Can someone help me make sense of this?

[crazypsychstudent]

"This thread has jumped the shark of professional discourse and positive contribution, and is being closed."
I don't understand how threads can be locked due to this, yet certain individuals are allowed to make comments on almost every thread that is most definitely outside of professional discourse and positive contribution... Not much congruence there.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Pragma]

That thread was ridiculous.

 

[erg923]

Probably not.

If it makes anyone happy, I am increasingly busy these days (growing family and growing professional responsibilities) and will def be slowing in my comments on SDN.

 

[PsyDr]

There is a significant amount of discourse here which prioritizes what feels good over truth. As a result people tend to ask questions in hopes that the other posters will validate their own opinions.

Life doesn't work like that.

No poster here has a responsibility to do others work. Not everyone can get into a doctoral program. Some plans to get into programs are not going to work. Most people have to move at some point for their education. There are bad financial choices you can make. Not all treatments work. In a job that reimburses hourly, productivity dictates income. Etc.

The problem developes when someone asks a question, those with the knowledge of the subject reply, and the op attempts to justify why their Reply is wrong. This inquiry strategy never works. The fallback tends to be a claim that either op knows better or that the truth hurt their feelings. Try that with an accountant.

 

[MCParent]

A not-zero number of people who come to the board/the internet/in real life interpret any disagreement with them as a personal insult.

 

[WisNeuro]

Mods let a lot go. Generally closing down a thread when it has gone well beyond the point of redemption. AA has done it before, lots of times. Made sense to me. Feel free to discuss ways in which the world is unfair and how you should never ever be uncomfortable or offended by anyone else in this thread.

 

[deleted656923]

Yikes, I wasn't intending to start a revolution with my observation about erg923 on the Rowan University thread However, I feel it was something that needed to be said for a long time, and I'm glad other SDN members addressed this chronic pattern of negativity on the Psychology threads.

 

[WisNeuro]

To May to, To Mah To. Negativity, uncomfortable truths. Sides of a subjective coin.

 

[deleted656923]

To May to, To Mah To. Negativity, uncomfortable truths. Sides of a subjective coin.

Tomatoes are nice, but I don't think this applies to the behavior people were pointing out about the lack of tact or kindness on the part of certain members on the forum.

 

[WisNeuro]

It's very apropos. It's interesting that people are whining about lack of tact and people not seeing things from their point of view, but they're just as willing to tell other people their point of view is wrong on this issue. Outside of that, why does everything need to have a certain level of "tact" or kindness? This isn't a therapists office, this isn't your best friend. It's a mix of a variety of people in a profession, with very wide ranging views on things. Some of those views will be things you do not necessarily agree with. And you know what? That's life. You learn to deal with these people. Ignore them, debate them, that's your choice. I'm still of the opinion that anyone who can't take the light level of discourse and debate on this board has no business taking care of patients in a professional capacity.

 

[MCParent]

Outside of that, why does everything need to have a certain level of "tact" or kindness? This isn't a therapists office...

A therapist who is hung up on "tact" and "kindness" is probably going to be a pretty **** therapist. Sometimes the most empathic thing you can say to a patient is "welllllll so what you've been telling me is a load of ****."

 

[erg923]

Tomatoes are nice, but I don't think this applies to the behavior people were pointing out about the lack of tact or kindness on the part of certain members on the forum.

The best supervisor I have had had little tact and was not "kind," I suppose. He made a derogatory remark about female colleague and used to belch loudly during our supervision. He told me to shut-up once when we were watching tapes.

He cared about my training and success deeply, likely more than anyone else I have ever met.

 

[erg923]

A therapist who is hung up on "tact" and "kindness" is probably going to be a pretty **** therapist. Sometimes the most empathic thing you can say to a patient is "welllllll so what you've been telling me is a load of ****."

There is, generally, way too much coddling that goes on in psychotherapy. Meehl has a paper on this (of course).

 

[CheetahGirl]

Tomatoes are nice, but I don't think this applies to the behavior people were pointing out about the lack of tact or kindness on the part of certain members on the forum.

Just note: The ones who are debating the other side of the coin have either finished all their training and are licensed professionals working in the field or pretty darn close to finishing their "training." The ones who are holding strong with the perspective of being polite, tactful, and the opposite of rude in your comments, on this forum, are still in training (perhaps, empathiosis is an exception).

You meet all kinds of different chickens in the coops you train in and this changes your perspective about who you should be, who you can be, and who you are. This is why I brought in projective identification on the other thread. Others are disavowing some parts in themselves that one may dislike (i.e., rudeness), identifying it in others (namely, erg923) and spitting it back out as lack of tolerance for his behavior - which could be viewed as just as irritating as some may find him. Let him be and be who you want to be. You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink. No one is going to be polite because you think they should be or because you want them to coddle anyone (specifically, bright young minds that inquire about how to do what some of us do as a career choice or how we got here).

However, I will be polite on SDN, unless you @#$&%* pi$$ me off. Like that one time in band camp...on that thread...when that one women said some completely inappropriate crap to me. So be who you are...and who you want to be.

I will now change my tune from the Disney movie to Nirvana (suits me much better anyway): I'll sing it this time and thrash my head about...

Come as you are, as you were
As I want you to be
As a friend, as a friend
As an old enemy

Take your time, hurry up
The choice is yours, don't be late
Take a rest as a friend...

 

[cara susanna]

Honestly, it bothers me that I'm often lumped in as part of a "clique" just because I happen to share some of the same opinions as other posters on certain professional issues.

 

[clinpsyc87]

Just note: The ones who are debating the other side of the coin have either finished all their training and are licensed professionals working in the field or pretty darn close to finishing their "training." The ones who are holding strong with the perspective of being polite, tactful, and the opposite of rude in your comments, on this forum, are still in training (perhaps, empathiosis is an exception).

You meet all kinds of different chickens in the coops you train in and this changes your perspective about who you should be, who you can be, and who you are. This is why I brought in projective identification on the other thread. Others are disavowing some parts in themselves that one may dislike (i.e., rudeness), identifying it in others (namely, erg923) and spitting it back out as lack of tolerance for his behavior - which could be viewed as just as irritating as some may find him. Let him be and be who you want to be. You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink. No one is going to be polite because you think they should be or because you want them to coddle anyone (specifically, bright young minds that inquire about how to do what some of us do as a career choice or how we got

I can't wait for the old timers to start in on the fallacies and biases in this. I myself don't even know where to begin. Oh wait, they won't be heard.

 

[CheetahGirl]

I can't wait for the old timers to start in on the fallacies and biases in this. I myself don't even know where to begin. Oh wait, they won't be heard.

Who are you calling an "old timer," junior?

 

[Pragma]

I think that one just has to accept that on a board like this there is going to be a variety of opinions. I don't hesitate to give mine on issues and have had some heated disagreements with folks like erg in the past, but at the same time, you have to take into account the context. I'm a few years past postdoc now and know a lot more than I used to. There are posters with more experience than me too. If something comes off as dismissive, it might be that poster just trying to save the others some time and giving them something to think about.

Experience does not mean opinions are more valid on every topic, and not all experience is the same. But you have to respect it and also know how to understand that you don't know what you don't know. It's a professional message board - I give more credit to people who know what they are talking about. Innovative ideas are awesome in people early in training. But don't have the hubris to think that no one else has considered it before. Usually that isn't the case, and it is naive to think you know it all. That's part of why people come here.

Also, sometimes posters like myself only have a few minutes and just make a response on their phone. I don't have time always to go over every nuance and that can lead to misinterpreatation of posts sometimes. It's a message board. Deal with it.

 

[PavlovianRude]

.

 

[smalltownpsych]

When you get out there in the trenches and make life or death decisions and even take away people's freedoms, you realize that there is a lot more to this profession than being nice. If you can't handle a little sarcasm or disparaging condescending attitude, then how the heck are you going to deal with being attacked on an inpatient unit or the supervisor from hell or dealing with a patient who committed suicide during your treatment or being cross-examined on the witness stand or deal with a court-ordered meth using prostitute who shows up tweaked out in your office or the angry parent who you just reported for abuse or...? These are all actual experiences I have had as a licensed psychologist. I have actually not really had too many debates with erg and I find him pretty funny at times. Some more food for thought is that I have never seen anyone on the psychiatry forum get offended by his posts and i have seen a few that were just as condescending or snarky. They just give it right back.

 

[empathiosis]

Such an impressive display of groupthink! I feel lucky for the opportunity to see SDN's best and brightest all gathered in one place to explain how the world works. Such a prodigious show of intellect to prove that hey, it's okay to be a jerk, as long as: a) you're alive; or b) on the internet or c) training to be a psychologist or an actual psychologist and d) have training in logic and can use it against others, and most importantly e) have friends to back you up.

Now that I understand how life works, I will be so much happier and better able to contribute to SDN in an acceptable way that won't be jumping over the shark of professional discourse.

Thanks, kids! I wish I had met you earlier in my career, I would have been spared so much heartache. (Oh wait ... I did meet you earlier! I've been on SDN for years! But I just didn't listen! Now that I have seen the error of my ways, and drunken from the font of your wisdom, I can continue to learn from you and become a better person, more able to cope with the many challenges that life, and our profession, presents on a daily basis.) Love to you all!

 

[erg923]

Such an impressive display of groupthink! I feel lucky for the opportunity to see SDN's best and brightest all gathered in one place to explain how the world works. Such a prodigious show of intellect to prove that hey, it's okay to be a jerk, as long as: a) you're alive; or b) on the internet or c) training to be a psychologist or an actual psychologist and d) have training in logic and can use it against others, and most importantly e) have friends to back you up. Not that you need them though, because you -- yes, YOU -- you would be fine on your own cause you're just so smart and capable, you little truth warrior!

Now that I understand how life works, I will be so much happier and better able to contribute to SDN in an acceptable way that won't be jumping over the shark of professional discourse.

Thanks, kids! I wish I had met you earlier in my career, I would have been spared so much heartache. (Oh wait ... I did meet you earlier! I've been on SDN for years! But I just didn't listen! No accounting for stupidity is there? Hopefully, now that I have seen the error of my ways, and drunken from the font of your wisdom, I can continue to learn from you and become every day a better person, more able to cope with the many challenges that life, and our profession, presents on a daily basis.) Love to you all!

Lets get a few things straight here.

The people who come here and post are accomplished professionals, both academic, clinical, and most often a blend of both of the two. We want nothing more than to guide those come here to decisions that will maximally benefit them AND the integrity of profession. We are all busy, and do not always have to time to preface every retort with, "Please oh please, please please dont think I'm being harsh, but...." None of my supervisors or faculty ever did that. How bout yours?

I refuse to believe that you have never had to deal with personality clashes during the course of your training. And that's exactly what this is. Nothing more. Nothing less. No need to throw keyboard tantrums about, aight? Not to mention drag this nonsense on endlessly through multiple threads. Lets ALL put our big boy and big girl pants on now and be done with it.

 

[empathiosis]

Lighten up, tiger.

 

[PsyDr]

Such an impressive display of groupthink! I feel lucky for the opportunity to see SDN's best and brightest all gathered in one place to explain how the world works. Such a prodigious show of intellect to prove that hey, it's okay to be a jerk, as long as: a) you're alive; or b) on the internet or c) training to be a psychologist or an actual psychologist and d) have training in logic and can use it against others, and most importantly e) have friends to back you up. Not that you need them though, because you -- yes, YOU -- you would be fine on your own cause you're just so smart and capable, you little truth warrior!

Now that I understand how life works, I will be so much happier and better able to contribute to SDN in an acceptable way that won't be jumping over the shark of professional discourse.

Thanks, kids! I wish I had met you earlier in my career, I would have been spared so much heartache. (Oh wait ... I did meet you earlier! I've been on SDN for years! But I just didn't listen! No accounting for stupidity is there? Hopefully, now that I have seen the error of my ways, and drunken from the font of your wisdom, I can continue to learn from you and become every day a better person, more able to cope with the many challenges that life, and our profession, presents on a daily basis.) Love to you all!

So sarcasm is bad, unless you are using it. Got it.

 

[Ollie123]

Am I the only one who sees some irony in demands that psychologists and posters all be warm and fuzzy and nice and puppies and rainbows and sunshines almost invariably devolve into personal attacks about erg's suitability to be a psychologist and caliber as a human being?

He can certainly come across as bitter, sarcastic, biting and snarky at times. I'm not sure I've ever seen him go quite as "ad hominem" as others here though and when he does I usually see it done in retaliation. I won't claim to speak for the moderators, but I generally see them let most anything remotely on-topic go regardless of its characteristics (forcefulness, accuracy, etc.). The other thread devolved into being about erg himself. We have a select few posters who seem to really abhor him and turn multiple threads into discussions of their personal dislike of him (sometimes provoked, other times unprovoked). These are the ones that tend to get closed. That distinction has always seemed pretty clear to me and seems to be reasonably consistently enforced across all the boards here.

 

[CheetahGirl]

I see it, Ollie. That's why I said something in the first place and keep at it.

All I have to say now...hopefully, in conclusion...unless I find something else terribly ironic or this thread gets locked (whichever is first) is:

Jedi Knights...resist the Dark Side...it is strong in some.

 

[WisNeuro]

Am I the only one who sees some irony in demands that psychologists and posters all be warm and fuzzy and nice and puppies and rainbows and sunshines almost invariably devolve into personal attacks about erg's suitability to be a psychologist and caliber as a human being?

We love hypocrisy here on SDN

 

[ClinicalABA]

While my ultimate preference is for posts that are a combination of "polite (leaning more towards neutral)" and "valid", I'll take "rude" and "valid" over "polite" and "invalid" any day. It's also possible to be "hypocritical" and "valid" concurrently. For chrissakes, this is an online message board- focus on the validity of the information, not your perception of the intended tone in which it is delivered.

 

[clinpsyc87]

We love hypocrisy here on SDN

You love hypocrisy when it suits you, and the fact that you don't see the irony of only calling out hypocrisy of people you disagree with is, well...

 

[deleted656923]

We love hypocrisy here on SDN

And this is why the SDN Psychology forums never seem to retain many active members beside the "old guard."

 

[smalltownpsych]

And this is why the SDN Psychology forums never seem to retain many active members beside the "old guard."

It might be the other way around and the posters who derail threads because they feel offended and then leave in a huff are the issue. I have seen very active message boards with much harsher back and forths. In all honesty, if people stopped posting any type of flip, humorous, facetious, satirical, or sarcastic comments, I might be less inclined to participate myself.

 

[CheetahGirl]

In all honesty, if people stopped posting any type of flip, humorous, facetious, satirical, or sarcastic comments, I might be less inclined to participate myself.

And with that said...

I ❤ SDN.

 

[Peacemaker36]

It seems to me that our most active members have an implicit, shared understanding of what constitutes acceptable behavior on this message board.

It's also clear that this vision is not shared by a sizable number of people who feel hurt, angry or disgusted. Some of these people make their feelings known, others vote with their feet.

Does SDN have some kind of code of ethics, or mission statement, or anything else the community might look to for guidance? Something more substantial than the judgment of the moderators and/or feeling which way the wind is blowing?

 

[cara susanna]

The other SDN boards are way worse than this one, imo.

 

[MCParent]

And this is why the SDN Psychology forums never seem to retain many active members beside the "old guard."

This has come up before and I continue to fail to understand it.

How is it possible to have a "guard"? This is an internet forum. It is literally impossible to force you out.

What I see more often is people posting nonsense and then reacting badly to correction, e.g., "psyds get more clinical experience than phds", someone posts the appic stats, OP throws a fit.

 

[deleted343839]

You know, I'm sure there have been many sociological studies of online message board communities, but as a participant in several online forums over the years (for both professional and personal interests) I've come to recognize some common themes. Most active boards have a core group of "regulars" without which the board would not function well. In truth, the composition of the "regulars" is always in a state of slow evolution. They don't all think with one mind, but they do share a tendency to value participation over the need to avoid conflict.

When a person is offended by something in the perceived tone or content of the board an easy explanation is that the regular participants are conspiratorial or clique-ish, which is generally not the case. Often, the offense is centered at first on one or two posters, and then when other posters fail to share in that individual's butthurt then it becomes a parade of escalating complaints and accusations that would make a really good list of "thinking error" examples. Hence SDN and other boards have icons like this:

It is true that, as in most communities, the broad "community guidelines" are subject to interpretation, and there are unwritten norms for behavior. That is, I believe, the nature of human communities virtual and traditional, and part of the spice of life.

 

[WisNeuro]

Is the "old guard" anything like the "Republican Guard?" Or the National Guard? And is "Old Guard" just code for "doesn't bitch and moan when someone provides factual data which does not correspond to my worldview?"

 

[smalltownpsych]

I have been posting on this board for almost two years now. I enjoy the interchange and the opportunity to have collegial discussions about the field. I started participating when I got the job in this town. Not only is it a small town, it is also very isolated and this little online community helps me feel connected to the psychology community at large. I also wish that I had found it many years ago because it would have been helpful for me. I have had disagreements with several of the regulars over various issues. Sometimes it is a matter of opinion and sometimes it is over a matter of fact. When it is a factual matter, I take the evidence in and reformulate my perspectives given the new information. When it is a matter of opinion, I try to see their perspective and also to provide my own perspective. I do not believe it is effective or even reasonable to commit to trying to force others agree with my opinions. That would be egocentrical and the path to tyranny.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

The SDN Terms of Service (TOS) and Online Service Agreement can be found here: http://www.studentdoctor.net/online-service-agreement/

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

The other SDN boards are way worse than this one, imo.

When I was a Senior Mod in the early days of SDN I would cover the Pre-Allo forum every once in awhile...it was a hot garbage fire of gunners and malcontents. This place is a stroll in the park compared to that forum.

It did provide the impetus for the WAMC Thread, so I guess it wasn't all bad.

 

[CheetahGirl]

Ancedote du jour: I don't care what anyone says about SDN...if I'm not super busy...you'll see me here - rude, crude, ignorant, brilliant, loving...whatever form.

I was DYING to get into a clinical psychology doctoral program, it's all I wanted from a career, and got an offer in the 11th hour from a professional school (>$200K debt), having interviewed and wait-listed at my top choices. I was going to take it, but I had little babies then and my husband (although supportive) was business-minded and 110% against that kind of debt. Jon Snow gave me some solid advice (he was working in field and on SDN from time to time). After a back and forth with him, I released the offer with plans to apply the following year (it was my second year applying). Then, I got a funded offer a few MONTHS later. (I am a lucky duck. )

And I'm not even going to mention a special someone who gave me feedback at internship time about my essays...being overly psychodynamic at the time, the perspective was extraordinary and on target....revised it and matched at my #1. Maybe these old timer SDN, National Guards were harsh (they both rejected my rose-colored vision), but hell, if it didn't get me where I wanted to go. Thank you very much.

And now, you folks are helping me figure out my dissertation acknowledgements. I love it.

I owe SDN my patronage.

 

[clinpsyc87]

Ancedote du jour: I don't care what anyone says about SDN...if I'm not super busy...you'll see me here - rude, crude, ignorant, loving...whatever form.

I was DYING to get into a clinical psychology doctoral program, it's all I wanted from a career, and got an offer in the 11th hour from a professional school (>$200K debt), having interviewed and wait-listed at my top choices. I was going to take it, but I had little babies then and my husband (although supportive) was business-minded and 110% against that kind of debt. Jon Snow gave me some solid advice (he was working in field and on SDN from time to time). After a back and forth with him, I released the offer with plans to apply the following year (it was my second year applying). Then, I got a funded offer a few MONTHS later. (I am a lucky duck. )

And I'm not even going to mention a special someone who gave me feedback at internship time about my essays...being overly psychodynamic at the time, the perspective was extraordinary and on target....revised it and matched at my #1. Maybe these old timer SDN, National Guards were harsh (they both rejected my rose-colored vision), but hell, if it didn't get me where I wanted to go. Thank you very much.

And now, you folks are helping me figure out my dissertation acknowledgements. I love it.

I owe SDN my patronage.

This is one of an endless string of false dichotomies. All we're saying is not only would it not be a burden for people to not go out of their way to add minor insult, it would be faster. You know, after thinking about this, I've come to this conclusion: my irritation is derived partly from the fact that I just have never once found erg funny. Ever. He finds himself funny (Dunning-Kruger) but many of us simply don't.

 

[CheetahGirl]

This is one of an endless string of false dichotomies.

I'm sharing my SDN love and you're going on and on about...

not only would it not be a burden for people to not go out of their way to add minor insult, it would be faster.

Says who?! Says you?!

There's a nice process in developmental psychology called maturation, and that, my friend, is not a false dichotomy. What is the false dichotomy here is the choice to perpetuate this stance of erg923 being a meanie butt-cheek. Just because some view him as the bully, why contribute to the bullying back? That's the irony and the hypocrisy.

Flip the coin and look at it from the other side (although this is a mult-sided coin, is it not?). Did you not see my Mr. Rogers post? Strive to accept people the way they are...it will serve you well if you do psychological intakes to determine how best to evaluate someone's psychological make-up and his/her subsequent goals....NOT YOUR GOALS. (Do you do intakes? Are you there yet? At this point, clinpsyc87, it would be helpful for me to know your level of training so I don't go over or under your head...you can PM if you want to keep it on the DL).

It is a burden to be someone or something you are not. That is what is a burden.

 

[deleted343839]

The SDN Terms of Service (TOS) and Online Service Agreement can be found here: http://www.studentdoctor.net/online-service-agreement/

Two key quotes from the TOS:

"Be courteous and contribute positively. If you’re not contributing to the forums in a positive manner, you may receive a warning or have your account temporarily or permanently closed."

"Harassment and Flame-Wars burn everyone. Be courteous. Just ignore those members that can’t discuss topics professionally."

Ah, the dialectic of SDN.

 

[clinpsyc87]

I'm sharing my SDN love and you're going on and on about...



Says who?! Says you?!

There's a nice process in developmental psychology called maturation, and that, my friend, is not a false dichotomy. What is the false dichotomy here is the choice to perpetuate this stance of erg923 being a meanie butt-cheek. Just because some view him as the bully, why contribute to the bullying back? That's the irony and the hypocrisy.

Flip the coin and look at it from the other side (although this is a mult-sided coin, is it not?). Did you not see my Mr. Rogers post? Strive to accept people the way they are...it will serve you well if you do psychological intakes to determine how best to evaluate someone's psychological make-up and his/her subsequent goals....NOT YOUR GOALS. (Do you do intakes? Are you there yet? At this point, clinpsyc87, it would be helpful for me to know your level of training so I don't go over or under your head...you can PM if you want to keep it on the DL).

It is a burden to be someone or something you are not. That is what is a burden.

Is the point of all of this that I should change my interaction style with Erg et al? Just since hypocrisy is a staff favorite and all

 

[WisNeuro]

I think the point was, erg et al. ain't gonna change. Some people like it, some don't. So, you can deal with it, or rage against the machine.

 

[CheetahGirl]

Yes. What he said.

My explicit point to you is be the change you want to see. If you want politeness, courteousness, tactful wittiness, (insert adjective here), be that person...but leave well-enough alone when it comes to others' styles. Unless you want to bitch and complain...then, keep on going, but it really is futile at this point. And not because erg923 has massive support and 'won' the duel. Those of us who seem like we are pro-erg923 are actually pro-individualism, pro-autonomy and pro-realism...in my opinion. Haters are going to hate. (Not that anyone said they hated each other.)

One good thing from this discussion may be that you figured out below:

You know, after thinking about this, I've come to this conclusion: my irritation is derived partly from the fact that I just have never once found erg funny

Good. Self-awareness is always a good thing...in my book.

I'm done with the ad hominem. I'm going to whip out my "Mom Voice" and infantilize the entire board in a minute by yelling "WORRY ABOUT YOURSELF!," like I tell my kids.

 

[clinpsyc87]

Yes. What he said.

My explicit point to you is be the change you want to see. If you want politeness, courteousness, tactful wittiness, (insert adjective here), be that person...but leave well-enough alone when it comes to others' styles. Unless you want to bitch and complain...then, keep on going, but it really is futile at this point. And not because erg923 has massive support and 'won' the duel. Those of us who seem like we are pro-erg923 are actually pro-individualism, pro-autonomy and pro-realism...in my opinion. Haters are going to hate.

One good thing from this discussion may be that you figured out below:



Good. Self-awareness is always a good thing...in my book.

I'm done with the ad hominem. I'm going to whip out my "Mom voice" and infantilize the entire board in a minute by yelling "WORRY ABOUT YOURSELF!," like I tell my kids.

Actually, I hear them right now, in the other room..."Moooooommmmmm, he tooooook my caaaaaarrrrrrr!" That's my cue...

So stop worrying about me and worry about... yourself? I find neuro is remarkably absent in going out of his way to tear down your points by attacking peripheral issues, the WisNeuro Special so to speak

 

[CheetahGirl]

So stop worrying about me and worry about... yourself?

Ok. Well played.

And I don't mind anyone on the board taking down my points - I admit to being pointless, tangential or just plain wrong at times. It usually leads to self-awareness or some sort of educational insight on my part.

Have a good evening then,

CheetahGirl
(poster-child for Healthy Narcissism...look it up )

 

[WisNeuro]

That one was on the house. You're welcome.