Updated Guidelines

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
myself said:
No you are not the only one. I too follow these same on line safety rules of only posting what I am comfortable having t he whole world know for it is the "world wide web" meaning anything posted is open to the whole wide world and I never give out my real name, address and so on when on line.

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

I am ok with first name but apart from that - nups.

So if someone quotes me (can't imagine why they would) who cares?

It is near impossible to 'police' the internet.

My suggestion is to just be careful with 'linking' things to your real identity.

And if someone says something mean then let them bounce.

it's hard to do (i know, i always have a problem and want to retailiate) but it is for the best.

But seriously ... be careful ... post what you wanna post but don't let it lead back to who you are.

My .002 cents.

ok, and again I am going to follow that up with "... be careful, but be RESPECTFUL of others who might not have thought to be careful in the past and who are now scared and feeling vulnerable"

No point in rubbing people's faces in their mistakes, if they hadn't thought to safeguard everything they say here out of fear that another member or a lurker would be unethical.

Thanks for understanding.

Hopefully, all these comments, if read by the right people, will help it to sink in that above all it's triggering to those who feel vulnerable and that it's a lack of respect for other's feelings.

I know you have no malevolent intent. and yes sometimes people have different ideas of what psych central for example some people consider each of the different locations - home, resourses, Disorders, quizes, ask, drugs, blog, news, books chats, community, photos, neurotalk and so on to all be different websites where as others believe its all one website as in - the one website called Psych Central has many pages or chapters.

Why is it so hard to understand? Why is it so hard to accept?

BY the way drunken flower, and alexandra k - even though you did not ask MY permission to quote me If you had asked I would have said yes.

By the way I was answerinmg alexandra ks statement that popel have different views about what psych central is. and I stand by my statement. It is true that I believe that many people have different views of what psych central is for everyone here comes from different experiences and different back grounds and different language and different on line language and edicute.

Some people do belienve that everything that psych central offers that can be found just by clicking on an icon is also a part of the psych central website because they can see and access those items by going (coming) to Psych Central and think about each item that can be accessed on psych central as being a new page. and also because when they click on those icons the website in the search bar that tells where the person is contains the name - psychcentral which means it is the same website just a different page.

Where as others believe search bar location and dispite their seeing the icons on the website psych central believe that each of those icons leads the person to a completely different website.

I was not stating whether of not it was ok to take something from the community boards into those other areas of the same website.

I was just supporting Alexandra _K's statement that people have different ideas of what psych central is.

and I stand by my statements of support because no body has the same experiences, computer classes and so on so every ones views of what is considered psych central is going to be different based on their own life, culture, experiences and computer knowledge.

And still other people believe

I don't want to get into this argument. I'd say the guidelines as well as Doc John post about it where clear and especific.

Im not argueing. I recieved pm which I cannot discuss here so I was just clarifying my above post. I am not questioning, argueing or going against Doc John's post. I am just clarifying my support of another member that brought up what I felt was a very good point - that people have different views of what psych central is.

I personally believe that persons statement is true.

This was not meant to be anything more than it was -

support for one persons statment that people have different views of psych central.

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
myself said:
BY the way drunken flower, and alexandra k - even though you did not ask MY permission to quote me If you had asked I would have said yes.

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

Myself,

Please read Doc John's post here and the new addition to the guidelines...it speaks twice of quoting, etc., outside of this specific support community including the blogs here (basically outside of responding to a post or PM from the way I read it). Quoting a person within a post is fine and permission is not necessary since the text is already visible to all. It's basically to be more specific in a response as I'm using here.

I can post the links if you would like me to, or PM them to you.

KD

Thanks for the clarification (((((((Kimmydawn))))))

What this means is that -

-I - am DOING NOTHING WRONG should - I - when making - MY - replys here on the boards quote something that is in another persons post WITH OUT asking that person that I am quoting for permission.

- My - doing so in any of - my - past present or future posts is completely following these new guidelines.

If quoting part of a post when replying to it here in the forums were not acceptable, don't you think that the quote features would be removed? We all sometimes quote part of a post for clarity in order to show what we are referring to in our replies. There is nothing wrong with that. It isn't the same as taking someone's postings that were intended for discussion on the forums and publishing them someplace else.

The intent of the guideline isn't to inhibit posting. It's to allow members to feel more secure about their posting and for all of us to feel better about being able to trust each other in this support group.

In a 3-D support group, isn't there usually a rule that what is said in the group remains in the group? If groups don't have that rule, a lot of people might be more uncomfortable than they are already and might be afraid to talk about what they need to, and then the group doesn't help them. This is a support group too. We might not be able to restrict what outsiders do with our words outside of copyright law, but we can at least establish trust with each other who are members of this support group.

Rap

Thanks for the clarification Just making it clear because I (along with others) have noticed in the past on the boards - I - had quoted people and people have quoted me WITHOUT permission.

- I - wanted to make sure that those posts on the boards ARE following this new guideline and if they did not - I -was going to have them removed and..

requesting those members that are quoting - ME - here on the boards AND in THIER blogs as to what I post on the public boards and in - MY - blog to start asking - MY - permission to qoute - ME - and or link to my posts and blog also.

The reason being This new guideline is for ALL to follow not just one member.

IMO quotes within the forum have always been permissive, , may we please continue on to a healthier outlook and stop over sensatizing
Angie

Rap said it best. "trust".........when we post here, we are working on establishing trust between ourselves that what is posted here, stays here. that's all everyone is asking, trust that what they post will be respected and left alone. left here. not picked up and put in a blog. not picked up and taken to another website. the forums are the support group here. whats in group, should stay in group.

i do not, for the life of me, see how hard this could be to understand.

Past postings are past postings. I'm going to quote Doc John..."This is not retroactive, so this is the new expectation of members going forward."

Let's move forward from here please. This is a guideline. It's pretty clear...especially after all of the discussion which I appreciate.

If there are any further concerns regarding specifics of the guidelines (not comments), please contact me via PM.

KD

thank you KD

Rap,

Thank you for your post. I get that. I've never been in a group setting, but remember the Bahamas with three other women and the vow, "What happens in the Bahamas, stays in the Bahamas!"

In other words, when there, and here, I'm not my children's mother mostly, I'm not my hubby's wife mostly, I'm not my real life friend's friend mostly...some of all this things I might come here and gripe about to my SUPPORTIVE friends here. I'm a survivor who suffers sometimes. I come here as I go to no one else but my past therapist...to attempt to understand what is sometimes considered the unspeakable, unwanted, undesired here in real life...to gain understanding that no one can give me here in real life. In doing that, I share here what I don't share at other places.

I think it's about respecting the spoken and unspoken trust that comes with every post and saying, "I hear you. I'm here for you. I respond to you and don't care to share your innermost thoughts with those you didn't share them with initially." This new guideline is backing up that general thought and expectation.

Have y'all been in a group of people and really suffering? You scan the group to check the safety of the individuals making up the group and then share because you've deemed them (as a whole) a confidential, caring bunch? Should be, and can be, the same here...

KD

exactly!!!

i don't want up to someone on the street and confide in them that i need prayers for a friend in Iraq. i come here and ask the people that i trust for the prayers and thoughts.

Yep, thanks.

This new guideline is trying to help realize that expectation and thought.

KD

check myself's blog----
crap!!!!
vicki

one this guideline is not retro active meaning any entries AFTER the giudeline has been set I cannot place any quotes and so on with in my blog.

And two when Doc John pm'ed me about blog standards That I did not previously know know about (which means most likely but no guarentee he has already read my blog)

I have made a blog entry stating my entrys would be changing to conform to the new standards such as no names in previous and future posts and so forth to meet those standards that Doc John has previously pmed me about.

Only two blog entries have been made since this guideline has been in place - my explaining why I could no longer be discussing community boards issues in my blog and one explaining why my blog was now a password access only blog for the time being.

Im sorry if those two blog entries explaining that I can no longer place my replys within my blog and that I have changed my blog to a password only blog upset you.

Is this the guidlines to read?

I have to team up with Rhaps on this one.....
Never even been a thought which crossed my mind that this is actually done.

Learn something new every single day.

Thanks, Dr.John...Keeping it all good.

Shangrala