Treatment referrals, forum social roles, and more

Nicholas King said:I realize I’m flirting with the risk of facing consequences for "commenting on the moderation," but I suppose I'll be brave 🙂.

The point here isn't about handing out diagnoses to random people on this forum—I'm trying to illustrate just how absurd it is to advocate for what would essentially be official oversight of forum members' mental health, and the sheer chaos that ensues when you allow public diagnosing.

Every single one of us is perfectly free to sit at home and diagnose ourselves privately, or engage in those informal, off-forum sessions where we basically have "Gossip about Forum Members, Vol. 15." We are also free to report anything we deem necessary to "the proper authorities" whenever we feel like it. Honestly, I don't understand why anyone would expect or demand that the forum administration take on that specific responsibility.

However, any attempt to lower the bar below a strict ban and sanctioning of all forum-based diagnostics would be pointless, harmful, and dangerous for this community—regardless of how certain a self-proclaimed diagnostician might feel that "everything is obvious." This entire tedious thread exists because of this simple fact, and changing it would pose a greater threat to the forum than any individual user ever could.

BTW, what are we going to do about the CUT in adminNice's post, where she clearly writes "gone crazy" without any provocation whatsoever? 🤣

dustyranger64 said:ERM, I've got a feeling his comment is actually talking about those painful bumps in the groin area along with some nasty discharge.
What exactly are we claiming isn't enough for an informed layperson to "diagnose" a real health issue? Seriously? I mean, come on!

Wait, what exactly are we talking about here? I mean, looking at this whole forum, the scope is just massive!

Look, obviously calling someone a psychopath or mentally ill is an insult. Period.
So, what actually counts as an insult worthy of a red card these days? Like, if someone just tells another person, "Hey, maybe you should go talk to a psychologist for a bit," does that really cross the line? Is that even worth a penalty?
Did I get you wrong? Feel free to set me straight on that first part of the quote, too. Honestly, looking at this thread, it’s not exactly clear where you guys are pulling all these mental health diagnoses from. Like, what's actually triggering this whole thing?

There’s another issue we have to deal with here—hypersensitivity. It's a real thing.
So, apparently, every single sentence on this forum that uses words like "problem" or "issue" is now being treated as some kind of medical diagnosis. Honestly? Total nonsense. Just complete nonsense.

So, what exactly should qualify as an insult worthy of a ban? Like, if someone just drops a comment along the lines of, "Hey, maybe you should go talk to a psychologist," is that really crossing the line? It feels like we need to figure out where that boundary actually sits.

Did I misunderstand you? Feel free to set me straight on that first part of the quote—to be honest, it’s not exactly clear from this thread where you guys are pulling all these mental health diagnoses from, or what exactly is triggering this whole debate in the first place.

There’s another issue we really need to address here—hypersensitivity.
It’s getting to the point where if you use a word like "problem" or "issue" in a sentence here, people immediately jump to labeling it a diagnosis. It's honestly complete nonsense—just total nonsense.

Eric Gray2 said:Alright, we’re on the same page here.

My point is that trying to diagnose someone else—especially when it’s done with the best intentions under the guise of "protecting" the community or whatever—is honestly just pointless. I mean, I won't go as far as calling it something else, but it really doesn't accomplish anything.

My take is pretty straightforward—when someone snaps and says, "You're a total psycho, just go get help, you lunatic," what they’re actually saying is: "This is a closeted psychopath, a genuine threat to everyone around them, this guy has a serious issue, and things have officially spiraled out of control."

So, what exactly should qualify as an insult worthy of a ban? Like, if someone just drops a comment along the lines of, "Hey, maybe you should go talk to a psychologist," is that really crossing the line? It feels like we need to figure out where that boundary actually sits.

No.
I find myself constantly suggesting that people go talk to psychologists or other mental health professionals—it’s just something I do quite often.

Did I misunderstand you? Feel free to set me straight on that first part of the quote—to be honest, it’s not exactly clear from this thread where you guys are pulling all these mental health diagnoses from, or what exactly is triggering this whole debate in the first place.

To be honest, I’ve been feeling pretty inspired lately—mostly by those posts Jason Gonzalez7 and driftingeagle27 have been putting up over on the FBI forums.
Since they’ve openly admitted they aren't actual qualified experts—and they certainly don't have the diagnostic tools required to make these kinds of calls—their entire argument falls apart. Even if we pretend they actually had the equipment and had put someone like steelskipper5 through a rigorous clinical evaluation, those results and diagnoses would be private medical data. They shouldn't be broadcasting that kind of sensitive information on a public forum anyway. At the end of the day, the only thing they're basing these "serious" claims on is a series of forum posts—which, if you ask me, is nothing more than straight-up harassment.

There’s another issue we really need to address here—hypersensitivity.
It’s getting to the point where if you use a word like "problem" or "issue" in a sentence here, people immediately jump to labeling it a diagnosis. It's honestly complete nonsense—just total nonsense.

If I’ve understood you correctly, we’re totally on the same page here.

Honestly, I don't really think we’re going to see any massive shifts on this issue. I've already laid out my position here—and even over in the moderator threads—but I actually have a bit of a silver lining. I moderate the Psychology section, which happens to be a specific PDF focused exactly on this topic, so, you know, it doesn't really affect me that much.

Also, I'm not. I haven't quite figured out what you're getting at yet—it looks like you might have hit send a little too early. If there was something specific you wanted to dive into or a thought you were trying to get down on paper, just let me know. I'm all ears and ready to chat whenever you're ready to lay it all out. Someone, right? Against it. I’ve had some heated debates about eating disorders and anorexia before—even with steelskipper5—but honestly, this whole witch hunt where people just throw diagnoses around at everyone is what really gets me. I can't stand it. In my opinion, until an actual specialist steps in, all this labeling is just noise and doesn't do anyone any good.

Nicholas King said:Look, as you pointed out yourself, there is a massive difference between suggesting someone see a psychologist when they are actually asking for help with a specific issue, and then—for reasons I can't quite fathom—suddenly bringing up psychologists, psychiatrists (not to mention pathologists 🤣), in a conversation about American cinema history.

The distinction is glaringly obvious; it isn't exactly rocket science to tell which situation we're dealing with here.

Eric Gray2 said:Alright, we’re on the same page here.

My point is that trying to diagnose someone else—especially when it’s done with the best intentions under the guise of "protecting" the community or whatever—is honestly just pointless. I mean, I won't go as far as calling it something else, but it really doesn't accomplish anything.

My take is pretty straightforward—when someone snaps and says, "You're a total psycho, just go get help, you lunatic," what they’re actually saying is: "This is a closeted psychopath, a genuine threat to everyone around them, this guy has a serious issue, and things have officially spiraled out of control."

So, what exactly should qualify as an insult worthy of a ban? Like, if someone just drops a comment along the lines of, "Hey, maybe you should go talk to a psychologist," is that really crossing the line? It feels like we need to figure out where that boundary actually sits.

No.
I find myself constantly suggesting that people go talk to psychologists or other mental health professionals—it’s just something I do quite often.

Did I misunderstand you? Feel free to set me straight on that first part of the quote—to be honest, it’s not exactly clear from this thread where you guys are pulling all these mental health diagnoses from, or what exactly is triggering this whole debate in the first place.

To be honest, I’ve been feeling pretty inspired lately—mostly by those posts Jason Gonzalez7 and driftingeagle27 have been putting up over on the FBI forums.
Since they’ve openly admitted they aren't actual qualified experts—and they certainly don't have the diagnostic tools required to make these kinds of calls—their entire argument falls apart. Even if we pretend they actually had the equipment and had put someone like steelskipper5 through a rigorous clinical evaluation, those results and diagnoses would be private medical data. They shouldn't be broadcasting that kind of sensitive information on a public forum anyway. At the end of the day, the only thing they're basing these "serious" claims on is a series of forum posts—which, if you ask me, is nothing more than straight-up harassment.

There’s another issue we really need to address here—hypersensitivity.
It’s getting to the point where if you use a word like "problem" or "issue" in a sentence here, people immediately jump to labeling it a diagnosis. It's honestly complete nonsense—just total nonsense.

If I’ve understood you correctly, we’re totally on the same page here.

Honestly, I don't really think we’re going to see any massive shifts on this issue. I've already laid out my position here—and even over in the moderator threads—but I actually have a bit of a silver lining. I moderate the Psychology section, which happens to be a specific PDF focused exactly on this topic, so, you know, it doesn't really affect me that much.

Also, I'm not. I haven't quite figured out what you're getting at yet—it looks like you might have hit send a little too early. If there was something specific you wanted to dive into or a thought you were trying to get down on paper, just let me know. I'm all ears and ready to chat whenever you're ready to lay it all out. Someone, right? Against it. I’ve had some heated debates about eating disorders and anorexia before—even with steelskipper5—but honestly, this whole witch hunt where people just throw diagnoses around at everyone is what really gets me. I can't stand it. In my opinion, until an actual specialist steps in, all this labeling is just noise and doesn't do anyone any good.

coppergardener said:It all feels quite a bit like defamation, too. Honestly, I’d be inclined to call it a "witch hunt," but given that we are dealing with serious individuals—people with families who genuinely care about the welfare of this forum and the entire community... 😁

Eric Gray2 said:Alright, we’re on the same page here.

My point is that trying to diagnose someone else—especially when it’s done with the best intentions under the guise of "protecting" the community or whatever—is honestly just pointless. I mean, I won't go as far as calling it something else, but it really doesn't accomplish anything.

My take is pretty straightforward—when someone snaps and says, "You're a total psycho, just go get help, you lunatic," what they’re actually saying is: "This is a closeted psychopath, a genuine threat to everyone around them, this guy has a serious issue, and things have officially spiraled out of control."

So, what exactly should qualify as an insult worthy of a ban? Like, if someone just drops a comment along the lines of, "Hey, maybe you should go talk to a psychologist," is that really crossing the line? It feels like we need to figure out where that boundary actually sits.

No.
I find myself constantly suggesting that people go talk to psychologists or other mental health professionals—it’s just something I do quite often.

Did I misunderstand you? Feel free to set me straight on that first part of the quote—to be honest, it’s not exactly clear from this thread where you guys are pulling all these mental health diagnoses from, or what exactly is triggering this whole debate in the first place.

To be honest, I’ve been feeling pretty inspired lately—mostly by those posts Jason Gonzalez7 and driftingeagle27 have been putting up over on the FBI forums.
Since they’ve openly admitted they aren't actual qualified experts—and they certainly don't have the diagnostic tools required to make these kinds of calls—their entire argument falls apart. Even if we pretend they actually had the equipment and had put someone like steelskipper5 through a rigorous clinical evaluation, those results and diagnoses would be private medical data. They shouldn't be broadcasting that kind of sensitive information on a public forum anyway. At the end of the day, the only thing they're basing these "serious" claims on is a series of forum posts—which, if you ask me, is nothing more than straight-up harassment.

There’s another issue we really need to address here—hypersensitivity.
It’s getting to the point where if you use a word like "problem" or "issue" in a sentence here, people immediately jump to labeling it a diagnosis. It's honestly complete nonsense—just total nonsense.

If I’ve understood you correctly, we’re totally on the same page here.

Honestly, I don't really think we’re going to see any massive shifts on this issue. I've already laid out my position here—and even over in the moderator threads—but I actually have a bit of a silver lining. I moderate the Psychology section, which happens to be a specific PDF focused exactly on this topic, so, you know, it doesn't really affect me that much.

Also, I'm not. I haven't quite figured out what you're getting at yet—it looks like you might have hit send a little too early. If there was something specific you wanted to dive into or a thought you were trying to get down on paper, just let me know. I'm all ears and ready to chat whenever you're ready to lay it all out. Someone, right? Against it. I’ve had some heated debates about eating disorders and anorexia before—even with steelskipper5—but honestly, this whole witch hunt where people just throw diagnoses around at everyone is what really gets me. I can't stand it. In my opinion, until an actual specialist steps in, all this labeling is just noise and doesn't do anyone any good.

Daniel Ward87 said:It’s clearly stated that we should keep this discussion at a high level instead of taking aim at specific members.

Nicholas King said:Disclaimer: this is going to be boring—there’s no blood, no insults toward anyone's mother, no images, and I'm not trying to bait any bans or red cards... there's nothing of the sort.

Following the summer slump on the PZ, things have started heating up over the last few days—specifically regarding whether or not it should be punishable to suggest someone needs psychological or psychiatric treatment. Furthermore, the supermoderator has once again been branded incompetent, partly because she apparently fails to see that suggesting a user seek treatment is justified in certain instances and therefore shouldn't be sanctioned.

In the same vein, for the umpteenth time, the eternal debate has resurfaced: "What is the relationship between the forum and real life, and what is real life to the forum?"—essentially, what should the "forum do or undertake" in one specific case or another.

I realize it might look like I'm seizing an opportunity while most of the main players are currently banned, but this isn't a vendetta against them (I already said this would be boring); rather, it’s just a few scattered thoughts. I don't think this is off-topic, but I won't lose any sleep if someone decides to delete or lock the thread.

Actually, it’s far too hot for me to go into a massive elaboration; I really only wanted to say two things. First, all levels of administration are truly incompetent—but in a completely different sense: they are professionally incompetent when it comes to judging whether calling a forum user mentally ill constitutes an insult or serves as a correct diagnosis. It isn't their job, nor should they be dealing with it even if they were professionally competent. That is precisely why I believe the phrase "go get treated" is an insult that should always be sanctioned.

Second, I don't see any basis upon which any level of forum administration should be monitoring posts to report potential instances of this or that to "the authorities"—in other words, I don't see why this should be the responsibility of the administration more or less than anyone else who reads the posts. You only need a tiny bit of caricature to argue that we could just as easily demand that an ISP monitor everything its users write. Besides, in situations where someone's writing suggests the author has certain issues (and where they aren't announcing some criminal act), what are we supposed to do? Report it to whom?

I also feel compelled to mention this: I am just as terrified by clear examples of people advocating for violence and taking pride in their own biographical violent endeavors (and I'm not just talking about recent events; you can find detailed descriptions on other threads of what one user or another would do to certain people), as I am by anyone embarking on a mission to "fix the world by any means necessary, whether those means are legal or not." Unpopular opinion aside, I am quite literally afraid of such people; I wouldn't want to be in physical proximity to them, because I never know if I or someone dear to me might end up in one of those many situations where they feel they have a right to justified🙄 violence. We might say the wrong word or act incorrectly... but I still maintain that labeling someone as ill on the forum should be sanctioned, no matter how pedantic it may seem to some.

There. I did say this would be boring 🙂.

Nicholas King said:Disclaimer: this is going to be boring—there’s no blood, no insults toward anyone's mother, no images, and I'm not trying to bait any bans or red cards... there's nothing of the sort.

Following the summer slump on the PZ, things have started heating up over the last few days—specifically regarding whether or not it should be punishable to suggest someone needs psychological or psychiatric treatment. Furthermore, the supermoderator has once again been branded incompetent, partly because she apparently fails to see that suggesting a user seek treatment is justified in certain instances and therefore shouldn't be sanctioned.

In the same vein, for the umpteenth time, the eternal debate has resurfaced: "What is the relationship between the forum and real life, and what is real life to the forum?"—essentially, what should the "forum do or undertake" in one specific case or another.

I realize it might look like I'm seizing an opportunity while most of the main players are currently banned, but this isn't a vendetta against them (I already said this would be boring); rather, it’s just a few scattered thoughts. I don't think this is off-topic, but I won't lose any sleep if someone decides to delete or lock the thread.

Actually, it’s far too hot for me to go into a massive elaboration; I really only wanted to say two things. First, all levels of administration are truly incompetent—but in a completely different sense: they are professionally incompetent when it comes to judging whether calling a forum user mentally ill constitutes an insult or serves as a correct diagnosis. It isn't their job, nor should they be dealing with it even if they were professionally competent. That is precisely why I believe the phrase "go get treated" is an insult that should always be sanctioned.

Second, I don't see any basis upon which any level of forum administration should be monitoring posts to report potential instances of this or that to "the authorities"—in other words, I don't see why this should be the responsibility of the administration more or less than anyone else who reads the posts. You only need a tiny bit of caricature to argue that we could just as easily demand that an ISP monitor everything its users write. Besides, in situations where someone's writing suggests the author has certain issues (and where they aren't announcing some criminal act), what are we supposed to do? Report it to whom?

I also feel compelled to mention this: I am just as terrified by clear examples of people advocating for violence and taking pride in their own biographical violent endeavors (and I'm not just talking about recent events; you can find detailed descriptions on other threads of what one user or another would do to certain people), as I am by anyone embarking on a mission to "fix the world by any means necessary, whether those means are legal or not." Unpopular opinion aside, I am quite literally afraid of such people; I wouldn't want to be in physical proximity to them, because I never know if I or someone dear to me might end up in one of those many situations where they feel they have a right to justified🙄 violence. We might say the wrong word or act incorrectly... but I still maintain that labeling someone as ill on the forum should be sanctioned, no matter how pedantic it may seem to some.

There. I did say this would be boring 🙂.

Nicholas King said:Look, as you pointed out yourself, there is a massive difference between suggesting someone see a psychologist when they are actually asking for help with a specific issue, and then—for reasons I can't quite fathom—suddenly bringing up psychologists, psychiatrists (not to mention pathologists 🤣), in a conversation about American cinema history.

The distinction is glaringly obvious; it isn't exactly rocket science to tell which situation we're dealing with here.

coppergardener said:I honestly don't understand how certain people expect to be taken seriously—especially when they target Nicholas King. He’s explicitly stated more than once that he has zero interest in being a moderator, and frankly, he doesn't even have any issues with the site administration. He’s simply offering a bit of social commentary by commenting on the "events" unfolding on this forum—which, while it might seem a little unconventional to some, I actually find incredibly refreshing, especially when you compare his input to that mountain of unconstructive nonsense found over in the admin feedback sections. And yet, people claim he's just sucking up? Seriously, who is the actual troll in this situation here? 😕 Good grief, at this point, I can't even tell who the trolls are anymore. 🙂 🤣

Jason Gonzalez7 said:The issue that inspired you to butt into administration matters—likely hoping to be noticed and perhaps become a moderator yourself—isn't really about a general approach to diagnoses. This is a specific exception. This exception poisons the forum, which makes this case much larger than those general issues...

Of course, bringing up diagnoses is totally irrelevant unless we're talking about something that has been trying to destroy this forum for a decade under the guise of "normality" and "rules," while nobody has the guts to call it what it is...

Anyone who doesn't see that is simply missing the point due to their own limitations—which is probably why they shouldn't be in administration—or they're just a troll or a suck-up...

velvettrucker52 said:Erm... Byron has been offered moderation duties several times across various PDFs.
I’ve personally reached out to him on both ŽuD and RiD. He turned down every single offer.

This whole business of assigning diagnoses is incredibly messy and unreliable. 😢

steelskipper5 said:You clearly don't get it. Byron is obviously holding out for a moderator role on something actually intense. Or—more likely—he's eyeing an admin position. He isn't just going to jump at any random offer. 🥳

driftingeagle27 said:The biggest joke here is how the admins used all this volunteer energy to troll, play both sides, and just muddy the waters right when we had a golden opportunity to actually fix a massive issue after years of this forum being dragged through the mud.

There’s barely anything left of that whole well-argued breakdown except for a few scraps in this pathetic thread, which is basically just trying to gloss over everything by pretending a specific case is some vague, general thing.

On the flip side, I guess someone who was actually supposed to pay attention read the whole thing before it got nuked—and hey, maybe the serious players are handling it behind closed doors where I can't see them.

I get that it might not be "appropriate" to talk about a certain guy like that in public, even if everything said was 100% facts; if that’s why things were deleted, fine, but then I don't get why I had to be shoved into the corner with the lowlifes and treated like a criminal. Look, you could have just sent me a DM saying, "Message received, we're deleting this, but just know we saw it, don't bring it up again, we've got it under control."

By that logic, this thread should be wiped too, because like I said, it's just obscuring the truth by turning a documented, specific situation into something "general," which is nothing more than massive trolling and—since I'm gonna call it like I see it before I walk away from this whole mess—brown-nosing.

(Personally, I'd love to see people get slammed with major penalty points for being suck-ups, but I realize that's not happening, so let me just say how pathetic, gross, and transparent this all is.)