Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
I have the distinct feeling that some characters are creating bogus accounts just to vote and push the poll in their preferred direction... Good thing IP addresses don't lie.
You're kidding? Surely people have better things to do? Well, I can check.
You're kidding? Surely people have better things to do? Well, I can check.
wouldn't it show them as brand new people? The join date I mean? or would it take the IP and push the date back?
Actually, that's what sparked my suspicion. Quite a few NEW people are commenting on these threads, that have only 2 or 3 posts. From there I thought of the poll votes, which are anonymous for everyone but the sysop.
Actually, I was thinking aloud. I wasn't asking you to check anything. It doesn't really affect me one way or the others, but, seriously, how many times have you seen 63 different people come out of the woods in Clarity and vote in any one issue? Furthermore, how seriously can you take an overwhelming vote for more moderation from people that, for the most part, are lurkers and not active participants?
Actually, I was thinking aloud. I wasn't asking you to check anything. It doesn't really affect me one way or the others, but, seriously, how many times have you seen 63 different people come out of the woods in Clarity and vote in any one issue? Furthermore, how seriously can you take an overwhelming vote for more moderation from people that, for the most part, are lurkers and not active participants?
I think some people are going to read definitively , and refer to outcomes they see as part of the reading. The counterpart to that can be those who offer less definitive readings, more "what ifs" ...sharing of how a reading played out in the past. even suggesting that a reading may only refer to the way things are heading right now.
The responsibility for doctors as well for mental health professionals is "first do no harm" ....In Divination readings, I personally think that emphatically squashing a person's hopes is definitely under this umbrella...regardless of how 'negative' a reading may look at first glance.
BUt everybody knows doctors have different bedside manners..some are rude and overly clinical, and others are kinder, more people oriented. My mom saw a doctor about her blood sugar reading which was just over the normal reading and he coldly told her "you have diabetes, that's it, you need to do this, that and the other thing, blah, blah...." and he sent her home crying and all upset. His approach was was not only uncaring and rather cruel ( as she had been a chocolate fanatic for years and felt her whole life was collapsing, I am not kidding!) but he was also not entirely correct. Other doctors had a softer approach and worked with her on modifying diet and other strategies...she is allowed to have occasional chocolates, eg.
My point is though that a doctor doesnt lose his license for having poor manners. and a patient is free to go get a second opinion. In this forum, we have the opprtunity to suggest counter approaches to readings, it isnt like the querent has to accept any one's word as law.
what often has bothered me is not the readings that are definitive...BUT that many times, querents come in with hopefulness and very auspicious readings, only to be told "dont get your hopes up " in so many words. That I think is just as harmful as anything else. Hope is a thing with wings, as they say, and I love to see the potential for hopefulness cultivated.
I am not talking about sugar-coating a reading that bodes ill for the question .... BUt especially readings that are hopeful - - should be treated with respect !!
More than I have ever seen definitive readings as potentially 'harmful" ( hardly ever, really) I have seen unnecessary analysis take all the sweetness out of a reading or an idea.
BUt everybody knows doctors have different bedside manners..some are rude and overly clinical, and others are kinder, more people oriented. My mom saw a doctor about her blood sugar reading which was just over the normal reading and he coldly told her "you have diabetes, that's it, you need to do this, that and the other thing, blah, blah...." and he sent her home crying and all upset. His approach was was not only uncaring and rather cruel ( as she had been a chocolate fanatic for years and felt her whole life was collapsing, I am not kidding!) but he was also not entirely correct. Other doctors had a softer approach and worked with her on modifying diet and other strategies...she is allowed to have occasional chocolates, eg.
My point is though that a doctor doesnt lose his license for having poor manners. and a patient is free to go get a second opinion. In this forum, we have the opprtunity to suggest counter approaches to readings, it isnt like the querent has to accept any one's word as law.
what often has bothered me is not the readings that are definitive...BUT that many times, querents come in with hopefulness and very auspicious readings, only to be told "dont get your hopes up " in so many words. That I think is just as harmful as anything else. Hope is a thing with wings, as they say, and I love to see the potential for hopefulness cultivated.
I am not talking about sugar-coating a reading that bodes ill for the question .... BUt especially readings that are hopeful - - should be treated with respect !!
More than I have ever seen definitive readings as potentially 'harmful" ( hardly ever, really) I have seen unnecessary analysis take all the sweetness out of a reading or an idea.
I would also point out others do this too sometimes only in a much more definate way...yet you never comment on that do you. There are negative promises of outcome too yet you don't see those..... And who is to say what is 'unecessary analysis', thats a totally subjective judgment. .
Happy Shredded Readings !!..
Trojan,
Over the years , I have seen many instances of shredded hope .......I just thought
I would mention it, since it strikes me as part of this discussion. Why would you think I wouldnt feel the same way about negative promises of outcome?! Of course I do.....but a certain thing that has always puzzled me is why sometimes a very hopeful reading will be over-analyzed to the point where even a 14.6 or a 50.6 is looked upn with a kind of cynical suspicion
all seemingly to just be sure one doesnt go away with "false hope" .......that makes no sense to me. I am not talking about promises, which personally I find contrary to the Book of Changes, but just acknowledging the potential.
what I think you really want is for definitive readings to be banned completely. Unfortunately , this is not what the majority of newbie querents seem to want at all. BUt besides that, it just doesnt make sense that if you felt so strongly for the querents, you wouldnt be more inclined to offer your own voice!
Trojan, you were saying that none of this is the real problem in your opinion.
I have seen folks say something is a definite--but while I'm in agreement with you that that isn't right as a rule,I honestly don't think that' the big problem.
That's what's bothering *you* evidently.
What concerns me more is that of attitudes flying around.
I never disliked *you* at all, and never had one porblem with you or even a negative thought* about you.I'm totally surprised that you believe you're not heard..
.This whole thing makes me think that perhaos a "Those who are furious" thread(can't remember the Italian) would be useful[.
Because then you could call out the perpetrators by name,and get it off your chest.I can see the value of that myself, because right now all this palaver and blaming from many folks is getting on my nerves.
Trojan, I just have to say no one, esp me, has missed your point. (How could we?) It is the ideas for the remedy that are different. Talk about 38 and 6 being similar...Dobro should read this thread.
there is no law in the universe that says you have to answer back.
Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).