Posted by 166.102.***.*** on April 17, 2000, at 2:52:06
In reply to Re 166.102.***.***, posted by 297.3 on April 16, 2000, at 21:24:52
> > Thank you for unblocking me. I see some possible problems with some of the above ideas. A large percentage of people coming here have mental problems. So to expect them to be civil at all times seems unrealistic. Some people may be coming here to offer support out of good will and are not likely to pay so they can do volunteer work. Anybody can have a bad day and come off in a negative way. Sociopathy is also a mental illness isn't it? Some of these disruptive posters may just be kids causing trouble, but it is also possible that they are people having a psychotic episode, who knows? I don't like the idea of being stuck with one username. Supposing I have viewpoints that seem to other people to be very inconsistent. If I stated all these viewpoints as one alias or whatever, wouldn't that reflect badly on my credibility? It seems more reasonable to me to use more than one alias so that if I state apparently conflicting viewpoints hopefully the consistent ones will belong to one (or more) alias. Also, to some degree, computers are used to collect various data from internet users for what ever purpose often without their knowledge. This irks me and I would not be inclined to make this any easier for these unknown interests and consider it an invasion of privacy. Does anyone think that this data collection has the users interests at heart? I recently visited a website and it downloaded a fair sized program without asking me or telling me. I later saw the program and noticed it didn't look familiar. I then had considerable difficulty removing it from my computer. I think this has happened more that once. I may have downloaded a program and embedded in it was a "mole" program that would collect data about the user and then send it back to some party when I was connected to the internet. This is partly conjecture, but I am reasonably sure it is true. Given all this, I think a certain amount of paranoia is justified. I thought you might consider breaking the chat site into different compatible groups, but I don't know if this would work or be feasible.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Your right (of course). I always turn napster off as soon as they start pulling things out of my computer too. I just take what I want and they can keep their little cyber fingers out of my computer. We don't think that's greedy, do we?
> oops think you answered that above-sociopathy.
>
> About the aliases your right also (of course) but wouldn't it reflect more on your consistency than your credibility if you posted conflicting viewpoints? Might not people even find you charmingly human?
>
> It IS unreasonable to expect the mentally ill to be civil. (right again) But since the reasonable approach is to call them consumers and ship them off to Godforsaken NAMI Clubhouses,isn't unreasonable kind of appealing?
>
> I hope you realize I'm teasing you because I can't figure out what the numbers are supposed to mean and it's driving me crazy (excuse the technical term). I remain confident that you and I are among the small percentage who come here without mental problems.
>
> 297.3
I don't know if I should laugh or feel insulted? What is "napster"?"I just take what I want and they can keep their little cyber fingers
out of my computer. We don't think that's greedy, do we?If you want to further the interests of Big Brother and Little Brother in a sort of 1984 scenario thats your prerogative. I would just assume not help them.
"About the aliases your right also (of course) but wouldn't it reflect more on your
consistency than your credibility if you posted conflicting viewpoints? Might not people
even find you charmingly human?"I like my approach better.
"isn't unreasonable kind of appealing?"
It depends on who you are and what your needs are. Can you find a more effective way of communicating than sarcasm? Maybe you could try something constructive? Oops, people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Can you explain what this phrase means?
Also, I am sure some of you people are familiar with the phenomenon of addiction to internet chat etc.. I have been through this before. Say, hypothetically, you have a person who is addicted to internet chat and also has OCD. Pulling the plug on them and then making demands on them is not a nice thing to do. Maybe its time to go to internet addiction rehab?
poster:166.102.***.***
thread:30106
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20000411/msgs/30513.html