How can you tell if someone's ignoring you on Skype? It's

>>18711816

Move. On.

>>18711818
How about you go fuck yourself with a steak knife.

>>18711818
Probably one of the worst things you can tell OP.

>>18711823
>>18711824

Some person is ignoring you. Why give them time in your day even just thinking about them?

If they are your only friend or something, you need to go make some more anyway.

>>18711827
>If they are your only friend or something
That would make this whole thing worse...

>>18711827
t. college freshman
>Some person is ignoring you. Why give them time in your day even just thinking about them?
That depends on the person.
>If they are your only friend or something, you need to go make some more anyway.
Not a skill, or culture, everyone has, you unempathetic asshole. And whether or not they're their only makes this a worse issue.

>>18711837
>>18711838

Instead of focusing on misery, why don't you realize there's a problem here? No person is an island, and online interaction is obviously not the same as the real deal. Case in point, poeple just disappear without a trace.

You can wallow with OP in his misery or you can use it as a wake-up call. OP needs more people in his life.

>>18711843
You're a selfish idiot. And you sound very white, too.

>>18711843
>Instead of focusing on misery, why don't you realize there's a problem here?
Because it sounds like they lost somewhere they cared about. And without explanation. That's a huge thing to be devastated by.

>You can wallow with OP in his misery or you can use it as a wake-up call. OP needs more people in his life.
You act as if they have that option.

>>18711870

So far, OP hasn't said that. Even the friend part is baseless assumptions. As far as we know this could be about a girl/boy OP fancies.

>>18711867

I'm brown, but to be fair, brown is the majority here.

>>18711818
>>18711827
>>18711843
The lack of empathy in these posts is disheartening, but typical. You didn't even bother answering OP's question.

>>18711892

You didn't either. Guess fighting me is more important.

I did offer advice, though. That's what this board is for. If he wants technical answers he can Google them or go to a tech board.

>>18711905
>Guess fighting me is more important.
when you give 'advice' that's essentially slapping someone in the face, you're going to get people trying to fight you back.

>>18711905
>I did offer advice, though.
You didn't though (>>18711818 isn't advice). You basically told him to fuck off. You have a misconceived approach to advice.

>>18711905
>You didn't either.
Tu quoque.

>>18711919

My problem is not you/him fighting me. I get that part. y issue is being told to give advice when Anon didn't either. Seems more like someone going through the board trying to pick a fight instead of actually trying to help OP or anyone else.

>>18711920

I told him to leave this behind. This is aproblem as long as he keeps wallowing in it. Online friendships end really fast. Even if he figured out if he is being ignored it would solve nothing. He needs to moveo on.

>>18711925

I did offer advice, it's just not the Advice OP or the people projecting want to hear.

I don'tuse Skype, but I'm pretty sure you can google if it has an ignore/block function pretty easily.

>>18711936
>I told him to leave this behind.
>He needs to moveo on.
That's not advice. That's not even helping. That's telling him/her to go fuck themselves.

>>18711942
>I did offer advice, it's just not the Advice OP or the people projecting want to hear.
then it's not advice. advice is relative to the person you're giving to, and has to be flexed for them personally.

>>18711943
>That's telling him/her to go fuck themselves.

Quite the opposite. I'm telling them to leave something that clearly hurting them behind. I'm telling them to protect themselves.

>>18711942
>I did offer advice, it's just not the Advice OP or the people projecting want to hear.
Then it wasn't advice.

>>18711954
No, it's telling them to fuck off and that they're irrelevant.

>>18711953

Well, given that he is a person coming to this board instead of their real life, fleshy friends AND that he is torn because a single online "friend" is ignoring them, I'm pretty sure telling them to put this behind and make more friends is pretty much targeted advice.

Also, I'd refine it more if OP bothered to reply. But just moving past this is a good starting point. Especially because this other person already did.

>>18711959

Projecting much? I never said any of that.

>>18711956

Read here: >>18711961

>>18711942
>I don'tuse Skype, but I'm pretty sure you can google if it has an ignore/block function pretty easily.
it doesn't. it has a remove contacts feature (you can only message people if both of you are in each other's contacts), but it tells you whether or not someone has removed you.

>>18711963
>Projecting much? I never said any of that.
You ought to learn the difference between explicit and implicit, and the impact/interpretation of which.

>>18711969

So, when I explicitely express my intent over several messages, it doesn't matter. But because it hurt your feelings it's all that matters?

"Move on" means continue, stop being stuck. Significance is never a part of it, implicitely or otherwise. You are reading too much into it. It's not my responsibility what goes on inside your head.

>>18711964

Then I'd tell OP to reach for someone else that knows this person to make sure they are all right. Either they decided to stop using Skype or they can't anymore. But I'm pretty sure OP has no other contacts to use, or else he'd be working on that instead of posting here.

Which sucks, but that's the nature of online interaction.

>>18711978
>"Move on" means continue, stop being stuck.
people tend not to have the option or choice.

>Then I'd tell OP to reach for someone else that knows this person to make sure they are all right.
that's really inappropriate.

You people are perpetual victims, aren't you? Everyone is always out to get you, huh?

>unempathetic
Empathy doesn't mean you get a long rubbery one anytime anyone else is slightly inconvenienced. We don't have any context, we don't owe you our hearts and minds. In fact, we're here to give unrequited advice, I can't imagine a more empathetic outlet on this site.

>muh advice
He didn't ask for any, this could've been posted on /t/. But it's obvious the thread is about deeper validation than that. But here's some free advice for the rest of you: just because you don't like the advice you got, doesn't mean it isn't good advice. I see this line of thinking every day, you want advice that pertains to your unique situation, to get you the results that you want.

Well big fat tough dicks, son, your situation is not unique and if you knew what you were doing you wouldn't come here and ask in the first place. Just because you're looking for a way to get your toxic girlfriend to stop fucking everyone are her gym and be a happy little girl, doesn't mean that "break up with her" isn't strong, practical advice.

>>18711919
Sorry that advice isn't sugar coated. Sometimes it's blunt and brutal. /adv/ stands for advice, not validation.

>>18711986
>Sometimes it's blunt and brutal.
then it's not advice. if you're going for a blunt and brutal approach to someone, you're not giving them advice, you're being abusive.

>>18711979
>people tend not to have the option or choice.

Then advice wouldn't matter, right? If he literally can't solve this, then whatever we say is moot. He will keep obsessing, he will keep suffering, and nothing changes.

If you start from the basis of people being unable to do anything about hteir problem, then why do you come here?

>that's really inappropriate.

That's a real concern, though. It happens on plenty of online-only relationships. Again, OP didn't post much, so there's a lot of guesswork here.

>>18711988

A doctor cuts into you to make you feel better. Just because it helps doesn't mean it's nice. The truth hurts sometimes.

>>18711961
"moving on" is a pretty terrible place to start, as it's often just a throw away answer to a given scenario. it's also a huge kick to the balls to someone who's just starting to go through some kind of grief. whether that grief is from losing a friend, a breakup, or someone dying.

>>18711992
>A doctor cuts into you to make you feel better.
because you consent to it and willingly accept their help. otherwise that'd be a terrible solution to what you're going through.

>The truth hurts sometimes.
abusers commonly use that line of thinking to justify their abuse.

>>18711996
>"moving on" is a pretty terrible place to start

Really? Coming to peace with what happened and starting to set up new routines that take into account the loss but set up new things to do is bad?

>>18711982
>just because you don't like the advice you got, doesn't mean it isn't good advice.
if it doesn't work for them personally, then it's not good advice.

>you want advice that pertains to your unique situation
advice HAS to pertain to the person themselves. not the adviser or the people they've worked with before.

File: 1504983858332.jpg (92KB, 804x960px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 804x960px

>>18711816
OP, just switch to Skype for business. It will crash so constantly that that person's presence status won't darken your tower again.

>>18712001

No one is making OP come here. Adv is pretty civil, but it's still 4Chan. And you can see I'm explaining everything with people that engage. OP made a thread and didn't even follow up. No one has shown up to tell him "kys faggot" yet, but we all know in 4Chan that always happens.

I'm sorry, but this is even better than what can be expected on this board.

>abusers commonly use that line of thinking to justify their abuse.

So? People also tell hard truths all the time with the intent of helping.

But you and the others sound like enablers. You don't want to face your reality so hide it and help others hide it, so you always have miserable people around to validate your lifestyle.

>>18712014
>People also tell hard truths all the time with the intent of helping.
people always do bad things with the intent of helping or making things better. even genocides have been started with the intent of making the world a better place. the impact of the action has more weight than the intent.

>>18712019

So... never tell the truth if it makes the other person sad?

>>18712004
Not him, but that actually can a bad thing, especially if someone has just recently receive bad news. Telling them to simply move on and get over it would only be salting the wound, and saying that the person and what they're going through doesn't count, nor mean anything. The only response you're going to get is being treated like you ran over their dog.

Moving on is often last in the process. You don't just jump ahead to the end like that. Otherwise, you're no better than those jerks who read the last page of a novel the second they pick it up.

>>18712026
Honesty isn't always the best policy.

>>18712026
I like how that's your response to a post that didn't mention anything like that. Plus, if you're constantly taking abusive habits in the name of the truth, then yeah you probably shouldn't tell it.

>>18712036

He didn't recieve bad news, he is being ignored on Skype. That at least was part of the OP. And once again you say it means YOU don't matter when it's quite the opposite. The other person is the one that doesn't matter. They are removing themselves from his life, they are abandoning him. He needs to kick them out of his system.

>>18712044

The post is saying that telling a hard truth is a bad thing, making a comparison to genocide because this is the internet so of course.

>the impact of the action has more weight than the intent.

So, as I said: "If it makes them sad, don't say it." I see no other way of reading that last part in this context.

>>18712043

>Honesty isn't always the best policy.

But sometimes it is. Lying to people to protect them also prevents them from seeing their own reality. This is enabling of the highest order, letting people simmer in sadness and obsessive habits instead of dealing with them.

>>18712049
>He didn't recieve bad news, he is being ignored on Skype.
That's not the point (your reading comprehension needs work). The point being is that if a person is starting to through some kind of grief, like losing a person they cared about (and before you start: it doesn't matter how they lost it them; just that they lost them one way or another), telling them to 'move on' would be just a throw away answer that does nothing more than to kick a person while they're down and communicating that they, as a person, and what they're doing, as an action in time and place, is irrelevant and doesn't count. This is probably what the other Anons mean by "lack of empathy," because it's not taking in account what they person is experiencing, how it's affecting them, and adjusting whatever it is you're saying or giving to them in a way that's both suitable and appropriate.

>And once again you say it means YOU don't matter
Because that is what you're telling them. It doesn't matter if you meant differently, it's still communicating the opposite.

>The other person is the one that doesn't matter.
Clearly not to the individual who's in grievance over not hearing from them.

>They are removing themselves from his life, they are abandoning him.
Which would make things worse.

>He needs to kick them out of his system.
Which can make him the bad guy here instead.

>>18712008
It would work if he tried it.

We don't owe you specialized advice, that's what your fucking therapist is for.

You have infinitely more control over your situation than we do. Stop waiting for someone to give you the alchemical formula for how to get a girl to like you, because when you boil it down, your options are "talk to her" or "get over it". If you can't talk to her, you'd better get over it.

No amount of you bitching will change this, and it's wholly outside of our control. Sorry dude, welcome to the party.

>>18712057
>making a comparison to genocide because this is the internet so of course.
yeah, if you actually read what the person is saying (>>18712019), you'd easily recognise that they were talking about how good intent doesn't really much if the end has an opposite effect. genocides and other overt human rights violation being one of the major examples of which.

>>18712075
>It would work if he tried it.
if he tried it, it can easily not work and worsen the situation.

>We don't owe you specialized advice
giving advice does mean you owe them a specialised version.

>If you can't talk to her, you'd better get over it.
which would be a selfish and unemphatic piece of advice.

also, notice how the original post didn't mention genders.

>>18712073
>communicating that they, as a person, and what they're doing, as an action in time and place, is irrelevant and doesn't count.

Again proffesional victim, NO. They are hurting themselves. They are still, after months, hanghing unto it. He said "since winter", so at least a full season has passed since, maybe 2 (6 months).

He had time to grieve, this didn't happen yesterday. And before you tell me everyone grieves differently, of course. He can move slowly. But he has to move on. It's been half a year.

>He needs to kick them out of his system.
>Which can make him the bad guy here instead.

How? How can it make him the bad guy? Have you even read the OP? He is being ignored, that's all.

I'm beginning to think you didn't read the OP.

>>18712081

So I ask: Never tell a truth that hurts? I feel you are avoiding this question.

I can be wrong, I'm man enough to admit that. But can you admit I might be right and OP needs to face reality?

>>18712093
>They are hurting themselves.
And you're enabling them to do so and victim blaming them.

>He had time to grieve
People can grieve over things for years.

>But he has to move on.
Not for you to dictate. This is where the 'abusive' part kicks in. Deciding for them, and going over an absolutist standard instead of a relative one.

>How? How can it make him the bad guy? Have you even read the OP? He is being ignored, that's all.
Yeah, and dropping people over the slight offence of being ignored would be a selfish act by those whose egos can't handle it. That can easily make you the villain in the story, not them. Slapping someone in the face can still make you the bad guy even if they slapped you first.

>>18712096
>So I ask: Never tell a truth that hurts?
i like that's your response to a statement that didn't even mention something like that. again.

>But can you admit I might be right and OP needs to face reality?
yeah, if you weren't so utterly wrong about that.

>>18712096
>But can you admit I might be right and OP needs to face reality?
You, first, have to be right about it.

>>18712103
>dropping people over the slight offence

Six months of radio silence. OP wouldn't be dropping them. OP would be dropping the candle they are holding for them. don't think I need to say anymore.

>And you're enabling them

I'm telling them to stop. I'm victim blaming though. That's because they are their own victim. No one is hurting them, they are hurting themselves by latching unto this person and refusing to move on.

>Not for you to dictate.

Sorry, but did you expect proffesional help? This board is for internet Anons. I'm offering him my advice. He can take it or leave it.

>>18712107
>>18712109

>yeah, if you weren't so utterly wrong about that.
>You, first, have to be right about it.

What should OP do?

>>18712107

>i like that's your response to a statement that didn't even mention something like that. again.

You keep telling me that having good intentions can hurt. I get that. Now I'm asking you, to expand on the genocide post: Is there any situation where telling a hurtful truth would be worth it?

>>18712089
Grow a fucking spine. Nobody here owes you advice, let alone advice that you WANT to hear. We do it of our own volition. If you don't like it, we'll, that's your problem. Don't ask for advice if you're not willing to listen to any of it.

Sometime last month, I diagnosed some Anon's father with persistent transient ischemic attacks, and provided he went to the doctors immediately AS PER MY ADVICE, in all likelihood I saved his life. I don't give a fuck, let me write that out again for emphasis, I DON'T GIVE A FUCK ABOUT YOUR TEENAGE RELATIONSHIP. I give specialized advice for people with specialized fucking problems, I'm not going to invest my whole morning into blowing smoke up someones ass or arguing with some defeatist about how maybe if he tried to do something, it could turn out well.

Do you know why people say "get over it" in these threads all the time? Because it's REALLY good advice.

>>18712113
>Six months of radio silence.
Periods of silence isn't enough evidence to determine X, Y, or Z. You need consistencies to do that, and one person being MIA doesn't provide that.

>OP wouldn't be dropping them.
They would be. Very easily.

>I'm victim blaming though.
Glad to you're admitting it.

>No one is hurting them, they are hurting themselves by latching unto this person and refusing to move on.
You're certainly abusing them and taking an abusive approach towards them.

>I'm offering him my advice.
It's abusive, incorrect advice.

>>18712123
So what's the correct advice?

>>18712117
>Is there any situation where telling a hurtful truth would be worth it?
In situations that call for it.

>>18712119
>Don't ask for advice if you're not willing to listen to any of it.
Don't give advice if it doesn't work for the person.

>Sometime last month, I diagnosed some Anon's father with persistent transient ischemic attacks, and provided he went to the doctors immediately AS PER MY ADVICE, in all likelihood I saved his life.
You're essentially taking credit for something another Anon did, and using it as a means to glorify yourself.

>Do you know why people say "get over it" in these threads all the time? Because it's REALLY good advice.
If it doesn't work for the person, or they're not willing to use it, then it's not good advice.

>>18712128
Actually answering his "how can you tell if..." question, for one.

>>18712123

Sorry, I'm incorrect?

You are literally telling me that if OP followed my advice and moved on with his life instead of checking Skype everyday to see if this person shows up HE would be the bad guy?

How in the nine hells do you arrive to that conclusion?

>Periods of silence isn't enough evidence to determine X, Y, or Z.

Well, periods os silence determine periods of silence, hope we can at least agree on that. This person doesn't want or can't speak to OP.

>OP wouldn't be dropping them.
>They would be. Very easily.

OP can talk to them IF they ever show back. He just needs to stop obsessing over them. I cannot see how OP would be the bad guy here.

Can you please explain it to me?

>>18712132
>In situations that call for it.

Careful, Nazis thought the situation called for extermination. Your attitude can be very damaging.

>>18712132
>You're essentially taking credit for something another Anon did, and using it as a means to glorify yourself.
Nope, it was me. A few people jumped in to support my diagnosis, but I'm the one who found symptoms he hadn't thought to mention, and I'm the one who insisted he take work off and go the next day, not over the weekend.

Literally the only reason I come here is to give medical advice.

But lol what do I know about specialized advice, right. Sorry, let's get back to the topic at hand.

Do you guys think OP should cup his girlfriend's hand when he finally decides to go for it? Or entwined fingers? Do you think that's too risky?
Shit, I didn't consider that thinking about things might give OP anxiety, I guess I really should've been careful about where I throw all of this abusive advice.

>>18712142
>How in the nine hells do you arrive to that conclusion?
How the hell did you arrive to the "if OP followed my advice and moved on with his life instead of checking Skype everyday to see if this person shows up HE would be the bad guy" conclusion? Because no one even said that.

>Well, periods os silence determine periods of silence, hope we can at least agree on that.
No, it doesn't. Simple periods of silence is still too scant of evidence to determine even that.

>I cannot see how OP would be the bad guy here. Can you please explain it to me?
Because it would make him the type whose ego can't handle seemingly apparent rejection, and thus drop anyone who offends their ego.

>>18712151
You're basically using advice not to help others, but to glorify yourself.

>>18712155

>How the hell did you arrive to the "if OP followed my advice and moved on with his life instead of checking Skype everyday to see if this person shows up HE would be the bad guy" conclusion? Because no one even said that.

I'm quoting you, right under this, saying OP would be the bad guy.

>Because it would make him the type whose ego can't handle seemingly apparent rejection, and thus drop anyone who offends their ego.

But OP is being unable to communicate. What should he do, in your expert advice?

>>18712168
>What should he do, in your expert advice?
He needs more fruitful evidence to determine which is which. Especially in a thread where that was specifically asked for.

>>18712189

Someone already googled it and it seems you can't be blocked on Skype. And he could have googled it himself.

Now that you have the info, what should he do?

>>18712193
>Now that you have the info, what should he do?
That's not for me or you to decide.

>>18712168
>>18712193
suspected tu quoques here.

>>18712204

Ok, what kind of advice would you give him, then?

>>18712164
Are you really arguing that I save lives, and risk my own, not because of any personal affinity towards it, but to have something to brag about? As evidenced by what, my tripciode? You know it's my professional career, too, right?

Ok, Mr Intentions, if hurting sometimes feelings while trying to help makes you the bad guy, wouldn't it stand to reason that if I did good deeds in an effort to be selfish, that it would make me a good person?

>>18712205

Only suspected? What a relief!

>>18712209
>Are you really arguing that I save lives, and risk my own, not because of any personal affinity towards it, but to have something to brag about?
Pretty much. A lot of people try to 'help' others for the glory and heroism that comes with it, not actually for the helping part. That happens all the time.

>You know it's my professional career, too, right?
People go into the medical profession for the glory all the time.

>>18712208
That's not for you or him to decide. Advice is not either of your responsibilities.

>>18712221
>That's not for you or him to decide. Advice is not either of your responsibilities.

So you wouldn't give him advice? Why are you here?

>>18712223
>So you wouldn't give him advice?
That's a straw man.

>>18712227

I asked what kind of advice you'd give OP, because I don't understand your position.

I'm starting to suspect you don't care about giving advice. You just want to argue.

>>18712233
Again, that's not for him or you to decide. It's beside the point.

>>18712233
that's not the point, dude.

>>18712243

Yes, it is the point. I want to hear a piece of advice that's not bad like mine. One that's not telling OP what to do. I want to see how you do it. Show me.

>>18712237

I con't decide. I offer advice. OP can take it or leave it. What else were you expecting on this board besides people telling OP what he should do?

>>18712251
>Yes, it is the point. I want to hear a piece of advice that's not bad like mine. One that's not telling OP what to do. I want to see how you do it. Show me.
1). it's not the point, and hasn't been.
2). tu quoque fallacy.

>>18712256

This is a board for advice. Telling people "You should do this" is advice. Unless you can show me another way to make it work, I think you just misunderstand this board.

>>18712263
again, tu quoque fallacy (and now a red herring). that's not the point.

>>18712221
>A lot of people try to 'help' others for the glory and heroism that comes with it, not actually for the helping part.
So, what leads you to assume those are my motivations? The fact that I come here, decidedly anonymous, to give people medical advice for free? And you never answered my question: even if I am doing it to look good, if I'm genuinely saving lives, does it matter?

Face it, dude, you're not holding any water, here.

>advice is neither of your responsibilities
That's literally what I've been telling you, just a few posts above this you said that it was our duty to give specialized, empathetic responses that people want.

You're so twisted up, you don't even know what your talking about, anymore. You've devolved into this non-argument sort of thing I see a lot of people do, where you hope that if you start making your answers as neutral and hair splitting as possible, you won't look like an unreasonable tool for arguing something as stupid as you have for as long as you have.

Go outside tonight and look at the stars until you get a little perspective, dude.

>>18712266

What is your argument?

>>18712263
Usually, just letting people talk and vent their problems with suggesting anything to them is all you need. Something I see a lot of men struggle with.

Also OP didn't really ask for advice, but how to tell if someone is ignoring you on the internet. Which never got an answer. Only assumptions about his situation.

>>18712268
>And you never answered my question: even if I am doing it to look good, if I'm genuinely saving lives, does it matter?
It does. A lot. Because it becomes more obvious that's about you and not the people you're helping.

>Go outside tonight and look at the stars until you get a little perspective, dude.
The most pretentious statement in this thread thus far.

>>18712279
>without* suggesting**
Typo.

>>18712279
>Usually, just letting people talk and vent their problems with suggesting anything to them is all you need.

I'll assume you meant "without suggesting".

There's a thread for that, it's a vent thread. And how do you help them vent? I didn't see any post asking OP to explain the situation or anything. What do you usually do on this threads?

>Also OP didn't really ask for advice, but how to tell if someone is ignoring you on the internet.

He could google how Skype works or go to a tech forum. And he did get the answer. People come here to get human advice, not to get information that's easily google-able.

>>18712268
>Go outside tonight and look at the stars until you get a little perspective, dude.
t. frat boy medical student

>>18712296
Firefighter, but nice try

>>18712293
>And how do you help them vent?
By letting them do just that. Vent. Talk. Pretty straightforward.

>He could google how Skype works or go to a tech forum.
I'm not seeing anything on Google about when someone ignores you on Skype. Just on how to block people.

>>18712302
so an uneducated jock

>>18712289
So, the first question, now? What makes you assume these are my motivations?

>>18712308
>By letting them do just that. Vent. Talk. Pretty straightforward.

So you don't say anything? Why click on the thread then?

>>18712313
Because a lot of people in your position do. You originally threw that in (>>18712119) in order to assert credence for your argument and standing, and mentioned "people jumped in" in further assertion (>>18712151). That makes your motivations highly suspicious and disingenuous.

>>18712319
>So you don't say anything?
Saying something can be the wrong thing to do. Stage hogging and all that. And giving them what they didn't ask for.

>>18712330
>Saying something can be the wrong thing to do.

Then, if you don't post, why do you click on the thread? Just reading the posts does nothing for OP.

>>18712334
Writing posts validating his experience or showing some kind of relation to it, without actually suggesting anything, also works. Another thing I see too many men have trouble understanding.

Plus, OP very clearly asked for something, and never got that. :/

>>18712342

Did you post anything for OP? When did you join?

I had between 2 to 4 people replying to me minutes after the OP was made. Not a single one adressed OP in any of their posts. Were you one of them?

>>18712344
>When did you join?
>>18712279

>I had between 2 to 4 people replying to me minutes after the OP was made. Not a single one adressed OP in any of their posts.
If you're talking about >>18711818, it was a pretty rude response that resoundingly says nothing.

>>18712311
How much medical expertise do you have?

>>18712342
>>18712348

Sorry, so you are not the same Anon that wrote this: >>18712330 and this: >>18712308 and that has been agruing with me over the last hour?

>>18712325
You accused me of being unsympathetic and unable to give specialized advice, I gave you a single specific example out of many to counter that claim.

>>18712352
argumentum ad verecundiam

>>18712358
Hey, I know Latin, too. Except I had to learn it from tech manuals and research papers, not image macros.

>>18712354
Not arguing, just clarifying. It's funny how any seeming disagreement with a person is seen as arguing. And funny how it seems to happen with almost always men.

>>18712361
either way, fallacious argument is fallacious.

>>18712367

So then, please tell me when did you join this thread. Because I went to the top and I didn't find any of the posts you supposedly like to make.

I never saw anyone else even try to interact with OP but me in that first post.

>>18712372
What argument? He called me a dumb jock. There's some Latin for that, right? I only know the long ones used to diagnose dying people, I'll leave the internet quips to you, Doctor.

>>18712378
>So then, please tell me when did you join this thread.
I already answered that.

>I never saw anyone else even try to interact with OP but me in that first post.
Yeah, and what you said was rather rude and disrespectful, which ended up derailing the thread into... this.

If it's important and you're not annoying, contact them another way such as by telephone, another online channel, or via a friend.

Otherwise stop being clingy and do something else. If you want to not see their status (maybe you don't have many people in your contacts), set it to only show people who have messaged you recently.

>>18712378
Dude, why are we even arguing with this guy?

>>18712396

It's not my fault no one even adressed OP. You can call me the bad guy, but you did nothing for him.

And it's impossible that you joined the thread here:

>When did you join?
>>18712279

>>18712387
>What argument?
that your credentialisms invalidates (or validates) either of your positions.

>There's some Latin for that, right?
they're called informal fallacies.

>>18712403

He likes using important words to seem like he knows how to argue. I've corralled him like twice already. I'm showing him his weak arguments don't work, so hopefully he won't use them on the board anymore.

Also, I have a very slow day at work.

>>18712411
>I've corralled him like twice already. I'm showing him his weak arguments don't work, so hopefully he won't use them on the board anymore.
that would actually just make me want to keep going if I were him. :/

>>18712415

Nah, he stops replying to posts that he can't twist to his advantage.

He will tire out.

>send message to someone you've been talking/known for a while
>seen but no response

One of the shitiest feelings

>>18712430
no, he won't. i've seen this before (done it myself). it actually just encourages you.

>>18712407
My credentials validate my medical knowledge. Because I can trust that my knowledge is accurate and reliable (and so can you), I come here to offer medical advice, where appropriate, for free, anonymously. All of this came up not because I am interested in your approval, but because you falsely accused me of being unable to be sympathetic, unable to give unique advice pertaining to an individual's specific needs, and that I come here for no other reason than to bully or otherwise abuse people.

"Fallacy" isn't synonymous with "stalemate". You're wrong in the most literal sense. Just stop. You assumed, you assumed incorrectly, and now you're just trying to dig your hole wider so nobody notices how deep you've made it.

>>18712411
I'm actually pretty sure I have, too. I'm starting to remember someone who wrote a lot like this accusing me of being an abusive glory hog when I mentioned that I sometimes handle victims of sexual assault.

>>18712442
>because you falsely accused me of being unable to be sympathetic, unable to give unique advice pertaining to an individual's specific needs
You probably can't. A lot of people are unable to under non-conditional means.

>and that I come here for no other reason than to bully or otherwise abuse people.
You probably do. A lot of people like you have.

>accusing me of being an abusive glory hog when I mentioned that I sometimes handle victims of sexual assault.
If you take pride in your interactions with sexual assault victims, then that's even worse. :/

>>18711816
Move on.

Also /adv/ isn't anyone's personal safe space

>>18712442
you certainly wouldn't be the first to be guilty of all that. that's what usually gives the accusations weight.

File: wtf-man.jpg (41KB, 600x588px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 600x588px

>>18712442
You took glory for handling sex assault victim...?

>>18712439

He stopped. Doesn't want to tell me when he got into the thread.

>>18712466
>He stopped.
where?

>>18712442
>I'm starting to remember someone who wrote a lot like this accusing me of being an abusive glory hog when I mentioned that I sometimes handle victims of sexual assault.
You know, as a sexual assault survivor, if I find out that a doctor has been accused of that, even falsely, I wouldn't want to be anywhere near him or the clinic he worked at.

>>18712455
So, your accusations have weight... because you made accusations? So, even though all actual evidence to the contrary, the fact that you have agency itself to second guess my motivations provides you enough reasonable doubt to disregard any and all of my points? If it's not appropriate to bring up credentials when they are asked for or challenged, when is it appropriate? In your mind, is any acknowledgement of accomplishment an attempt to wring validation from you?

Do you know what Occam's Razor is?

>>18712487
>So, your accusations have weight... because you made accusations?
because they're based on something to spur those accusations in the first place.

you argue like one of those mtgows ranting about false rape accusations.

>>18712471
Let me clarify.

As an emergency tech, I process victims of sexual assault. In that thread, I believe I was defending the wildly different stress reactions that victims have post-assault.

I was accused, on 4chan not by any sort of ethics committee, of being abusive and cruel by "using these traumas as a way to fulfill my ego" or something. All I do is give them a blanket, comfort them, and try to convince them not to shower.

>>18712492
>because they're based on something to spur those accusations in the first place.
Yeah... your false assumptions.

Dude, this whole conversation we've had started with one incorrect assumption, and then it's just been a cascade of them, since.

>>18712496
But you were still accused. That's a huge red flag for both you and those who employ you. Even if the accusations only came from here, that's bad enough, and makes your services completely unsafe to people in my predicament.

>>18712500
those assumptions still had to be based on something. you wouldn't normally have this cascade otherwise. now you're just blaming others for your behaviours.

>>18712468

He didn't reply to those posts anymore. Look up, it's this one; >>18712405

>>18712506
>But you were still accused.
By some fag on 4chan who knows nothing about him...are you kidding me right now?

>>18712516
You were still accused, at all, of something that affects sexual assault survivors. That's a problem for survivors.

>>18712518
I'm not him but you are being totally irrational. If I accuse you right now as pretending to be a sexual assault victim in order to suck sympathy from people while providing no evidence for it, does that make you a lying scumbag who everyone should watch out for? That's literally what you're saying right now. You're fucking retarded.

>>18712522
>If I accuse you right now as pretending to be a sexual assault victim in order to suck sympathy from people while providing no evidence for it, does that make you a lying scumbag who everyone should watch out for?
It makes you a men's right activist.

>>18712525
But I accused her so therefore she's definitely lying if we use her logic.

>>18712516
>>18712522
An accusation alone can present a problem for future victims you might end up meeting. That includes dubious sources.

>>18712506
>>18712512
Have you two read the thread? My professional integrity was never questioned, only the motivations that lead me to my career choice. I was accused of doing my job for glory and validation, which is in direct contrast to, well, the fact that I come here to offer free, anonymous medical advice.

It's been about an hour and a half of this guy trying to convince me that I'm actually a huge piece of shit because he can't accept the idea that I do it out of genuine empathy towards my fellow man, because that would mean that his knee jerk assumption at the very beginning of the thread may have been off mark.

I'm in the fire service because I am good at it, because I'm not effective in non-active roles, and because yes, it's fulfilling to know that I help my neighbor, and have the ability to do so for the rest of my life.

Or I could be a hero like that dude and enable teenagers on the internet to keep burying their head in the sand and avoid all personal accountability.

>>18712540
>An accusation alone can present a problem for future victims you might end up meeting.
Only if they're as brain-dead as you are, which is probably unlikely.

For the record I believe I remember what that anon is talking about. It was some thread where a guy heard his roommate rape his gf and was asking advice what to do. The anon in this thread was trying to teach empathy for abused people to persuade the guy to help the girl, and simply mentioned his expertise because the supposed anon who was arguing AGAINST HELPING A RAPE VICTIM tried to discredit him.

So you are literally siding with either a rapist or at best, rape apologist right now and disparaging someone who would actually help you. g fucking g

>>18712547
>I was accused of doing my job for glory and validation, which is in direct contrast to, well, the fact that I come here to offer free, anonymous medical advice.
That doesn't mean you're not doing it for some selfish gain.

>I do it out of genuine empathy towards my fellow man
People always think they're more empahetic than they really are. People always think they're the good guys.

>it's fulfilling to know that I help my neighbor
Which you probably do more for you than for them.

>>18712525
But in that thread I referenced, I was actually arguing with a rape apologist and men's right activist (and, so it seems, the person you are actively defending right now) by defending the vulnerability of a victims state of mind following an assault. Then he accused me of doing so as a means of virtue signaling (the same thing he's been doing this whole thread).

It's literally a baseless accusation that neither of us have a way to prove one way or the other, and really has no bearing on whether or not I'm a competent medical practitioner. Which I am.

Also for what it's worth, part of my job involves putting my hands over, literally, every single inch of a person's body. This includes breasts and crotch. I've been putting my hands all over intimate places of people for years in a professional setting, and not once was my professionalism or intent ever questioned. Not in class by the girls I had to practice on, not in real life when I revive someone and they realize I took off their shirt. I have never been accused of being a danger to victims, other than by you.

>>18712550
That was the thread, spot on.

Actually I do that a lot, too. Sexual assault threads often fall into my territory, and I try to help the victims if I can, but more often than not I'm trying to teach a little empathy to the rest of the thread who assume she's just lying.

>>18712556
Nigga get the fuck out the way, I'm arguing with some other dipshit now.

>>18712564
>part of my job involves putting my hands over, literally, every single inch of a person's body. This includes breasts and crotch. I've been putting my hands all over intimate places of people for years in a professional setting
the fact you do that, while being accused of some kind of misconduct, even on the internet, is disturbing.

>>18712641
I'm an EMERGENCY MEDICAL TECHNICIAN, I'm not there you fluff your pillow. What does "rapid trauma assessment" mean to you? Because to me, it means "don't let your patient asphyxiate from a sucking chest wound because you were too shy to check and see if her breasts were punctured by her wire bra".

That happens, by the way. A lot.

>>18712692
That guy has to be a troll. just don't, dude

>>18712692
but you were still accused of sexual misconduct and still handle assault survivors. you mentioned it yourself. that's concerning.

>>18713001
Real question, are you fucking high?

>>18711816
She probably is.

Sorry.


Women tend to do this if they are afraid you will not move on without being an asshole or trying to convince them really hard not to stop talking to you when they want to stop talking to you.

>>18711818
This guy is right. Find another girl. Sorry. It might not even be anything you did, she might be depressed or met someone else who who the fuck knows what.

>>18712692
It's still pretty upsetting to have you admit to being accused at one point, while also posting about having to place your hands on intimate parts of patients who are in vulnerable states. If this were a different discussion, or you were a different person, none of this would be alarming. But you still admitted to being accused at one point, and keep talking about touching women in intimate areas as part of your job. None of that looks good, and would call for an investigation.

>>18713136
did op mention the person's gender? or even their own gender? and whether this was platonic or romantic? those are a lot of assumptions you're making.

I've had even friends and family ghost you out of existence. and those hurt the most.

>>18713137
Do I have to say it in Swahili?

I've never been accused of sexual misconduct. I've never been accused of misconduct whatsoever. You just keep perpetuating that, and I don't know how to tell you more simply.

I was accused, by the person in this thread whom you are defending, who is ACTUALLY a rape apologist, of needing an attitude adjustment.

Do I need to write it out a sixth time, or do you think you can follow?

>>18713182
But you still said you were accused of some kind of abuse to assault survivors, and are still being accused of it by other people:
>>18712442
>>18712496
>>18712458
>>18712471
>>18712496
>>18712506
>>18712516
>>18712518
>>18712547
>>18712564
>>18712641
>>18713001

And you still work in a job that handles people in very intimate areas. When they're in highly vulnerable positions. That's really concerning. Especially for some of us who had to be abused by those we were supposed to trust.

File: Screenshot_20170911-175739.png (196KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 1080x1920px

>>18713200
You're the only person accusing me of sexual abuse.

What I was accused of, by a stranger in this thread and nobody else ever, was being """abusive""" in the sense that I use helping sexual assault survivors as a means of self validation. Which is baseless accusations and you should honestly feel bad, because that dude is in fact a rape advocate and you're defending him.

>>18713250
You still had someone accuse you of something like that. You were still accused. And then you go on to talk about having to touch women in vulnerable areas as part of your job. Several times. Touching women who, by your descriptions, are more vulnerable. Those together are disturbing and warrant an investigation.

>>18711816
>tfw 2 skype friends have suicided :/

>>18713263
YOU accused me of that. And if you had bothered reading any of my posts to completion, tasked as you were, you would've noticed I brought up details about my job specifically to punctuate it with "and I've never been accused of any sort of misconduct".

I'm not gonna sit here and explain a year's worth of classes, books, and tests so that you understand protocol. Your inability to wrap your head around what is being told to you is your problem, not mine.

Also, no, you don't go feeling up sexual assault survivors. I know that's what you THINK you read, but like every post before this, you've misunderstood and created your own narrative.

>>18713443
I don't think you're getting it. You said someone accused of some kind of abuse towards sexual survivors. And then talk about putting your hands on people's intimate parts as part of your job. Do you not realise how concerning that is? In any other context, nothing would come of it. But when you put what you have to do for your job, and admission that someone has accused you of this before, as stated in >>18712442, that's a huge problem. You were accused of something abusive towards sexual assault survivors, and then make numerous mentions of having to touch people's breasts (>>18712564), vaginas (>>18712564), bras (>>18712692), and other parts of their body as part of your job. Those are so many red flags consistently working together. And very threatening to some of us who have experienced sexual assault.

>>18713443
>and I've never been accused of any sort of misconduct
you're being accused of it itt

>>18713477
Yes, the abuse I was accused of was the hyperbole of a stranger on the internet, one whom could not have any idea about my work history. I described my work in detail to really drive home that, even though I have a bet physical and intimate job, I've NEVER had anyone describe my presence as anything less than professional. AMR will fire you if you touch sometimes femoral artery, your knee jerk reaction and concern exists entirely in a situation that you made up in this thread.

Either way, I think I kept this shit thread alive long enough. I'm sure you'll find me again, though, I'm one of maybe three people on this board who bother steering SA victims to recovery rather than harassing them.


>>18713482
This is me, formally accusing you of sexual misconduct. Now we're even.

>>18713774
Yet someone still accused you of those kinds of inappropriate behaviour, legitimate or not, while at the same time you work a job where you have to partake in those actions. Do you not see why that would be a problem for many abuse victims? That's a huge, huge issue.

>I've NEVER had anyone describe my presence as anything less than professional.
Most sexual abusers go years without any reports or complaints against them. Hell, many sexual abusers have helped abuse victims in the past, while partaking in inappropriate actions with others.

File: 1505045228566.jpg (16KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 480x480px

>>18713872
I'm not sure what you want from me, dude. A stranger on the internet said something false about me, and you just started running with it.

There are many, many redundant systems in place to protect victims from potential abusers. Spend a minute googling them, instead of attacking the people who spend their free time trying to support you.

I want to remind you for the final time, too, that the gentleman who accused me of being abusive was vigorously defending a man who had violently raped his girlfriend. His idea of abuse was the kind of twisted "helping women = cuck degenerate" logic you'd expect from a rape apologist on 4chan. If you want to start taking the word of guys like that as gospel, go ahead, I guess.

>>18711816
I came to see people discussing about OP's problem but all I see is people arguing about thr first reply. Can somebody answer this for OP and other curious readers?

>>18714098
I did. He should get over it.

>>18714214
That's not an answer.

>>18714054
>There are many, many redundant systems in place to protect victims from potential abusers.
a few abusers still get through now-and-then. usually only years later.

>>18714377
100-something posts above you would disagree

>>18714383
100-something posts above me were about arguing about the first reply and sexual assault accusations.

>>18714214
okay, cool. now can someone *actually* answer op's question?