How does this help educate DCUM posters looking to learn information?

[Anonymous]

Jeff, I sometimes post on the special needs forum. DC has some mild issues and I've been through years of researching and reading and seen the best professionals. The topic of getting spec needs kids immediate attention and therapy is close to my heart. So when I post, I post passionately and sometimes in absolute and unequivocal terms. In my line of work I see many children with issues and parents who just do not want to act on them..for a variety of reasons, but many of which do not serve their children well. I expressed another one ofmy absolute opinions on the Forum on social skills groups and I got slammed bigtime. One poster said she had hoped I was not in charge of any children because it wouldn't be good for them. One poster tried to make me lose credibility with posters by attempting to "out" me - by telling posters I was the same person who wrote x opinion on this thread and y opinion on another thread. What is the point of that except to cast doubt on my position on social skills groups? I supported my view with proof from the best psychiatrist in the country on Autism and developmental issues...and here comes this poster trying to denigrate me, the messenger so that this proof will be dismissed by posters.

How does this help those posters or readers out there who truly might want to hear what another view is? Why are some posters allowed to detract from the issue in this way?

I have learned so much and children are so near and dear to my heart now, especially special needs children, that I want to share all that I have learned. YES, I speak in absolute terms and with passion. But I do not throw stones first. Why can't anything be done with posters who slam people who just say what they don't want to hear.

[Anonymous]

It called the free exchange of ideas, and that's the main reason we're here (or hear). If you feel threatened by it, perhaps that means that you're not confident in your ideas. That's the whole idea. You open the marketplace up for free exchange of ideas. Good ideas. Bad ideas. Stupid ideas. Crazy ideas. Offensive ideas. All are welcome. People consider them, and the best ones ultimately emerge, while the lesser ones are dismissed. It's one of the founding principles of our democracy.

What is it you would like Jeff to do?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Jeff, I sometimes post on the special needs forum. DC has some mild issues and I've been through years of researching and reading and seen the best professionals. The topic of getting spec needs kids immediate attention and therapy is close to my heart. So when I post, I post passionately and sometimes in absolute and unequivocal terms. In my line of work I see many children with issues and parents who just do not want to act on them..for a variety of reasons, but many of which do not serve their children well. I expressed another one ofmy absolute opinions on the Forum on social skills groups and I got slammed bigtime. One poster said she had hoped I was not in charge of any children because it wouldn't be good for them. One poster tried to make me lose credibility with posters by attempting to "out" me - by telling posters I was the same person who wrote x opinion on this thread and y opinion on another thread. What is the point of that except to cast doubt on my position on social skills groups? I supported my view with proof from the best psychiatrist in the country on Autism and developmental issues...and here comes this poster trying to denigrate me, the messenger so that this proof will be dismissed by posters.

How does this help those posters or readers out there who truly might want to hear what another view is? Why are some posters allowed to detract from the issue in this way?

I have learned so much and children are so near and dear to my heart now, especially special needs children, that I want to share all that I have learned. YES, I speak in absolute terms and with passion. But I do not throw stones first. Why can't anything be done with posters who slam people who just say what they don't want to hear.

You are making a few presumptions. Others may "slam" your posts not because they don't want to hear it, but possibly don't agree with you. And that is okay. I don't mean to sound insulting here, but you appear to consider yourself a definitive authority on these matters. Even if true, this doesn't shield you from people disagreeing with your comments.

What exactly are you asking of Jeff? To delete posts that challenge you and your opinions?

[Anonymous]

PP again. I just read the post in question. It appears that you won't be satisfied until there is agreement that you are 100 percent correct in your stance, and that all ideas that challenge yours are incorrect.

This is not going to happen, and you are spinning your wheels and wasting your time.

[Anonymous]

Can you please link to the post in question?

[Anonymous]

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/79406.page

Obvious who OP is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can you please link to the post in question?

Here's another link http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/15/80028.page

I, too, would like to know what the woman who speaks in absolutes would like Jeff to do. Re-reading the posts, it's easy to see who's out of line.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Jeff, I sometimes post on the special needs forum. DC has some mild issues and I've been through years of researching and reading and seen the best professionals. The topic of getting spec needs kids immediate attention and therapy is close to my heart. So when I post, I post passionately and sometimes in absolute and unequivocal terms. In my line of work I see many children with issues and parents who just do not want to act on them..for a variety of reasons, but many of which do not serve their children well. I expressed another one ofmy absolute opinions on the Forum on social skills groups and I got slammed bigtime. One poster said she had hoped I was not in charge of any children because it wouldn't be good for them. One poster tried to make me lose credibility with posters by attempting to "out" me - by telling posters I was the same person who wrote x opinion on this thread and y opinion on another thread. What is the point of that except to cast doubt on my position on social skills groups? I supported my view with proof from the best psychiatrist in the country on Autism and developmental issues...and here comes this poster trying to denigrate me, the messenger so that this proof will be dismissed by posters.

How does this help those posters or readers out there who truly might want to hear what another view is? Why are some posters allowed to detract from the issue in this way?

I have learned so much and children are so near and dear to my heart now, especially special needs children, that I want to share all that I have learned. YES, I speak in absolute terms and with passion. But I do not throw stones first. Why can't anything be done with posters who slam people who just say what they don't want to hear.

There are a great many things that I love about online communication. It knocks down barriers of time and distance. Similarly, social barriers that we might face in real life become less important (what people write matters while how they are dressed or wear their hair is not). However, one of the downsides is that even the best writing can often be received differently than it's meant. What might be strongly held opinions expressed passionately to you, may well be understood as an insult or criticism by others. That is to say that while you may not mean to do it, you might be unintentionally alienating some posters.

It's also true that strong opinions generate strong reactions. If you've read many of my own posts, you'll know that I've managed to upset any number of posters (who haven't been shy about letting me know it). That's pretty much par for the course if you are going to express strong opinions. Inevitably, somebody's ox is going to get gored and they are not going to like it. So, you really have two choices: 1) invest a lot of effort in increasing your tactfulness so that you never offend anyone; or 2) get used to the reactions and being attacked. But, if you are going to take strong stands on sensitive issues, people are going to disagree with you. More often than not, they will not express their disagreement as nicely as you might hope.

I'm not sure what to tell you about those posters who prefer to attack the messenger rather than the message. To an extend, we probably all do it. If you don't want to get into a debate at that level, all you can really do is ignore it. I'm afraid that's just one of the unfortunate downsides of this type of communication.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeff, I sometimes post on the special needs forum. DC has some mild issues and I've been through years of researching and reading and seen the best professionals. The topic of getting spec needs kids immediate attention and therapy is close to my heart. So when I post, I post passionately and sometimes in absolute and unequivocal terms. In my line of work I see many children with issues and parents who just do not want to act on them..for a variety of reasons, but many of which do not serve their children well. I expressed another one ofmy absolute opinions on the Forum on social skills groups and I got slammed bigtime. One poster said she had hoped I was not in charge of any children because it wouldn't be good for them. One poster tried to make me lose credibility with posters by attempting to "out" me - by telling posters I was the same person who wrote x opinion on this thread and y opinion on another thread. What is the point of that except to cast doubt on my position on social skills groups? I supported my view with proof from the best psychiatrist in the country on Autism and developmental issues...and here comes this poster trying to denigrate me, the messenger so that this proof will be dismissed by posters.

How does this help those posters or readers out there who truly might want to hear what another view is? Why are some posters allowed to detract from the issue in this way?

I have learned so much and children are so near and dear to my heart now, especially special needs children, that I want to share all that I have learned. YES, I speak in absolute terms and with passion. But I do not throw stones first. Why can't anything be done with posters who slam people who just say what they don't want to hear.

There are a great many things that I love about online communication. It knocks down barriers of time and distance. Similarly, social barriers that we might face in real life become less important (what people write matters while how they are dressed or wear their hair is not). However, one of the downsides is that even the best writing can often be received differently than it's meant. What might be strongly held opinions expressed passionately to you, may well be understood as an insult or criticism by others. That is to say that while you may not mean to do it, you might be unintentionally alienating some posters.

It's also true that strong opinions generate strong reactions. If you've read many of my own posts, you'll know that I've managed to upset any number of posters (who haven't been shy about letting me know it). That's pretty much par for the course if you are going to express strong opinions. Inevitably, somebody's ox is going to get gored and they are not going to like it. So, you really have two choices: 1) invest a lot of effort in increasing your tactfulness so that you never offend anyone; or 2) get used to the reactions and being attacked. But, if you are going to take strong stands on sensitive issues, people are going to disagree with you. More often than not, they will not express their disagreement as nicely as you might hope.

I'm not sure what to tell you about those posters who prefer to attack the messenger rather than the message. To an extend, we probably all do it. If you don't want to get into a debate at that level, all you can really do is ignore it. I'm afraid that's just one of the unfortunate downsides of this type of communication.

Jeff, your responses are wonderfully eloquent, straightforward, and thoughtful. If you ever leave your current vocation, consider writing for a living. (Disclaimer, I follow your political posts as well, and shake my head in agreement marvel over how you respond with brevity to attacks.)

This poster got under my skin. She is well intentioned, well read, and cleary puts children first. All good. She is getting in her own way by being so bombastic and single minded. Maybe she is too close to the subject matter. Hopefully she can extract some learnings from the exchanges, and consider a way to play well with others. Ostensibly, this is important to her.

[Anonymous]

OP here.
I may sound like I'm the authority on this subject and it may irritate some people, but that doesn't mean my child should be brought into the discussion to hurt me and it doesn't mean anyone needs to resort to underhanded and lowly personal attacks. It detracts from the important discussion/debate on this very serious issue involving special needs children. It makes some posters, who might have valuable knowledge that might help other children, so disillusioned that they no longer share information on DCUM anymore. Could I have said what I said with less of an authoritative tone so that it would not have sparked so much fury? Probably. But I suspect that regardless of my tone, Dr. Greenspan's message would have been rejected anyway. Greenspan demands quite a bit from parents of spec needs children.

DCUM is filled with strongly expressed opinions but when they cross the line and become personal attacks I think it's not helpful...especially on this very important topic.

One poster said that I have strong opinions on this issue because my child must have serious issues. Why mention my child? Another poster said she hoped I wasn't in charge of any children for their sake. So what does that mean, my child should never have been born to me for his sake? That's hitting wayy below the belt. My child shouldn't be mentioned or brought into this discussion. That's getting personal. Why not simply argue on the merits? One poster dug up some old thread I posted on on the subject of stims in an attempt to discredit me so readers would not pay attention to Dr. Greenspan's perspective. What does my opinion on previous posts have to do with the validity of my point on this post?

[Anonymous]

PP again. The poster should refrain from calling people "lame." Especially in the Special Needs forum.

It is not about political correctness. More about being a grown-up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here.
I may sound like I'm the authority on this subject and it may irritate some people, but that doesn't mean my child should be brought into the discussion to hurt me and it doesn't mean anyone needs to resort to underhanded and lowly personal attacks. It detracts from the important discussion/debate on this very serious issue involving special needs children. It makes some posters, who might have valuable knowledge that might help other children, so disillusioned that they no longer share information on DCUM anymore. Could I have said what I said with less of an authoritative tone so that it would not have sparked so much fury? Probably. But I suspect that regardless of my tone, Dr. Greenspan's message would have been rejected anyway. Greenspan demands quite a bit from parents of spec needs children.

DCUM is filled with strongly expressed opinions but when they cross the line and become personal attacks I think it's not helpful...especially on this very important topic.

One poster said that I have strong opinions on this issue because my child must have serious issues. Why mention my child? Another poster said she hoped I wasn't in charge of any children for their sake. So what does that mean, my child should never have been born to me for his sake? That's hitting wayy below the belt. My child shouldn't be mentioned or brought into this discussion. That's getting personal. Why not simply argue on the merits? One poster dug up some old thread I posted on on the subject of stims in an attempt to discredit me so readers would not pay attention to Dr. Greenspan's perspective. What does my opinion on previous posts have to do with the validity of my point on this post?

Okay, you are inferring things that are clouding your judgement.

You are clearly a fan of Greenspan. You mention him in every post, and he has clearly been a huge figure in your family's approach to your child's situation. But you must understand that others might not regard him as the definitive expert. And while he is highly regarded, like you, they have done their own research and are working with doctors whose philosophical approach aligns with theirs. There is no reason to discount their experiences simply because it is different from yours.

[Anonymous]

OP, if you stick around long enough you'll see the mean posters parodied again and again. People know enough to ignore anyone who says they feel sorry for your children. (It happens in threads regarding any and all subjects.) Just keep your cool and respond about the subject at hand and ignore the a**holes who attack you.

[Anonymous]

Thank you 20:54.

This post was intended for Jeff. I addressed it to Jeff only. I was interested in Jeff's reply only. If there was a way I could have emailed or private messaged Jeff I would have done that. It was not my intent to transfer the ugliness of the debate gone sour of that special needs discussion to this WebFeedback forum. Those posters have followed me here with their knives but as Jeff said:
"So, you really have two choices: 1) invest a lot of effort in increasing your tactfulness so that you never offend anyone; or 2) get used to the reactions and being attacked."
It is really not feasible for me to invest a lot of effort to increasing their tactfulness so I can be certain never to offend anyone. Someone somewhere will always be offended with any positions strongly held. So I opt for the latter - IGNORE those posters. The fact that they used my five year old to get a dig into me is really unforgiveable. I intend to keep posting Dr. Greenspan's treatment views and philosphy and as Jeff said - simply ignore these people.
"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thank you 20:54.

This post was intended for Jeff. I addressed it to Jeff only. I was interested in Jeff's reply only. If there was a way I could have emailed or private messaged Jeff I would have done that. It was not my intent to transfer the ugliness of the debate gone sour of that special needs discussion to this WebFeedback forum. Those posters have followed me here with their knives but as Jeff said:
"So, you really have two choices: 1) invest a lot of effort in increasing your tactfulness so that you never offend anyone; or 2) get used to the reactions and being attacked."
It is really not feasible for me to invest a lot of effort to increasing their tactfulness so I can be certain never to offend anyone. Someone somewhere will always be offended with any positions strongly held. So I opt for the latter - IGNORE those posters. The fact that they used my five year old to get a dig into me is really unforgiveable. I intend to keep posting Dr. Greenspan's treatment views and philosphy and as Jeff said - simply ignore these people.
"

Consider the bolded quotes.