LNE Forum Policy and much much more

[Spanky]

"admin":

I will take it into consideration.

Thank you.

I will look forward to hearing your decision.

[tosho]

Spanky, haven't you said on October 4th that you leave this forum?
http://www.lymeneteurope.org/forum/view ... 006#p32006
You have lasted in your decision only five days, because since Oct 10th there are about 80 new posts from you on this forum. That's some serious yo-yo effect

Now seriously - please be polite toward others, even if you are right in a discussion, ok? I don't know if you see it, but, otherwise, any obsessive, competitive, ridiculing behaviour is very demotivating for other members and doesn't speak well about the author. This rule applies for everyone, of course.

[Spanky]

"tosho":

Spanky, haven't you said on October 4th that you leave this forum?

Yes. And that decision is still very much under consideration. I am somewhat hopeful that something positive may yet come, here, from the recent difficulty.

You have lasted in your decision only five days, because since Oct 10th there are about 80 new posts from you on this forum. That's some serious yo-yo effect

Some posted material in reply to me that I thought required a reply after I left. It has sort of snowballed since then.

Right now, I am waiting on another decision before I decide whether to retire permanently.

Thanks for your interest in my posting record, though. Although it seems more than a bit strange to me...

Now seriously - please be polite toward others, even if you are right in a discussion, ok? I don't know if you see it, but, otherwise, any obsessive, competitive, ridiculing behaviour is very demotivating for other members and doesn't speak well about the author. This rule applies for everyone, of course.

Tosho, I have always tried to act towards others as they have acted toward me...and I don't usually start "taking off the gloves" until someone has started in on me, first. I think that if you pay close attention, that I am perfectly capable of maintianing respectful communications with those that treat me respectfully.

But I usually return fire when fired upon. And those who sling names around and then refuse to apologize for that...deserve little respect, in my opinion.

You may have noticed that I sometimes take positions that are not exactly popular or welcome. This isn't a popularity contest.

And you, yourself, may recall that you started in swinging at me without provocation. Some in Lymeland try to bait others who express unpopular opinions into mudslinging matches.

It's a tactic.

I am often a target of that tactic. Anyone who goes online on a board like this and tries to express an opinion contrary to the "groupthink" eventually has to deal with this.

This is one of the issues that I feel needs to be addressed by the Admin.

The value of LNE in my opinion, is that it allows people to express their thoughts without fear of censorship.

But the bitchy attack tactics of a few...the baiting and taunting and name-calling, really does need to be stopped, forcefully, and publicly...so that others can see the example, if the minority opinion is going to be continued to be allowed and expressed. There are some very peculiar psychologies out there, in Lymeland...and all the name-calling directed at other patients...it's just not worth it.

I would advocate a policy of zero tolerance for personal attack. That's just common sense and for the benefit of all.

And everyone needs to hear both sides.

Thanks for your input.

[Bagge]

Spanky, haven't you said on October 4th that you leave this forum?
http://www.lymeneteurope.org/forum/view ... 006#p32006
You have lasted in your decision only five days, because since Oct 10th there are about 80 new posts from you on this forum. That's some serious yo-yo effect

Now seriously - please be polite toward others, even if you are right in a discussion, ok? I don't know if you see it, but, otherwise, any obsessive, competitive, ridiculing behaviour is very demotivating for other members and doesn't speak well about the author. This rule applies for everyone, of course.

Please keep in mind that there may be other issues and events going on that not everyone reading or posting to this forum is aware of, and such events may very well explain a bit of rightful expression of emotion, i.e. anger and frustration.

As an example, although a certain physician that posts here seems to dodge the issue, I keep seeing his name being advertised alongside some rather questionable characters. Allowing one's persona to be misrepresented once or even twice without permission in such a manner as to seemingly facilitate the 'use and abuse' of patients may be understandable, especially for a person that perhaps lacks the ethics or humanity to stand up and speak out against such abuses. However, when the misguided advertising continues, that is another story.

When anyone seemingly allows their persona to be used, without apparent objection, in a blatant and exaggerated fashion so as to instill doubt and fear into viewers of a certain film for example, that is just not deserving of any eminence, I'd say. Then for anyone to further, seemingly willingly advertise alongside people under indictment for fraud as well as other despicable criminal allegations, well... And when this pattern of advertising still continues to this day, well... As Spanky has touched on before, if you want respect, you need to earn it, and show it.

I ask you, what do you think of people who facilitate the leading of the masses towards unproven and oftentimes dangerous treatments? You see, it does indeed anger me when I see someone being misguided in such a way as, for example, to result in their withdrawing their child from necessary and proven life-saving medical treatments, simply because they were filled with a bunch of unproven alternative approaches. The specific part that angers me is when I later read that the child is indeed quite ill and will likely not survive, but had they received proper medical treatment, they might well have had a better chance of survival.

So when I read of any supposed reputable and eminent researcher boasting about their high and mighty blah-blah-blahs, but repeatedly see them misuse their eminence to aid and abet such exploitation, it just gives me a different perspective on things. And this is why I continue to applaud the authors of the Lancet article for taking a firm stand, making it clear what type of so-called science and group behavior they do and don't support. Mostly, I appreciate their warning the public, loud and clear, by writing it out for everyone to read, complete with peer-review.

Edited to insert: If anyone thinks I'm merely talking about a handful of oral antibiotics or a few months of IV, then think again.

PS. So if I post here in a few months ranting and angry, it may very well be the day that I find out said child has died because their parents were misled towards unproven treatments by a facade of 'eminent' physicians and researchers promoting their wares alongside some seemingly dubious characters.
.

[tosho]

Thanks for your interest in my posting record, though. Although it seems more than a bit strange to me...

I, on the other hand, was a bit surprised how quickly and actively you came back, so just out of curiousity checked the number of your new posts. And no, I didn't counted one by one. It was an easy math, since search engine sorts 10 posts per page.

As to the rest - you are not saint, Spanky. Express your opinion, but don't provoke people, especially those who are seriously afflicted by tbds.

Bagge - what I see very frequently is that the IDSA proponents scrupulously point out cases that were harmed by longterm treatment or wrong diagnosis with tbds and at the same time stay completely quiet about those who were actually misdiagnosed or not helped by standard treatment. This is one sided position.
Balance is needed. I am proponent that patients should have full, objective information - not only based on scientific evidence (which is not so unequivocal) but also on reasonable clinical observations. It will allow us nowadays to significantly reduce both misdiagnoses and wrong diagnoses with tbds. At this moment, any trials of puting tbds in a simple frame, were it a standard approach or non-standard approach, will fail and cause harm.

[Bagge]

At this moment, any trials of puting tbds in a simple frame, were it a standard approach or non-standard approach, will fail and cause harm.

Tosho, I do not understand what you mean by this statement.
.

[Spanky]

"tosho":

As to the rest - you are not saint, Spanky. Express your opinion, but don't provoke people, especially those who are seriously afflicted by tbds.

Tosho:

Have you ever heard the expresssion "walk a mile in my shoes" before you criticize me?

Now, I have heard you.

Don't presume to lecture me when we both recall how you attacked me, here...without provocation on my part.

And another adage..."let he without sin cast the first stone".

[tosho]

Bagge. By saying 'simple frame' I meant for example: "2 step testing, 4 weeks of abx, PLDS" way of thinking or, on the other side, "indefinite longterm treatment and focusing only on tbds" thinking.

Spanky - you don't have to provoke personally to be criticized.

Now, I don't want to take part in another snowballing discussion, only wanted to signal my opinion.

[Spanky]

"tosho":

Spanky - you don't have to provoke personally to be criticized.

Now, I don't want to take part in another snowballing discussion, only wanted to signal my opinion.

And what I meant by "let he without sin cast the first stone"...is that personal criticism of another poster's behavior here might be more convincing if the person offering the criticism wasn't guilty of the behavior also.

It's sometimes referred to as the "clean hands" principle.

[Lorima]

Tosho wrote:

...the IDSA proponents scrupulously point out cases that were harmed by longterm treatment or wrong diagnosis with tbds and at the same time stay completely quiet about those who were actually misdiagnosed or not helped by standard treatment. This is one sided position.
Balance is needed. I am proponent that patients should have full, objective information - not only based on scientific evidence (which is not so unequivocal) but also on reasonable clinical observations. It will allow us nowadays to significantly reduce both misdiagnoses and wrong diagnoses with tbds. At this moment, any trials of puting tbds in a simple frame, were it a standard approach or non-standard approach, will fail and cause harm.

Tosho, thanks for saying this. I've often noticed the same peculiar failure to consider the numerous patients who are being harmed by undiagnosed, untreated or under-treated TBI's. It's as if any harm done by "authorities" is to be ignored.