Criticising other posters contributions

I think that Jingl is no stranger to robust replies and those of us who "know" her, might feel we ccan take this into account.
It is hard to judge, but I did not see anything today that might have "pushed someone over the edge". However, as a former Sam I too was trained to give a caller/client the benefit of the doubt until I was convinced otherwise. The extreme wind-ups frequently caused real grief and trauma when taken at face value and it was only afterwards that I would sometimes find out that a similar tale of woe had been peddled to another volunteeer.
I think Elegran's post right at the beginning of the thread (if this is what we are talking about) was wise, gentle and sensible, judging things just right. Of course there will be 2 sides to most if not all quandaries and it is not unrealistic to try to find out what the other side is.
If you are asked your opinion - you should be able to give it after all. Advice can be another matter altogether.

To be honest, I am feeling a bit acerbic today, so I think I shall go away and do something else before I tell someone to get a grip, or to pull the other leg, the one with the bells on.

There is plenty of housework to be done.

Yes, suicidal thoughts are very real, but so are windups from people who want to see how we will react! Maybe I am a cynical old B, but I have seen some posts on the forum which looked decidedly dodgy to me, but had several replies that would have had a joker chortling into his Pepsi. Better that than a sarcastic answer to someone really at the end of their tether, though. You just can't judge from a single post.

I've been thinking about this while I was out. It seems to me that there are different types of 'criticism' when it comes to others' contributions.

There's "I think so and so is wrong and here's my advice..."

There's "What a terrible thing to say to poor so and so, how could you...?"

and there's "That's not helpful and here is my much more compassionate view on the subject..."

All valid as points of view, of course, but sometimes there does seem to be a bit of competition as to who can be the most caring and understanding.

We can't have a questionnaire about their emotional health for each post. We just have to use our own judgment. Mostly that works well, but if people ask strangers what to do in a given situation, the answers they get will be very varied. They will pick out the ones they like best anyway.

jingl it isn't silly and I just wanted to raise awareness that suicidal thoughts are very real.

That's silly! We are not doctors. It's a whole different kettle of fish.

I give up.

When I saw my doctor at the time my marriage was breaking down, the first thing he asked me was 'do you feel suicidal'. I replied that I didn't and we proceeded from there. So, if trained GP's have to establish someones state of mind when they're at a low ebb and asking for help, should we not be very careful in what we say?

Oh Aka! We cannot possiby be held responsible for a stranger's emotional health to that extent! That is just silly.

Elegran I'm jot criticising your advice at all. I think it is very good. Just defending my own position.

I am not "spoiling for a fight"! Or being "confrontational". Just.... oh! never mind!

jings No-one has handed in their membership to GNHQ as a result of my advice, so it can't be too bad. (unless they went silently, snuffling as they crept off. If I have offended anyone, do PM me to let me know)

I try to keep out of threads where I would get too cross to be tactful, so I don't give a lot of advice. I let willing vounteers like yourself to take any flak that is going.

I do agree with you that people do ask what they can do and then take the huff when they don't get the answer they wanted. Others keep coming up with reasons why whatever is suggested is quite impossible for them because . . .

There are also some "problems" which should be taken with a large pinch of salt, IMO. Invariably a few posters take the bait and reply, whereupon the original poster either produces more and more dreadful complications of their "problem" or vanishes completely.

Indeed! dollie

Oh, under certain circumstances Samaritans will confront a caller in the first few minutes ......

I strongly believe "tough love" only works if you actually know the other person, know their state of mind and have made a judgement that they can take it. A new member on a forum, presumably posting in crisis, could be in a very desperate or fragile state.
Most counsellors would only "confront" a client once they had got to know them for a few sessions and assessed their state of mind.
Someone may know different but I doubt whether Samaritans ever confront people in the first few minutes of a phone call.

looks like someones spoiling for a fight..

How would you feel if your advice drove someone over the edge?

I think jinglbellsfrocks has got a point, to be fair.

See. That is exactly what I mean.

How do you KNOW your way of giving advice is better than mine?

It is all in the phrasing, Jings as I remember you saying once. Tough love goes down better with some words than with others. Best to type twice, post once, and use the delete button freely.

Oh, back to the "soft place to fall" are we?

Sensible advice is what is usually asked for and that is what is usually needed.

We don't actually know the state of mind that someone is in when they post, especially if it's someone new. Best to err on the side of caution , I feel until we understand the situation more and get to know them better. It can be a very lonely place, typing on a forum when your world has just crashed around you. TLC first along with practical advice. 'Tough love' comes further down the line.

Yes. I'm sure you know best about absolutely everything Jess.

Yes I know it was me what done it this time, wasn't it!
I know you mean to be helpful. But when a new member, obviously upset, comes here for the first time, desperate for a bit of support and advice, shooting straight from the hip, I believe, can be a bit strong. Different case if it is a long-term member that is having a bit of an AIBU rant, or suchlike.
But we have had this exact debate a few times before, haven't we? So maybe the solution is you have a right to post whatever you want and I have the right to say that I think you are coming on a bit strong?

I guess I just hate being preached at. And yes, it would be a thread about a thread.

We are free to criticise I believe and to respond to criticism if we so choose. The guidelines (I think) just say we shouldn't be personal or "attack" the poster, just the post.
Would you be prepared to be more specific, Jngl or does that run the risk of "Threads about threads"??

on any forum its sometimes more difficult to type what you want to say in response to a thread and it can easily be taken in the wrong way by the reader...

i wouldnt class it as being a 'holier than thou attitude' we all at times can be offended by other posters comments but we dont have to deliberately go on the attack...lifes too short ...if you dont like what a poster has written ignore it!