BPDRecovery.com: Forums

This came up on another board I hang out at and wanted some input from ya'll.

How much is too much?

Is there a certain number of posts that fall below the "Oh wow, is she ever a drama queen" threshhold? Is it ten per day and over ten, we just get tired of seeing that person's user name in every active thread?

Is it more focused on a longer period of time - like the last thirty of the last seventy posts in the last two weeks came from that person and it seems like they have nothing better to do but be here, marking their territory or peeing in every pot?

Is it an ownership thing? If Person A posts about their cat and someone else chimes in with "me too and more" about their dog in the original thread, is that the annoyance, drama, spotlight-hogging factor?

Is it more spotlight-hogging than that? In the dog/cat example, if Person B starts a new thread (to not hijack) but then essentially starts the same thread time and time again, is that seen as "one-ups-manship" which is then seen as annoying?

(I used to work with a lady who was notorious for the one-ups and the standing joke was about when someone said "I watched as they built a pyramid of six waterskiers high" and this lady had to chime in with "I saw one that was twelve high!" Lo and behold, not a few weeks later, she had a story to top someone else's about how her dog chewed up her glasses and the optometrist supposedly said "Gee, I've never seen anything this bad, not even when a lens had a bullet through it!" Our response was along the lines of, "If you had a bullet go through your eyeglasses, I doubt the dog chewing them up is going to top that one." So evermore, the inside joke was "twelve high with a bullet" as an indicator of how annoying the one-upsmanship could really be.)

So where does the annoyance start to creep in for you?

Is it posts per day?

Overall presence of volume of posts over an extended period of time?

Thread hijacking?

Thread mirroring / continuation?

Something else entirely?

A combination of things?

I'm really curious about this because this seems to come up from time to time and I'd love to know what separates "tolerable" from "intolerable." I'm guessing it's an individual line, somewhere in the grey, that can't be outright-defined. But I'm still curious about your thoughts ...

You know, this is rather destabilizing to admit since it means I have to acknowledge progress, but it no longer bothers me to have the "drama" posters on boards or e-mail lists (haven't been back here long enough to pin point anyone, but I could mention several on other lists I'm on). I've discovered I have the wonderful option of deleting e-mails or ignoring posts, and I choose to do so if what the person is saying doesn't relate to me or if I feel like they're just looking for attention. I'm a firm believer in give and take, and if an individual was constantly posting the "look at me!!!" posts & never providing constructive responses to others concerns I would probably peg it as attention seeking. I don't think it's quantity, for the most part, at least I hope not. I know I can post several posts per day, a few of them may "just" be venting, but for the most part I try to limit posts about me to practical explorations on how to utilize tools, or thought provoking questions that I think may open a discussion of interest to several group members. I also try to at least scan through the other posts & reply to those where I feel I can contribute positively--what does bug me is thread hi-jacking, so if reading a post brings up *my* issues I think it is general courtesy to move my thoughts into a new thread.

JMO, of course.

Most intolerable for me is repeatedly asking the same type of questions and getting the same sort of replies, but when a poster seems hell bent on getting new life out of an old stone and seems to disregard the answers previously given even if it would appear possible avenues have been exhausted.

I cope with it, but often find it can be draining. I wonder when they will do their own work! (my stuff entirely of course as I am positively sure I may appear to have done it in the past!)

Someone I work with....repeatedly does the same behavioural crap over and over again, repeatedly I listen and suggest a possible way of avoiding this kind of drama in future and yet again they will return...same story, different people and different setting. I wonder when the penny will drop. But yeah I sometimes get too woah too much point with them and head brick and wall spring to mind!

I guess I must be different to Harindy in that I really don't mind if people hijack my threads.... sometimes it progresses to the point I gain new things from it anyway. Hey we are all different eh?

I never see things in terms of drama. Partly because I'm not one to seek drama, and also, my abilities to understand those different than me only go so far. So, I'm never bugged by "drama" because I don't perceive drama. I don't look at it that way.

I can't recall a case where I've been bothered by the sheer number of posts from someone, or even just thought badly of someone for posting a lot. So, if I've felt that way, it was a minor thing.

The two types of situations where I ever get bothered by stuff on the internet, well, both involve interacting, not just what the other person posts. One would be those people who are actively unkind (nasty, mean) to me or who choose to tell me what they think of my stuff without really listening to my perspective.

The other would be if I think I have something to offer as far as their own issues, but the other person isn't listening. That can be frustrating. I've learned to accept that either I'm wrong (that I don't have something to offer), or they aren't able (or are unwilling) to see my perspective right now. The challenge there is to not keep wasting my time saying more or less the same thing over and over.

Actually, I could also get annoying if someone keeps posting general topics with viewpoints which I think are bullshit but I think might convince others. But that kind of thing as a repetitive thing is pretty rare, except maybe where on-going political conversations pop up.

I don't really look at others and label their behaviour in terms of "drama-seeking" or "marking-territory". I don't do it in real life either. I tend to expect everyone to be responsible for their own behaviour, and the consequences of such, and to that extent, it's not my problem and I don't mind if that's the real intent behind their actions. I'm big into personal responsibility and believe that kind of thing just comes back to bite the person doing it, sooner or later. We know so little of each other just over the internet that I almost think coming to any conclusion like that is an assumption of sorts, which I try not to do. That sort of thing only hurts me/effects me if I allow it to get to me or presume things about another I don't really know for sure. I tend to just keep doing whatever I think is 'right' and let others be whoever they are too, without judgment. The judgment doesn't help me, so I don't do it anymore.

I don't notice others post counts nor am I concerned about them. People can post however they see fit--it's not my job to police them or say how much is too much or too little. IMO, how often or where or when others post just isn't any of my business--it doesn't help me in my recovery to keep track of that sort of thing. I was concerned with my own post count at one time (in the beginning) but I've let that go now and it really doesn't matter to me. Why keep score?

I do kinda second Tracy's thoughts that it gets frustrating when someone refuses to grow. I also find that aspect draining, but I do realize that much of that is my stuff to deal with and I'm working on it. I really attempt to take each post at face value and realize that's how the person is feeling/expressing at that moment in time and go from there. My response is for that moment in time too, I don't obsess over yesterday or tomorrow anymore--trying to stay within the Now. Emotions and people in the recovery process can change so quickly sometimes.

High-jacking my threads or when someone else does it doesn't bother me either....but I don't like to do it myself. I don't know why I have that double-standard going on, but I do. I enjoy the interesting things a high-jack can bring up, but I always worry too much that the originator of the thread I might high-jack will mind so I don't do it personally (I'm sure I have, but I try not to). I don't like offending others and try not to do so when I'm aware of it.

I try to realize that we are all here to recover from some pretty serious PD issues. We will make mistakes in the social aspects of things (boundaries and such) and I try to give others and myself a bit of slack. We are all in different stages of recovery and it takes a different amount of time for each of us to progress, some not at all. I really attempt to say present with my own issues and not worry too much about what someone else is or isn't doing. I do like to respond to others threads, but that helps me as well, it's not just for their benefit that I do so.

When I do feel annoyed or frustrated or begin to think ill of another, I try to realize that it's usually my issue, not theirs. If I feel strongly about another in a not-so-positive way, I try to see what it is inside me that is bringing up that response. I'm here to work on me. That may sound selfish to some; I do try to help others here, but my main reason for being here/my goal is to work on my own stuff.

I have never viewed any posts here as one-upmanship. I may be one of the people you talk about who has a hand in every pot. I guess if I do seem to post a lot, it's not because I want to blab my mouth off - it's more because I have found a community of people with similar issues to mine and I feel comfortable here. It's almost like talking to friends on the phone. I have come to depend on the advice I get here and I just like being here.

I also don't have a problem with how much people post. I don't "count" how many times anyone posts. It's their business how much they want to post - not mine. I don't understand why it even bothers some people how much others post - we all have a right to be here, don't we?

I guess I am more interested in recovery-based posts rather than "my dog did this" or that kind of stuff. Again, it's not my place to say people should or shouldn't post that kind of stuff - it's just that I'm not interested in some of those things. But I would never say people don't have the right to post those things. Again, I have written some of those kinds of posts, so I would never throw stones.

I think what annoys me most here is when the arguments start. I have been part of that scene, so I am not "blaming" anyone. But it really bothers me when Ms. A goes at Ms. B and then it goes back-and-forth. And to be honest, I really get upset when one person goes after someone else, and there are no consequences for the person who isn't being nice. I wouldn't have brought that up, but you did ask what we find intolerable.

I guess one other thing that does bother me is when someone posts about a certain topic, and then someone else responds, but it has nothing to do with what the original poster said. Like maybe Ms. A posts about a therapy session. Then Ms. B posts about what happened to her that week, what she did, etc. etc. And the post has very little to do with the original thread. Why did Ms. B post about that stuff? I find that a bit disconcerting.

I can't think of anything else, but if I do, I'll come back to this. Interesting topic, Ash!

I have not yet read what others have written here - there may be duplicate ideas, I don't know.

I am a "big picture" person so I tend to have overall impressions rather than specific data to back up my perceptions. I would not be able to state a particular number of posts as excessive so for me it is more of an ongoing pattern that I notice. It might be that someone posts in nearly every thread on a continuing basis, not just when there is a lot going on for them personally. It is logical that people who are experiencing a great deal of turmoil in their personal lives are going to carry that over wherever they go, including internet forums. When it is the same people involved time and time again, it becomes an obvious behavior pattern that goes beyond what I personally find tolerable in most settings. I would call it "attention-seeking" behavior while others may label it as "drama" and still others may not even notice because they are so focused on themselves.

It seems that what might be called "hijacking" by one person might not be seen the same way by another. Some people may be more sensitive to this sort of thing than I am, though. I tend to prefer that conversations about a topic stay within the same thread as long as the posts are related to the original topic because the new threads that refer to other threads tend to start with the assumption that the reader has been following another thread enough to make sense of the tangent thought in the new thread. I kind of like each thread to be a "stand alone" so that someone has enough information for an intelligent response without first having to figure out "where is this coming from?" when the tangent threads pop up, especially if the original thread is pages long and not something I have any personal interest in plowing through. Keeping discussion in the original thread helps keep people from repeating themselves if they are following both threads and are not sure in which thread they should post their comments. At times when a specific person is referenced in a new thread, it seems more appropriate for the thread to be in Conversation Corner or done through PM, although I understand not wanting to communicate with someone in PM because there is more accountability when the discussion is public.

I do see the same "theme" brought up time and time again in thread after thread but the hope is that eventually a person makes progress and won't have to keep going over the same thing again and again. I know that there have been times I have gone in circles over something that I could not figure out because it took going through the "is it this?" or "is it that?" and "can I live with this or that, whatever it is?" before I was able to sort through my own thoughts without the emotional "freak out" that usually went along with each line of thinking. There are still times I go over the same ground I have already covered (depending on what I read mainly) because each time I am willing to venture a bit further than the last time. I think that when there is a high level of resistance about dealing with something, it can take some gradual exposure over time for us to reach acceptance.

It is usually the "ranting" posts that serve no real purpose except being a "me too" fest. Someone starts out with "I hate. . . blah blah blah" and the choices are to chime in with how much we also hate blah blah blah, keep quiet or remain neutral (blah blah blah is just so blah blah blah) because we prefer not to get involved in threads with such negative themes, or to post that we don't actually hate blah blah blah even though we recognize that others have the right to hate blah blah blah and everything else in life they find disagreeable with who they are as a person. I don't think the "so what are you going to do about it?" types of replies enter into those threads very often because the intent seems to be to have something to complain about rather than to look at ways to deal with reality. Suggesting someone do something about the way they approach the problem, rather than to invest so much energy in complaining about external forces over which we have no control, would be viewed by some as too "mean" anyway. There is comfort in complaining about how others don't understand us because it keeps us from looking into ways we can better understand others.

As far as the "one-ups-manship" goes, I don't think it is always the intent of the person posting. It might be that finding "common ground" with that person's thoughts and feelings would naturally come about under different circumstances than those brought up by the original poster. For example, if someone posts about how sad they are that their cat died and I respond with how sad I was when my father killed my cats, while I am relating to the feelings of losing a cat the fact that my father violently killed my cats is not something the person can handle. I don't usually bring up something that I believe will be upsetting to others (the graphic details are not something I would share with anyone, not even my therapist) and yet I have been told that some of the experiences I have shared in the past are "over the top" of what others are able to cope with so that instead of relating to someone as I am trying to do, it ends up being a situation where my words cause further distress instead. This may be viewed as "one-ups-manship" by people with low stress tolerance, which is often the case with people who have BPD, even though it is not my intent to "one-up" anyone.

The biggest problem I personally have is that I tend to assume that what people say and what they do are compatible. I think that is why I have problems with people who often try to convince others that they are not as they appear. It is considered a "crazy-making" environment when there are so many contradictions between statements about the type of person someone claims they are when their observable behaviors don't match their statements. It is not so much that I am making judgments about people as it is that I have an uncomfortable reaction around people who are "bull shitters" (I can't think of a more appropriate term for these people) since I find that I trust my own instincts more than the "cons" that people try to pull on others. I have discovered that my best defense is usually avoidance, for better or worse, so I step back and become less involved as a result. My foster mother's ex-boyfriend used to state how important it is to "treat women with the respect they deserve" and yet that meant that he was good to my foster mother and myself while at the same time he was raping and murdering other women. I suppose that in the past I have split people like him and my father into separate people because I have a hard time with words and actions that don't match up in the same person. Perhaps that is a part of the root cause of my own mental illness.

I know this is a long reply so some short questions and that there is a chance I have been too specific in my answers. It has been good for me to think through the questions for myself, though. I am sure that there will be many different answers to the same questions and it will be interesting to see how others answer them.

As one of those still others, let me point out, not because we are overly focused on ourselves. Rather, because we don't focus on others when it's none of our business.

As for those who call in attention-seeking (or drama-seeking), that's mindreading, which is one of the forms of twisted thinking. Any conclusion we come to about why someone is doing something is an assumption, and may be wrong.

And while the word "drama" on it's own doesn't imply anything about the person's motivations, but more often than not when it's used here at BPDR, it's used in a way that does make implications about their motivations.

What about those people who pay attention to others without making presumptions about them. Isn't it possible there are some of those here?

As far as people posting in nearly every thread, I think there can be multiple reasons. Some of them good reasons. It may be the person really truly has something to contribute. Or that the truly believe that have something to contribute, and desire to help. It also relates to how busy the board is overall. Sometimes one person having a lot a participation compared to others is because others aren't participating. It reflects the under-participation of others rather than anthing about the person.

Heck, on one music related message board, my response to noticing that most of the threads were either started by me or I had the last post, was to start another thread. The idea was to get others participating. No, it doesn't change the me posting in most threads thing. But it did encourage others to be involved.

How much is too much? I'm not sure I can define how much is too much. Sometimes there can be an ongoing useful discussion or chat that people will return to over and over and the discussion is engaging and embodies happy, healthy living.

Is there a certain number of posts that fall below the "Oh wow, is she ever a drama queen" threshhold? Is it ten per day and over ten, we just get tired of seeing that person's user name in every active thread? For me, this really relates to the content of the post. If an individual is focusing externally on how everything around them is against them and they do not recognize their own contribution I tend to lose focus. I have seen people come and post about an experience and others will offer empathy, sympathy, advice, or share a similar experience, but the person won't hear anything except how screwed up everything is against them and then starts lashing out. To me, that's drama seeking and the individual may be better off cooling down for a bit before continuing to post.

Is it more focused on a longer period of time - like the last thirty of the last seventy posts in the last two weeks came from that person and it seems like they have nothing better to do but be here, marking their territory or peeing in every pot? If the same type of individual as described above continues the type of behavior for a prolonged period of time, I tend to ignore all posts made by that person. Which is really a shame because it means I'm not reading what they say and they may have something great to share that I can learn. But if their posts are always related self-centeredly and aggressive against others, then I'm not going to give a shit.

Is it an ownership thing? If Person A posts about their cat and someone else chimes in with "me too and more" about their dog in the original thread, is that the annoyance, drama, spotlight-hogging factor? This doesn't bother me as long as the someone else chiming in can directly respond to the individual with the cat issue and not turn the focus of the thread to their dog.

Is it more spotlight-hogging than that? In the dog/cat example, if Person B starts a new thread (to not hijack) but then essentially starts the same thread time and time again, is that seen as "one-ups-manship" which is then seen as annoying? In some instances, I think it's smart to start a new thread. For instance, if Person A is talking about their cat and Person B mentions their dog and realizes there's something specific about their dog they want to explore, a new thread should be started.

So where does the annoyance start to creep in for you? The annoyances creep out when people cease listening to one another. It drives me crazy when a person rapid-fire posts in a heated thread without even taking into consideration what other people are saying. For instance, if I were really angry with Ash and she posted to say she was sorry for what she'd done to me, I'd wait to respond to her apology. I'd probably read it 70 times and let it really sink in before responding. I'd want to be sure my emotions don't get the best of me. I wouldn't want to react to seeing her name while angry and not actually hear the apology.

Is it posts per day? Depends on the circumstances. If a person is having a difficult day and they post one thread into each forum but each of those posts is spot on appropriate for said forum and they are genuinely trying to reach an understanding of a concept/tool, then I think that's great. If a person is only responding to posts and isn't adding any value whatsoever to the original poster, or a new thread is misaligned then I wonder if the individual is just looking to be seen.

Overall presence of volume of posts over an extended period of time? Nope. For me it's content of the posts. If a person is only responding to say, "nice" or "boo" or something insignificant, I would think that person is just trying to be seen and not adding value to the thread.

Thread hijacking? I dislike threads being hijacked.

Thread mirroring / continuation? I'd rather see people get to the root cause rather than mirror issues with others. If I need help getting my thinking untwisted and Ash is already talking about twisted thinking, I think I can learn from that thread rather than making it all about me.

Ellen, you're right. Drama is a subjective observation based on perceptions and thoughts external to the other person's actions.

That said though, there are - I think - a certain set of actions that are either excessive or extreme and, as such, tend to be deemed (or perceived) as dramatic or attention-seeking.

Borderline's diagnostic criteria includes terms such as "intense" and "alternating between extremes" and I think these are the things that can be displayed in online postings which are then characterized as dramatic and/or attention-seeking.

While I didn't start this thread out based on BPDR and the generic examples I used in my first post came from another board, since we are here, I think it's relevant to weave in the Borderline Personality component to our discussion.

For instance, excessive punctutation has often been pointed to as a form of displaying drama. It's enough to simply end with an exclamation point to express emotion! When a sentence ends with more two or three, it's excessive -- and against English grammar rules to boot!!!!!!!!!!

It is also a widely accepted form of discourteousness when one uses excessive capitalization as the societal norm is to construe this as shouting. It's one thing to use ONE word in all-caps to emphasize the point. BUT WHEN THE ENTIRE THING IS CAPS WITH EXCESSIVE PUNCTUATION!?!??!?!??!?!??!?!

Additionally, from the DSM diagnostic criteria, we find "markedly and persistently unstable self-image or sense of self" and when we see a person posting in a bunch of different threads, is it really that much of subjective perception (instead of objective observation) to equate the frequency and sheer volume with a desperate need to belong, be accepted?

We often say that the distinction between a "normal, NON" and someone with BPD is the intensity and moderation of their actions. With recovery and healthy coping skills, I think there comes a level of judiciousness with interpersonal interactions. I can care about everyone here without posting in every thread every day after every new post. The five posts I may put out don't detract from my level of compassion and interest, just as I don't believe fifty posts from someone else demonstrate any further level of compassion or interest.

In fact, in one of the original examples I gave (cats & dogs), someone who consistently hijacks threads and makes things self-focused (along the lines of: "yeah, you were talking about that, but I'm here now and I want to talk about this and I'm going to see who else I can get to talk with me about this and nevermind you & your original topic or concern") are very much in the Single Green Circle, as demonstrated below.


I don't think that every time someone brings up a tangential or tertiary issue, they're trying to hijack the thread and/or that they completely lack boundaries.

As I shared with a cat lover friend of mine the other day, when she posts about her cats, I don't really have common ground because I don't have cats so I can't really speak to cats as a general topic. On a larger setting though I can relate to having fur-covered, four-legged pets and the companionship they bring so I may say "Hey, my dogs do something similar / completely opposite. I think it's a hoot / seriously frustrating. Do you deal with similar antics / problems with your fur kids?"

What makes a post not-self-centered even if it veers slightly off the original topic is that the poster makes a genuine effort at wrapping back around to the original poster and/or the original topic.

The self-centered post is one in which someone might say "Oh, you posted a Christmas picture of your cats, well here's one of my dogs and aren't they cute?! I had the best time with them, they mean the world to me" without any regard whatsoever to the thread's originator. Even in the light-hearted threads in Shoot the Breeze, unless there's an open call for "Hey everyone, share your stuff, open call, free for all!" it's definitely a social faux pas to divert the attention away from the original poster's topic or completely ignore the reasons they may have started the thread.

Don't get me wrong - we all fall into this category at some time or another. We may become so engrossed in a long thread with many participants that we may not be able to see the forest for the trees (we may be too focused on a single detail that we've forgotten how we've gotten there and not realize we've strayed very far off the originally designated path.)

That, however, is more socially forgiveable because it's a gradual process. It happens slowly and is more likely to be accidental, usually due to carelessness or a lack of mindfulness.

When it's a sudden "no, I'm talking about THIS now!" it's less forgiveable and less likely to be accidental. As such, there is usally more intent - whether consciously or subconsciously - to divert the attention away from the original poster/topic and onto themselves.

Again, I think this wraps back to frequency and intensity.

Side note: If you watch the show "The Big Bang Theory" Sheldon is a particle physicist and lacks many social skills. When knocking on his neighbor's door, his practice is to knock-knock-knock and say the name, Penny; then knock-knock-knock and say the name, Penny; then knock-knock-knock a third time and say the name, Penny. It's three knocks and the name, done three times in quick succession. Social norms are such that one might knock a couple, three times, wait a few seconds (15-20) and then possibly call out the name, wait a bit longer (10-15 seconds) and try knocking again, giving pauses in between to allow for the person to reach the door before attempting again.

It's the frequency and rapid-fire approach that makes Sheldon's character funny on the show but the funny part of the skit is that Penny is just perturbed by his lack of social grace and incessant persistence. This is very similar, I think, to what we see in many online discussion forums -- the incessant postings, the rapid-fire punctuation, the repetitiveness are annoying to many people.

Within the framework of borderline, I do believe these examples of extremes can be indicative of deeper issues and can be symptomatic of an unstable sense of self, thinly disguised desperation, fears about belonging, chronic fears of emptiness, etc. - many of the hallmarks of the disorder itself.

** Long pause -- had work things to get done, went back to proof the above and review the existing thread ... **

There are some points ya'll raised that I would like to address, if I may.

The "refusal to grow" aspect is definitely annoying. That also came up in our discussion at the other community. In fact, it has been a recurring theme, of sorts, during the last five years at this company I've worked for, only in a slightly different way. I used to say "I'm tired of caring out getting their employees paid more than they do!" When it comes to recovery work, there does come a point where "I'm tired of caring more about their recovery than they do!"

I think there is a level of attention-seeking involved in that insofar as getting feedback provides validation and proof of existence. However, in the realm of recovery work specifically, I think it's deeper and more broad than just that. I think there's a much, much larger fear of moving out of the comfort zone and into the unknown, knowing full well that it will be hard, challenging work.

With regard to general "moving thoughts to a new thread" (which I generally agree with, in principle) I do think there's a certain level of societal norm involved and violating that mutually agreed upon (implied or stated) status quo is generally considered to be attention-seeking and drama building.

In heated situations, there are times when it's appropriate to begin a new thread. This is usually when things have escalated to a point where there are dozens of posts from many participants over a longer time-period and everything-but-the-kitchen-sink has been tossed into the mix. It may be appropriate at that point to step out and start a new thread to focus on just one specific thing rather than trying to rake through all the muck being slung about. In cases like this, a separate and new thread would be along the lines of "Hey, so it doesn't get lost, this point was brought up in that other thread and here's a summary of what was mentioned along with some new information - I'd like feedback from folks / please share your perspectives on this."

There are other times, also in heated situations, where starting a new thread can be seen as attention-seeking. It's along the lines of "Hey, ya'll arent' paying enough attention to me so I'm going to start this other thread so *I* can be the one to 'get credit' for starting this new discussion and so *I* can be the original poster so that (per the previously mentioned societal norms) people have to respect ME and wrap their posts back around to ME and pay attention to MY topic - that way I won't get lost in the shuffle."

I don't think there conscious thought patterns in place wherein people deliberately set out with those outlined intentions however I have certainly seen it play out and a few times, I've even seen people get pretty close to saying it outright: "No, I started this thread so we could talk about what I want to talk about." (Usually in response to someone trying to stir up more drama and divert attention their way. They say birds of a feather flock together and when drama starts up, drama junkies are there in a heartbeat - posting, pointing fingers, slinging insults, flinging accusations, etc.)

Another aspect of societal norms with regard to starting new threads as offshoots of another thread is the focus and intent those new threads take. When we say "Here's something that caught my eye, and here's why it caught my eye, and here's how I reacted to that but here's how it's ultimately sitting with me" or "I saw this in that other thread and it's bugging me but I can't quite figure out why and I'd like help from you guys" we're focusing on healthy stuff. We're offering insights that might be of value to other people to aid them in their journey. Or we're using the space to work through something, inviting insights which may or may not be taken on-board.

When we say "Hey, I saw this and I wanted to talk to you, One Specific Person, about it without getting lost in the other mess" it's more likely a form of attention-seeking. Why? Because if the intention is truly one-on-one conversation, norms dictate that such conversations be conducted in private (through PM or email.) Insisting that it not get lost in a longer thread is a way of insisting on (or at least requesting) a specific amount of attention.

"But how is that different from respecting the original poster's thread and not hijacking?" Both actions do respect the original poster's thread by not hijacking it however the difference (and what makes it attention-seeking) is that it's not necessarily designed to be a full community-wide discussion. These cases are usually instances where they want the spotlight on them & their thoughts OR they want a 1:1 convo but in public so everyone can share in their brilliance & give them applause.

I guess this is my long-winded way of saying, "Roz had it right in 2003" and it's really about the basics:

- Am I posting this only because of my feelings?
- Do I care about this person/these people?
- Am I willing to stay with the dialogue regardless of the difficulty of it?
- Am I in a frame of mind to be conscious of how my words will be heard?


Meaning well and being mindful don't have to be mutually exclusive. We can mean well but let's also try to be mindful and aware of how our posts and post frequency may be impacted by societal norms.

Side Note: My mother-in-law, before she died, believed that "If it's true, I can say it." After my husband and I drove 1,000 miles to visit her, she opened the door and greeted him by saying "Hi, Fatty!"

Just because we mean well, doesn't mean we should.

Just because we can post (i.e., there's nothing in the software stopping us from posting 10,000 times) doesn't mean we should.

Just because a billionaire can have a toilet made out of platinum doesn't mean he should.

The book is called "putting the pieces together" and I think this is a really important piece to ensure gets put into the puzzle. It's very easy to get wrapped up in a single thing (step, process, mindset) during the recovery process and lose sight of all the other facets involved in the bigger picture. It's more than just intent. It's more than just black-and-white rules about posting where, when and how. It's a grey, nebulous thing that needs to be navigated and explored and learned - sometimes the hard way.

Sometimes it takes being outright ignored to learn not to post every day in every thread after every new post.

Sometimes it takes getting reprimanded to learn not to be so self-centered.

Sometimes it takes being asked to leave before a person is able to step back far enough to see how their own actions were being perceived by the community.

I'm not threatening anyone here with a ban! I'm still focused (in my head) on the other community. It's a much smaller place which means a single person can cause much larger ripples in the pond. (What might be a ripple here might be a tidal wave over there.)

The bottom line is that it's a grey and murky area with different levels of tolerance by person with specific hot buttons here and there but overall, it seems to boil down to: intensity and extremes = drama and attention-seeking

Thank you ALL for your insights on this. I really appreciate the input.

I must say, there are some people that generally attract a lot of turmoil in their lives and don't often know that they do it. Voicing it is one thing, needing an unjudging soundboard is one thing, but to bring every issue to the table on the forum I think is another. We all (at least I hope) have a therapist, a psychiatrist, a doctor, a counsellor, a group, friends, family, some support. Sometimes it's easiest to bring it to the people that know what you're going through, and understand where you're coming from rather than the very support systems you have acquired prior to finding this site. I think when the person posting forgets the tools that they really have to work with, or choose to not use them, is when it's excessive.

Again, on another page, it's hard to determine whether or not that person is choosing not to use them or just unable to do so as they are so far down. I myself have not been coping in the healthiest way lately, but in turn, called a crisis line. Since we all suffer from the same ailments, at one point or another, it's maybe best not to judge as fellow forum go-ers, and maybe allow the people higher up in recovery that are senior members, to contact the person who is creating the "drama" and speak to them on a more personal note as someone concerned about what's going on with them, rather than someone who is just wanting them to control their forum happy posts.

I'm not judging anything, anyone, in anyway, but as someone who is new to the diagnosis, extremely insecure, and still constantly challenging every distortion, I was worried the person in question was me! lol. I have posted a few posts lately, as over the holidays it's particularly hard to cope with everything, and I just went through a rough break up. After challenging that distortion, I knew it wasn't me. But for those people that maybe are posting constantly, they could take this post about that issue, the wrong way, which could make things worse. Again, I am still so new to everything here, and am just offering my two cents. I know that everyone is just looking out for all parties on this forum, but I guess we never really know what triggers others (other than our own experiences).

I just hope everyone is happy and healthy, and if people responsible for over abundant posts read about this, that they may take it the way it is intended, and exercise the many other resources available. I guess that would be a good way to express the concern to those particular individuals. Kindly remind them of the other options out there for dealing with their issues, while still letting them know there is support here, but not meant to be their primary source of it.

Those are my two cents, don't know if it makes sense, just doing my best with what I know (like we all are!) and hope it is of use.

Cheers!

I always go back to content. I've been accused of many things on the various incarnations of this forum over the years. Some I've had coming, some were downright ugly.

I like the idea of moderators jumping in when something gets out of hand. Otherwise, let everybody just play ball.

If somebody is craving attention and drama, then forcing them to look at that behavior is part of recovery. Not to give us all an excuse for bad behavior, but this is a web forum for people with a personality disorder. It's not like we're all right in the head all the time.

When I see somebody creating drama or posting like a squirrel running around a tree, I just figure they're in a bad place and need to have their behavior brought to their attention.

It's nice we don't have a huge troll problem here. I've seen some hillarious troll posts on other forums but they just wouldn't go well here.

I also believe folks are not too heavy handed in branding others or badgering them into "healthy" thinking.

All in all, a good balance.

I have noticed that I was raised to focus my concern on others and not myself so that I still have an issue with this as an adult. As a mother, it is a good thing to focus on my children rather than on myself and yet my children may end up expecting others to focus on them as much as I do when that is not the way of the world! I tend to be too much of a "caretaker" so it is hard for me to look to others for support when I am usually the one supporting others.

What I was referring to as "attention seeking" behavior is when people are doing the "it's all about me" thing. When someone starts a thread about an issue in which they are seeking feedback, there will be a variety of replies. Most feedback tends to be along the lines of "I have found this to work for me" because giving advice is usually unwelcome. For some people, there tends to be a pattern to a person's posting style that makes every topic about them even when the focus is not on them. In these situations the person tries to get others to focus on them instead of on the original poster, sometimes by asking for feedback from others involved in the thread (and even from the original poster) instead of providing feedback to that person. I suppose it is possible that this pattern of behavior is driven by a person's extreme neediness rather than by a desire to be the center of attention but it tends to come across as "attention seeking" to me.

I used to invest too much of my own energy into helping others and I have had to step back from doing that so much. Now I am far more detached from people so that I have stopped caring what they do anymore. I recognize that people have the right to be as dysfunctional as they want to be and it is not my responsibility to offer them help in finding more effective ways of dealing with their dysfunctional behavior. In fact, sometimes the best thing is to allow a person to experience natural consequences for their behavior rather than to suggest that they modify it because that is the only way they will ever figure it out for themselves. This shift in my own perspective has allowed me to distance myself more and that has been a good thing for me because I no longer have any personal investment in relating to others through this "helper" role. My former therapist told me that when she is bothered by someone's behavior over which she has no control she has this "it must suck to be you" thought in her head - I am finally able to do this myself and it really is helpful in keeping a distance between myself and those who will only bring me down if I were to get involved in their personal drama!

I can't really go into specific examples so hopefully this is a bit clearer without being directed at anyone in particular.

I think too much is when one or two people posting so frequently dominate the atmosphere of the board. There have been times here when I'd have thought this board was being directed by one or two particular members rather than the premises BPDR is based on. Posters in this position can have an influence on the overall intent of the board which may not be so recovery focused, as they themselves are unclear on their own recovery. This is a concern to me bc a person posting so frequently, by the sheer fact that they need to spend so many hours of their life here, is not in a position to be setting the atmosphere and recovery focus on the board, and yet the number of posts dominates the board so much that indeed they are playing a large part in the recovery focus of the entire board (particularly for newbies).

As far as attention seeking or drama goes I think these descriptive terms lack the empathy required to see further into the problem for such posters. They are like negative brands. The more those words are used I think the more those people who dominate the board will be defensive about them, and thus become less likely to address the issues behind the behaviour. People who seek attention need it and do not know healthier ways to meet that need. People who create drama are also exhibiting unhealthy traits that are deeper than the coloured description of "dramatic". I doubt anyone who fits those descriptions will recognise themselves in them, just as it's unlikely anyone would recognise themselves in words like "cruel" or "selfish".

I also think that threads allusing to specific people displaying the behaviours being discussed will not be heard by those people. The best way to address them is directly.

I think the answer to the general question depends on the message board. Which is perhaps why most of the answers focus on this message board; it's hard to generalize. And, in addition to differences in content, a busy message board is different from one you can dominate with a post a day.

I've stayed away all this time because of the atmosphere Sarah has mentioned: it seemed every time I checked in (which was usually at the end of the month each month for 5+ months) there was some dang drama going on board-wide.

I remember Ash once saying "you are the drama you seek" and truthfully, drama is no longer exciting to me - it's the opposite and I try to stay away from it. My life is much happier that way and I can focus on real problems and real growth.

I'm glad to see the environment here at BPDR has somewhat settled because I'd like to give back a little to the community that supported me so much and I think my example may be useful to newbies who are scared and need help, because I was there once myself and once in awhile, still am. We all need compassion, understanding, and guidance, especially when we are acting-out.

May all be blessed with health & happiness and lots of joy in this new coming year.
Marni

I wonder, are people who used to seek drama, or like drama, or whatever, more likely to see it? And I don't say that as a criticism. If it's actually there, it's not wrong to recognize it.

Ellen, I think people (such as myself) who used to seek out and create drama are more likely to be aware of - if not hypervigilant about - drama in general however "regular" people seem to inherently recognize drama though they may not label it "drama" outright. They'll generally just steer clear of the drama and opt to engage in more peaceful, calm situations. (That's just what I've picked up through observation and the occasional question of those I figure are "normal.")

Sarah, when you say:

I guess that's where I'm stuck in a quandry. It's not like there's a list of black-and-white rules of appropriate posting on a message board that our tiny group of Admins (at the other board) could say "Hey, wake up - you're being a butthead. To stop being a butthead, follow these rules." So how - exactly - would you address it with the person directly? It's such a grey area that's like a fleeting, smoky set of vapors. Being direct is a good thing but it still seems like it would be akin to nailing gelatin to a tree - a futile exercise.

Using the feedback model I've come to embrace, I would want to say something like:

"When you _______, the impact/consequence is _______. What could you do differently?"

Let's assume I gave feedback like that: "When you post so many times in so many threads, a significant portion of the community feels unduly influenced by your presence in so many areas, on so many topics, with so much to say. What could you do differently?"

I would imagine the response to be something along the lines of either "Fine, screw you people, I don't need this kind of shit" or "I don't need to do anything differently because I don't have to take responsibility for how other people feel."

I've been talking about this topic at the other board (with the other admins) and we had also gotten to the point where we were able to differentiate (usually by example) "acceptable" versus "unacceptable" but we're still stumped on coming up with an effective way to deal with it.

When it comes to a random stranger or a relative newbie, it's a little easier (I think) to direct them toward group-accepted behavioral norms by a few comments here & there and a lack of response/reaction toward unacceptable actions. (Like that My Little Pony thing Terrabus shared, in a small enough group with a stranger/newbie, it's easier to come to consensus to "just ignore the troll, s/he's being a child, trying to get attention - don't give it, don't feed the troll.") With someone who's already part of the group, someone that people generally like and accept, someone who's not "all bad" and does offer good stuff to the rest of the people once in a while, it gets stickier and I'm not quite sure how to address it so I'm really interested in suggestions. Honest and truly!

That saying about it being "easier to look out the window than to look in the mirror" comes to mind. I want to help them see how their behaviour is being seen by others (hold up the mirror) but while trying to be conscious of how my words will be heard, I feel paralyzed to say anything at all. By saying the 'wrong' thing, I'm afraid (pretty confident) that drama will flare up as a result anyway! LOL

Ash, you say you are genuinely interested in suggestions, so here is mine.

While I'm not sure I do see a general consensus here in this thread (there have been various levels/aspects of what different people find intolerable), I do think it would be a good thing to at least try to call whomever you believe is disrupting the board out on their stuff. From the perspective of whomever is doing the calling out rather than claiming the 'whole' board feels the same way, which I'm not sure is possible.


Call them into CC and approach their specific actions that you personally find intolerable, disruptive, or unacceptable, not nebulous rules they might have crossed. Speak from your caring place and say how you (and possibly others) are being affected by their behaviour and Listen to their response. Do not go into the conversation with preconceived thoughts on what their response will be. Take their words at face value and have enough faith in them to listen to you as well.

I like this approach and feel others would respond to it well also.

Mind-reading, fortune telling...just listen to them and respond accordingly. While I generally think it's a good idea to sort of plan out how a conversation may go, I see no instance in your example of someone thinking "wow, I had no idea I was seen this way. I will do better. Could you help me?" The latter, in my mind, is just as viable a response as the first two. I would think it would be important to not conclude that the responder will have any sort of reaction before they actually do. In other words, give them a chance.


As someone who possibly falls into this category, I can emphatically say that I am here to be called out and to work on my stuff. If there is a problem with my behaviour, I expect the general community to make me aware of the things I am not. Personally, I would appreciate being called out in the manner described above and I think it might be underestimating others to think they would not like to have any community-disrupting behaviour called to their attention as well.

This whole thread has left me asking: what do we DO about it?
Here is the answer I think would work...take action. If you see someone, anyone newbie, regular or even mod, causing 'drama' or in any way 'disrupting' the board--be honest and tell them what you think. It's then up to them what to do with that information, but at least you are not thinking/saying ill things about someone behind their back. Or building up resentment towards that individual because it keeps happening. After all, if one doesn't know what they are doing is not looked favorably upon (especially when they get positive feedback from some), what reason is there to stop/change the behaviour?

It may cause an initial flare-up, but it is my belief that if this behaviour is regularly called out, in general it will stop. Many of us here are still learning social norms--these aspect have to be taught, IMO. It also seems by reading this thread that many assumptions are being made by all....maybe if we were to directly discuss these things, that element at least would be eliminated.

Except most message boards don't have anything like our CC forum. That's a good strategy here, but not one that can be used at other boards, since they don't have any equivalent forum.

I wasn't aware of that, I don't belong to any other message boards.

Is there not some way to speak to someone privately (without input from the whole board) such as a PM? Would that not be an equivalent?

Most message boards have private messaging, as we do here. But I definitely see that as something distinct from CC. One's private. One's public, but one on one.

And when we try the CC approach and the person does not respond in the favorable way you suggest?

Ah, that does get tried that every so often. Some people respond well. Some people don't. Most often the persons who seem to demonstrate the "dramatic" behavior are also those who do not respond well to being "called out". The very people who could benefit most from stepping back and considering the effect of their actions appear to be the least prepared to do that very thing.

Some people prefer not to hold personal discussions in PM because there is no accountability to keep either party civil.

You make good points, Minx.


At least you tried and got out your own feelings on the matter, not letting them fester within yourself. Again, what they do with the info is up to them to some extent. However, if the behaviour is truly disruptive, I would think more severe consequences would be called for if the talking-to approach failed. Although, I couldn't say what that would be. Needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, so to speak.

I suppose much of this depends on the level of commitment of the person doing the calling out--how far into it they are willing to go and stay with it.


I agree. However, many times it just takes awhile for this stuff to sink in. There will be that initial reason of "nope, not my problem" or whatever, but upon distance and reflection combined with good modeling from the rest of the community.....I don't know it just seems to me like if we are here to help ourselves and others recover we are doing a disservice to all by not calling out any adverse behaviour. If these people in question are indeed "least prepared" yet they are here trying to better themselves, isn't it up to the community to help them become prepared?

As for the other board Ash is referencing, I do not know the focus of that board and can really only speak from the perspective of this one.


I agree. That's why my initial suggestion was for CC and not PM. On a board without CC, PM was the only equivalent way I could think of to speak with someone privately.

I'm just trying to offer an opinion. I'm not thinking I have all/any of the answers.