New rules question II

[WarKitty]

Sorry to bring this back up, but I'm still rather confused by the scope of the new rules. The clarification Roland posted, assuming I am reading it correctly, said that diet and exercise advice or friendly relationship advice would be a examples of things that would not violate the new rule. I know this was meant to be a clarification, but those are the kinds of things
I'd typically consider the paramount examples of what you go to a licensed professional for. I don't want to break the forum rules, but I don't want to completely cease from, say, being able to advise other posters on handling gender dysphoria day-to-day because I'm not sure of the rules.

[Seffbasilisk]

I second this statement.

While I see where it's coming from, it's basically a broad "Don't help people, even if they ask for it." If we're worried about the site from a legal standpoint, wouldn't it make sense to have a tagline like 'These forums are for entertainment purposes only" as a broader covering blanket, that would still allow us to help those who honestly are seeking it?

LBGT issues are just one of many where people might hesitant to seek professional help on, and to do so, would further complicate their problem.

I know there have been times when I have brought my problems to the boards, in the relationships thread to name a one, and while I didn't expect clinical level treatment, the fact that the GiantITP family was there, having my back if nothing else, listening and trying to give advice? That really helped.

I don't want there to be some kid out there, who tries to reach out, only to be rebuffed and told to get professional help, only to think the answer is in eating the barrel of a gun, or (worse, from many points of view) turning that gun on others in an effort to exorcise the pain by sharing it around.


Please. Don't let us lose our sense of community. Those who do not want to be helped, will not be, whatever is done. Let those who truly do seek, if nothing else, the solace of friends found through this board, be able to find some measure of acceptance with that here.

Thank you.

[SilverSheriff]

I'm just gonna quote something I said earlier in agreement with both of the above.


"When it comes to rules and laws they should be clear and concise, not open to interpretation or the whims of whoever is enforcing them.
e.g. One of the mods might just be having a really bad day, see someone he doesn't like say something that could be vaguely interpreted as against the rules and then B&HAMMER the poor guy."

What I'm trying to say is that rules should be here to restrict and guide, and letting the rules be vague and fray isn't exactly going to help anyone.

[The Succubus]

I have to share the concerns of some of the other here.

LGBTP, The Relationship Woes and Advice and the Depression Thread have all been mainstays of Friendly Banter for years and have given good advice to lots of people, including myself, over the years. From a legal standpoint I can see why this has to happen but it's going to cause the community to lose some of its sparkle. =/

[Jack Squat]

Sorry to bring this back up, but I'm still rather confused by the scope of the new rules. The clarification Roland posted, assuming I am reading it correctly, said that diet and exercise advice or friendly relationship advice would be a examples of things that would not violate the new rule. I know this was meant to be a clarification, but those are the kinds of things
I'd typically consider the paramount examples of what you go to a licensed professional for. I don't want to break the forum rules, but I don't want to completely cease from, say, being able to advise other posters on handling gender dysphoria day-to-day because I'm not sure of the rules.


There's a difference between something that people see licensed professionals for, and things that you need to be a licensed professional for. You don't need to be certified to be a nutritionist or a personal trainer, but most do become certified as it's easier to get a job. And the friendly relationship advice is just that, friendly advice. All of us have relationship experience of some sort (romantic, friends, family, work, etc.), and we certainly haven't taken standardized tests to receive that knowledge. If you were try to take place of a psychiatrist, that's where the line gets crossed, but so long as it would be something "friends would say", rather than "what a shrink would say" it should be in the clear.


I'm just gonna quote something I said earlier in agreement with both of the above.



"When it comes to rules and laws they should be clear and concise, not open to interpretation or the whims of whoever is enforcing them.
e.g. One of the mods might just be having a really bad day, see someone he doesn't like say something that could be vaguely interpreted as against the rules and then B&HAMMER the poor guy."

What I'm trying to say is that rules should be here to restrict and guide, and letting the rules be vague and fray isn't exactly going to help anyone.

Banning doesn't work like that. You have to build up multiple infractions first and reach a certain "points" level. Even then, if someone had an unjust infraction that pushed them over the edge, they can appeal the ban, just like they could appeal any infraction. And that's if it's an automatic ban after you get a certain amount of points. I can't be certain of the process - not having been on either side of it - but I believe that there's discussion as to whether a user should actually be banned, and that it's possible to stick around while "maxed out" on points.


I have to share the concerns of some of the other here.

LGBTP, The Relationship Woes and Advice and the Depression Thread have all been mainstays of Friendly Banter for years and have given good advice to lots of people, including myself, over the years. From a legal standpoint I can see why this has to happen but it's going to cause the community to lose some of its sparkle. =/

Last I checked, the RWA and LGBTitp threads are still open. The depression thread is the only one that really seemed to more of go into "professional" territory, and I would assume that that was one of the reasons it was removed.

[Sarco_Phage]

I thought the new rule was put in place to cover things like the giving of medical, legal, or financial advice.

[Zherog]

I thought the new rule was put in place to cover things like the giving of medical, legal, or financial advice.

That's the intention, yes.

[bluewind95]

I dunno. Being a regular lurker at the depression thread, the advice seemed to be as "friendly advice" as the advice I've seen at the relationship thread. The kind of advice you do not go to a shrink for. I never saw any professional advice. Only support, the exact same kind you would recieve from a friend. I don't think anyone thought that it was "the Shrink thread". I dunno about you guys, but when I'm down, I DO go and talk to my friends about it. I know they're not shrinks, but, seriously, the support they can give can do wonders for my ability to cope.

The relationship advice thread seems to me much more like the kind of thing I'd recommend someone going to a licensed counselor for. I mean, goodness, putting the whole success of one's relationships in the hands of internet "strangers". It can be life-altering for some people. Many (if not most) times, relationship issues are heavily linked to emotional/psychological issues, too. So that means advice should not be given there? Or should it only be given when people are not having emotional/psychological issues linked to their relationship issues? Where should the line be drawn?

And what about the LGBTA thread? Should no advice be given there? Should we only talk about LGBTA topics as long as they do not give support or advice to anyone?

The new rules confuse me too, really.

[Sarco_Phage]

The relationship advice thread seems to me much more like the kind of thing I'd recommend someone going to a licensed counselor for. I mean, goodness, putting the whole success of one's relationships in the hands of internet "strangers". It can be life-altering for some people. Many (if not most) times, relationship issues are heavily linked to emotional/psychological issues, too. So that means advice should not be given there? Or should it only be given when people are not having emotional/psychological issues linked to their relationship issues? Where should the line be drawn?

I dunno, it always seemed to me to be roughly the equivalent of asking your real-life "bros" or whatnot for advice - and just as likely to result in shenanigans.

Are relationships the kind of thing to go to a counselor for? Maybe if it's a marriage question, as there are professionals who are meant to deal with such things, but what about the vast majority of young folk that populate these boards? For them, a "relationship" isn't necessarily the kind of life altering thing a long-term commitment would suggest.

This is rather a thorny issue, and by thorny I mean my clothes are getting caught in it.

[bluewind95]

I dunno, it always seemed to me to be roughly the equivalent of asking your real-life "bros" or whatnot for advice - and just as likely to result in shenanigans.

Are relationships the kind of thing to go to a counselor for? Maybe if it's a marriage question, as there are professionals who are meant to deal with such things, but what about the vast majority of young folk that populate these boards? For them, a "relationship" isn't necessarily the kind of life altering thing a long-term commitment would suggest.

This is rather a thorny issue, and by thorny I mean my clothes are getting caught in it.

That's the thing. The DT is expressly against the rules and the kind of advice there is EXACTLY "roughly the equivalent of asking your real-life "bros" or whatnot for advice". This is EXACTLY what makes it so confusing.

Long-term commitment is also not the only thing that can be life-altering. An especially good or especially bad incident can influence a person for many, many years.

[Sarco_Phage]

True. For example, a few months ago I was in a car accident (technically: me versus Honda Civic, Civic: 1, Me: 0). Let's say I make a thread talking about the physical therapy I'm currently undergoing. If people give advice in that thread, that would probably fall under the new rule, right? Especially since it's a medical concern.

Or, say, someone recently found $100 on the ground and makes a thread asking for what to do with it. Would chiming in on that thread constitute giving financial advice?

I, too, am confused.

[bluewind95]

Sorry to bring this back up, but I'm still rather confused by the scope of the new rules. The clarification Roland posted, assuming I am reading it correctly, said that diet and exercise advice or friendly relationship advice would be a examples of things that would not violate the new rule. I know this was meant to be a clarification, but those are the kinds of things
I'd typically consider the paramount examples of what you go to a licensed professional for. I don't want to break the forum rules, but I don't want to completely cease from, say, being able to advise other posters on handling gender dysphoria day-to-day because I'm not sure of the rules.

Actually, thinking about it, diet and exercise advice NOT given by a professional that knows what they're doing is actually a DANGEROUS thing. Diet and exercise are things that are heavily influenced by the state of health. I have to agree with WarKitty on this one. These are paramount examples of what you go to a licensed professional for (and if you don't, it can be dangerous).

I'll give an example. I have a medical condition (mind you, I only know of this since fairly recently! It's a rather obscure medical condition). I am not fit. So if I were to seek advice of someone who does NOT have a license and is not a professional, they'd tell me lots of exercises that would get me fit... and would promptly cause me to faint, putting me in danger of serious injury. Same with diet. Pre-existing medical conditions can put a person at risk from following diet advice. And these conditions are not always known, even by the person seeking advice. And say, things like diabetes? A nascent case, for example? You could send a person to the hospital with the wrong advice.

And I dunno about you guys, but... if I'm going to take my computer in for repairs, I take it in with someone who does that for a living. There ARE certifications for learning to repair computers.

No, seriously. I am terribly confused by this.

[Haruki-kun]

I would like to admit that I'm somewhat confused by it, too. Being a bit of a health & fitness guy and having participated in several threads on it in the past, dieting tips, exercising tips, I'm wondering if that sort of thing is no longer allowed. :smallfrown:

[Castaras]

Add another one who's confused and waiting to hear more confirmation about this... quite honestly, it's the advice stuff that keeps me coming here every day. So until I get confirmation, I'll be mostly lurking until this gets straightened out, as I don't particularly want to get infracted for something that is due to a frayed and vague rule.

[Tirian]

Actually, thinking about it, diet and exercise advice NOT given by a professional that knows what they're doing is actually a DANGEROUS thing. Diet and exercise are things that are heavily influenced by the state of health. I have to agree with WarKitty on this one. These are paramount examples of what you go to a licensed professional for (and if you don't, it can be dangerous).

That's what I thought when I asked in the previous thread. To give a real-world example from here, it seems to me that military people and other high-impact workout folk in the playground are discussing their relatively extreme (compared to the general population) exercise regimens and dietary supplements. Is that advice appropriate for, say, adolescents? I don't know, but this advice is offered without pursuing that sort of dilligence. A licensed physical therapist would know to be more cautious when offering specific suggestions to hundreds of people at once, or perhaps would know not to, and I wouldn't undertake a demanding exercise program without consulting a professional.

At the end of the day, everything is going to be a question of degree, and Roland made it clear that the moderators will be exercising their judgment. My expectation is that they will note the difference between "People should save money for retirement" and "A retirement fund should be invested 80% in a broad-based stock index fund and 20% in government bonds" -- only one of those being the sort of advice that one should only be getting from a licensed financial planner while the other is all-purpose financial advice that can be offered by laymen. Furthermore, I expect that the moderators are not creating this to be a minefield for innocent posters to rack up infraction points. Understand the spirit of the rule (which is, I think, very proper and for some threads overdue) and post in good faith and accept the moderator's rulings with good spirits even when you are surprised by them and this will continue to be a happy playground.

[bluewind95]

I dunno. I still would like this to be more defined. I mean... for the inappropriate topics that have until now been in place, the lines are not fuzzy. The lines are pretty clear. But... for things like advice, the lines are not clear. Some kinds of advice in one thread are prohibited, and the same kinds of advice in another thread are not. That's...

... I dunno. Since this announcement, I have been feeling fairly... nervous about posting. I don't like skipping around the line to see when someone will think I crossed it and get me in trouble. And when the line is fuzzy... it makes me want to run in the opposite direction. I do not like trouble.

[Roland St. Jude]

There's a difference between something that people see licensed professionals for, and things that you need to be a licensed professional for. You don't need to be certified to be a nutritionist or a personal trainer, but most do become certified as it's easier to get a job. And the friendly relationship advice is just that, friendly advice. All of us have relationship experience of some sort (romantic, friends, family, work, etc.), and we certainly haven't taken standardized tests to receive that knowledge. If you were try to take place of a psychiatrist, that's where the line gets crossed, but so long as it would be something "friends would say", rather than "what a shrink would say" it should be in the clear.

Banning doesn't work like that. You have to build up multiple infractions first and reach a certain "points" level. Even then, if someone had an unjust infraction that pushed them over the edge, they can appeal the ban, just like they could appeal any infraction. And that's if it's an automatic ban after you get a certain amount of points. I can't be certain of the process - not having been on either side of it - but I believe that there's discussion as to whether a user should actually be banned, and that it's possible to stick around while "maxed out" on points.

Last I checked, the RWA and LGBTitp threads are still open. The depression thread is the only one that really seemed to more of go into "professional" territory, and I would assume that that was one of the reasons it was removed.All of this is correct. Not only are those threads still open, some form of the Depression Thread is likely to return once we get the existing problems with it sorted out.


I thought the new rule was put in place to cover things like the giving of medical, legal, or financial advice.That is correct. There are some fields where a license is required to dispense advice. We'd like people, licensed or not, to refrain from giving that kind of advice here.


That's the intention, yes.It's the practice, too.

Sheriff: Go about your business. Seriously, that's the best advice I can give you. No one is going to get insta-banned for giving advice that crosses the line. Most violations will be issued as zero-point Warnings in the first place anyway.

Just avoid giving the kind of legal, medical, financial, or similar professional advice that governments control and regulate by requiring licenses. Don't try to be someone's lawyer, doctor, or investment manager via the Forum. Because if people are doing that here it opens them and us to liability, among other problems.