So it's all about Richard.
"As far as I can tell, the charge of "obsession" falls
completely on the shoulders of those who are so attached
to their beliefs and so petty as to get uptight when they
encounter ideas contrary to their own. Bitching about
others having such ideas is weird, and IMO the sign of a
weak mind." - TurquoiseBee, 1/29/2015
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <jamesalan735@...> wrote :
And so Richard is back, and here is my prediction of how his behaviors will
play out.
Richard will continue to exhibit classic behaviors of a person with an
addiction. As I noted in a previous post (included below), he is (and clearly
was, prior to his banning) unable to control his behavior here.
Asking an addict to control his behavior, or giving him a 'second chance', or
asking him to modify his behavior is pointless. That is, each of these
alternatives has a 0% chance of success. Because, truthfully, one is not asking
the addict - one is asking the addiction. And addictions do not respond to
reason, to pleading, to being asked nicely, to being ignored, or to being
argued with. An addiction can only respond to whatever the addict needs in
order to get high. Nothing else matters. This is true across all kinds of
addiction, whether to substances or behaviors. So to stop the addictive
behavior one takes away the means to get high - there is no other way.
When deprived of the opportunity to get a high, addicts will engage in
whatever behaviors they can in order to get the high their mind-body system
needs. These behaviors obviously differ among addictions, but they have the
following characteristics (among others): manipulation, playing the victim, and
minimizing.
In Richard's case, this behavior has been to write to Rick to "let me
subscribe to the group because some informants were still talking about me and
I wanted to post a few replies." This sentence is a textbook example of the
above three characteristics of addict behavior: manipulation and playing the
victim ('let me subscribe to the group because some informants were still
talking about me'), and minimizing ('I wanted to post a few replies').
And so Richard is back and, within a relatively short period of time, his
behavior will be exactly the same as it was previously. It cannot be stopped by
Richard, no matter how much we might like that to be the case. It will only be
stopped by him being banned again.
It is not that Richard can choose to leave FFL or change the character of his
posts: Richard cannot not post on FFL**. To put it another way: If in the very
unlikely event that Richard decided that he would like to stop posting or
change the nature of his posts, he wouldn't be able to do so. Even if no one
FFL were never to interact with him or refer to him from this moment on, he
will continue to troll the group.
Rick let me subscribe to the group because some informants were still talking
about me and I wanted to post a few replies.So, I promised not to out anyone's
real name - now this is funny - since I subscribed three people in the group
have outed me. You can't make this stuff up, Alex. LoL!
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <j_alexander_stanley@...> wrote :
Don't look at me. When I saw the subscription request, I left it for Rick to
handle. Richard made no attempt to conceal his identity, so Rick approved the
subscription, knowing fully well who it is. Rick's kind of a softie about stuff
like that; after some period of time, he usually lets people back in. Years
ago, there was another person who was far more deserving of being permanently
booted, and Rick even let him back in.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote :
Rick or Alex, If memory serves this arsehole has been barred from posting.
Please send him back to wherever he's been dragging out his miserable existence
since he last wasted everyone's time here.
