Guest guest Posted May 17, 2001 Report Share Posted May 17, 2001 Harri: I'm not trying to hide anything at all. I don't have any interest in aspartame. What I am trying to say is, don't pass along rumors that are sent to you without checking them out first. And especially not in my forum. I don't want to argue about this. What you decide about aspartame is your decision. I don't use it because I don't like it, and I have a history of migraines. I also don't drink some kinds of wine or eat some hard cheeses. I judge by my own body, not out of fear. I'd like for this to be the last of this discussion on the list; if you would like to continue a discussion of aspartame, I'd suggest you find a forum for that; this whole discussion started because I do not want forwarded posts with frightening health information placed in my forum. While I don't have my head in the sand about the possibilities of conspiracy, I'm not particularly a conspiracy theorist, either. You can think what you like about that, that is all right with me. I am not here to make people feel good about me, I'm here to moderate a forum on the body mind connection, and this has gotten way off topic already. Thank you. Caroline Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 17, 2001 Report Share Posted May 17, 2001 Hello... As I have also been on the receiving end of such repremands, I understand the need for the moderator to keep discussions and email on topic. And I have respected this in the past and taken discussions off the list and put them in private emails to the great satisfaction and benefit of both me and the other people involved. However, this " moderating " can be done with a degree of tact that does not alienate people or put them on the defensive. It can be done without harsh and overly firm language (i.e. " I am not here to make people feel good about me, " etc.). I believe there is room within the English language for eloquence that allows us to make our point well without resorting to such things. I can also understand the exasperation that a moderator might feel from time to time about topics he or she would rather not have posted on their list because they don't perceive them as being relavent to the topic at hand (however right or wrong that might be). However before asking that these topics be taken off the list, it would be the better part of valor to recognise them as worthy of conversations elsewhere. Even if the moderator has made up her mind on the issue and doesn't find it particularly of interest. Being boss and being bossy are not the same thing. It is an important distinction to learn in my opinion. I mean all of this in the most constructive way possible. Cheers, Anne-Louise. > Caroline Abreu <carocrow > > Thu, 17 May 2001 09:49:05 -0400 > > Re: Other side of the coin > > Harri: > > I'm not trying to hide anything at all. I don't have any interest in > aspartame. > What I am trying to say is, don't pass along rumors that are sent to you > without > checking them out first. > > And especially not in my forum. > > I don't want to argue about this. What you decide about aspartame is your > decision. I don't use it because I don't like it, and I have a history of > migraines. I also don't drink some kinds of wine or eat some hard cheeses. I > judge by my own body, not out of fear. > > I'd like for this to be the last of this discussion on the list; if you would > like > to continue a discussion of aspartame, I'd suggest you find a forum for that; > this > whole discussion started because I do not want forwarded posts with > frightening > health information placed in my forum. While I don't have my head in the sand > about the possibilities of conspiracy, I'm not particularly a conspiracy > theorist, > either. > > You can think what you like about that, that is all right with me. I am not > here > to make people feel good about me, I'm here to moderate a forum on the body > mind > connection, and this has gotten way off topic already. > > Thank you. > Caroline > > > > > **************************************** > Visit the community page: > For administrative problems -owner > To , - > > All messages, files and archives of this forum are copyright of the > group and the individual authors. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 17, 2001 Report Share Posted May 17, 2001 I have a good friend who is terrible allergic to flower pollen in the spring. If she'd been a " blame " person she might have started a email warning people of the terrible effects of the toxins in flowers. She could have gone to Dr.s who are allergists and quated the symptoms that they have observed in people with these reactions. She could have had some flowers chemically analyzed and found serious poisens in them, Like Foxglove which contains digitalis, and when ingested incorrectly can stop the heart. She could have added that flowers attract bee's and bee's kill many people, even children every year. She could have referred to botanists who would have told her that heating a heap of flowers for 10 hours and then ingesting them was lethal. She could have effectively started a whole compaign, put it on the net and let it start spreading the rumor mill. She could then effect stores that sell flowers and seeds, and people can be laid off of these business etc. Net result, you drive through your neighborhood and no flowers planted this year, and no honey to be bought. I know that sounds silly, but I see it all the time. All she would have to do is use the latin names, refer to the active ingredients by thier chemical names and bang, people hate chemicals and latin named stuff. They are bad. LOL Everyone has sensitivities to something or other, most people's immune systems are over taxed due to stress and one last thing, like flower pollen can tip the scale into disease, but should we blame the flower? Should we then scare a ton more people about flowers? Should we negatively effect the flower industry ? I think thats totally irresponsible. This is a body mind forum, meaning lets look at the mental, emotional, spiritual components to health. Yes we can blame things on chemicals. But blame rarely cures the disease, and fear makes it worse. I for one will be buying flowers, eating twinkies, having a diet pop now and then, wearing deoderant and enjoying life. When I have aches and pains I want to consider the Ockhams Razor therum (sp?)(remember the movie Contact?) which states something like this, " the simpiler an explanation is the more likely it is to hold the truth. " When my body wacks out, I'd better look at my stress levels first, then factor in, I'm not as young as I used to be, added to, I'm " afraid " it could be worse, which ads negatively to the problem. Is my body giving me a clue to rest? to eat generally a bit better? to change something in my life that is not working? to meditate a bit more, to laugh a bit more, to call a girlfriend and have tea-do a craft, draw a picture? I'm not saying that people with serious problems, that they are all in thier head. But nearly all disease is psychogenic in " origin " , which means that stress is what started the whole ball rolling down that hill. If it picked up a twinky along that roll, it's likely that removing the twinking won't reverse the roll of the ball. Example, she's been working over 60 hours a week, she's a socker mom after, she's been fighting with her husband, thinking about divorce, she still hasn't resolved her anger at her dad, she eats organic on the weekends but grabs fast food during the week along with alot of coffee, she doesn't have time for friends and tea, she's freaked about money. Now she has a twinkie or two, and her next Dr.'s visit show's an ulcer and high blood preasure. Do you honestly think removing the twinky will cure her? But in this culture, it's always the twinkies fault. If she's really smart she will sue the twinky idustry to solve her economic worries, which will allow her to leave her job and husband, and then she will get healthy and it will all be because she quit eating twinkies. ok, I ranted, this is just my opinion, I could be wrong. love connie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2001 Report Share Posted May 18, 2001 Connie, What's a twinkie? LOL Kate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2001 Report Share Posted May 18, 2001 Dear Kate: A twinkie is a type of cup cake that instead of telling us the shelf life of it, it has so many preservatives that they tell us its half life instead. LOL It's just junk food, not very nurtitious, but really good. love connie > Kate Strong <kates > > Fri, 18 May 2001 11:18:05 +1200 > > Re: Other side of the coin > > Connie, > > What's a twinkie? > > LOL > > Kate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2001 Report Share Posted May 18, 2001 Dear Anne-Louise, I didn't get these impressions at all. I saw a nice request not to post and discuss rumors, and I saw it ignored, then I saw a warning that was a bit stronger. These sights are not our personal space, they are operated by someone else, that person has a right to have it as they prefer. To moderate a group of this size takes an enourmous amount of work. I for one, have found the whole thing very valuable. I have my own egroup, and its alot of work, for free!! But I've had people post things which are in direct opposition to my stated goals. It's very hard to deal with these posts, as we don't want to censor if we don't have to, but how do you handle it? It's a challange. In a number of other , the moderator will simply not post a message that he/she doesn't want. No one is the wiser. I realize you don't need an education from me about this. But since you made your criticism public I felt that opened the door for my opinion as well. love connie > Anne-Louise Lasley <rosebud76 > > Thu, 17 May 2001 15:43:33 +0100 > > Re: Other side of the coin > > Hello... > > As I have also been on the receiving end of such repremands, I understand > the need for the moderator to keep discussions and email on topic. And I > have respected this in the past and taken discussions off the list and put > them in private emails to the great satisfaction and benefit of both me and > the other people involved. > > However, this " moderating " can be done with a degree of tact that does not > alienate people or put them on the defensive. It can be done without harsh > and overly firm language (i.e. " I am not here to make people feel good about > me, " etc.). I believe there is room within the English language for > eloquence that allows us to make our point well without resorting to such > things. > > I can also understand the exasperation that a moderator might feel from time > to time about topics he or she would rather not have posted on their list > because they don't perceive them as being relavent to the topic at hand > (however right or wrong that might be). However before asking that these > topics be taken off the list, it would be the better part of valor to > recognise them as worthy of conversations elsewhere. Even if the moderator > has made up her mind on the issue and doesn't find it particularly of > interest. > > Being boss and being bossy are not the same thing. It is an important > distinction to learn in my opinion. > > I mean all of this in the most constructive way possible. > > Cheers, > > Anne-Louise. > >> Caroline Abreu <carocrow >> >> Thu, 17 May 2001 09:49:05 -0400 >> >> Re: Other side of the coin >> >> Harri: >> >> I'm not trying to hide anything at all. I don't have any interest in >> aspartame. >> What I am trying to say is, don't pass along rumors that are sent to you >> without >> checking them out first. >> >> And especially not in my forum. >> >> I don't want to argue about this. What you decide about aspartame is your >> decision. I don't use it because I don't like it, and I have a history of >> migraines. I also don't drink some kinds of wine or eat some hard cheeses. >> I >> judge by my own body, not out of fear. >> >> I'd like for this to be the last of this discussion on the list; if you would >> like >> to continue a discussion of aspartame, I'd suggest you find a forum for that; >> this >> whole discussion started because I do not want forwarded posts with >> frightening >> health information placed in my forum. While I don't have my head in the >> sand >> about the possibilities of conspiracy, I'm not particularly a conspiracy >> theorist, >> either. >> >> You can think what you like about that, that is all right with me. I am not >> here >> to make people feel good about me, I'm here to moderate a forum on the body >> mind >> connection, and this has gotten way off topic already. >> >> Thank you. >> Caroline >> >> >> >> >> **************************************** >> Visit the community page: >> For administrative problems -owner >> To , - >> >> All messages, files and archives of this forum are copyright of the >> group and the individual authors. >> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2001 Report Share Posted May 18, 2001 Thanks Connie, loved what you wrote by the way in your original email. Kate At 12:22 AM 5/18/01 -0400, you wrote: >Dear Kate: > A twinkie is a type of cup cake that instead of telling us the shelf life >of it, it has so many preservatives that they tell us its half life instead. >LOL > It's just junk food, not very nurtitious, but really good. >love >connie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2001 Report Share Posted May 18, 2001 Your welcome Kate, and thankyou. love connie > Kate Strong <kates > > Fri, 18 May 2001 21:10:44 +1200 > > Re: Other side of the coin > > Thanks Connie, loved what you wrote by the way in your original email. > > Kate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.