|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
 Posted - 02/25/2006 : 16:36:09 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by marfknox
Who said anything about universally shared standards. There are always social standards of decorum. They are not clearly set out. they are largely based on an intuitive sense. Otherwise the word "rude" would have no meaning. By telling me to not defend my own sense of decorum, you are doing exactly what you are telling me not to do.
By telling you to mind your own business I'm guilty of butting into yours? How does that work again? Look, this isn't the first time where you've felt the need to comment upon something not even directed at you, but which you somehow found offensive anyway. I'm just suggesting that if a remark isn't directed at you, then don't worry about it. Is that a little more clear?
quote:
And as far as "resented" goes, how would you even know that about anyone other than yourself? Are you only speaking for yourself? And if so, how petty would you be for resenting me when I've come out and admitted my criticism of you was a mistake.
I'm saying constantly harping on the tone of other people's remarks is a good way to piss people off. I don't care what you find rude. I said I don't need to hear it from you, and I'm not going to censor myself for your sake. Either get a thicker skin or stop reading my comments. I'll be pretty happy with either.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 02/25/2006 16:37:15 |
 |
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 02/25/2006 : 16:39:23 [Permalink]
|
Humbert wrote: quote:
Anyway, the point is some of us here know a bit about the types of material from which Storm takes her ideas. It seems many times you are far too eager to jump in and start accusing me or other members of this forum of impropriety, when it is often the case that you do not know the whole story.
Does it even occur to you that anyone new to the forum or who hasn't read your earlier exchanges with storm would be privy to that info, and thus they are not unreasonable to assume you are being rude? If you are going to write something that depends on something outside of that discussion to make sense, then you should include that outside information in your posting.
Tell ya what - I'll say logical fallacy via "ad hominin attack" instead of "rude". That way I'll be speaking in skeptic rhetoric and no one will resent me.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 02/25/2006 : 16:52:08 [Permalink]
|
Humbert wrote:quote:
By telling you to mind your own business I'm guilty of butting into yours?
Oh, you were telling me to mind my own business? What does that even mean on a public forum???
Humbert wrote:quote:
How does that work again? Look, this isn't the first time where you've felt the need to comment upon something not even directed at you, but which you somehow found offensive anyway.
Oh, so you are saying that it is proper decorum to not respond to statements that are originally directed toward someone else, even on a public forum. To quote someone else from this forumL “I suggest you worry less about policing the decorum of the other members, as your standards often will not be universally shared and your presumptive reprimands resented.”
quote:
I'm saying constantly harping on the tone of other people's remarks is a good way to piss people off. I don't care what you find rude. I said I don't need to hear it from you, and I'm not going to censor myself for your sake. Either get a thicker skin or stop reading my comments. I'll be pretty happy with either.
Humbert, I'm not “offended” by people's rudeness. I think it damages the quality of the debate. I think it interferes with reason by distracting from the real issue and causing emotions to run high. When people feel personally attacked, they are less likely to be open-minded, and the whole conversation suffers. You seem to agree with that general principle since you are encouraging me to not “piss people off”.
If you really didn't care about what I find rude, then why are we evening having this exchange. You said something. I criticized what you said. YOu defended yourself. I agreed with your defense and apologized. It should have ended there, but instead you come up and tell me that my entire critical approach regarding personal attacks (which are a logical fallacy in a debate) is out of line.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 02/25/2006 : 17:15:49 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by marfknox
If you really didn't care about what I find rude, then why are we evening having this exchange. You said something. I criticized what you said. YOu defended yourself. I agreed with your defense and apologized. It should have ended there, but instead you come up and tell me that my entire critical approach regarding personal attacks (which are a logical fallacy in a debate) is out of line.
These are not formal debates are you are not a debate moderator. Bitch about the tone of my posts all you want, but I'm going to continue to adhere to my standards, not yours. Your criticism is noted and I choose to ignore it. If you want to continue to play hall monitor that's your business.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 02/25/2006 : 17:59:04 [Permalink]
|
Humbert wrote: quote:
These are not formal debates are you are not a debate moderator. Bitch about the tone of my posts all you want, but I'm going to continue to adhere to my standards, not yours. Your criticism is noted and I choose to ignore it. If you want to continue to play hall monitor that's your business.
I did not criticize the tone of your post. I criticized its content. We are all guilty at one time or another of logical fallacies, especially those of prejudicial language and personal attacks, or just plain confusing others by leaving out info that is necessary for comprehension. When I make those mistakes, I certainly hope someone will point it out for me. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 02/25/2006 17:59:37 |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 02/25/2006 : 19:55:42 [Permalink]
|
Gee guys, I don't read fights on this forum very often. Glad to see it's normal here after all.
I'm not saying anyone has to agree with Storm, but is it really necessary to be sarcastic and rude? If you've given up replying to her civilly, why not just ignore the thread? Or give a minimal reply? |
| Edited by - beskeptigal on 02/25/2006 20:47:37 |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 02/25/2006 : 20:43:03 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
...
Well, as an RN by profession, and one who has paid his dues in a trauma center ER, I'll say it again....
In my experience, if you come through an ER complaining of pain/nausea and you are actually throwing up your stomach contents, you are automatically getting IV fluids and an anti-emetic.
Dispute it all you want, I have administered this treatment to dozens of people over the years.
There is definitely some variation, by region (and by individual doctor for that matter), to what is the SOP for certian common symptoms.
It isn't so much variation by region, Dude, it's variation by physician with the majority saving treatment with antiemetics for only the most intractable vomiting or once an infection as cause has been ruled out. I did a quick Google search and took the first treatment sites on the list. Most of them discussed gastroenteritis as if diarrhea were the only symptom, but a few did mention antiemetics. Only PostGraduate Medicine noted antiemetics in a casual way as if it were routine.
Post Grad Medquote:
...
Severely dehydrated patients need intravenous (IV) fluids to rapidly restore fluid balance...
3. Control symptoms.
When symptoms are particularly bothersome, antiemetic and antimotility agents are sometimes indicated...
And Wikipedia stated a single dose of anti-diarrheal med was OK.
quote:
but an appropriate single dose [of Loperamide] will not slow down the duration of the disease (Wingate et al, 2001).
Loperamide is not recommended in children, especially in children younger than 2 years of age, as it may cause systemic toxicity due to an immature blood brain barrier, and oral rehydration therapy remains the main stay treatment for children.
The rest either did not mention anti-emetics or mentioned them as a last resort.
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000252.htm
quote:
The objective of treatment is to replace fluids and electrolytes (salt and minerals) lost by diarrhea. Antibiotic therapy is not effective in viral illness. Antidiarrheal medications are generally not given, as they may prolong the infectious process. Self-care measures to avoid dehydration include drinking electrolyte solutions (available over-the-counter) to replace fluids lost by diarrhea.
http://www.merck.com/mrkshared/mmanual/section19/chapter265/265a.jsp
quote:
The mainstay of treatment for diarrhea and vomiting of any cause is to give appropriate fluids and electrolytes.
http://www.emedicine.com/med/topic856.htm#section~treatment
quote:
Administering antiemetics and antidiarrheal agents to small children is not recommended.
http://web.uct.ac.za/depts/mmi/jmoodie/gastro2.html
quote:
Treatment: No specific treatment of viral infection is available nor is it really required.
Treatment is aimed at prevention and/or treatment of dehydration by oral and/or intravenous fluids and electrolytes..
http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Gastroenteritis_an_overview?Open
quote:
Avoiding anti-vomiting or anti-diarrhoea drugs unless prescribed or recommended by your doctor, because these medications will keep the infection inside your body.
http://www.drreddy.com/gastro.html
quote:
Usually we try to make sure a child stays properly hydrated, and wait until the virus has run its course.
http://hgic.clemson.edu/factsheets/HGIC3720.htm
quote:
Medications, including antibiotics (which have no effect on viruses) and other treatments, should be avoided unless specifically recommended by a physician.
http://www.merck.com/mmhe/sec09/ch122/ch122a.html
quote:
For adults, a doctor may give a drug, either as an injection or as a suppository, to control severe vomiting. These drugs usually are not given to young children.
ED doctors can sometimes follow the give 'em a drug and send them out' routine but that isn't appropriate treatment. Patients should get IV fluids and advice on managing the symptoms with gut rest and gradual re-introduction of fluids. A doc who gives an antiemetic either has the philosophy it keeps the patient from returning or if a patient is sick enough to come in they need one. Most EDs do not routinely give anti-emetics, but a few obviously do.
I understand where your assumption came from about Storm getting drugs in the ED but it is not the most common approach. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 02/25/2006 : 21:00:00 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by marfknox
Does it even occur to you that anyone new to the forum or who hasn't read your earlier exchanges with storm would be privy to that info, and thus they are not unreasonable to assume you are being rude? If you are going to write something that depends on something outside of that discussion to make sense, then you should include that outside information in your posting.
And...quote:
When I make those mistakes, I certainly hope someone will point it out for me.
Okay. It is unreasonable to assume that H. was being rude, especially since you didn't assume it, you jumped to that conclusion, at the same time you were criticizing H. for apparently jumping to a conclusion:quote:
I think it is both rude and presumptuous to jump to such specific conclusions about Storm.
The fact that there's a backstory of which you were unaware was definitely hinted at by H.'s tone and statements, and a simple check of Storm's post count (included on each post) should have told you that she's been around quite a while longer than her recent posting history might indicate. One might even check a user's profile, and look at the "member since" date to get some evidence that there are things going on to which you aren't privvy.
And with that information in hand, one might check for older threads (for example) which could explain H.'s statements, or simply ask about the missing history, rather than assume that it doesn't exist at all. A simple "Am I missing something here with regard to this seeming hostility?" would have resulted people providing lots of links and explanations, and nobody would have "resented" you.
beskeptigal wrote:quote:
Gee guys, I don't read fights on this forum very often.
You should read this forum more often, then.  |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 02/25/2006 : 22:00:41 [Permalink]
|
H.H. said to marfknox:
quote:
There is no reason for you to act like some kind of "rudeness cop" going around and flagging each comment you think crossed some imaginary line, nor will I feel compelled to further explain each and every one of my remarks to you in the future. I suggest you worry less about policing the decorum of the other members, as your standards often will not be universally shared and your presumptive reprimands resented.
Yeah, she busts my chops routinely. The funny part is that she is just as rude, or more so, as anyone who posts here.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 02/26/2006 : 06:23:16 [Permalink]
|
Yay, flame war!
Anyway, Storm, hope you're doing fine now. |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 02/26/2006 : 10:26:02 [Permalink]
|
Dude wrote: quote:
Yeah, she busts my chops routinely. The funny part is that she is just as rude, or more so, as anyone who posts here.
That's right, don't respond to specific things I've said or even try to counter the ways in which I've already defended myself in this discussion. Ignore, too, the times I've admitted to my own faults. Just make some blanket statement about me being generally rude. There's two of you saying it now, so maybe if you say it enough times, you can make it true. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 02/26/2006 : 10:37:43 [Permalink]
|
To Dave W.,
I appreciate the critique, but can I point out that I already admitted fault and apologized about the initial critical post. As for Humbert not giving backhistory with Storm, I think that point is debatable, though I lean toward your side. I don't think it would work in all cases to depend on readers having to research the history of members' previous exchanges, but in this case, Humbert didn't say anything that was all that confusing. I criticized it largely because I saw his statements as having little substance, and turning the discussion against Storm on a personal level, rather than trying to debate the specifics of her claims.
Again, I appreciate your critique, not just because it was persuasive, but because you didn't make it personal. Thank you. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 02/26/2006 10:39:25 |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 02/26/2006 : 10:42:26 [Permalink]
|
Siberia wrote: quote:
Yay, flame war!
Anyway, Storm, hope you're doing fine now.
Nothin' like a little drama, eh? Where the heck is storm? I really had hoped she'd come back and talk more on this subject. Oh well, maybe she's just sitting back and laughing about the turn this discussion has taken. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 02/26/2006 : 11:25:59 [Permalink]
|
All's well that ends well.  |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 02/26/2006 : 19:37:14 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by marfknox
To Dave W.,
I appreciate the critique, but can I point out that I already admitted fault and apologized about the initial critical post.
Absolutely you can point that out, but I wasn't criticizing a lack of apology or lack of admission of fault.quote:
As for Humbert not giving backhistory with Storm, I think that point is debatable, though I lean toward your side. I don't think it would work in all cases to depend on readers having to research the history of members' previous exchanges...
And I never claimed it would "work in all cases." I was pointing out that there should have been enough clues to get a person asking questions about a possible backstory, instead of jumping to the conclusion that there wasn't one at all.quote:
...but in this case, Humbert didn't say anything that was all that confusing. I criticized it largely because I saw his statements as having little substance, and turning the discussion against Storm on a personal level, rather than trying to debate the specifics of her claims.
Well, to be frank, there isn't a lot of substance to Storm's claims, and that's been the case for quite some time. For example, despite being asked over and over again, Storm has yet to offer a definition of "ghost" which isn't meaning-free. Dealing with such people - those who demand answers but largely refuse to participate in the process of framing the questions so they can be answered - is frustrating as hell, and Storm, aside from the first couple of month she'd been here, largely drops bombs like this thread, makes sure people get confused and/or annoyed, and then vanishes again from the forums for months at a time.
As an armchair psychologist, I think Storm seeks out such abuse with the idea that generating such reactions means she's "touched a nerve" and might be whittling away at some facade of scientific "dogma," but that'd just be postmodernist projection on her part. I mean, it's not as though we haven't tried to communicate with Storm - she just seems to be using language and logic in ways that are fairly repugnant to the average skeptic.quote:
Again, I appreciate your critique, not just because it was persuasive, but because you didn't make it personal. Thank you.
What was I going to do, end my prior post with "so up yours, marf"? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
