Ah, so wise. My fascination with other and especially group dynamic is self reflective, as you point out, my friend. Often good shadow or mirror work allows the lotus blossom. I firmly believe that nothing passes through our consciousness without our consent, and our entire experience is a creation of our dynamic relation of the one and the many, and who we are, collectively and individually.
On Jul 13, 10:54 am, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote: > " I was also wondering if anyone else sees what I see...another of my > past times." > > I see something brave in your post, Molly ! > > " Human behavior has always been fascinating to me, especially my > own." > > To share my take, let me offer that it's ONLY " my own " that > fascinates me. Others are others, they have their own reasons for > behaving in a manner or saying particular things. It 's theirs, having > nothing to do with me. What is a continuous challenge, not just > fascination, is to understand why do I feel like saying things, or am > inclined in behaving in a manner, that do not agree with my long ' > settled ' values. > > Thereafter, everything falls into place, and is easy to handle. I rise > up or attempt to rise up to my own values. My interaction with the > universe is complete, for then, and that leaves me free. > > On Jul 13, 7:19 pm, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Please don't think I am advocating for an exclusionary group, dear > > Slip. But I do wonder at the dynamic here. I know the admin does a > > stellar job and am always grateful. Human behavior has always been > > fascinating to me, especially my own. We often walk in the shadow > > areas together and this may be one of those times. I hope you don't > > mind my wondering out loud. I was also wondering if anyone else sees > > what I see...another of my past times. Thanks for playing Slip. > > > On Jul 13, 10:14 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Yep, it's clearly a bit of a dilemma the way you present it. Maybe we > > > should have a specified page/room/forum specifically designated and > > > confined to intelligent discourse, where intrusion posts are > > > immediately removed and continually moderated. Possibly a separate > > > sign in page to the, let's say, upper room. Public access is just > > > that and there are no safety mechanisms in place that would not appear > > > as discrimination or censureship. > > > > On Jul 13, 8:55 am, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I was thinking more of an examination of what we get out of running > > > > through the same old argument with someone over and over again, or > > > > allowing threads to by hijacked off topic again and again by the same > > > > persons anger. The internet group is, in many ways, a new phenomena > > > > and just coming into an age where it can be a productive tool or > > > > inspiration to our lives. But given the number of unbalanced people > > > > using the web for their own agenda, how do we identify them, and > > > > continue to retain something of value? I am not sure it should be > > > > left up to the moderators only, as they will suspect that if the > > > > members continue to engage folks with these behaviors in debate, it > > > > might be acceptable or necessary. > > > > > The pattern I see in this group is that we take turns engaging and > > > > managing attacks and nonsense until the moderators take over. If we > > > > truly get something out of that type of engagement, then the group is > > > > benefiting. There are groups all over the internet involved in flame > > > > wars. It is not uncommon. I sometimes read the comments on u tube > > > > posts and it is apparent that people just have the need to spout off > > > > in irrational and angry ways. I think we have something much more > > > > valuable here, and wonder if we don't lose articulate, intelligent > > > > folks when we engage like this. Do we truly need a Chaz in the group > > > > dynamic? > > > > > Please believe that I am just trying to understand, and find it > > > > somewhat fascinating. But also get quite frustrated when we have some > > > > great threads going and they get lost in the BS. > > > > > On Jul 12, 6:57 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > In a sense even though you and I can identify there is nothing we can > > > > > do about it. We all have our style of contribution but group > > > > > consistency sometimes depends upon newcomers fitting in with the > > > > > current core group. If the entire group consisted of e types then > > > > > perhaps you and I would be considered the disruptive ones. > > > > > > On Jul 12, 2:29 pm, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > That all sounds good, but I wasn't asking so much for a structure > > > > > > for > > > > > > internet groups for the mentally ill, as I was asking that we > > > > > > consider > > > > > > how, in general, we best deal with group members who display the > > > > > > signs > > > > > > of mental illness and contribute little or disrupt the group > > > > > > dynamic. > > > > > > For example, in this group, we have seen several members come and go > > > > > > who were unable to converse but ready to vehemently argue, bully, > > > > > > flame, etc. The signs of mental illness are as widely variable as > > > > > > the > > > > > > illnesses - the narcissist can only discuss topics as they relate to > > > > > > them and expect the group to conform to their needs, and often > > > > > > brings > > > > > > the focus of the threads back to them. The schizophrenic presents > > > > > > themselves with irregularity and incongruence, often angry. Angry > > > > > > too > > > > > > is the boarder line personality who can also be addicted to rage and > > > > > > jumps on the flaming bandwagon at every chance, but can occasionally > > > > > > contribute something specifically valid. > > > > > > > The list goes on and on. What I am wondering is how, as users of > > > > > > internet groups, we identify these folks and stop them from making > > > > > > the > > > > > > forum unusable by those looking for reasonable discourse, and safety > > > > > > from not irrational venting? At what point does our compassion > > > > > > allow > > > > > > us to feel every persons worth, yet know that some are better off in > > > > > > other venues? > > > > > > > On Jul 12, 1:42 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > There should be an established level for each group within, let's > > > > > > > say, > > > > > > > five levels ranging from simple venting to crisis and/or mild to > > > > > > > anything goes. In less extreme areas of mental illness chat > > > > > > > groups > > > > > > > provide a sharing forum where the individual meets others > > > > > > > allowing for > > > > > > > the individual to drop the isolation curtain while identifying > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > others who have similar emotions and expressions. The extreme > > > > > > > level > > > > > > > of course may be subject to chaotic activity but then again there > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > the option of "one to one" communication between members of the > > > > > > > chat > > > > > > > group. The in between levels will allow for an individual to > > > > > > > find the > > > > > > > optimal level for the optimal experience. Each level should in > > > > > > > some > > > > > > > way provide at all times someone trained in the field of mental > > > > > > > illness in order to identify and categorize what might be a crisis > > > > > > > level participant in a low level group which can ultimately > > > > > > > exacerbate > > > > > > > the crisis as the individual increasingly feels that others don't > > > > > > > understand. > > > > > > > > On Jul 12, 12:06 pm, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Before the widespread use of personal computers, suicide > > > > > > > > hotlines > > > > > > > > performed the community service of giving local community > > > > > > > > members > > > > > > > > suffering from mental illness an outlet for expression. All > > > > > > > > hotline > > > > > > > > workers are trained in various mental illness and how to best > > > > > > > > communicate with these callers, maintain call time limits, give > > > > > > > > local > > > > > > > > resources for further help if needed, and call the local > > > > > > > > authorities > > > > > > > > in case of an actual suicide consideration. Fact is, calls > > > > > > > > concerning > > > > > > > > suicide comprised an average of less than 5% of callers to > > > > > > > > suicide > > > > > > > > hotlines. The other 95% of the calls are from people with > > > > > > > > various > > > > > > > > mental illnesses, that were not in crisis but felt isolated from > > > > > > > > society and just need an avenue of expression. > > > > > > > > > The advent of online chatrooms brought relief to these hotlines > > > > > > > > as it > > > > > > > > provided an avenue for those not actually in crisis of > > > > > > > > contemplating > > > > > > > > suicide, to interact with others and express themselves. This > > > > > > > > alternative community of the online groups offers relief for > > > > > > > > families, > > > > > > > > communities and the individuals themselves by providing semi > > > > > > > > social > > > > > > > > environments for interaction. > > > > > > > > > At the same time, it requires legitimate online groups to take > > > > > > > > on the > > > > > > > > added responsibility of administering the groups to prevent > > > > > > > > trolling, > > > > > > > > flaming, spamming and other behavior disruptive to the group. > > > > > > > > This > > > > > > > > behavior can be juvenille, or the result of personality > > > > > > > > disorders of > > > > > > > > myriad varieties, i.e., those who typically call the crisis > > > > > > > > hotlines. > > > > > > > > > How far should an online group go in creating an environment of > > > > > > > > free > > > > > > > > self expression? What boundaries should be set for folks who > > > > > > > > might be > > > > > > > > better directed to a mental health chat room, where participants > > > > > > > > trained in the communication patterns of the mentally ill can > > > > > > > > respond > > > > > > > > effectively? The answers obviously depend on the goals and > > > > > > > > guidelines > > > > > > > > of the group, but in general, what do you think? > > > > > > > > >http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Review/EDUCAUSEReviewMagazineVolume4... > > > > > > > > >http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2004/03/30/the_problems_wit... > > > > > > > > >http://www.nowpublic.com/people/adult-cyber-bullying-should-laws-prot...Hide > > > > > > > > quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
