Rape topic?

Why question the truth if it's even a remote possibility when it comes to 'enough is enough'? Why be so stingy with empathy that you can't 'waste' a bit on someone who just might have had an assault?

And if someone was that bothered by alien abduction they would still be 'that bothered' and need help, not being pulled apart here, where they chose to entrust their story.

There's enough nonsense around to be mean about, and I think this has had its day.

Julie wrote:Why be so stingy with empathy that you can't 'waste' a bit on someone who just might have had an assault?

Because at this point, the Sleep Center in question has been named, and if the story is not true, then innocent people are now being affected in a life-altering way.

mgaggie wrote:

Bill44133 wrote:

mgaggie wrote:

dinycat wrote: Whether or not the rape allegation is true, is it really germane to discussions about CPAP use?

What does germane mean?

relevant to a subject under consideration.

Thanks Bill, never heard of it before

Its just us silly American's we have several ways to say the same thing.

We talk funny...

Julie wrote:Why question the truth if it's even a remote possibility when it comes to 'enough is enough'? Why be so stingy with empathy that you can't 'waste' a bit on someone who just might have had an assault?

And if someone was that bothered by alien abduction they would still be 'that bothered' and need help, not being pulled apart here, where they chose to entrust their story.

There's enough nonsense around to be mean about, and I think this has had its day.

Your premise is a fail to start with. I don't see how you keep missing the point of logic here. The "truth" as you put it is still in question, and should not be so referenced at this point. If this story is found to be true, I'll be very empathetic. Well, sympathetic.

The truth may be in question, but being civilized people I still think some of the stuff written here - some of it - could have been left out. Feel free to disagree again of course. What happened to 'innocent until proven guilty'?

mg:
> What does germane mean?

One of the Jackson 5.


j:
> Hasn't there been enough exploitation of one person's terrible experience for one week?

Not nearly. lol

And BTW you've made a huge assumption in your post.

j:
> Why question the truth if it's even a remote possibility

You impeach yourself right from the start when you say "why question the _truth_ ."

You have, once again, without evidence, declared what an unknown person said to be true. Without evidence!

This is the same person who wrote in this forum:
"to top it off .. was trying to save damaged 13 yr marriage - he screams I have to many issues and left."

How can you believe one (fantastical) thing "she" said and ignore another?

j:
> What happened to 'innocent until proven guilty'?

Exactly. What about the alleged sleep tech?
Who are you thinking of?

Until you know if the story's true or not, why not give her the benefit of the doubt just because...? If you need it spelled out differently.

Julie wrote:Until you know if the story's true or not, why not give her the benefit of the doubt just because...? If you need it spelled out differently.

Because Julie, that isn't how life works on the internet. It's pretty much not how life works anywhere. But on the internet everyone hides behind a curtain of anonymity, so we don't know anything about "her" as you assumedly put it. Heck, "she" could be a sloppy 300 lb. man in flip flops for all we know.

When you or anyone else is taken in simply because the story is so horrifying, then another internet troll has likely met with the success they wanted to start with. As far as your comment about being innocent until proven guilty, yes, that's a founding precept of the U.S. judicial system. The court of public opinion is required to afford no such protection, and in fact never has.

So anything goes... no room for decency? I must be older than I thought.

The Internet is a lot like hanging clothes on a clothes line to dry. (Many here probably have never seen that, it's before clothes dryers, back when housekeeping was done by wives, they also taught and raised children.)

Anyway when you dry clothes in the open, things do happen, some bad, like birds crapping on them and rain, dirt blowing from the neighborhood, once enen paint on thd sheets. (Guilty as Charged) Posting your laundry on the Internet, can make it soiled too, so beware! Jim

One benefit of this thread is that it made me realize that I was too trusting in going in for a sleep study. The following link from the American Academy of Sleep Medicine will assist anyone concerned in finding an accredited sleep center, and also provides a means for filing a complaint....

http://www.sleepeducation.com/find-a-center

For what its worth, the sleep center I went to last summer is new and not on the list of accredited facilities. However, the rooms were clean, the techs professional, and there was minimal awareness of other patients.

Bill44133 wrote: Its just us silly American's we have several ways to say the same thing.

We talk funny...

giggle, usually its the aussies that apparently talk funny

Julie wrote:So anything goes... no room for decency? I must be older than I thought.

Julie, it has nothing to do with decency. What's indecent about questioning a story that on the face of it has components that just don't seem to compute?

That just seems to be using common sense, which I think transcends age. It must, since I'm 65.

old dude wrote: . . . zero empirical evidence . . . many reasons to call the veracity of the story into question . . . isn't universal acceptance of the story being factual. Certainly . . . huge leap of faith with no evidence . . . like to see some more evidence . . .

Decency, in my opinion, requires that a board dedicated to support of fellow patients not require the evidence you demand, old dude, sir, since no patient posting on this board is required to provide such evidence in order to receive help, and it would therefore be indecent to single out this kind of story as one requiring more evidence than any other story posted on this board. That would be prejudicial. If you don't demand "proof" of people who claim to have trouble finding the right mask or right pressure, why demand more "evidence" from this poster before you post something helpful?

No one is asking you to take a leap of faith, old dude. If you don't believe the story, you are free to choose to ignore it. But attacking the poster by setting yourself up as judge of the truthfulness of the story is bad form in the context of the claims made by the poster, in my opinion. If you want to say something constructive to be helpful to the poster, do so. If not, don't. But I'm sure you can see, if you stop to think about it, why the bar you set for believability is an impossible one in most situations and that your setting it as you have is an insult in and of itself. Common sense tells you that there often is none of the "evidence" you are demanding in cases of accusations of sexual assault.

Being helpful to someone claiming to be a victim of sexual assault does not require assuming the guilt of the accused party. That is a matter for the lawyers and officers to sort out, not us. But if the people who want to be helpful to those claiming to be victims were to require a conviction of the accused party before offering help, few people would ever get any help.

She did not come here asking for money. She told a story. It is your choice whether to help or ignore. But attacking the story is not decent, in my opinion, just in case it is true. Because if it is true, and the only place she felt safe enough to tell it, whether coherent or disjointed, is on an anonymous public board, attacking her story would be hurtful. Agreed?

So even if you choose to consider the poster some form of troll, be decent enough to treat her the way you would like a lurker to see people who make such claims treated. That will send a powerful message about the helpfulness and safety of the board.

In other words, even when you think you smell a troll, treat the alleged troll the way you want the public to know they will be treated here. Don't let trolls, or assumed trolls, control your actions. Even a purely trolling post can be an opportunity to say something useful that someone else might benefit from. And I believe the decency of any community can be judged by how the community treats those who appear less believable or more troll-like.

And if any story is worthy of decency from others, it is one claiming what the poster claimed. Whether you buy it or not. Being helpful does not require taking sides.

In my opinion.

Excellent post Jeff. I wish it could be a sticky.

And kudos to Julie for her posts also about decency.

49er

jnk wrote:

old dude wrote: . . . zero empirical evidence . . . many reasons to call the veracity of the story into question . . . isn't universal acceptance of the story being factual. Certainly . . . huge leap of faith with no evidence . . . like to see some more evidence . . .

Decency, in my opinion, requires that a board dedicated to support of fellow patients not require the evidence you demand, old dude, since no patient posting on this board is required to provide such evidence in order to receive help, and it would therefore be indecent to single out this kind of story as one requiring more evidence than any other story posted on this board. That would be prejudicial. If you don't demand "proof" of people who claim to have trouble finding the right mask or right pressure, why demand more "evidence" from this poster before you post something helpful?

No one is asking you to take a leap of faith, old dude. If you don't believe the story, you are free to choose to ignore it. But attacking the poster by setting yourself up as judge of the truthfulness of the story is bad form in the context of the claims made by the poster, in my opinion. If you want to say something constructive to be helpful to the poster, do so. If not, don't. But I'm sure you can see, if you stop to think about it, why the bar you set for believability is an impossible one in most situations and that your setting it as you have is an insult in and of itself. Common sense tells you that there often is none of the "evidence" you are demanding in cases of accusations of sexual assault.

Being helpful to someone claiming to be a victim of sexual assault does not require assuming the guilt of the accused party. That is a matter for the lawyers and officers to sort out, not us. But if the people who want to be helpful to those claiming to be victims were to require a conviction of the accused party before offering help, few people would ever get any help.

She did not come here asking for money. She told a story. It is your choice whether to help or ignore. But attacking the story is not decent, in my opinion, just in case it is true. Because if it is true, and the only place she felt safe enough to tell it, whether coherent or disjointed, is on an anonymous public board, attacking her story would be hurtful. Agreed?

So even if you choose to consider the poster some form of troll, be decent enough to treat her the way you would like a lurker to see people who make such claims treated. That will send a powerful message about the helpfulness and safety of the board.

In other words, even when you think you smell a troll, treat the alleged troll the way you want the public to know they will be treated here. Don't let trolls, or assumed trolls, control your actions. Even a purely trolling post can be an opportunity to say something useful that someone else might benefit from. And I believe the decency of any community can be judged by how the community treats those who appear less believable or more troll-like.

And if any story is worthy of decency from others, it is one claiming what the poster claimed. Whether you buy it or not.

In my opinion.