next »

[prytania3]

I could have sworn you said, "Goodbye Cruel Fora!"

[pathanalysis]

Yes, until people libel me. I kind of like to put out that fire ASAP!

[galactic_hedgehog]

Yes, until people libel me. I kind of like to put out that fire ASAP!

You're just asking people to throw more grease on the fire.

[wet_blanket]

You seem to think it an unusual pathology that a traditionally aged undergrad is insecure and this manifests as appearing arrogant at times and seeking reassurance from others.

I don't.  That's why I referred to my own experience of insecurity as a grad(not undergrad), with specific reference to threads about on the grad board about grandstanding and my conversations about those insecurities with others. 

You know, I normally agree that the OP doesn't get to control the direction of the thread.

The OP engaged my question and I replied.  I don't see where this comment fits into that equation.

I think it is uncanny (in the Freudian sense of unheimlich, not "unusual") that there is more than one aspiring clinical psychologist among undergrad forumites with a self-described magical writing ability, and a disability with substantial physical limitations.  Big difference.

Now it's time to put on a costume and get out of the house.

See, when I read Snowstorm's posts, I see what I would label psychological pathologies, if I were qualified to make such diagnoses.  When I read pathanalysis' posts, I see nothing more than the competing ego/insecurity of someone in their early twenties.

Uncanny, the characteristics that you describe?  Let's accept pathanalysis' 20% prevalence of disability. Aspiring clinical psychologists? Hardly a small group.  People applying to grad school who are confident in their writing abilities? I would assume the majority, especially in a field like psychology.    

You know, I normally agree that the OP doesn't get to control the direction of the thread.

The OP engaged my question and I replied.  I don't see where this comment fits into that equation.

Rereading, I was probably overreacting.  It came across a bit like "OP you have X,Y,Z pscyhological issues" when I first read it.

OP, I really don't think the best thing you can do for yourself is to demand a retraction of a perceived libelous comment.  If you want to participate in the fora, then you'll have plenty of opportunities to demonstrate it's an inaccurate characterisation (though I'm not entirely sure what you're referring to).  If you don't, then who cares what some random internet people say?

[pathanalysis]

No, I'm asking BPN to request the deletion of or otherwise rectify his bizarre, untrue, and insulting post. I am not snowstorm and morover, I am not any of things he mentioned based on that assumption, which was, well, libel.  

Thank you, wet_blanket. Making a post that assumes a poster to be someone else (who, juding from the HOF'ed posts may have had serious issues) and assuming the pathology of another poster based on that is pretty much libel, or at least extremely presumptuous and insulting.

Also, I know someone in my same department with my same disability. So, not that uncanny.

[pathanalysis]

Also, I responded to BPN's intial question the way I did because I found it insulting that he would assume dthere are only a handful of disabled people in the world! If a poster identified as being African-American, should we assume all future posters who identify as African-American are all the same person?

[bread_pirate_naan]

See, when I read Snowstorm's posts, I see what I would label psychological pathologies, if I were qualified to make such diagnoses.  When I read pathanalysis' posts, I see nothing more than the competing ego/insecurity of someone in their early twenties.

I did not invoke snowstorm as an unqualified diagnosis.  Like the OP, the majority of Snowstorm's posts read like a friendly undergrad interested in joining the fora community.

Uncanny, the characteristics that you describe?  Let's accept pathanalysis' 20% prevalence of disability. Aspiring clinical psychologists? Hardly a small group.  People applying to grad school who are confident in their writing abilities? I would assume the majority, especially in a field like psychology.  

 

Here's a little help from wikipedia.
The Uncanny (Ger. Das Unheimliche -- literally, "un-home-ly") is a Freudian concept of an instance where something can be familiar, yet foreign at the same time, resulting in a feeling of it being uncomfortably strange. Because the uncanny is familiar, yet strange, it often creates cognitive dissonance...

The uncanny is a description of my experience, not any implication of pathology or anything about either moniker except a certain number of similarities I found striking.  Unfortunately, you can't dictate my experience nor frame it as libelous because I disclosed it.

The word doppelganger is sometimes associated with the uncanny.
In the vernacular, the word "doppelgänger" has come to refer (as in German) to any double or look-alike of a person.

From where I sit, these two undergrads have more in common than any on the fora.  Heck, you can't even find two people more alike in their representation of self if you include everyone from grads to administrators.  Except Malcha and her other self.  I forget who that is right now.  Why my saying so was unsettling to you, I don't know.  Perhaps that was your experience of the uncanny.  It is All Hallows Eve.

Rereading, I was probably overreacting.  It came across a bit like "OP you have X,Y,Z pscyhological issues" when I first read it.

You don't say.  I didn't even introduce the word arrogant to this thread or apply it to the OP.  She, like snowstorm on a perfectly innocuous thread, introduced it.  You took the bait, not me.  I just asked if she was snowstorm after she revealed to characteristics that I associate with that moniker and find distinctive among forumites.  I don't think there is another forumite who has disclosed a similar disability.  We have many more disclosures of mental illness. I don't think it is useful to stigmatize them or snowstorm, who preferred to treat herself.

OP, I really don't think the best thing you can do for yourself is to demand a retraction of a perceived libelous comment.

It is if you are imitating the series of events that led up to the deletion of an entire thread on the OPs request.  Not that "straight shes" had anything to do with that.

I can't say I am feeling all that bad for finding any of this uncanny or worth a double take.

[grasshopper]

I can't say I am feeling all that bad for finding any of this uncanny or worth a double take.

But don't it make your brown eyes blue?


Path, let it go. And don't tease the Spork.

[pathanalysis]

BPN, I apparently have someone with the same disability who uses the same uncommon adaptive equipment and looks exactly like me in another city in UniversityState (I know this because several people here have asked me if I am her/am from NotRemotelyMyHomeTown!). Uncanny? Probably. But I didn't clone myself!

You still didn't apologize for your offensive, insulting, and libelous comments. Admit when you are wrong and apologize, please.

[polly_mer]

BPN, I apparently have someone with the same disability who uses the same uncommon adaptive equipment and looks exactly like me in another city in UniversityState (I know this because several people here have asked me if I am her/am from NotRemotelyMyHomeTown!). Uncanny? Probably. But I didn't clone myself!

That's fine.  I can point to two essentially duplicates of me in my field.  Yes, it happens.

You still didn't apologize for your offensive, insulting, and libelous comments. Admit when you are wrong and apologize, please.

That's not going to happen. The sooner you figure that out and let it go, the happier you will be on these fora.  BPN could be calling you out for some of the examples you made which, intentional or not, bear directly on her situation in an unflattering way.  That she refrains is a credit to her.

Oh, and do stop engaging with Spork if you wish him to hush.  Claiming that you don't wear thongs just brings to mind other possibilities; it is not the conversation stopper that you think it is.  Didn't you notice the commando comment right above your post?  Please read and think before posting.

[foxy_voxy]

You still didn't apologize for your offensive, insulting, and libelous comments. Admit when you are wrong and apologize, please.

I'm posting under this other moniker because I just crossed the 10K post line with my regular one and frankly I can't bear to have the first post of the next 10K be on this drivel, as a matter of principle.

The circumstances under which libel is actionable among pseudonymous monikers are rare; I'm not a lawyer but as far as I can see, this absolutely does not qualify. As a new poster, you have no reputation here to be damaged, and the only one connecting your posts here with your real life is, well, you. There is no actual injury here. There's a lot more, but I'm stopping there. Really, you should read up on what you are talking about before you go flinging around legal accusations. Practice that reading comprehension of which you are so proud.

Offense and insult are in the eyes of the beholder, and frankly, just because you have chosen to see insult and chosen to be offended does not actually mean that BPN is required by law to apologize. I am not weighing in on whether or not I agree with BPN's opinion, but none of this is helping your claim that you are actually a smart, well-balanced, self-aware person who understands interpersonal relationships.

If you argue with BPN, BPN will win. You can try, of course, but we will all stand back and watch the bloodshed.

VP

[pathanalysis]

The circumstances under which libel is actionable among pseudonymous monikers are rare; I'm not a lawyer but as far as I can see, this absolutely does not qualify. As a new poster, you have no reputation here to be damaged, and the only one connecting your posts here with your real life is, well, you. There is no actual injury here. There's a lot more, but I'm stopping there. Really, you should read up on what you are talking about before you go flinging around legal accusations. Practice that reading comprehension of which you are so proud.

Fine, not legal libel, but accusing me of potential mental instability is pretty hackle-raising, especially as people are frequently "outed" on the fora (I've stumbled upon the identity of a couple of forumites myself). The polite, professional thing to do would be to apologize.

[polly_mer]

The polite, professional thing to do would be to apologize.

An alternate polite, professional thing to do would be to let a thread on which you feel maligned disappear into the mists so that it is not on the top of the threads-with-new-posts list for more eyes to read.

You have also assumed that somehow an apology will fix something that isn't broken.  Most people here already have firm opinions about Naan and you.  Naan's comments are completely irrelevant to our opinions about you because those opinions were formed and are now being confirmed by your actions.

Let it go and go post on another thread about something relevant to your teaching or research.  Seriously.  The best way to fix the reputation you think is in jeopardy is to make good posts somewhere else.  Demanding an apology just makes you look foolish and out of touch with the norms here.

[rowan1]

Hey, I just got out my lawn chair and fired up the grill.  Did anyone bring doughnuts (or donuts?).  I got some truly yummy coffee (liberally spiked), the mugs are right over there.


We'll be having a low country boil later on in the day so bring beer, crawdaddies, lobster, shrimp, etc.

Oseph - did you find the cookies?

[pathanalysis]

Let it go and go post on another thread about something relevant to your teaching or research.  Seriously.  The best way to fix the reputation you think is in jeopardy is to make good posts somewhere else.  Demanding an apology just makes you look foolish and out of touch with the norms here.

I fail to see what is so wrong about conceeding error when one posts potentially harmful, somewhat wild assumptions about another poster. For all the posts about recognizing one's limitations, apparently those rules apply solely to me.