HealingWell
Search Close Search
☰

Interesting Question from Mr Logoslidat

Support Forums
>
Prostate Cancer
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply
❬ ❬ Previous Thread |Next Thread ❭ ❭
Posted 3/7/2014 3:01 PM (GMT 0)
Logos and I have started an interesting discussion which is worth talking about but probably shouldn't steal the oxygen from another thread.

He said...
PeterD . I have the the same empathy for rayyan as Mylastie, what am I missing? Is it fear she will write a book and and is capitalizing off healing well . My goodness, Morrie would be rolling over in his grave. This kinda of stuff, is so frustrating. Im trying to be righteous here, but it makes no sense to me and I'm a fairly sensible guy. I see no harm in her request. Its not like she would be the first to use this resource to help the the dying. I mean the administrator himself and others are capitalizing on these resources to help the suffering and attaining capitol as they do so. The amount of capitol is irrelevant. So if, "there he goes again" is the thought, I can only be muzzled, by a failsafe muzzle. y'all all do what you do, I can shake dust off with nary a thought…..

---

I would have posted this on Mylastie post. An edit would have worked as well as a lock there.

Then I said...
Logos,

We're not trying to shut Mylastie down. Her project sounds interesting and if she is really as dedicated to it as she appears to be then she should be able to contact that other Peter (the Admin) and get his permission. On the face of it it sounds like something he would be likely to approve.

It was the unanimous decision of the moderators that her request was enough of a rule 4/rule 5 issue that it ought to have prior approval. I hope she gets it but that's up to Peter.

So, for discussion: bearing in mind rules 4 and 5 for the forum ...

4. No advertising or links to advertising or "Spam" is permitted.

  • Advertising or spam is defined as posting a link for the purpose of selling, soliciting or promoting something.
  • Links promoting fundraising, advocacy, etc. are not permitted.
  • Links to personal blogs/homepages are allowed in member profiles and signatures
  • Sharing of links to helpful and relevant web sites and resources is allowed if they are not used for a promotional purpose.


5. No posts regarding research studies, surveys, or clinical trials without prior approval from the forum administrator.

... what is your position? My take on the request from Mylastie was that it falls somewhere between rule 4 item 1 ("soliciting" something..., "etc".) and rule 5 (studies requiring prior approval). The rule 5 tie-in is a bit of a stretch but since her request was not objectionable on its face and since rule 5 does provide a way forward I reached for it.

So I put it to the membership: what would you have done had you been a moderator? Why? What do you think of this sort of posts -- people who are looking to contact men with prostate cancer (and their caregivers, if appropriate) and who neither need nor offer support or information about the disease?

In your answers please be kind to your moderators.
Posted 3/7/2014 3:14 PM (GMT 0)
Peter -

Yes, the argument can be made both ways on this one.

I'm going to come down on the side of "if it might do somebody some good, why not go for it?" which has always struck me as one of the underlying (good) philosophies of this forum.

However, in the words of Reagan era diplomacy, "Trust but verify."

That is, so far her proposal does seem sincere. So if Peter Waite approves, we let her post.

If her participation on the forum turns out to be as sincere as we are expecting, then all well and good.

But if it starts to go down the wrong path, then you Mod guys can always go into warning first then if necessary shut down mode.
Posted 3/7/2014 3:32 PM (GMT 0)
Peter,

I would have done what you did in a heart beat.

In my former career, I spent 30 years, among other things, doing a lot of corporate law work (not as a lawyer).

I feel you correctly used rules 4 and 5.

The OP should have gone straight to Peter, the owner, and presented her project to him. That would be the correct order. Not speaking for Peter, but I would think he would have approved it. But if not, it's his house and his rules.

I think you did fine.

David
Posted 3/7/2014 3:56 PM (GMT 0)
Be advised, I did, in a following post, defer to the moderators decision. I don't think the moderators did anything wrong and on reflection, do not think it was knee-jerk reaction, just not well thought out. I will also say it was my little i, speaking with sparks of truth, that in a dialectic sense could ignite the capital I that we all contain. Ignite in the sense of giving warmth and comfort, not embers of darkness. I ,also think Mylasties gracious departure, shaking off of any dust she felt, speaks well of her. She was aware and spoke to that awareness of the controversy her post might convey. Albeit that "controversy" was not the reason for the extra step she was asked to take. Its a fine line, like so much of the little i. Also know that I use the grammatically correct usage of the capitol, except when its usage, in the spiritual sense is indicated by context. Aloha nui loa. PS I think I can safely say that Peterd's intent with this thread is not a referendum of t the moderators value, but an attempt for a dialog, in the Socratic sense, sans any need for an urge to lockstep into a " I support the moderators ,willy-nilly, because I wouldn't want the job." consider this if you choose to reply.
Posted 3/7/2014 4:38 PM (GMT 0)
I've seen a number of these kinds of posts on other types of forums. In general they are scams or other types of spam. A person really looking for someone to talk to wouldn't need to reach out to a forum like this. Personally the post smelled like spam and a scam, had the post not been locked when I saw it, I would have reported as spam. It didn't pass my test of a 'real' request.

I would have done exactly as the moderators did, lock it and redirect the poster to the owner for proper vetting and validation before presenting it as a real request to members of this forum. Someone with honorable intentions would all to happy to comply.

Or would have read the posting rules before posting to understand if the post would be accepted here.

Andrew
Posted 3/7/2014 5:01 PM (GMT 0)
clearly a slow day :)
Posted 3/7/2014 6:06 PM (GMT 0)
I think it would have been interesting to see where her link went and what was going on, on that end...

But rules are rules. I think that clearly #5 kicks in... Few more clicks and she might and still can get approval... How hard is that?
Posted 3/7/2014 6:07 PM (GMT 0)
In my experience Peter is fairly approachable. But he is also busy and has his own health issues.

Don't think there was a link. Just an email address, as I recall.
Posted 3/7/2014 8:05 PM (GMT 0)
I agree, that it{failure to follow thru}, is disturbing and an indicator of falseness, but am sure I have such indicators myself to some, of some hidden agenda. I am also sure this is true of others here doing the same. I will concede for the arguments sake, that a violation of a rule could be interpreted as being broken. Maybe that rule could be modified to allow suspicious posts a caveat, such as was done in this case. I wish my 3rd post was included in this thread as it was an important part the puzzle.{ I in no way fault PeterD for this} I rarely attempt to take advantage of the software devices or finer points of rules.
To suggest that we all should read and understand the rules, just doesn't jive with human nature, anymore than reading the fine print on many signed contracts does. As we say in hawaii, shuda, wooda, dint, applies.
A slow day is a good day for the forum, for obvious reasons.
Posted 3/7/2014 8:10 PM (GMT 0)
I agree with Andrew- scam of some sort-

Or perhaps someone looking for ideas for a book.-

 

Posted 3/7/2014 8:18 PM (GMT 0)
Logos,

Can't find that third comment. I don't think I deleted anything except what I copied here. On Mylastie's thread...

...you said...
Mylasttie, your intent is admirable. I write to share my feelings and the thoughts that those feeling create and am bold enough to "think" I could do what you ask. Having said that, my experience is not one of a dying man,but of one that lives within a paradigm of death. Whoever contacts you to fulfill your wish will be composed of all that you seek. It is the seeking that defines us, not necessarily, the endpoint, tho i believe, the two equate. Good luck in your quest. " Your so vain" Carly Simon. fear not it is not you in that song, but I. PS boys and girls, do know that spam is not involved here, but a seeker.

But I doubt that is what you are talking about.

Do you, perchance, remember what you said?
Posted 3/7/2014 8:36 PM (GMT 0)
Peterd, I couldn't find it either. I might have posted it , went to edit and hit deleted it. Basically the posters email was edited, but the thread was locked. I questioned , the need for the lock. that folks could, without the lock, post their thoughts without having the email address They could ask questions, encourage, call her out, volunteer for the project, direct her to their e mail, you know the kinda of stuff we do when someone makes a request, ostensibly to console and comfort. I called all those things the meat of the forum. It was that post that I said I deferred to the moderators,less anyone thinks I fibbed on one of my posts later on. Ended up with Oh well the sun will come up tomorrow. Its not a problem at all. I have as yet read your modest proposal, it won't ruin my lunch, I hope, tee hee. Discerned by readers of Swift and Yahoo. Its weird I know I posted it, and if i went to edit and cancell instead I should have noted the blank page . Ah who cares. as we also say in hawaai, no worries brah, no worries
Posted 3/7/2014 8:46 PM (GMT 0)
Logos -- Members can discuss that here. I added a note to Mylasttie's thread encouraging her to email me if she needs help contacting the administrator.
Posted 3/7/2014 8:50 PM (GMT 0)
Alls well that ends well.
Posted 3/7/2014 9:03 PM (GMT 0)
The idea of a book was my reference to Morrie, subject of the book, Tuesdays with Morrie , best seller, , made the author lots money. So what, it inspired and inspires today. I betcha healingwell members would be proud, if the author had the forum in its bibliography, or the author of Death and Dying. I hear ya, Sherwin, Im trying, I hear ya…… bet your set up nicely now , aren't ya…...
Posted 3/7/2014 9:38 PM (GMT 0)
I think the mods did the right thing. The rules are what they are and the moderators are right to apply them to all. There is no harm in asking someone in a friendly way to go through the prescribed process before posting.

If folks want to propose a rule change, that's a fine discussion to have, but until then, it's best to apply the rules consistently. Personally I think rules 4 and 5 are both good because there are scammers out there who would pose as a having a benign purpose when they in fact want to trade off the trust that this site has built up. So I am happy to see all such requests being vetted by moderators or the site owner.
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply