Discussion To believe or not to believe? Is it one's job to make a definitive determination?

[LMFAO FOCKERS]

To continue the question / title of the thread:

​

If one believes it is their job to determine the truth, what's the purpose for the determination? Does that purpose serve any greater good?​

The purpose of this thread is not to vilify people but rather have a discussion about how to handle cases where one deems a life story to be untruthful. The focus is not on any particular member or situation.

There have been many times on this forum where people have made comments on a specific life story or situation. Often times the thread starts off well-intended. Then one person begins to question the veracity of the statements made. And then a barrage of questions / attacks / posts flow in, often time leaving the subject or the OP feeling attacked, harassed, embarrassed and/or alienated especially in cases where the person was being truthful about their life.

Aftermath: Now the person is left feeling really f'd up. Or they leave SS. We have no clue how psychologically strong or damaged a particular person is. Often times people here have dealt with bullying or have become ostracized from their community so much so that SS becomes their last place to connect, have human interaction or even gain a slither of hope. It is this factor that leads me to exercise caution when considering whether its useful to vocalize dissenting thoughts on a person's storyline; and if one deems their dissenting thoughts useful at all, exactly how that should be done in an effort to be constructive.

As such, it may be useful to consider that everything is not black and white and there are other choices.


When considering the veracity of a thread there are 4, not 2 possibilities to consider. I consider 3 of them to be truthful and 1 of them completely false, thereby expanding the idea of how one evaluates the content of a post. The possibilities I see are as follows:

1. The person is 100% lying (intentionally deceptive) (25% probability)
2. The person is 100% truthful (25% probability)
3. The person is suffering from some type of temporary delusions, PTSD, schizophrenia, etc. over the course of time encompassing a series of posts throughout a person's history. (25% probability and grey area of truth)
   • This may lead the person to say something like my sister is dead in one post. However in another post the person may say I can hear the cries of my sister over and over in the next room.
     • In this case the person may bounce around making conflicting albeit confusing statements such that it is difficult to understand their grasp on reality or whats happening in that moment. (Think about the army vet who beats up his wife / boss after a trigger because he thought he was back in a war zone.) In those specific moments the person is being as truthful as they know how to be.
     • It may also be the case the person has more than one sister. A stepsister by marriage. Or maybe even a cousin/best friend whom they refer to as a sister. But when you ask if they have a sister they tell you "no" because they respond to you from a literal familial perspective vs their typical colloquial perspective.
4. The person has dissociative identity, serious psychological / neurological trauma, or some other sort of deeper longer term delusional disorder that causes them to assume identities/personalities or characteristics of others. (25% probability and grey area truth)
   • In this case the person truly and 100% believes everything they are saying is truthful and proceeds to carry out their lives as if these things are 100% truthful.
     • In this case there is your truth and their truth. Now "the" truth is more confusing especially if you decide to engage with the person.

I assigned each of these reasons a probability because it may be useful to look at the situation from a mathematical perspective as an attempt to weigh the benefits and costs of how one responds to the specific thread/ situation. There are many ways to view what is considered truthful. Unless one is a doctor and has had in depth discussions with a person it is often virtually impossible to determine what the person's real truth is. Thus it may be helpful to ask questions with an open mind. This is very different than spewing accusations, looking for proof / evidence, and/or otherwise forcing everyone to view the truth as a version of 2 choices black and white.

Offering definitive proof may not be possible in most cases in this day and age. The reality is you may never really know. It is something every person has to become comfortable with at some point in life.


Using the categories outlined above, there is a 25% chance the person is a deceptive liar and a 75% chance the person is dealing in some version of the truth if not 100% truth. So I ask, if the chance is 3x greater that the person is functioning in some level of truth:

• is it not reasonable to take this under consideration when responding?
• is it possible that assuming the 25% probability that the person is lying, and posting a repetitive series of inflammatory remarks to "expose" the person serves no purpose or potentially does more harm than good to an otherwise fragile human being?
• does a person have to be telling the 100% truth in order to be "worthy" of support? / Does the person have to be 100% correct on the issue to be "worthy" of support?
• is it possible that one's view is too black and white? where is the gray? maybe ignoring the grey is part of the reason that one has arrived here in life?
• there are many other questions to consider, however in the interest of keeping this post readable I will stop here.

Anyway, I hope this post spawns safe, useful discussions, and introspection about how to treat other humans and how to treat the community, rather than turning into an a chitstorm about who told the truth, when, where etc...

 

[Rachel74]

Wow! It's a good wow and what you've put is things I've actually thought myself lately on SS.

 

[mynameispaige]

I completely agree. I've had all of these thoughts and wish more people on here took this into consideration.

 

[Deleted member 1465]

Sometimes I find myself wondering about the veracity of certain posts then I feel bad for doubting. Even if people arnt completely honest that doesn't necessarily mean they don't deserve support. I think the only real question is what is the approach that causes least harm. Is calling someone out uand causing a flamewar going to do any good? Is saying nothing going to be less harmful or more harmful?
Is it best just not to feed the trolls? Finally are there circumstances when one is duty bound to intervene to stop abuse?

 

[Stan]

First of all, great piece of writing @LMFAO FOCKERS . Excellent way to set the scene and explain the various type of people that may be on this forum.

To say that there are not people on this board who are not here for the main purposes of the board are fooling themselves. It is down to each individual to make that assessment themselves. I come to a point now that I just ignore them as it's less hassle. Why? Well some people get invested quite quickly in a story and anyone breaking into a thread to highlight the honesty of the poster is like an atheist storming a church during Sunday service and shouting anti religion slogans. You are not preaching to the choir, you are pissing on them (excuse the language). That is only going to cause a massive negative reaction from those who are in belief. But as pointed out by the OP, you can't determine whether it is a teenager doing it for shits and giggles or a person who has a MH condition that they crave and need this attention.

I am quite an avid reader both now and in my previous existence. What people don't know is that individuals have a writing style, its like a finger print. Have I seen members leave with a goodbye and come back as another username? I think I have. What do I do about it now? Nothing. What's the point or the value in doing so? None, just creates drama. If they are here for a bit of trolling, then we have played right into their hands.

So my stance is that I just ignore now. Do I hit the ignore button? No. I tend to like to watch where these people take their story. Do I try and educate those that I think are being duped? Hell no!

The OP mentions 'grey areas' a lot, and I think on this board we are mostly grey, very few individual stories are black or white.

My contact with the outside world is primarily through this board, I communicate in my way, some may think it's a bit inappropriate at times when you put the context of the forum's purpose in mind. But how can I criticise someone else's method without taking a damn good look at my own style and purpose?

I think the OP gave the best bit of advice in the goodbye thread that may started this conversation. If you don't like it or don't believe it, then ignore it. It's guaranteed drama to challenge and in the process makes the board 'tribal' in respect to the believers and non believers. Our strength comes from being united in common ways, don't let small things break that up.

I do find it funny that some 'interesting' posts get some attention, then others that are completely off the scale get none at all! Again, I have learnt the hard way not to say anything. I would love to give one of my inappropriate attempts at humour to them but currently sane enough not to do it.

So why would I be sad reading the OP's post? It's a great piece of writing and is really educational for active members of the forum. But I feel that within 24 hours it will be forgotten and the endless cycle of drama will start again. It's not as if we have not had similar discussions in the past.

Thanks again OP. I will certainly be actively considering your points when looking at posts.

 

[FTL.Wanderer]

There have been many times on this forum where people have made comments on a specific life story or situation. Often times the thread starts off well-intended. Then one person begins to question the veracity of the statements made. And then a barrage of questions / attacks / posts flow in, often time leaving the subject or the OP feeling attacked, harassed, embarrassed and/or alienated especially in cases where the person was being truthful about their life.

Aftermath: Now the person is left feeling really f'd up. Or they leave SS. We have no clue how psychologically strong or damaged a particular person is. Often times people here have dealt with bullying or have become ostracized from their community so much so that SS becomes their last place to connect, have human interaction or even gain a slither of hope. It is this factor that leads me to exercise caution when considering whether its useful to vocalize dissenting thoughts on a person's storyline; and if one deems their dissenting thoughts useful at all, exactly how that should be done in an effort to be constructive.

Here of all places, on a suicide forum, I hoped there wouldn't be cross-attacks, dismissals... I thought we'd all just understand how those kinds of reactions contribute to suicidality. What's the old saying? "If you can't say something nice..." Alas...

 

[LMFAO FOCKERS]

This is not a theocracy but an open forum where everyone should be allowed to give their opinion so long as they are respectful and considerate of others.

I understand your viewpoint and you are welcome to express anything you like.

I just dont see the value in calling anyone a liar. Lets assume you see value in it, and you can prove they are a liar now what?

• Whats the next step?
• Does the self-proclaimed detective think he/she was the only one who was smart enough to see it?
• Does the self-proclaimed detective get a prize?
• Do we now commit to burning the liar at the stake?
• How does one call someone else a liar in a respectful manner? (I dont know anyone that would feel great about character assassination.) If OP does feel good about being called a liar, then one might say the post accomplished their intent which was to elicit a response. Is that response helpful and something to feel excited about as the self-proclaimed detective?
• What has been accomplished?

I posed a bunch of questions in the post, thus which to generate a discussion. However I have not seen any attempt to answer any of them to understand the alternate viewpoint which I'd assume has a purpose. If there is no purpose i.e. nothing gained, then one could say the purpose is just to talk. If the purpose is just to talk why not engage in other conversation that has a more productive outcome than character assassination?

In the day and age of photoshop and fake news, I don't see the internet as a place to expect anything other than info: Some fake, some real. Should one go to facebook to call out all the fake posts?

• If so, what have you accomplished? (new fake news will be posted)
• If not, why do it here?

 

[Stan]

How does one call someone else a liar in a respectful manner? (I dont know anyone that would feel great about character assassination.) If OP does feel good about being called a liar, then one might say the post accomplished their intent which was to elicit a response. Is that response helpful and something to feel excited about as the self-proclaimed detective?

I don't think you can. My observation of certain situations I have seen a smouldering ember turn into a raging forest fire within minutes. personally i used to feel quite protective over the board and wanted to grill impostors, but realised in the process of doing that I did more damage than good. Personally, I like a bit of banter with a troll. Even though I adopt a non-interference approach now, I do get angry when I see people's emotions being played with as we are all already fragile to some degree. So I look at the consequences of me calling someone out. I get called a bully, reported or banned. IF the person was a troll, all they are going to do is create a new account and come back with another tale to tell, business as usual. So I have lost and they continue.

So if I am being honest, those people do rile me, they are taking advantage of members. But you cannot definitively state their intention.

If they issue a goodbye report and claim a method outlined as peaceful as painful, then I will pour scorn over it because that is then an obvious tactic of someone closing down avenues for a peaceful end. I nearly did it today but held back because it just wasn't bad enough, but I know their last statement on symptoms will be repeated for months to come putting members off the method and that is damaging!

 

[LMFAO FOCKERS]

​

If they issue a goodbye report and claim a method outlined as peaceful, then I will pour scorn over it because that is then an obvious tactic of someone closing down avenues for a peaceful end. I nearly did it today but held back because it just wasn't bad enough, but I know their last statement on symptoms will be repeated for months to come putting members off the method and that is damaging!​

​

​

This definitely has a purpose. The focus is on the method not the person, thus the result is to correct misinformation about the method not to attack the person. This is very useful.

​

​

Personally, I like a bit of banter with a troll. Even though I adopt a non-interference approach now, I do get angry when I see people's emotions being played with as we are all already fragile to some degree.​

...​

IF the person was a troll, all they are going to do is create a new account and come back with another tale to tell, business as usual. So I have lost and they continue.​

​

​

This makes sense. The purpose becomes a "fun" exercise. Everyone has fun until someone gets tired and taps out. A true troll will expose themselves eventually for everyone to see and will eventually tire at their own hand. No harm no foul. Wash rinse repeat the fun and games.

​

​

I don't think you can. My observation of certain situations I have seen a smouldering ember turn into a raging forest fire within minutes. personally i used to feel quite protective over the board and wanted to grill impostors, but realised in the process of doing that I did more damage than good.​

...​

Even though I adopt a non-interference approach now, I do get angry when I see people's emotions being played with as we are all already fragile to some degree.​

..​

So I look at the consequences of me calling someone out. I get called a bully, reported or banned.​

​

So if I am being honest, those people do rile me, they are taking advantage of members. But you cannot definitively state their intention.​

​

​

​

I totally get it. I've been there too with the frustration of trolls (particularly pro-lifers or entrapment posters) but similarly I realized it serves no purpose. Either I'm unnecessarily penalized and/or the person is made to feel like a piece of chit.

I think there are worse consequences that we may never know of when the person is not a troll per say. I think the assumption for most is that everyone who posts a perceived lie is a troll which is not the case. People may have much deeper issues going on. There is no point in intentionally inflicting harm on a person especially when I have no idea about their intentions. Nothing good can come out of it unless I enjoy making people miserable which says more about me than the person in question.

​

​

 

[Stan]

This definitely has a purpose. The focus is on the method not the person, thus the result is to correct misinformation about the method not to attack the person. This is very useful.

That's a tough one. If you see an outrageous symptom being mentioned and it is challenged, by default you are calling the person a liar. If it's in a goodbye thread then emotions are already charged. Hey presto - forest fire

 

[LMFAO FOCKERS]

That's a tough one. If you see an outrageous symptom being mentioned and it is challenged, by default you are calling the person a liar. If it's in a goodbye thread then emotions are already charged. Hey presto - forest fire

I'm not sure I'd call anyone with "outrageous" symptoms a liar. For example I know people who can't eat any fruit except apples due to crazy symptoms. Everyone's body is different. If one uses crazy symptoms as a proxy for themselves I would find that subjectively, unreasonable unless the person already has wild allergies similar to the fruit issue I mentioned. Albeit its not something I'd venture to call out as a lie. I probably wouldn't care enough about it.

 

[Soul]

I'm lost. What do you peeps mean by "an outrageous symptom" that is mentioned and then challenged? Do you mean when someone is reporting how they feel after taking whatever? If I think they're misrepresenting the method and afraid that others will be needlessly put off, can't I say "I'm sorry your eyes have popped out [or whatever] - that's not what normally happens when one takes M&Ms, so perhaps you should consider making yourself vomit"?

I mean: A challenge doesn't have to be unempathetic or disparaging, right?

 

[Morphosis]

I'm lost. What do you peeps mean by "an outrageous symptom" that is mentioned and then challenged? Do you mean when someone is reporting how they feel after taking whatever? If I think they're misrepresenting the method and afraid that others will be afraid when their time comes, can't I say "I'm sorry your eyes have popped out [or whatever] - that's not what normally happens when one takes M&Ms, so perhaps you should consider making yourself vomit"?

I mean: A challenge doesn't have to be unempathetic or disparaging, right?

I think it's regarding a thread earlier today when someone mentioned pain and choking on vomit/being unable to breathe after taking SN. It caused quite a stir and some fear for the method.

Sorry I know it's not funny but your phrasing made me literally laugh out loud re: eyes popping out after M&Ms. I am afflicted with the black humour common to nurses and police, it often helps me cope. @Stan also frequently makes me smile.

 

[Stan]

I'm not sure I'd call anyone with "outrageous" symptoms a liar. For example I know people who can't eat any fruit except apples due to crazy symptoms. Everyone's body is different. If one uses crazy symptoms as a proxy for themselves I would find that subjectively, unreasonable unless the person already has wild allergies similar to the fruit issue I mentioned. Albeit its not something I'd venture to call out as a lie. I probably wouldn't care enough about it.

I don't think you need to use the word liar, but showing signs of disbelief in a statement is a gateway to saying someone is either exaggerating or giving misinformation. Bit like someone mentioned recently that they were in pain, possibly chocking on their own vomit and hands going to sleep. my internal response was - well you are still a damn good typist with all that going on!

 

[Morphosis]

I don't think you need to use the word liar, but showing signs of disbelief in a statement is a gateway to saying someone is either exaggerating or giving misinformation. Bit like someone mentioned recently that they were in pain, possibly chocking on their own vomit and hands going to sleep. my internal response was - well you are still a damn good typist with all that going on!

Ha yeah I thought that myself but didn't say anything.
I have experienced vomiting to the point of being unable to breathe, and was at the time more concerned with my next gasp of oxygen. I certainly wasn't able to take time out to type about it.
But as someone mentioned, everyone is different and some people can cope with more than others. Unbearable pain for one person could be a niggling annoyance to another.

 

[Deleted member 1465]

I suspect in my final moments my uncorrected autocorrect would type something truly random and memorable for all the wrong reasons.