Minutus

Rik
agreed that professionals can get pretty heated with each other. look at the bouhaha around
climate warming and the 'hacked' emails attacking climate warming. you know there is much
mudslinging going on there.
however, we do not have to resort to insults. when people let their frustrations get the better of
them and resort to name calling, etc, it is more a reflection of the person's inability to maintain
emotional distance than the argument of ideas themselves. i do not see any value in venting
such judgemental emotions at any given individual.
tanya

I would suggest, with all due respect Liz, that you go back and read
some of your own posts. You can't criticize others when you behave in
the same manner.

Kerry

I think you'll find, Kerry, that I am largely respectful and moderate in my opinions. I have, admittedly, been driven to making a tart comment or two when I have been provoked beyond measure by multiple attacks from more than one person. But I challenge you to find one single example of an email where I have replied to a new thread with a rude comment - I don't do that.
Neither do I hold a grudge. I am happy to say 'thank you' and 'well done' when praise is due.
Happy New Year to you, anyway - let's try and move on in a spirit of co-operation and friendship. God knows, we've got enough detractors without in-fighting.
Liz

Hi Liz

No doubt everyone feels justified in replying the way that do, but it
really doesn't matter who said what first, it is what is said that
counts.
I am all for a spirit of friendship, but not a lowering of standards.

Kerry

Absolutely - but the spirit of friendship shows in the way you answer someone. Maintaining standards does not imply disrespect, does it?
So - Happy New Year!
Liz

Er, Rik, it's not even REMOTELY anything resembling private or semi-private.
Anyone who wants to join, can join.
It's the *largest* and most active public homeopathy list.
There's no moderation, no oversight.
We've seen numerous instances where "trolls" (i.e. people here in order to bring us down, *not* because they have any actual interest in homeopathy) have mined our words, posting them on "quackbuster" and "skeptic" sites. I wonder whether they've posted or noted any of our nastiest exchanges?

Shannon

Liz said:

"Maintaining standards does not imply disrespect, does it?"

Some sensitive people on this list seem to think that it does.

Happy New Year.

Kerry

Helo Liz,
It would appear that if in fact the "mission statement" of the site were adhered too, that the "personal" attacks would cease. I have seen enough good and good hearted, well intentioned Homeopaths give and take on this forum over the years, and yes some have never returned, but to include the difficult, uncomfortable debate along side the deplorable and contemptuous personal attacks is of no benefit to Classical Homeopathy. Especially at a time when there is so much awful Homeopathy being practiced and touted even on this very site.
I remember JW dishing out some very specific and punchy retorts on more than one occasion in the past. Yes people were insulted, yes people left etc. Does it mean that discourse with regards to sound Homeopathic practice should end?
Maybe we could use the current time of year and all of the current self imposed reflection to instigate a set of basic professional standards....starting with the mission statement of the forum?
On another note to Shannon...if quack busters were only gleaning sound homeopathic principles from this site I would have no issues at all. It is when the conversation strays into "unsound" non Classical airy fairy, meditative Californized pseudopathy that I worry they will take that away and post that.

Best regards to all, Rik
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "Liz Brynin" wrote:

Hi Rik,

This site should be a *perfect* place for conducting "difficult, uncomfortable debate." It should be (and in the *main* it is) a gathering of dedicated and knowledgeable people, with strong motivation to determine the truth of various conflicts. But, I would add that this won't always be possible, at least with present resources, so ability to "agree to disagree", and practice of "cognitive dissonance"--letting apparently contradictory viewpoints coexist--are truly mandatory if *real* discovery and learning are to take place.

Unfortunately, tho, the vast majority of the "deplorable and contemptuous personal attacks" have been in exactly that context, intermixing with attempts at debate.

To compare any of this in ANY way with JW's occasional pointed put-down, tho... Well, that's like comparing a housecat (well, a very erudite housecat ) that occasionally gets testy, with a bad-tempered pit bull. Okay, I am not trying to call any particular person / people names with this, but yes the analogy does describe my (and some others') reactions to the types of "debates" that have on occasion blossomed here.

I am wrestling (as have been for quite a while, sadly) with a growing conclusion that I'm one of the "souls" who are just too "sensitive" for the current state of this list. I'd hate to miss all the gems, but it's getting to be less and less worth slogging through all the unpleasantness.
You may make whatever reply to this you like, and I will let it pass. I've got other things to do today...

Shannon

Homoeopathy is a system with a difference. Unfortunately it has become a system with differences. There are many reasons for that. One reason is that Homoeopathy is based on laws and when people break laws it can upset the ardent followers of HAHNEMANN. The other problem is people follow more laws than hahnemann ever dreamt of.
Nevertheless even if we want to make a point it is good to be polite. Please sit down and take your bloody seat mean basically the same thing - but what a difference.
The best results come when we follow all the rules. But people are at different levels of understanding Homoeopathy and we should guid them not frighten them away.
Best regards
Elham