Forum Index
»
Website Feedback
How does this help educate DCUM posters looking to learn information?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
I think that you have to reread Jeff's suggestion #1 and pay particular attention to the capitalized words here. It says, "Invest A LOT of effort in increasing tactfulness so that you can NEVER offend ANYONE." Who on DCUM invests A LOT of effort increasing tactfulness so that they can be certain they NEVER offend ANYONE? I would venture to guess the vast majority of people do not. They invest some effort, but not so much that they be assured NOBODY get offended, ever. The fact that Jeff says never offending anyone will require the investment of A LOT of effort should tell you that he likely thinks it's not a practical objective or goal of most people. He has said that he himself has offended some people with his strongly held positions. So clearly it's a difficult task, not feasible to NEVER offend ANYONE. |
Anonymous
You dug up an old thread that I posted on to try to discredit me on this new thread. If that isn't 'lame' what would you call that, fair and intelligent debating? |
Anonymous
| And now the woman who speaks in absolutes is spilling her baggage all over the Website Feedback forum. Maybe Jeff could create a forum dedicated to her and Dr. Greenspan. |
Anonymous
No one is trying to discredit you. You are doing that all by yourself. |
Anonymous
You're being sarcastic but that would be a gift to all special needs children and I, for one, would be honored to be able to help them in that way. All the better for special needs kids. You probably would dislike that quite a bit though. No matter, stick to Parenting Playgroups. |
Anonymous
|
Is this the same poster who said we should all cash in our 401Ks and spend it all on our kids because our kids are more important than anything else, including ourselves as we grow older?
If so, why are you even bothering to make fun of her? |
Anonymous
Because they enjoy it. Are you implying there are valid reasons to make fun of someone you disagree with? Sad. |
Anonymous
| Look, frankly, OP needs to get over it. This is DCUM not Hallmark. People are going to disagree, be rude, be supportive, be bitchy, be whatever. You have to take things in context. I get into arguments all the time with people on the nanny board (yes, I am the educated militant nanny, not the crazy nanny or the troll nanny or the LP nanny). I argue on here but when I walk away from my computer I don't take it with me. I love the Seinfeld show, but I don't believe I'm Elaine in real life. Keep things in context and always focus on the big picture. There's lots of ignorant assholes on the beltway to whom I'd like to flip the bird (well, truth be told, have flipped the bird) but once I get where I'm going and get out of the car, I forget about it. There's so much else to do right in front of me. |
Anonymous
I'm just defending the underdog here. I get right in the mud pit with the best of them when I feel the urge. I just think OP has a right to tell it like it is -- someone is being underhanded and mean because they don't agree with her position on an issue. I can't stand posters like that. They're intellectually bankrupt and ruin the dialogue. They always say things like, "Are you the poster who just cried because she spent $4,579 on a ring she couldn't return" or "Are you the poster who thinks diapers should be changed every ten minutes and believes in breastfeeding until Kindergarten?" They never ask things like, "Are you the nanny who quoted Freakanomics?" (Are you? If so, you're great.) |
Anonymous
| OP has certainly felt free to tell it like she thinks it is. She's just got her feelings hurt because many of us think her ideas are whacked. She then got all whiny and complained to Jeff. If she can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. If she can't let things go and move on, she should get therapy. I'm sure this spills into her personal life. That many of us can recognize her from other posts, ought to tell her something. Why is she so identifiable? It's not like there are so few opinionated people on DCUMs. Why does she stand out? |
Anonymous
| It is helpful precisely because there are many folks out there with strongly held, passionate opinions, which happen to conflict. The road to education is to carefully consider multiple points of view, not to accept the word of one parent, or even of one expert. If no-one disagreed with the OP, we would all be the poorer for it. |
Anonymous
OP here. By all means, let the ideas flow free and unfettered. A free exchange of ideas means some will be supportive and some will disagree. Opinions can be expressed strongly. Sarcasm may be used at times too. Coloful language such as F$#@, AS%$#@, and SH!@ can probably be used too if you just can't seem to find better words to help punctuate your expression or language. But when people make personal attacks, start bringing up things that have nothing to do with the issue or topic, try to get digs in to escape the more difficult task of having to argue on the merits (and in my case they used my child who has some minor developmental problems to get a dig into me - totally beneath contempt) do you not think that crosses the line between debate and discourse to indecency? Really? If someone said that about your kid you'd just ignore it? Where exactly should that line actually be drawn in debates? Can I say 'oh they're just loser parents who don't deserve special kids'? Or is it really okay for them to tell me my child must be so messed up with serious challenges? Is it okay for anyone to try to track the history of all their posts and then publish all of them in an attempt to discredit me to the public to detract from my message? I wrote on the Special Needs forum, I was totally blasted there by these few posters. So I wrote to Jeff on the WebFeedback forum. They followed me there to interject there too. Then they go back to the Special Needs forum and post my WebFeedback complaint to Jeff to show everybody I complained. Then they create a new post on the Special Needs forum titled, "Social Skills Playgroup - hope this doesn't get hijacked too" in reference to me, their accused hijacker. But it doesn't stop there! They create this new forum, presumably to get away from me or my message, but they don't stay put there. No, of course not. They come back to the original contentious thread and keep taking further whacks at me. It still doesn't stop there. Then they go to the WebFeedback forum once again and create yet another post in reference to me, titled, "Can we have a debate forum" so people like me don't hijack legitimate information threads. Yikes, I feel like the drop of blood in the shark infested waters off the Florida coast. The daggers are out and they're out for blood all in an effort to shut my mouth. Just how far can posters go without somebody stopping them? Too much permissiveness comes with a cost in my opinion. It detracts from important discussions. It disgusts some people. It disuades people from sharing important knowledge. |
Anonymous
| OP--I think these exchanges are starting to cause damage to you. You are making inferences that aren't correct, putting words in people's mouths, and devoting LOTS of time making the same points over and over. (While also getting a few jabs in yourself.) |
Anonymous
|
Some people need to create adversity. Just as she misstates Dr. Greenspan, she also mistates other posters. OP was the one who recited the list of her DS's problems and struggle for diagnosis. What is one to think after reading of her arduous ordeal - that the challenges weren't any more significant than a hangnail? You can't have it both ways OP. There's a reason we want you to stay away from our threads and it has nothing to do with Dr. Greenspan.
Just what were you expecting Jeff to do? |
Anonymous
|
OP- I hope you read what I am going to say. And if you don't, maybe that is good as well, because it means you have left this behind you. I think everyone's frustration (including yours) boils down to a difference between intent and impact. [b]Your intentions are well meaning for the most part.[/b] (Although you have made some uncalled for swipes at people, and that is not nice.) But the impact of your posts is alienating and troublesome for people.
In my opinion, your inability to listen to and reflect on the impact people are expressing is a problem, and suggests something you might need to think about. You are clearly at Greenspan fan(actic.) You are perceived as someone who absolutely believes in one scholar, and suggest that others who don't are short changing themselves and their children. You repeately suggest that we revisit his articles. OP, some people may not share the same faith in this individual, and that is okay. YOU aren't okay with it, and I think this baffles people. You repeatedly say that people are bringing your child into this. They aren't. One comment was made that your child might have issues. No one ever said (as you quote), that your child is "messed up." YOU know your child. We don't. So don't dwell on this. Let it go. You say you want dialogue and debate, but what we see is behavior on your part that is almost evangelical for your savior. It is wasted energy to convince people of ideas that people might have already considered and rejected. To suggest that they are wrong is not in the spirt of dialogue. It is off putting and disrespective of people that hold views different than your own. At the end of the day, you are devoting lots of time and energy to this, and it is probably sapping energy you might need for your family. It might be helpful for you to take a step back, and instead of dismissing everyone as out to get you, think about what you might be doing that is eliciting such a visceral response. This introspection might be helpful beyond your contributions in this forum. |