User talk:Barbara Shack
From Rationalwikiwki
(9 intermediate revisions not shown) | |||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
:Now I look at it, I appear to have misread the situation, as have you. RW is in no way linked to RWW, in any official capacity, and none of their views represent ours, etc. --[[User:Oberkommando NeuGwenson|Oberkommando NeuGwenson]] | :Now I look at it, I appear to have misread the situation, as have you. RW is in no way linked to RWW, in any official capacity, and none of their views represent ours, etc. --[[User:Oberkommando NeuGwenson|Oberkommando NeuGwenson]] | ||
- | I'm talking about the "Stalk this user" boxes on '''this''' Wiki. They will probably disappear now but we all know that they have been there. Police and psychologists aren’t as omniscient as they pretend to be. This applies especially to psychologists. If you (especially a woman) | + | I'm talking about the "Stalk this user" boxes on '''this''' Wiki. They will probably disappear now but we all know that they have been there. Police and psychologists aren’t as omniscient as they pretend to be. This applies especially to psychologists. If you (especially a woman) get into a relationship because you think a threat to stalk you was a joke the relationship may later become abusive. Then psychologists are likely to say that the abuse victim brought it on herself because she refused to recognize the obvious threat. If she refuses to develop a relationship because of something as threatening as the user boxes psychologists are inclined to say that it is her fault she is lonely. She shouldn’t have been paranoid over “obvious” jokes. With psychologists you can’t win easily. Now that they are on everyone's page they are less threatening than they were when they were only on mine, and perhaps a few others. |
+ | |||
+ | The threat to stalk has gone I'm glad to see. I've got print outs of the way they were before.[[User:Barbara Shack|Barbara Shack]]05:25, 15 March 2008 (EST) | ||
+ | |||
+ | :OK. Would a little retribution against RWW be in order ;) ?--[[User:Oberkommando NeuGwenson|Oberkommando NeuGwenson]] | ||
+ | ::What... the... fuck... is going on? - [[User:Night_Flare|NightFlare]] | ||
+ | :::Barbara, the title of those boxes was ''a joke''. Yes, a joke. I take your point about joke vs. hidden agenda/reality, but the internets are serious business, and not every corner of them will appeal to everyone's sensibility. Print outs? Wow... Anyway, thanks at least for explaining your objection. Please note that the contents of those boxes are all derived from clear public postings, not rabid net-stalking via google etc. As far as I can tell, at least. {{User:Human/sig}} 14:42, 15 March 2008 (EST) | ||
+ | |||
+ | ::::Having another [[FBI]] incident here would be totally awesome though. [[User:Night Flare|Night Flare]] 15:04, 15 March 2008 (EST) |
Current revision as of 14:21, 16 March 2008
Welcome to RationalWikiWiki, Barbara Shack. Let me know if there is anything I can do for you. Hans Johnson I'll get my hans on it 19:36, 14 March 2008 (EST)
Threats, sadism, etc.
Care to give examples thereof? What exactly has RW been up to?
You say:
'Then police, psychologists etc will say, 'You were asking for it. They made it clear what they were like.'
What has any RW member done that would merit police intervention? If we have made it clear what we are like, what exactly are we like? Those are some fairly major allegations; if you believe that anything illegal is happening, or about to happen, I suggest that you do something about it/tell us, so that we can stop it. --Oberkommando NeuGwenson
- Now I look at it, I appear to have misread the situation, as have you. RW is in no way linked to RWW, in any official capacity, and none of their views represent ours, etc. --Oberkommando NeuGwenson
I'm talking about the "Stalk this user" boxes on this Wiki. They will probably disappear now but we all know that they have been there. Police and psychologists aren’t as omniscient as they pretend to be. This applies especially to psychologists. If you (especially a woman) get into a relationship because you think a threat to stalk you was a joke the relationship may later become abusive. Then psychologists are likely to say that the abuse victim brought it on herself because she refused to recognize the obvious threat. If she refuses to develop a relationship because of something as threatening as the user boxes psychologists are inclined to say that it is her fault she is lonely. She shouldn’t have been paranoid over “obvious” jokes. With psychologists you can’t win easily. Now that they are on everyone's page they are less threatening than they were when they were only on mine, and perhaps a few others.
The threat to stalk has gone I'm glad to see. I've got print outs of the way they were before.Barbara Shack05:25, 15 March 2008 (EST)
- OK. Would a little retribution against RWW be in order ;) ?--Oberkommando NeuGwenson
- What... the... fuck... is going on? - NightFlare
- Barbara, the title of those boxes was a joke. Yes, a joke. I take your point about joke vs. hidden agenda/reality, but the internets are serious business, and not every corner of them will appeal to everyone's sensibility. Print outs? Wow... Anyway, thanks at least for explaining your objection. Please note that the contents of those boxes are all derived from clear public postings, not rabid net-stalking via google etc. As far as I can tell, at least. humanbe in 14:42, 15 March 2008 (EST)
- What... the... fuck... is going on? - NightFlare
- Having another FBI incident here would be totally awesome though. Night Flare 15:04, 15 March 2008 (EST)