’ve been here forever, and lately, things on the forum only move forward when someone takes charge after an initiative (thanks to the admins 🙏), which is why I've started some stuff myself. One thing I did was push back against radical extremists, and now the site is at a higher level because its rules forbid denying anyone's sovereignty. Even the communication is slightly less trash now.

Maybe you don't remember the days when people were openly selling juice cleanses, emetics, and other homemade concoctions in the alternative medicine section. Remember how many fights it took to get that banned? Back then, the admins didn't care; they’d show up once a month just to ban people or lock threads. Now, we have hollowtrucker77 with a stance that's actually right, we have mellowraven22 who isn't even allowed to say what he thinks because it brings the bulldozer 😬, and we actually have a chance to apply that same kind of rule to the alternative section.
Tomorrow or the day after, some admin will show up who doesn't give a damn, and the space for posting nonsense will still be there. Just like any rule will stay if hollowtrucker77 just stuffs it into some paragraph somewhere.
That warning everyone talks about? That was a three-month battle over on PZK. The female admin finally wrote it, but it was basically just a compromise where certain people were told: "Fine, we'll put the warning up, but you can never talk about this again." So they're effectively silenced to this day.
So, stop acting like it's easy. Let people who actually care choose what's best for themselves.

Why is it that you, as a moderator—who should actually care about the forum's health—won't let users do what they think is good for the community? Instead, you just label them as troublemakers. And why are you defending the very claims that the troublemakers are attacking?

The alternative medicine subforum is a place that can get dangerous, and honestly, it's great to say everyone chooses their own path. But the moderators and admins here still have responsibility in those choices. If they could stop someone from ditching chemotherapy to go follow Braco, then they share the responsibility for that decision. It's the same as the mod who allowed a thread about a bomb that actually blew someone up.
When you start taking your job seriously—and yeah, you aren't getting paid, but you should treat it like a job—then maybe we can talk. As long as you don't care whether people forge their own luck or get talked into risking their lives or their kids' lives because of this forum, there's no point in discussing this. You're still a mod on this board. Some long-time users feel that responsibility even if they aren't on the staff, simply because they view this place as "theirs" and care about how it looks. That's why the petty wars happen and why there's constant conflict in the alternative section between real medicine and hocus pocus.

We're talking about one specific subforum within the alternative section that needs different rules because there's a real risk of someone giving advice that actually hurts someone.
You're saying it's not worth fighting for?

I think it is.

silverpuma542 said:So, if I'm following you correctly, you're saying the only hard line is that we shouldn't discourage people from seeking official medical care.

Well, that kind of content is all over the Alternative forums, and it used to pop up on RiD too. I actually remember this one thread about being against vaccinations—the moderator ended up shutting the whole thing down simply because the posts from the common-sense and alternative medicine side were blowing up so fast she just couldn't control the circus anymore.

My bad, I wasn't quite sure if you were being sarcastic or actually serious there.
🙂
Look, people have every right to make their own choices, but nobody has the right to fill someone else's head with nonsense about how mainstream medicine is some kind of poison, suggesting instead that it's better to go visit some local guy at a diner to drink detergent and sit on a washing machine to "detox" the body.
It's just as absurd as telling someone they should run off into the woods to play hide-and-seek instead of showing up before a judge to pay the fine for riding a dirt bike without a helmet.

dustypuma5 said:I think we need a rule. And Jose White18, you're being rude. People who start an initiative that actually makes sense aren't just starting petty arguments; maybe they just want to make this place better.
I’ve been here forever, and lately, things on the forum only move forward when someone takes charge after an initiative (thanks to the admins 🙏), which is why I've started some stuff myself. One thing I did was push back against radical extremists, and now the site is at a higher level because its rules forbid denying anyone's sovereignty. Even the communication is slightly less trash now.

Maybe you don't remember the days when people were openly selling juice cleanses, emetics, and other homemade concoctions in the alternative medicine section. Remember how many fights it took to get that banned? Back then, the admins didn't care; they’d show up once a month just to ban people or lock threads. Now, we have hollowtrucker77 with a stance that's actually right, we have mellowraven22 who isn't even allowed to say what he thinks because it brings the bulldozer 😬, and we actually have a chance to apply that same kind of rule to the alternative section.
Tomorrow or the day after, some admin will show up who doesn't give a damn, and the space for posting nonsense will still be there. Just like any rule will stay if hollowtrucker77 just stuffs it into some paragraph somewhere.
That warning everyone talks about? That was a three-month battle over on PZK. The female admin finally wrote it, but it was basically just a compromise where certain people were told: "Fine, we'll put the warning up, but you can never talk about this again." So they're effectively silenced to this day.
So, stop acting like it's easy. Let people who actually care choose what's best for themselves.

Why is it that you, as a moderator—who should actually care about the forum's health—won't let users do what they think is good for the community? Instead, you just label them as troublemakers. And why are you defending the very claims that the troublemakers are attacking?

The alternative medicine subforum is a place that can get dangerous, and honestly, it's great to say everyone chooses their own path. But the moderators and admins here still have responsibility in those choices. If they could stop someone from ditching chemotherapy to go follow Braco, then they share the responsibility for that decision. It's the same as the mod who allowed a thread about a bomb that actually blew someone up.
When you start taking your job seriously—and yeah, you aren't getting paid, but you should treat it like a job—then maybe we can talk. As long as you don't care whether people forge their own luck or get talked into risking their lives or their kids' lives because of this forum, there's no point in discussing this. You're still a mod on this board. Some long-time users feel that responsibility even if they aren't on the staff, simply because they view this place as "theirs" and care about how it looks. That's why the petty wars happen and why there's constant conflict in the alternative section between real medicine and hocus pocus.

We're talking about one specific subforum within the alternative section that needs different rules because there's a real risk of someone giving advice that actually hurts someone.
You're saying it's not worth fighting for?

I think it is.

Just to throw a little defense toward Jose White18 here: look, the alternative subforum exists for a reason. People are naturally going to be interested in various forms of alternative approaches—stuff that hasn't been swallowed up by the mainstream or strictly validated by standard scientific methods. It's just how people work.
Coming in here demanding scientific proof for things that aren't even part of the scientific method is honestly a bit pointless, and I think the moderator was spot on when they labeled it as nothing more than trolling and disruptive behavior.
If all these different alternative movements and practices actually had a legitimate scientific basis, they would be classified as science and would have moved over to the PZ, health, or some other subforum specifically designed for those kinds of discussions.

silverpuma542 said:Some people act as the true architects of fortune for their children and those else they look after. It’s a heavy responsibility, really. That's why I think it would be incredibly helpful if someone could remind us all that the principles of alternative treatment in refuls actually carry over directly to RiD.

On those Alternative forums, people are always so quick to jump on anything they can write off as a placebo effect—it’s like their absolute last resort for an explanation. But the second you bring up the nocebo effect? Suddenly, everyone loses interest and shuts down. It's funny how that works, isn't it? 🙄

Honestly, until someone actually takes that right away from them, it's their business. Parents do all sorts of stupid things, yet we still don't require a license or formal training just to raise a child. I wouldn't want to live in a country that tries to micromanage every corner of private life—including parenting—no matter what nonsense people might potentially get up to.

As for this "spillover" you mentioned, that sounds like a you problem. I'm not sure how that's supposed to "spill over," or how one thing relates to the other? If someone gets hooked on alternative medicine and starts posting about it on RiD, I highly doubt that has anything to do with the existence of the Alternative PDF or the site's moderation policy.

On the Alternative side, everything is always conveniently blamed on the placebo effect, but the moment you mention the nocebo effect—suddenly it's off-limits, right? :rollehyes:

Yeah, it's the same way medical professionals lose their cool when you start bringing up the same concepts within mainstream medicine, even when I cite actual studies. In reality, your average doctor probably struggles more with negative suggestions than your average alternative medicine enthusiast.

Jose Barrett said:Look, please don't go blurring the lines between actual medicine and quackery, or suggesting that people here should just "choose" whichever version suits them better.

What kind of counterpoint is that!?
comparing a PhD researcher like Ivan Đikić against Braco from Srebrenjak 🤣

Even if alternative medicine is nonsense, being foolish isn't illegal.
🙂

dustypuma5 said:I think we need a rule. And Jose White18, you're being rude. People who start an initiative that actually makes sense aren't just starting petty arguments; maybe they just want to make this place better.
I’ve been here forever, and lately, things on the forum only move forward when someone takes charge after an initiative (thanks to the admins 🙏), which is why I've started some stuff myself. One thing I did was push back against radical extremists, and now the site is at a higher level because its rules forbid denying anyone's sovereignty. Even the communication is slightly less trash now.

Maybe you don't remember the days when people were openly selling juice cleanses, emetics, and other homemade concoctions in the alternative medicine section. Remember how many fights it took to get that banned? Back then, the admins didn't care; they’d show up once a month just to ban people or lock threads. Now, we have hollowtrucker77 with a stance that's actually right, we have mellowraven22 who isn't even allowed to say what he thinks because it brings the bulldozer 😬, and we actually have a chance to apply that same kind of rule to the alternative section.
Tomorrow or the day after, some admin will show up who doesn't give a damn, and the space for posting nonsense will still be there. Just like any rule will stay if hollowtrucker77 just stuffs it into some paragraph somewhere.
That warning everyone talks about? That was a three-month battle over on PZK. The female admin finally wrote it, but it was basically just a compromise where certain people were told: "Fine, we'll put the warning up, but you can never talk about this again." So they're effectively silenced to this day.
So, stop acting like it's easy. Let people who actually care choose what's best for themselves.

Why is it that you, as a moderator—who should actually care about the forum's health—won't let users do what they think is good for the community? Instead, you just label them as troublemakers. And why are you defending the very claims that the troublemakers are attacking?

The alternative medicine subforum is a place that can get dangerous, and honestly, it's great to say everyone chooses their own path. But the moderators and admins here still have responsibility in those choices. If they could stop someone from ditching chemotherapy to go follow Braco, then they share the responsibility for that decision. It's the same as the mod who allowed a thread about a bomb that actually blew someone up.
When you start taking your job seriously—and yeah, you aren't getting paid, but you should treat it like a job—then maybe we can talk. As long as you don't care whether people forge their own luck or get talked into risking their lives or their kids' lives because of this forum, there's no point in discussing this. You're still a mod on this board. Some long-time users feel that responsibility even if they aren't on the staff, simply because they view this place as "theirs" and care about how it looks. That's why the petty wars happen and why there's constant conflict in the alternative section between real medicine and hocus pocus.

We're talking about one specific subforum within the alternative section that needs different rules because there's a real risk of someone giving advice that actually hurts someone.
You're saying it's not worth fighting for?

I think it is.

If you actually cared. Solve it. Braco's whole situation is a mess. Honestly, someone should step up and file a formal criminal complaint against him for running those medical scams and practicing quackery. That would be a genuinely worthwhile move. If you actually cared, you'd do something about it. Seriously. You should actually take some action. Right now, it just looks like you only care about being on this forum.

Honestly, the moderators and admins on this forum really do have some nerve. Responsibility. If they had the power to stop someone from walking away from cancer treatment to seek an alternative, then they carry a share of the responsibility for how that turns out.

Does Braco deserve any credit if he steps in to help when chemotherapy fails?

It’s the same deal as the moderator who allowed that thread about the bomb that actually blew someone up. Responsibility falls on them too.

By repeating this comparison, you’ve officially crossed the line into trolling. If you actually want to be the truth-seeker you claim to be, you should realize that being a provocateur hurts everyone else involved. Everyone has the absolute right to decide what they do with their own lives. It’s hard to tell if you're just rambling like a drunk because you don't get it, or if you're being purely Machiavellian just to push your own agenda.

We're talking about a specific sub-forum within the alternative section here. I think it needs its own set of rules to prevent anyone from giving out bad advice that could actually end up hurting someone.

Take a look at this thesis. Then, try to actually wrap your head around what you wrote. Once you do that, maybe you'll realize just how thin that argument really is. There's always a risk. If someone goes out and posts something that some idiot ends up using against themselves, what am I supposed to do? Who am I to stop someone from choosing tahébo tea over chemotherapy? Who are you to try and prevent them from doing that? They made their own choice.

It seems like I can always find someone even more clueless than you just to protect them from your own nonsense, only to end up using them as the perfect example of why you're wrong. Hey everyone. We should probably tighten up freedom of speech just a little more. No thanks.

hollowtrucker77 said:Look, I'll be blunt, but people have every right to decide what works for them, even if they end up making a mess of things personally.
The only thing you shouldn't be doing is trying to steer someone away from legitimate medical science.

I still haven't heard a solid argument against that. The article being cited is about practicing medicine without a license, which is a different story entirely. To get the full picture right—as I mentioned, I'm waiting to hear from my lawyer—it shouldn't be a legal issue given the disclaimer on the PDF. As for the idea that one person can't share their own perspective on why mainstream medicine might fail them? That hasn't been proven either. I'm just a layman sharing my thoughts and experiences.

dustypuma5 said:I think we need a rule. And Jose White18, you're being rude. People who start an initiative that actually makes sense aren't just starting petty arguments; maybe they just want to make this place better.
I’ve been here forever, and lately, things on the forum only move forward when someone takes charge after an initiative (thanks to the admins 🙏), which is why I've started some stuff myself. One thing I did was push back against radical extremists, and now the site is at a higher level because its rules forbid denying anyone's sovereignty. Even the communication is slightly less trash now.

Maybe you don't remember the days when people were openly selling juice cleanses, emetics, and other homemade concoctions in the alternative medicine section. Remember how many fights it took to get that banned? Back then, the admins didn't care; they’d show up once a month just to ban people or lock threads. Now, we have hollowtrucker77 with a stance that's actually right, we have mellowraven22 who isn't even allowed to say what he thinks because it brings the bulldozer 😬, and we actually have a chance to apply that same kind of rule to the alternative section.
Tomorrow or the day after, some admin will show up who doesn't give a damn, and the space for posting nonsense will still be there. Just like any rule will stay if hollowtrucker77 just stuffs it into some paragraph somewhere.
That warning everyone talks about? That was a three-month battle over on PZK. The female admin finally wrote it, but it was basically just a compromise where certain people were told: "Fine, we'll put the warning up, but you can never talk about this again." So they're effectively silenced to this day.
So, stop acting like it's easy. Let people who actually care choose what's best for themselves.

Why is it that you, as a moderator—who should actually care about the forum's health—won't let users do what they think is good for the community? Instead, you just label them as troublemakers. And why are you defending the very claims that the troublemakers are attacking?

The alternative medicine subforum is a place that can get dangerous, and honestly, it's great to say everyone chooses their own path. But the moderators and admins here still have responsibility in those choices. If they could stop someone from ditching chemotherapy to go follow Braco, then they share the responsibility for that decision. It's the same as the mod who allowed a thread about a bomb that actually blew someone up.
When you start taking your job seriously—and yeah, you aren't getting paid, but you should treat it like a job—then maybe we can talk. As long as you don't care whether people forge their own luck or get talked into risking their lives or their kids' lives because of this forum, there's no point in discussing this. You're still a mod on this board. Some long-time users feel that responsibility even if they aren't on the staff, simply because they view this place as "theirs" and care about how it looks. That's why the petty wars happen and why there's constant conflict in the alternative section between real medicine and hocus pocus.

We're talking about one specific subforum within the alternative section that needs different rules because there's a real risk of someone giving advice that actually hurts someone.
You're saying it's not worth fighting for?

I think it is.

You don't have any right to be deciding things like that. You aren't anyone's yardstick, and you certainly don't have the authority to set the standard for anything.

If you’re looking to "clean up the forum" by hiding behind some lofty, universal moral high ground, be my guest. As for me stepping into a moderator role? That’s not happening unless there’s an actual legal issue on the table.

So, you've got a few ways to play this:

1 - Prove that it’s actually illegal (like I mentioned, I'll send an inquiry to a law firm "off the record" and wait to see what they say).

2 - Shut down the PDF or the entire PDF sub-section.

3 - Swap out the moderators, though I highly doubt that’s going to happen. It was already a struggle finding someone willing to try and maintain some semblance of balance between two extremely polarized, high-strung factions.

Look, if I’m acting as a moderator down there, and it turns out there isn't a legal issue—and I'm saying this strictly because I don't want the Forum getting sued, not because I agree with him—then I won't allow the "alternative skeptics" (which is a total misuse of the term anyway) to constantly try to hijack the PDF's policy.

We should have a legal opinion within the next few days. If it doesn't align with what you're hoping for (and, frankly, I don't think it will), then your options are to launch new "campaigns" to either replace the mods or shut the PDF down. There is simply no way I'm going to penalize users for having alternative views, even if I am privately laughing my head off at them. 🙂

hollowtrucker77 said:My bad, I wasn't quite sure if you were being sarcastic or actually serious there.
🙂
Look, people have every right to make their own choices, but nobody has the right to fill someone else's head with nonsense about how mainstream medicine is some kind of poison, suggesting instead that it's better to go visit some local guy at a diner to drink detergent and sit on a washing machine to "detox" the body.
It's just as absurd as telling someone they should run off into the woods to play hide-and-seek instead of showing up before a judge to pay the fine for riding a dirt bike without a helmet.

I honestly don't see how you can separate the two. 🤷If someone opts out of conventional medicine in favor of alternative medicine, or even believes the whole medical establishment is some massive conspiracy and posts about it here, that's automatically going to be viewed as "incitement." Every public discussion is a form of influence once it's posted online. And let's face it, people aren't going to add a "this is just my opinion" disclaimer to every single post, which is exactly why we have the site's terms of service. 🤔

There’s always the option of shutting down the sub if things get too volatile, but I don't see how we can have our cake and eat it too—meaning, having an alternative medicine section without the inevitable content that comes with it. 🤷

bluemason3 said:Honestly, until someone actually takes that right away from them, it's their business. Parents do all sorts of stupid things, yet we still don't require a license or formal training just to raise a child. I wouldn't want to live in a country that tries to micromanage every corner of private life—including parenting—no matter what nonsense people might potentially get up to.

As for this "spillover" you mentioned, that sounds like a you problem. I'm not sure how that's supposed to "spill over," or how one thing relates to the other? If someone gets hooked on alternative medicine and starts posting about it on RiD, I highly doubt that has anything to do with the existence of the Alternative PDF or the site's moderation policy.

On the Alternative side, everything is always conveniently blamed on the placebo effect, but the moment you mention the nocebo effect—suddenly it's off-limits, right? :rollehyes:

Yeah, it's the same way medical professionals lose their cool when you start bringing up the same concepts within mainstream medicine, even when I cite actual studies. In reality, your average doctor probably struggles more with negative suggestions than your average alternative medicine enthusiast.

Even if alternative medicine is nonsense, being foolish isn't illegal.
🙂

Look, I’m not taking a shot at you personally; I’m simply pointing out what I see as a systemic issue with how this forum is being moderated.

What a beautiful way to dodge the point. It’s obvious these alternative medicine peddlers have plenty of experience twisting things.

So, let me remind everyone once again why this whole thing was even started in the first place.

Ryan Gomez4 singled out one specific side (I won't get into which one right now), and honestly, it was mostly unjustified—especially when she started nuking posts.
From the looks of it, she’ll be holding back on handing out sanctions for simply stating facts for a while (hopefully for good). In that sense, I guess it partially worked.

Look, it’s a fact that there's no point in defending stupidity, but that’s not what we're talking about here. This is about stopping people—people who clearly lack even a shred of morality—from exploiting that stupidity. The government, just like any other organized group, exists to prevent exactly that.
The fact that some of you clearly hate that isn't my problem. You love to play the victim, so I wouldn't be surprised if you eventually find some legal loophole that makes it perfectly okay to tell people to go kill themselves. At the end of the day, the psychic Milan moved over here precisely because selling snake oil on TV is banned in places like the UK, but it's totally fine here in the States.

Just sharing my take with bluemason3. Honestly, there’s no point in arguing this further until we get a real legal opinion. By the way, everyone here thinks they’re a legal expert, but being a pseudo-lawyer is just as bad as being a quack.

bluemason3 said:I honestly don't see how you can separate the two. 🤷If someone opts out of conventional medicine in favor of alternative medicine, or even believes the whole medical establishment is some massive conspiracy and posts about it here, that's automatically going to be viewed as "incitement." Every public discussion is a form of influence once it's posted online. And let's face it, people aren't going to add a "this is just my opinion" disclaimer to every single post, which is exactly why we have the site's terms of service. 🤔

There’s always the option of shutting down the sub if things get too volatile, but I don't see how we can have our cake and eat it too—meaning, having an alternative medicine section without the inevitable content that comes with it. 🤷

Look, some branches of alternative medicine are straight-up lethal, and others aren't. Is it really that hard to tell them apart?
MMS, trashing actual medicine, and all that garbage has no business being here. Everything else can stay. That said, trying to silence critics? Still absolutely unacceptable.

steelsurfer42 said:What a beautiful way to dodge the point. It’s obvious these alternative medicine peddlers have plenty of experience twisting things.

So, let me remind everyone once again why this whole thing was even started in the first place.

Ryan Gomez4 singled out one specific side (I won't get into which one right now), and honestly, it was mostly unjustified—especially when she started nuking posts.
From the looks of it, she’ll be holding back on handing out sanctions for simply stating facts for a while (hopefully for good). In that sense, I guess it partially worked.

Look, it’s a fact that there's no point in defending stupidity, but that’s not what we're talking about here. This is about stopping people—people who clearly lack even a shred of morality—from exploiting that stupidity. The government, just like any other organized group, exists to prevent exactly that.
The fact that some of you clearly hate that isn't my problem. You love to play the victim, so I wouldn't be surprised if you eventually find some legal loophole that makes it perfectly okay to tell people to go kill themselves. At the end of the day, the psychic Milan moved over here precisely because selling snake oil on TV is banned in places like the UK, but it's totally fine here in the States.

If you start throwing around your "wonderful" vocabulary again (idiot, moron, etc.), I'm deleting those posts immediately.

Ryan Gomez4 said:If you start throwing around your "wonderful" vocabulary again (idiot, moron, etc.), I'm deleting those posts immediately.

Honestly? It’s been nothing but a bunch of pseudo-intellectual hacks insulting everyone here for a while now, so if that’s really how you plan to handle things, go right ahead. I'd be more than happy to see it happen. 😍

bluemason3 said:I honestly don't see how you can separate the two. 🤷If someone opts out of conventional medicine in favor of alternative medicine, or even believes the whole medical establishment is some massive conspiracy and posts about it here, that's automatically going to be viewed as "incitement." Every public discussion is a form of influence once it's posted online. And let's face it, people aren't going to add a "this is just my opinion" disclaimer to every single post, which is exactly why we have the site's terms of service. 🤔

There’s always the option of shutting down the sub if things get too volatile, but I don't see how we can have our cake and eat it too—meaning, having an alternative medicine section without the inevitable content that comes with it. 🤷

Alright, let's please stop repeating this tired mantra about banning alternative views.
🙂
If we actually followed that logic, we'd have to ban spirituality and religion too...

As for the legal side of things, try this scenario: go see a lawyer and tell them your brother passed away from an illness because some guy talked him into drinking soap suds instead of getting actual therapy, and ask if you have grounds for a lawsuit.
Look, I'm not a lawyer, so everything I'm saying is strictly my own take, but I suspect any decent attorney would be jumping for joy at the prospect of that case, thinking about the percentage they could pull from the settlement; they'd jump at the chance to take it on.

silverpuma542 said:Look, I’m not taking a shot at you personally; I’m simply pointing out what I see as a systemic issue with how this forum is being moderated.

I didn't mean to imply that this was a personal attack. The idea that information is just being copied from a PDF over to some other platform doesn't really hold water. Even if that PDF didn't exist, the people interested in alternative medicine would still be saying exactly what they're saying. Those two things aren't connected.

steelsurfer42 said:What a beautiful way to dodge the point. It’s obvious these alternative medicine peddlers have plenty of experience twisting things.

So, let me remind everyone once again why this whole thing was even started in the first place.

Ryan Gomez4 singled out one specific side (I won't get into which one right now), and honestly, it was mostly unjustified—especially when she started nuking posts.
From the looks of it, she’ll be holding back on handing out sanctions for simply stating facts for a while (hopefully for good). In that sense, I guess it partially worked.

Look, it’s a fact that there's no point in defending stupidity, but that’s not what we're talking about here. This is about stopping people—people who clearly lack even a shred of morality—from exploiting that stupidity. The government, just like any other organized group, exists to prevent exactly that.
The fact that some of you clearly hate that isn't my problem. You love to play the victim, so I wouldn't be surprised if you eventually find some legal loophole that makes it perfectly okay to tell people to go kill themselves. At the end of the day, the psychic Milan moved over here precisely because selling snake oil on TV is banned in places like the UK, but it's totally fine here in the States.

Everyone’s got an opinion on something. How Beg handles the alternative medicine section is his business, and honestly, maybe I’m overstepping by talking so much about a corner of the forum I don't actually moderate. But I'll say it again—unless there's some actual legal justification for this "witch hunt," it's nothing more than a personal vendetta and a smear campaign.

I think you’re just playing games here. You can't equate a healthy debate or an exchange of ideas with exploitation. Besides, blatant advertising has always been against the rules on this forum. This really comes down to free speech; you have to defend the right to be wrong. Once we start penalizing "nonsense," we enter some pretty slippery territory. If you start defining what counts as nonsense, it becomes a very easy slide toward a dictatorship. It’s honestly ridiculous—as already mentioned, there are no consequences for actual harmful actions (like the stuff the alternative medicine crowd does in Orasi), yet people are trying to run this self-righteous crusade on the forum. In practice, it should be the exact opposite: we should be sanctioning dangerous behavior, not opinions. At least, that's how it works in a democracy.

What a beautiful way to twist the truth. It’s pretty obvious that people peddling alternative medicine have a massive amount of experience at this game.

What exactly are you trying to imply here? That I'm some kind of peddler of alternative medicine? We aren't even debating the people using that PDF right now. I hope you actually have something to back up those claims. 😁

Besides, if you’ve actually bothered to read my posts on this forum before, you’d know I’m not some blind follower of alternative medicine. But that’s beside the point. As the moderator of this specific sub-forum, I believe everyone here has every right to express views that fall under the umbrella of this topic.

So, nice try at playing games, but it’s clearly coming from your side. 😉

hollowtrucker77 said:Alright, let's please stop repeating this tired mantra about banning alternative views.
🙂
If we actually followed that logic, we'd have to ban spirituality and religion too...

As for the legal side of things, try this scenario: go see a lawyer and tell them your brother passed away from an illness because some guy talked him into drinking soap suds instead of getting actual therapy, and ask if you have grounds for a lawsuit.
Look, I'm not a lawyer, so everything I'm saying is strictly my own take, but I suspect any decent attorney would be jumping for joy at the prospect of that case, thinking about the percentage they could pull from the settlement; they'd jump at the chance to take it on.

hollowtrucker77, I asked a lawyer at the office about this. He backed off, saying it’s not his specialty, but he thinks there's no case here. It would be nearly impossible to prove that someone died specifically because they chose soap over cancer treatment instead of getting medical help.