Posted by Lou Pilder on June 23, 2010, at 16:21:51
In reply to Re: the system here » Dr. Bob, posted by Toph on June 23, 2010, at 8:52:22
> > > Descerning intent has never been a part of the discipline system here yet intent is assumed all the time when determining uncivil conduct.
> >
> > Assumed by others, but not by us, you mean?
> >
> > Bob
>
> What I meant was if something is deemed not civil, in my experience saying my intent was not to cause harm is no defense against something assumed by you or the deputies to be harmful.Toph,
In looking at what you posted here above as a reply to Mr. Hsiung, I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean. If you could post answers here to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
In, [...no defense...]
A. Could this mean then that the practice here of the manager of the site calling a member out to change what they said as a condition to not be ostracized from the community to be a practice that could cause psychological/emotional harm to that member called out to do that?
B. Could you be wanting to mean that since the manager of the site has posted here that if someone posts here what could lead another to feel put down, that the posting of whatever could lead tht person to feel put down coud cause harm to the recipiant of the statement even though the intent of the poster of such posts that it is not their intent to cause harm?
C. Now if the above are true to you, could it be considered that there could be an issue here about what is known as {two wrongs do not make a right}?
D. What mental-health practice, if any, could you see in this situation, if you could, as the practice being analogous that could involve infliction of emotional distress?
Lou
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:951844
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20100321/msgs/952004.html