Guest guest Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 I've been sick with a painful, sleep-killing bladder infection for a week, and otherwise " out of it " for a while before that. So I haven't followed things closely of late, except that last recollection I did have of the list, it had deteriorated into almost nothing but back-biting personal attacks. When I just tuned in again, I found what seems to be some sort of agree-ment that Chuck and Venezia " admit " they are responsible (or more than others), and that their withdrawing from the list will somehow restore things to a much better state. From my obervtion over nearly a year, I have found Chuck the most valuable member, by far, in terms of solid scientific-and medical-based knowledge, who doesn't hesitate to call people of some of the most dangerous and simply wrong things that get put up here. Look back at the files using the search box at the top. DOM " T go on your memory of recent posts, or how they may have been represented. I've found Chuck's posts not only on-target, but respectful and far beyond the call of duty in their care and completeness. (It takes time and re-search to produce replies like his.) I can't recall any time I ever con-sidered him disrespectful, although some of the things slung around here would amke any human react. Venezia obviously has strong feelings about her illness and lack of effec- tive treatment (which seems to be what unites the list, in general), but she has some helpful things to say, mixed with what might be considered " extreme " rhetoric, which hasn't been uncommon on the list. I can't relate to her answers as well, not only for their style, but because--as I recall--she tends to deal with issues I haven't yet encountered, and may or may not in future. But when our health is almost systeamtically ingored by the " professionals " who are supposed to treat us (in the sense of improve or at least stabilize), and we suffer accordingly, high emotions are not suprising. I have the impression Venezia'general approach is what some members are comfortable with. I may have missed something along the way, buy certainly looking over the longer term, it would be a tragedy to lose Chuck. And I doubt losing Venetia would help more than hurt, though Chuck (in terms of imput that is valuable for ME) would be hard if not impossible to replace. If is unable or unwilling to provide a moderator, seems to me we need clear, enforceable and enforced rules. I've seen them work elsewhere. If that doesn't fly, would it be feasible to have two separate and (partly overlapping?) groups---one based on an approach where some degree of scientific or medical knowledge--and documentation--supports what otherwise what would be mainly, anecdotal, personal experience. (Of course one can't draw a clear line between the two--sone anecdotal exper- ience may turn out to be valid,at least in combination with others'...and lots of " scientific. medical " experience is flawed--and continues to pre- vail long after it has outlived its usefulness. Sorry if I'm repeating ideas or observations already aired in this brou- haha. I hope something sensible can be worked out, but if Chuck leaves this list, I would like to be able to follow him. That's not a personal judgement for or against anyone, just for my particular needs and approach to getting the best information, Perhaps this would have made a whole lot more sense had I been able to read all the relevant posts, but I got flabbergasted and tuned out pretty early. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 I second that emotion! [gg] > > Posted by: " brian cooper " brianevans_99@... > <mailto:brianevans_99@...?Subject=%20Re%3AChuck%20and%20Venezia> > brianevans_99 <brianevans_99> > > > Wed Oct 15, 2008 10:25 am (PDT) > > > I've been sick with a painful, sleep-killing bladder infection for a > week, and otherwise " out of it " for a while before that. So I haven't > followed things closely of late, except that last recollection I did > have of the list, it had deteriorated into almost nothing but > back-biting personal attacks. > > When I just tuned in again, I found what seems to be some sort of > agree-ment that Chuck and Venezia " admit " they are responsible (or > more than others), and that their withdrawing from the list will > somehow restore things to a much better state. > > >From my obervtion over nearly a year, I have found Chuck the most > valuable member, by far, in terms of solid scientific-and > medical-based knowledge, who doesn't hesitate to call people of some > of the most dangerous and simply wrong things that get put up here. > Look back at the files using the search box at the top. DOM " T go on > your memory of recent posts, or how they may have been represented. > > I've found Chuck's posts not only on-target, but respectful and far > beyond the call of duty in their care and completeness. (It takes time > and re-search to produce replies like his.) I can't recall any time I > ever con-sidered him disrespectful, although some of the things slung > around here would amke any human react. > > Venezia obviously has strong feelings about her illness and lack of > effec- tive treatment (which seems to be what unites the list, in > general), but she has some helpful things to say, mixed with what > might be considered " extreme " rhetoric, which hasn't been uncommon on > the list. I can't relate to her answers as well, not only for their > style, but because--as I recall--she tends to deal with issues I > haven't yet encountered, and may or may not in future. But when our > health is almost systeamtically ingored by the " professionals " who are > supposed to treat us (in the sense of improve or at least stabilize), > and we suffer accordingly, high emotions are not suprising. I have the > impression Venezia'general approach is what some members are > comfortable with. > > I may have missed something along the way, buy certainly looking over > the longer term, it would be a tragedy to lose Chuck. And I doubt > losing Venetia would help more than hurt, though Chuck (in terms of > imput that is valuable for ME) would be hard if not impossible to replace. > > If is unable or unwilling to provide a moderator, seems to me we > need clear, enforceable and enforced rules. I've seen them work elsewhere. > > If that doesn't fly, would it be feasible to have two separate and > (partly overlapping? > ) groups---one based on an approach where some degree of scientific or > medical knowledge--and documentation--supports what otherwise what > would be mainly, anecdotal, personal experience. (Of course one can't > draw a clear line between the two--sone anecdotal exper- > ience may turn out to be valid,at least in combination with > others'...and lots of " scientific. medical " experience is flawed--and > continues to pre- vail long after it has outlived its usefulness. > > Sorry if I'm repeating ideas or observations already aired in this > brou- haha. I hope something sensible can be worked out, but if Chuck > leaves this list, I would like to be able to follow him. That's not a > personal judgement for or against anyone, just for my particular needs > and approach to getting the best information, > > Perhaps this would have made a whole lot more sense had I been able to > read all the relevant posts, but I got flabbergasted and tuned out > pretty early. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.