Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Obsessive Debunking Disorder (ODD)?
#31
I have not time to read this whole thread, I just want to say this.

a critical attitude or an awareness of manipulation risks is something different than having ODD or being skeptical.

I like when people are sometimes more open for willingness to hear and verify a unusual opinion I have that cann't be proven with usual sources, yet. At the other side I do respect resistance against my opinions or against my convictions because  it keeps me awake.

On a forum like this I think it is healthy when every member can maintain their own attitude or style, sometimes debunking a lot, sometimes being to naive.

Just everybody try to find some balance here to give everybody room for having overinteresting stories or having overcritical attitudes.
Reply

#32
(05-28-2013, 05:45 PM)Octahedron Wrote: I have not time to read this whole thread, I just want to say this.

a critical attitude or an awareness of manipulation risks is something different than having ODD or being skeptical.

I like when people are sometimes more open for willingness to hear and verify a unusual opinion I have that cann't be proven with usual sources, yet. At the other side I do respect resistance against my opinions or against my convictions because  it keeps me awake.

On a forum like this I think it is healthy when every member can maintain their own attitude or style, sometimes debunking a lot, sometimes being to naive.

Just everybody try to find some balance here to give everybody room for having overinteresting stories or having overcritical attitudes.

All true.  I would say a hallmark of a true ODD, is an inability to think for ones' self, and an uncritical acceptance of opinions, beliefs, facts, and attitudes of authority figures or authority bodies.  When dealing with pronouncements of official organs, once should consider the source. :^)
Reply

#33
(05-28-2013, 05:45 PM)Octahedron Wrote: I have not time to read this whole thread, I just want to say this.

a critical attitude or an awareness of manipulation risks is something different than having ODD or being skeptical.

I like when people are sometimes more open for willingness to hear and verify a unusual opinion I have that cann't be proven with usual sources, yet. At the other side I do respect resistance against my opinions or against my convictions because  it keeps me awake.

On a forum like this I think it is healthy when every member can maintain their own attitude or style, sometimes debunking a lot, sometimes being to naive.

Just everybody try to find some balance here to give everybody room for having overinteresting stories or having overcritical attitudes.

 Just checked to see if there is still an ignore feature . There is.

I wonder why  the users who found my debunking so troublesome didn't make use of it ?     

****************************************************************************************

Octa my apologies. I mistakenly replied to your post . When I attempted to delete it this was the message I got .....

"You do not have permission to access this page. This could be because of one of the following reasons: 1.Your account has either been suspended or you have been banned from accessing this resource.
2.You do not have permission to access this page. Are you trying to access administrative pages or a resource that you shouldn't be? Check in the forum rules that you are allowed to perform this action.
3.Your account may still be awaiting activation or moderation. (Resend Activation Code)
4.You have accessed this page directly rather than using appropriate forms or link.

You are currently logged in with the username: 'Mercy Now'
Reply

#34
(05-28-2013, 11:37 AM)Mercy Now Wrote: Firstly, I  ignored  a lot of the bunkum .
 I didn't attack them . I challenged and questioned their info and then they attacked me.


You might think it's challenging them but members that left here have said it's discouraging to post anything because you always come along and attack them.

No I didn't quit posting because GWSOL left. Though he had very good reason to leave  as you well know.
Apparently Richard, when you disagree with someone you reveal private info on them. You can't be trusted.


I didn't say you left because of GWSOL leaving. I said you 2 quit posting when Elizabeth came here. You 2 thought she was a spy.

What personal info are you claiming I revealed?
 
GWSOL and I were two of the very first to speak out about the Swerdlows.Initially we were both attacked for  that. That was my main purpose here .Them and many others like them that were being touted around here.

You're wrong. Michael was the first.
Reply

#35
(05-28-2013, 09:11 PM)Richard Wrote: [quote pid='61621' dateline='1369755449']
... 
GWSOL and I were two of the very first to speak out about the Swerdlows.Initially we were both attacked for  that. That was my main purpose here .Them and many others like them that were being touted around here.

You're wrong. Michael was the first.

[/quote]

We as the old crew were already busy with that on the Australian SOC forum.

We already had the troubles with SJ at expansions forum at summer 2005, even before HCF was started up. Remember the attacks on Avatar and silverinfinity by S, and of course the viking stories at SOC and expansions forum..
Reply

#36
(05-28-2013, 08:32 PM)Mercy Now Wrote: [quote pid='61627' dateline='1369777545']

****************************************************************************************

Octa my apologies. I mistakenly  replied to your post . When I attempted to delete  it this was the message I got .....

I wonder why  the users who found my debunking so troublesome didn't make use of it ?

[/quote]

No problem.

I used your (& GWSOL's and Xanthas") critical "debunking" visions sometimes; i.e. I remember you gave good warnings in case of Whitewolf.

Also you gave me good warnings about the book of Kybalion.

GWSOL gave good info on hoax risks in the stories of German ufos.

Xanthas wrote some interesting critical stories about Jan van Helsing.
Reply

#37
I think there is nothing wrong per sé with being overly critical and debunking a lot. Leaving here in the middle whether the debunking critics are valid or not.
However, when such a so-called debunker finds its own debunking ego so much more important than the mood and well-being of another, like for example a discussion partner or another forum member, I pull myself out. When a debunker doesn't want to or isn't capable of imagining him/herself in the views and/or circumstances of the other, I pull myself out as well.
Here we are also entering the terrain of social abilities, also mentioned by Thomas Sheridan in his article. People have feelings and emotions, find themselves in a certain position, and I think one should take that also into account when you are out debunking, like debunking the topics of interest of other members.
Unfortunately my impression is that there are quite a lot of self-centered ego's and know-it-alls in this world, and that usually doesn't go away when they enter the virtual world of the internet, often quite the contrary.  

In any case, I personally draw the line at personal attacks. I wouldn't want to be on a forum where members are being accused of being spies, infiltrators or something similar with no solid evidence whatsoever. I have seen such paranoia and nasty behaviour on conspiracy related forums more than once.

I don't like cyber bullying either, which is unfortunately a phenomenon that is quite wide spread as well. I understand it is safe and comfortable from behind a computerscreen, which also makes people's boundaries and inhibitions more easily to blur or even to disappear entirely.
I have seen things go down in forums that would make people's jaws drop and also things which I found to be quite upsetting.

Nothing wrong with debunking in itself at all - it is absolutely necessary, but avoid becoming too sure and rigid, be subtle and be respectful to the other, is my motto.
Reply

#38
Filter I disagree that you should take a member personal attachment to a theory into acount, as long as it's not a direct personal attack.  Things do get emotional, but that's a plus to forum conversations.  Everybody is emotionally invested in their beliefs, even if they are delusional.  That's why according to social etiquette, religion and politics are not discussed, but this board would be dead if we didn't slaughter everybody's sacred cows.
Reply

#39
(05-29-2013, 08:52 AM)Octahedron Wrote:
(05-28-2013, 09:11 PM)Richard Wrote: [quote pid='61621' dateline='1369755449']
... 
GWSOL and I were two of the very first to speak out about the Swerdlows.Initially we were both attacked for  that. That was my main purpose here .Them and many others like them that were being touted around here.

You're wrong. Michael was the first.

We as the old crew were already busy with that on the Australian SOC forum.

We already had the troubles with SJ at expansions forum at summer 2005, even before HCF was started up. Remember the attacks on Avatar and silverinfinity by S, and of course the viking stories at SOC and expansions forum..
[/quote]

This is true. Members at Rodrigo's tried to debunk the swerdlows but Rodrigo didn't like that and he would put an end to it.

At the unofficial David Icke forum they were debunking the swerdlows too. ATF, and GLP they did too. Almost every forum on the net they were debunking the swerdlows so it's hard to say who was first. On this forum Micheal was first. Andrew was second. GWSOL was third. I was forth and after that there was quiet a few members debunking the swerdlows.
Reply

#40
(05-29-2013, 03:38 PM)Filter Wrote: In any case, I personally draw the line at personal attacks. I wouldn't want to be on a forum where members are being accused of being spies, infiltrators or something similar with no solid evidence whatsoever. I have seen such paranoia and nasty behaviour on conspiracy related forums more than once.

I don't like cyber bullying either, which is unfortunately a phenomenon that is quite wide spread as well. I understand it is safe and comfortable from behind a computerscreen, which also makes people's boundaries and inhibitions more easily to blur or even to disappear entirely.
I have seen things go down in forums that would make people's jaws drop and also things which I found to be quite upsetting.

 I've seen the wars at other forums too. We had our share of them too. It always starts with someone who thinks they're top dog on the forum and everyone else is inferior. When you have more than one person who thinks they're top dog is when the power struggles go on.
Reply



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2022 Melroy van den Berg.