splitting threads too early

[atheist_angel]

this post (http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/forums/showpost.php?p=45913&postcount=14) was relevant in the context of the thread it was posted in: because one could argue that there are indeed delusions that could be classified and hallmarks of specific untreated neurological disorders.

If we were to split that thread; and make this same post (http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/forums/showpost.php?p=45913&postcount=14) the opening post of the new thread; and slap a title on it that said: 'Schizophrenia and Logic' -Would that appropriate? Would it be fair to the other atheists that suffer from schizophrenia and have had to put up with one ad hominem after another? More importantly, would the post support the title and would the title support the post?

I was really, really, really afraid to say anything (http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/forums/showpost.php?p=25923&postcount=27) because, I didn't want to feel like I was butting heads, but (http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/forums/showthread.php?t=3112).. :( Is there any chance we could just delete the offshoot autism (http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/forums/showthread.php?t=3112) thread? I'm very embarrassed by it.

The split didn't make any sense to me and the new thread topic still doesn't make any sense to me. It's like if I offhandedly said, I suspected a gluten allergy could be responsible for some heart problems and then my comment was split off into a new thread titled: 'Gluten and Its affects on the Heart'... That would not be the same as writing an opening post about gluten with links to articles of recorded cases and research. It would also be better to include the name the of the particular autoimmune disease in the title of the thread.

...call me picky when it comes to science, I guess.

Otherwise I don't care about title match. I also think the thread was split too early because there were just 4 semi-off topic posts and then it went right back on topic so it just resulted in a chunk of the on topic conversation getting cut out along with the semi-off topic posts. It's a big mess now.

Sorry for long post, I know there's a point in there somewhere.

[atheist_angel]

Or change the title or something?

Or re-merge even? (although I do think the original OP should be asked if that is what they would prefer, before hand.)

Anyway, I think I'm asking for opinions. (or about options)

[Praxis]

I still don't entirely understand why you're embarrassed about it AA but the thread title is easily changed if you would like.

As I said in PM, I believe the topic has its own merits (having an Asperger's son myself, it's something I have an interest in) and warranted its own thread.

The fact it was split at one of your posts was entirely random (as already mentioned in PM) - I could easily have split it anywhere but felt, on reading, that was a good place to split and to have the discussion continue elsewhere.

So how about if we change the thread title and I'll see if we can even insert a post above yours so it looks like it was started by someone else and the discussion can continue?

I wouldn't mind hearing from gruber about this either.

Plenty of threads get split when they start to head off in another directly, particularly welcome threads and coming out stories, once the initial welcomes and comments have passed.

Cheers.

[The Irreverent Mr Black]

This Aspergian might have titled the child-thread differently but does not mind.

Interesting thing: there are many of us here, I think.

[Crocodile]

And this Aspergian would be OK with the title as such since it does reflect on the relevance of the content. I don't think it is really much of a big deal to be honest.

I have done thread splitting early on in another privately owned forum which I co-administer too. If one can see that it is going to go completely out into a different topic I do not see much trouble splitting it. I think it wasn't a bad idea to be honest.

[zebba]

Interesting thing: there are many of us here, I think.Is that an atheist thing, an internet forum thing, or a "specific interest" thing do ya reckon?

(not an aspie myself, but being in IT I'm certainly not a stranger) :)

[The Irreverent Mr Black]

Is that an atheist thing, an internet forum thing, or a "specific interest" thing do ya reckon?

(not an aspie myself, but being in IT I'm certainly not a stranger) :)
@zebba: AS people have low thresholds for bullshit and social lubricant. We are not the only people with that trait, but I can see how AS and atheism would tend to coincide.

[zebba]

@zebba: AS people have low thresholds for bullshit and social lubricant. We are not the only people with that trait, but I can see how AS and atheism would tend to coincide.
I reckon that's a factor for sure. But I was curious whether the "specific interests" is a bigger factor? What I mean is, I imagine that AS people ARE likely to tend towards atheism (for the reasons you stated), but at the same time I imagine that they are more likely to be represented in online forums in general due to the tendancy to be a bit more passionate about their interests then non-AS people?

And is the term "aspies" OK to use or not? I dropped it before without thinking... Apologies if it isn't...

[The Irreverent Mr Black]

I reckon that's a factor for sure. But I was curious whether the "specific interests" is a bigger factor? What I mean is, I imagine that AS people ARE likely to tend towards atheism (for the reasons you stated), but at the same time I imagine that they are more likely to be represented in online forums in general due to the tendancy to be a bit more passionate about their interests then non-AS people?
Religion is not one of my Big Interests. Reading and languages both are, so when I was infected with the god virus, I gravitated toward becoming a theologian.

I couldn't speak for the other AS people here, but perhaps they will give their facets of the story.
And is the term "aspies" OK to use or not? I dropped it before without thinking... Apologies if it isn't...
Hmm. Interesting one, that. Perhaps like gay people using the Q word among themselves, or people with a wealth of melanin using the N word, again in-community, is how I view it.

I don't really like hearing it applied to me by neurotypical people, but again that is my personal take.

Perhaps "Aspergian" is best: it beats the old "suffering from" (I'm not), "living with" (not an accurate description) and so forth.

Just don't call me late if there's good coffee or whisky and I'm generally contented!

[Praxis]

I use the term "Aspie" when talking with another friend of mine who has an AS son (ie. "with Aspie kids blah blah") and I have no problem with the term.

Then again, I don't have AS, I just gave birth to one who does :) (he has no problem with the term either BTW).

[wearestardust]

@zebba: AS people have low thresholds for bullshit and social lubricant. We are not the only people with that trait, but I can see how AS and atheism would tend to coincide.

You earlier comments started me also to thinking about whether certain traits might relate to a disposition to atheism - or the reverse. Your comment makes sense to me.

Sociopathy (yes I know there's no such thing and the nearest thing in the DSM IV is antisocial personality disorder) seems to be useful in religious groups, in exactly the same way as it is useful in corporate structures - it's easy to bully people when you don't understand that they have value in themselves.

My own series of major depressive episodes certainly helped me out of faith in large part, I think, to the therapeutic process which made me much more analytical about what was what in my life and what was good and what wasn't. Guess where that led (being told that "men of god don't get depressed" helped me on the way too). That said, there are a lot of people with depression in churches, it seems to me. Or maybe just the same proportion as in the general community, but being religious brings on the episodes (it did it for me until I snapped and walked out) and so it just looks to be more common ...

Continuing with the free assocation, before Mrs WAS did her social work qualifications mid-career, she did some counselling qualifications. From what I could gather a narrow majority of people doing the counselling training were do-gooder busybodies sent by this or that parish to be the official parish counsellors, or who undertook the training with some general idea of being useful to their church community. Scary scary stuff.

Edit: we need another thread split!

[atheist_angel]

Although, Aspergers\Autism is a syndrome in its own right, and has its own collection of symptoms.. It can also be a 'symptom' itself, so to speak, in regards of having been cause by another medical issue. (different for everybody) Therefore, the topic of 'autism and health' is a more complex topic (than one might first think). It would need to be treated with respect from the scientific POV. But, none of that necessarily affects things at the moment ... because, that point can be viewed as moot ... Because the new thread is way more off topic, than the original thread would have been: because more 'on topic' was cut than 'off topic'.

I think the posts were all relevant because they were regarding issues that were raised in the opening post and it didn't continue long enough to become a separate discussion of it's own ... it went back full circle to topic straightaway. I also wasn't initially certain if I wanted to keep the two posts in question or delete them ... but I figured that since it had already become part of the discussion and would also be relevant to another 'on topic' question I wanted to ask ... I thought best to leave it in. - Yet, if I had known it was going to result in a split, I would have deleted it... partly because I think an 'autism and health' topic should be approached in a different way.

-(Am I wording these things right? - Probably not... but I'm trying.)

@Praxis: I think we both might be sticklers for order in the universe :D, each in our own way. (I love order!)

Edit: we need another thread split! @WASD: NOOOOOOOOOO! (I can't take change!)

[Crocodile]

Might be going a little off the original subject here bit:I use the term "Aspie" when talking with another friend of mine who has an AS son (ie. "with Aspie kids blah blah") and I have no problem with the term.

Then again, I don't have AS, I just gave birth to one who does :) (he has no problem with the term either BTW).I've seen a lot of people use that term too. Even though personally I do not like that term (might as well give every other disorder stupid nicknames as well!) very much I have heard it several times. I do tend to use Aspergian from time to time though. I guess I should stop trying to use that one too. I might start saying "person with Asperger's syndrome" or "fella with Asperger's syndrome" or something. I mean to be honest how many times have you heard someone with down syndrome being known as a "downie" now a days?

[Crocodile]

So how about if we change the thread title and I'll see if we can even insert a post above yours so it looks like it was started by someone else and the discussion can continue?That will work until somebody finds this thread. :D

[Praxis]

I don't care if this thread ends up in a discussion about who will get the role of Mary Poppins in the Australian production - I'm not splitting it 'cos I'll get in trouble if I do ;)

[Crocodile]

<insert shit boring longarse text about who will get into the role of Mary Poppins in the Australian production here>

[atheist_angel]

Might be going a little off the original subject here bit:I've seen a lot of people use that term too. Even though personally I do not like that term (might as well give every other disorder stupid nicknames as well!) very much I have heard it several times. I do tend to use Aspergian from time to time though. I guess I should stop trying to use that one too. I might start saying "person with Asperger's syndrome" or "fella with Asperger's syndrome" or something. I mean to be honest how many times have you heard someone with down syndrome being known as a "downie" now a days?
I like it because I can talk about aspie\autie issues without having to constantly use the word "syndrome".

I also have the "I have poor eyesight and have to wear glasses" "syndrome".

Just don't care for that word: "syndrome" :cool:

[Crocodile]

All entitled to one own's opinion I guess. I do however have a problem with it because it is quite strange that Asperger's syndrome and autism seem to be the only ones that have silly nicknames. How come we don't call people with Down syndrome "downies" then?

And also why not just say "Asperger's" if you don't like the word "syndrome" though?

Personally I have mixed thoughts about the word "Aspergian" as it sounds "alieny" and "sci-fi-y" which describes how I feel a lot. :D

But yeah I can understand that the word "syndrome" can be a bit...errr...spooky I guess.

[atheist_angel]

But yeah I can understand that the word "syndrome" can be a bit...errr...spooky I guess.
More like "depressing"

[The Irreverent Mr Black]

I use the term "Aspie" when talking with another friend of mine who has an AS son (ie. "with Aspie kids blah blah") and I have no problem with the term.

Then again, I don't have AS, I just gave birth to one who does :) (he has no problem with the term either BTW).
Parents are community. Let somebody not of my close family refer to me, third-person, as an "Aspie" to somebody else, and you will witness Mister Offended in full, crisply-spoken, icy, eloquent swing.

[Praxis]

I've been thinking on this and you know what? I have decided/realised that I use the term "Aspie" simply because it's shorter to say than Asperger's or Aspbergian (3 and 4 syllables respectively) and I'm always in such a rush that any corners I can cut, I will :)

[zebba]

Thanks for the info folks.

I should point out that I've long suspected my brother of aspergers, or something similar. So I've done a little reading on it, and you know what they say - a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Thanks for being open.

[Crocodile]

Unlike one autism/AS forum I have been on, I personally do not advocate self-diagnosis to be honest. I would only worry about diagnoses when there is actually a problem. I think theoretically I should have no problem getting a diagnosis of leprosy. But since I do not have any problem, cavorting about with a diagnosis of leprosy in my opinion is a selfish excuse to gain some benefits (if there are any leprosy benefits) and this is a problem I do have with self-diagnosis particularly of Asperger's syndrome and/or autism.

If you do a little research on someone called Amanda Baggs you will probably find that this is an extreme case where she got herself a diagnosis of severe autism (note that she was not autistic until 1997 apparently) and is now using that to make lots of money. That also means that those who actually have severe autism will soon enough be ignored because of the actions Amanda Baggs has committed. So as far as suspecting someone with Asperger's is concerned, I wouldn't bother with a diagnosis unless it is actually a problem.

[zebba]

I agree 100% crocodile.

It's a curiosity thing, nothing more. My bro has a few traits that I've always wondered about. When I heard about AS, it sounded very similar and I did a little more reading, that's all.

In his case, if he does have AS or some form of autism, it certainly isn't something that needs any intervention. He's happily married, kids, job, etc.

[atheist_angel]

... happily married, kids, job, etc.What's that?

What is this "happily married, kids, job, etc." thing you speak of? :p

(I've heard Bill Gates knows, but... :confused:)

[zebba]

What is this "happily married, kids, job, etc." thing you speak of? :pShe let's him spend all day in his garage. Lucky bastard.

[The Irreverent Mr Black]

Secret of any happy partnership.

I was cunning and wound up with an AS partner.

Two Weird-Crap Collections, One House!

[atheist_angel]

Parents are community. Let somebody not of my close family refer to me, third-person, as an "Aspie" to somebody else, and you will witness Mister Offended in full, crisply-spoken, icy, eloquent swing.I guess I just haven't had to deal with that one yet. The only 'NeroTypical' person that has ever called me an "Aspie" was a nurse, but in return, I called her an "NT" (just to see the look on her face). However, I HAVE been called an "Aspie" quite a bit by non-NeroTypical people. Most them didn't have AS, but some other neurological condition. - btw, anyone that has done this got a 'cute name' right back, like "Schizo" or "Tardis!"


But some 'semi-incircle' NT people do keep telling me, "Autism is a Fascinating Topic!" (or similar). - But to me, it's not. It's a painful topic and it's very personal. I almost feel like I should start telling them, "Neurotypicalism and a Fascinating Topic!" - It's not, but you know...Like I can imagine, if I walked up to a couple of strangers and said: "Homosexuality" is a "Fascinating' Topic!" ... one person might think I was a well meaning person that knew someone that was gay ... but the other person might just think I was a bigot.

I still have a hard time knowing when NOT to get offended when it comes to such issues. Oh well, I guess... I dunno.

[Fearless]

AA, thank you for that post. To be honest I can relate to that post in that I could have slipped up and said something similar about Autism, but your feelings on the matter have sort of outlined the very real fact about people who are living it. Of course you have the right to feel upset about it.

I wouldn't have meant to say it intentionally to harm or insult anyone. If anything, it is more an admiration for people who manage to live with it at whatever degree.

I have known and have worked with people with Autism so I am no stranger to 'it', but I don't for one second think I know what 'it' is like and don't presume to.

Thank you.

[Crocodile]

I guess I just haven't had to deal with that one yet. The only 'NeroTypical' person that has ever called me an "Aspie" was a nurse, but in return, I called her an "NT" (just to see the look on her face). However, I HAVE been called an "Aspie" quite a bit by non-NeroTypical people. Most them didn't have AS, but some other neurological condition. - btw, anyone that has done this got a 'cute name' right back, like "Schizo" or "Tardis!"Ah, now sorry to mention that, but the first thing I saw when I was trying to read that was the bit I have just highlighted. Perhaps I've been watching too much Doctor Who or something.


But some 'semi-incircle' NT people do keep telling me, "Autism is a Fascinating Topic!" (or similar). - But to me, it's not. It's a painful topic and it's very personal. I almost feel like I should start telling them, "Neurotypicalism and a Fascinating Topic!" - It's not, but you know...Like I can imagine, if I walked up to a couple of strangers and said: "Homosexuality" is a "Fascinating' Topic!" ... one person might think I was a well meaning person that knew someone that was gay ... but the other person might just think I was a bigot.

I still have a hard time knowing when NOT to get offended when it comes to such issues. Oh well, I guess... I dunno.I can relate to that. It's like consistent harrassment about one thing or another. I say there is a time and place. It's just that often people like us get that bit wrong. :( I am one of them.

It can be exhausting knowing when not to get offended. In fact it just sort of happens. I also have a hard time knowing what will offend people, although I do have some capability of figuring this out, many slip-ups happen. Personally I am getting fed up with looking after other peoples' emotions for them and have started to develop an attitude such that, if people get offended by what I am saying it is probably their problem. Especially if people get offended for "swearing" and DEFINITELY their fault if people get offended if I say "Jesus" because I am an atheist.

Why don't they start going "Oh celebral palsy is an interesting subject" or something like that?

Or focus on another, more prevailant mental disorder like "Religion is an in..." oh wait... that's what people do on this forum. :D

Occasionally there are good places for the subject to pop up like for instance a forum dedicated to it. I have only been a n00b of one of them but their attitude is a bit on the encouragement of false autistics so I left after the behavior escalated.

I doubt the "neurotypicalism is a fascinating topic" idea will do anything because to be honest, I think there are not too many neurotypicals who know what a neurotypical is.

Now I'm not sure about you guys but for some reason I am sure the title of this thread is "splitting threads too early" now.

[atheist_angel]

Occasionally there are good places for the subject to pop up like for instance a forum dedicated to it. I have only been a n00b of one of them but their attitude is a bit on the encouragement of false autistics so I left after the behavior escalated.

I doubt the "neurotypicalism is a fascinating topic" idea will do anything because to be honest, I think there are not too many neurotypicals who know what a neurotypical is.Plus, I can't stand to see real autistics thanking g-d for helping them cope with their autism - who supposedly gave it to them in the first place!Now I'm not sure about you guys but for some reason I am sure the title of this thread is "splitting threads too early" now.How about "splitting threads too early + ______ awareness" for a title? (It sounds like a good 'feedback and support' topic to me!)