Meet Emily: the harassing, attention-seeking manipulative stalker and computer-crasher

So I participated in a forum for the first time. I asked (nicely) about a strongly held belief on the owner/moderator’s website about DID (that it’s a psychosis). Didn’t make sense to me. After an escalated discussion, I was trashed by the moderator for my “harassing attention-seeking, manipulative behavior.”

Then to prove her point, she edited my posts to her liking in order to remove her inconsistent statements and my questions that she refused to answer. After she locked me out of the forum. <laughing>

Don’t worry – I will not do the same to her. I will keep her anonymous.

But, appears to be a dictatorship. Rewriting history for your own needs. Jr. High School drama, eh? Let’s take a look at how moderators can hurt their own readers, as well as their own reputations. And for this woman, perhaps even her own patients.

Rationale and guidelines for this post

<standard disclaimer>

Let me state upfront. This is a blog. My blog. I am clear about when I present researched information, and when I present opinion or my own experiences. For this post, there is no researched information. This post is purely my own musings. And as such, I can interject my own opinion and sarcasm. I can let other people’s words speak for themselves. And this I will. If this offends you or simply does not interest you, you are welcome to leave at any time.

Regarding the moderator on this website I will discuss: I will not list this woman’s username or her website address here as it is not my intention to slam her directly. Really. I will not trash her or her website forum like she has me and mine. If she reads this post, I hope she recognizes that. That I am not attacking her message, but addressing how she handled the exchange on her forum.

</standard disclaimer>

Table of contents for this post

Yeah, this is a tad of a long one. But here are the main topics to cover to help your decision to read along. Sorry these are not hot links.

– Using the anonymous Internet to mislead or slam other people. Or not.
– Spill it girl – so what happened?
– I was informed that DID is a psychosis
– Some meandering about “multiplicity” and “DID” regarding “people,” “personalities” and “identities”
– References, please?
– Editing the past to “better support” your viewpoint
– And now for the personal attacks!
– Scariness just like the HR professionals– she’s a THERAPIST!
– An opportunity for this moderator to respond
– How the moderator changed her site as a result of our interchange
– So how does her behavior affect her own website, and what should be your takeaway message from this be?

And so we shall begin.

Using the anonymous Internet to mislead or slam other people. Or not.

It is our personal choice how we use the Internet. Or misuse it.

If you are reading my blog, then you are surfing other sites. You need to make sure the site provides useful and not misleading information. You need to be an informed user. For all you know, I am feeding you BS. How would you know? Well, I try to validate my writings by providing a boatload of references at the end of researched articles, and also as a large bibliography on a different page. Check my facts. It’s all there. I am not worried.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of blogs and websites out there who present their opinion as facts, claim that research supports their statements, and then provide little or no references to back up their claims. People out there who believe that THEIR thoughts are the only ones that matter. Their way or the highway.

Hey – for a personal blog, that is okay. Your opinion is your own. I could do that if I wanted.

But when you run a public forum with the stated goal of education, and you answer people’s questions from the standpoint of an expert, you must hold yourself to a higher standard. You must be fair, weigh all sides of an argument, and allow others to present their opinions. You should not scream at them. If you feel their behavior is inappropriate, either deal with it off-line or just remove them from your forum. To do otherwise, you lose credibility, you lose readers, and you gain the reputation of being dictatorial.

My discussion here is how manipulative and passive-aggressive the internet can be using my own experience as an example. As my meds doc says, “The internet is a bad neighborhood.” (I love it!) In this case, it was disguised as a positive thing. That is sad. But stick with me though the humor and amazement of what happened – the kicker at the end is scary.

Spill it girl – so what happened?

I ran afoul of the latter – in a nut shell, a website claiming to be a “site is intended for education” regarding multiplicity and abuse survivors. I asked to be educated. I didn’t agree with their findings and asked for references. Then I got yelled at by the moderator and owner of the website – in BOLD CAPITAL RED LETTERS (reminds me of my best friend’s old whack-job-of-a-girlfriend who is, hmmm, I think over 40? She even jacked up the font size and alternated colors when she was especially pissed off, but that’s another amusing story).

This moderator edited my posts to suit her own arguments. She removed questions I asked but she was unable (or unwilling) to answer. Or she answered slightly different questions to avoid the point. And then I got banned.

So in a nutshell, don’t ask questions of people who don’t want to be questioned.

I was informed that DID is a psychosis

I was quickly taken aback by statements on the website that DID is a psychosis. She told me,

“If you research, you will see that DID is actually a psychosis-based disorder.”


(The site’s main contention is that “multiplicity” is not a disorder and is naturally occurring. That it is different from DID (which is only a U.S. diagnosis) and MPD. And that the difference has something to do with “people” inside vs.”personalities” inside. Her most consistent message is that multiplicity is okay, multiples have many people inside, and DID is a psychosis because those folks have the DELUSION that they have many personalities inside. Got it?)

<Gak. I think I got that tongue-twister right.>

So I said that I did not agree with her conclusions based on peer-reviewed research I had read (much of which is presented on my site).

She countered,

“Professional articles on DID are saying the same thing that I am saying about the diagnosis.”

Okay, maybe there is stuff I haven’t read. I’m an information gatherer. I asked again for the professional references/articles she referred to. She didn’t like that. She replied instead,

“I USED to have links to references by experts that EXACTLY used the term “psychoss” to describe multiplicity… I already have seen it – I do not have to prove it.”

Sigh. She said that if I really had done my research “that you would have found the information.”

<Well dang me. It must be in that secret handbook she has. And didn’t she that multiplicity was the *good” one?>

** I will state here for complete honesty and accountability that I said I felt “discriminated against” by this extreme view presented on her website that DID is a psychosis and that she was implying I was psychotic.

Addressing that, she did admit that


Whew! Fooled another one with my psycho ways! I guess that disagreeing and asking for references is only borderline-psychotic, but still offensive.

But this whole psychosis thing – I just can’t leave it alone. I am totally confused by her arguments, but I can’t even decide what she really stands for, as evidenced by this basic contradiction of hers:

First, she attempts to clarify by saying she will not use the term DID to refer to multiplicity.

<Multiplicity GOOD, DID BAD.>



Okay. That’s like a double negative. But I think I got it. She SUPPORTS multiplicity (they are not psychotic) and DID is a psychosis because of the delusional=psychosis thing. Now recall her statement a while back where she has links that multiplicity=psychosis:

“I USED to have links to references by experts that EXACTLY used the term “psychoss” to describe multiplicity… I already have seen it – I do not have to prove it.”

<Stick to facts, girl. It’s not a psychosis, it’s a psychoss!>

Silly me. Anyway, at that point, it digressed into the history of diagnostic criteria, how the criteria have changed over time, how the US sucks and our mental health system is corrupted because it is influenced by torturers and rapists, etc. And somehow that we are psychotic.

<Ah, yeah. I think I am psychotic for even trying to understand this argument. Perhaps you are psychotic for even GETTING this far in the post.>

(A moved section) Some meandering about “multiplicity” and “DID” regarding “people,” “personalities” and “identities”

Editor’s update: After reviewing this post later, I realized that I had nearly stooped to this moderator’s level by arguing back and forth about the controversial nature of the DID vs. MPD vs. Multiplicity debate. The debate is based not only on the actual diagnoses themselves, but also on changing political and social issues, and updates to both the DSM-IV and the ICD-10 (both recognized diagnostic manuals).

Both the DSM-IV and the ICD-10 have “problems” and are constantly being revised to best reflect the opinions of the experts and researchers in the mental health field. Neither is perfect, and I think neither are completely isolated from political, economic and social issues.

That being said, the section I moved from here was a digression on the moderator’s conflicting statements about what DID is, what MPD is, and what multiplicity is. I originally said the specifics of our episode online was outside the scope of this post, and I should keep it that way. I had only wanted to address this “DID is psychosis” thing and the attitude of the moderator when her ideas where challenged.

Therefore, my digression on DID/MPD/Multiplicity has been moved to an Appendix of this post. It is not germane to this discussion but it remains there so you can see an example. Of what, I am not sure. But anyway…

References, please?

You folks know me. Information information information. So about those references – I requested some good journal ones. Accepted by the international community. For example, the International Society for the Study of Trauma and Dissociation. (She slams the US for it’s diagnostic criteria which is actually supported INTERNATIONALLY!)

But she only provided only 4 or 5 references that were blogs or essays. Nothing peer-reviewed. In response, she says she looked at my site and commented,

“(remember, I also looked at your site), and nothing but what appears to be unsubstantiated one-sided simple literature research to which you can’t give references, is far from enough to give reasonable logical conclusions of any sort.” [emphasis added]

Was she really reading MY blog? Simple literature?

Hmm. I guess she missed this References page where I have listed, oh, 125 references? Fifty of which are either peer-reviewed journals, books, or presentations at relevant conferences? And her page lists NONE?

<Sorry about the tinge of sarcasm there…when people clearly deny the obvious and state falsehoods, it makes this engineer a tad testy.>

I found it also interesting that she DELETED my blog address from my posts so that others could not visit my site and see my references. So, not only a dictator, but restricting her members to freely-available information.

Remind you of internet censorship in China?

Editing the past to “better support” your viewpoint

You know how history text books get rewritten over time to better reflect the “political correctness” of the times, or to advance political agendas? Read about WWII in history books from different countries, for example.

Here, I’d like to address this serious issue of censorship and rewriting events. I have two issues with this type of behavior.

1) The moderator edited both her and my posts and admits it. Her inconsistent statements are gone (I printed out copies of before the deletion). This starts immediately – at the top of my VERY FIRST POST, she interjects:



“Certain edits?” *rolls eyes* <GMAFB>

Forums don’t work like this – replies are in a separate post so a) everyone can see the whole “conversation,” and b) everyone can see who is the author of each statement. She committed both of these forum sins.

<Editing the past to suit your own needs, eh?>

2) The moderator forced her own views without allowing a rebuttal. Here is her justification for locking me out and editing my posts…to preserve her own agenda without debate.


I only requested my posts be deleted if I was found to be psychotic. To remove the “fight.” Where, exactly, did I request that HER information be deleted???

Then it gets better. Several times I tried to be nice. To get us working together to support one another.

Purposely said I was trying not to be antagonistic, I also said I was not trying to start a fight. I implored her:

“We are all a minority in the world – those of us who are multiple/DID or whatever you want to call it. We should all be sticking together rather than creating this kind of division between us. If you don’t like the name “disorder” that is fine. But don’t alienate those of us who have no problem with the term.

“We have so much in common, especially in a world that doesn’t really believe us. “

Was she interested in this? Nope, sorry. She still maintains (in that totally cool James Earl Jones voice), You are different than we are.

<Oh, do they have Stars upon Thars?>

As to the antagonism thing (and this SO cracks me up…) she yells at me (and I am “editing her words” using the ACCEPTED method of brackets to change the pronouns from third to second person. No other changes, including her use of bold red CAPs anger thing she does so well.)



<Oh boy, we gotta live one here!>

Is this like the HR professionals that say people with mental disorders have no control over their actions? Apparently she’s has been talking to them, too.

<deja fcking vu>

She also suggests that I would blame my posts on an alter!

Sounded too much like a cult for me, and a junior high school one at that, so I decided to leave and not return. That’s okay – I asked her to delete my account if I was psychotic anyway, and she complied with my request. But not before accusing me of harassing behavior and all that other stuff in BIG RED LETTERS.

And now for the personal attacks!

Yes folks, there’s more! Next she lashes out at me personally. The content of the lash is out of left field, although lashing like this usually happens when people are backed into a corner; when their own inconsistencies are revealed and they feel they have no recourse but to stoop to this behavior. Oh well. Human nature.

<But where are MY big capital letters? Lemme have a couple to use!!!>

Hmmm. As soon as her anger boiled over into childishness, I gave up. I didn’t respond after her first foray into red-letter angry land. (After all, I couldn’t. I was banned, remember?)

So to the good stuff – accusations without merit. Interesting; not much originality. But a fun read.

Here is a great accusation from nowhere.

“You are either the person who has been reeping havoc on another forum, or the person who has been stalking a family member on forums for a completely unrelated subject.”

ExCUSE me?!? Exactly WHERE did that come from? Sigh. (Remember this attack when you get to the “Big Reveal” later in this post.)

She also said her computer crashed twice while she was responding to me,and she thought it could be me hacking into her system. Cool – I wish I knew how to do that, but I don’t.

<But I am amused she thinks so. Perhaps she has pissed of God as well. Heh heh.>

She also accuses me of this:

“It is typical forum harassment behavior to go to a forum, make all kinds commotion, then pretend you have to rush off forever due to the forum not suiting you…”

And just next to that…


Interesting, her accusation becomes self-fulfilling because she locked the thread without GIVING me the chance to respond. And she did more than lock the thread, she locked my account. Heh heh. So, not much choice other than to leave. But no biggie, not a cult I want to hang with.

This is just more of that dictatorship-type stuff <that’s the technical term, heh heh>. If you don’t like what someone says, edit their words and silence them.

<Cool – this is the first time I have been banned from something. Except perhaps from the grocery store several years back when I got triggered pretty good and yelled at the manager. But hey, that part of me doesn’t participate in this blog. Or most of my life actually. But this rest of us are pretty co-conscious when we need be.>

So not only am I being harassing with my initial non-threatening question, I apparently have Bigger Plans as well:

There is evidence here of your alterior motive for coming forum, to HARRASS. I can support this allegation.

<Yeah, asking those damned “provide some references” questions. Bad bad girl.>

The Big Reveal – this woman is a THERAPIST!

This really reminds me of conversations with my last therapist. I kept asking for concrete answers about treatment methods, and she didn’t have anything to offer. We found that she didn’t have the background to treat DID, and that is fine – most people do not. I probably should have realized this was a similar situation and just left when the information was not provided.

It seems I touched a similar nerve with this moderator. She states that:

“I have a degree in social work and mental health, and have worked in the mental health field for very many years. I work currently with a general population of adults with psychiatric disabilities…

“I have done a lot of research, have been to the Center’s annual conference on dissociation and trauma a couple of times (one of the biggest in the US). I have a bookcase full of books on child abuse, treatment, diagnosis, etc.”

Okay folks, this is where my humor and light sarcasm ends. In all seriousness, this scares the shit out of me.

This woman says she is trained. That she has been to “the center’s” conference (what center, ISSTD?) That’s the BIG one, which supports the DSM-IV diagnostic criteria – which she states several times that she does not. She has lotsa books on the bookshelf (did she read?) and has done research (that she will not provide).

Folks, this woman TREATS people. What scares me is that she is treating people with her OWN beliefs and not accepted practices! She says that the US MENTAL HEALTH SYSTEM is “influenced … polluted and dirtied” by the False Memory Syndrome Foundation (FMSF), and by “child beaters, rapers, torturers, and killers.”

(I agree about some past behavior of the FMSF, some funding comes from Pharma. But now Pharma has to PUBLICLY reveal funding to the US government. A lot more transparent now. But rapists and torturers polluting the mental health system?)

<Oh please please PLEASE can I ask for references on the rapist and torture thingie?>

No. please stop torturing the poor girl…I mean, the poor therapist.

My god, this woman is TREATING PEOPLE.

Okay, I will back down. This post was, until now, my humor and sadness at her forum moderation and her attitude. But her words about her background I share here are with complete seriousness and concern. Because she is not just some nutcase junior member on a forum somewhere. She is an OWNER and MODERATOR for a forum that seeks to HELP people. And she TREATS people. This realization is probably what prompted me to write all this in the first place. It is scary when mental health professionals behave like this.

<And she has a friend who has an academic degree in neuroscience. Well, I have a friend who has a degree in aeronautics engineering – that doesn’t make me cognizant of his field or expertise, or make me capable of using it in my own research. Although he COULD direct me to some relevant journal articles, which apparently her friend has not.>

<Kinda like, “I’m not a doctor, but I play one on TV.”>

An opportunity for this moderator to respond

So, in the interests of closing down the discussion more calmly and telling her that it was not my intent to get her so upset, and that I was sorry it ended this way. I wanted to send her an email. But after searching her whole site I tried I couldn’t find an email address. So she lists no email to contact her, and she’s locked me out of posting on her site. How’s that for isolationism and anonymity? My email is all over my website.

Well my moderator friend, remember that I have not used your name or your website. I have not trashed you personally. I recognize that you may submit a comment here regarding my post. If your comments to me on this site actually have substance, then I will accept them. Discussion here is rational.

I also recognize that you may continue to trash me on your on forum even though 1) you give me no opportunity to respond to your capital red letter venting, and 2) your trashing would be as “scary” to your readers as my posts. You may even decide to start spamming me. Will you stoop to that? Or just be happy I am gone?

Your underlying ethics will dictate what further action (if any) you decide take. To any rational person, further hostility and repeated justifications will make your choice obvious. Especially since I doubt you will offer me the opportunity to respond.

But again, as an active therapist, will your ethics or your anger win out?

How the moderator changed her site as a result of our interchange

Interestingly, the moderator changed the front page of her site based on our little “interchange”. I have a printed copy of her original page to compare the new to the old version.

She removed this sentence in the “What the Main Site is and is Not,” section, thereby removing any idea that the site is to educate visitors.

Old website:

“This primary <webpage name> home site is intended for education.”

New website: (In the same section replacing the above quote):

“** This primary <webpage name> home site is intended for the sharing of support and information.
“** It is not a “scientific research” site, nor is it operated by some well-known mental health organization.”

Ahh, now no more education! Just cult-like propaganda! But now it is for sharing? Just her views! And she now clearly dissociates (oh, the irony) herself from recognized organizations!

I said to her that I considered it an “insult” that she said DID was a psychosis-base diagnoses. So, she added to HER website that it was a “horrible insult” that the current diagnostic criteria for DID be applied to multiples. (Oneupmanship?)

So she “updated” how “multiples” can be created (one of her MAIN arguments for multiplicity being different from DID – the cause). … Hmmm, changing that story again. Now doesn’t this new cause sound more like DID? I guess we are NOT SO DIFFERENT after all!

Here’s the relevant old version (in the Points About Multiplicity Presented on the Site) section:

“Multiplicity occurs naturally.”

New version:

“Multiplicity is not always (though usually is) the result of child abuse.”


So how does her behavior affect her own website, and what should be your takeaway message from this be?

Sometimes forums are jammed full of people. These are the ones I look for. Others have few visitors. I would not have registered for her site, due to its low participation, but I was genuinely interested in her interpretation and confusing remarks about DID. Hence my original question.

(I am happy to repeat my original question to show I was not being hostile, but that would probably easily reveal her website forum. I will not, in the interests of fairness, unless she writes and gives me leave to.)

Not surprisingly, I read elsewhere on her general discussion page that she is concerned about readers leaving.

Checking her site, the last post before our little interchange was May 11, 2008. (Our “discussion” began on July 20th.) Then going back a more posts, they immediately jump back into the 2007’s. As I said, not a particularly active site. Wonder why.

Her posts asked the following:

“where did everyone go? what happened to everyone?’

And another post:

“I am looking for some feedback here regarding the forum. There are so many peeps who do not register, and the board seems to have infrequent posters.

Please answer if you can:

1. Is it just that you see no one here posting on a daily basis so you don’t stick around?

2. Is it that you register for sites but don’t get around to go back to them?

3. Is it that you feel uncomfortable posting at all?

She got a some responses of support, but that people were busy, not much happens here, etc. But a few of these I find interesting:

“who the f**k cares.. done with forums and thinking people actually give a damn”

“I’m starting to think its me that drives everyone away.. people talk and talk until i make a post, and then it all stops.. if someone doesn’t want me here, its ok.. I wont take offense.. id just rather know than not know”

“sometimes I feel like I don’t fit here.. there’s a lot I don’t/won’t talk about, so I feel like I don’t belong here.. anyway..”

Well, I guess you see the results of the dictatorship. Decreased readership. Decreased participation. Decreased trust. And that’s how forums (and democracies) die.

Ain’t the Internet great?

PS: As much sarcasm as this post contained, it is not designed to be a personal slam on this woman or her website. None of this I wrote is directed at her as a person. However, it is a serious look at her behavior as the moderator and owner of a public forum, and how she abused that power by attempting to dictate and silence a member. In addition to the fact that she is a practicing therapist. That makes this more a professional slam than a personal one.

Appendix: Some meandering about “multiplicity” and “DID” regarding “people,” “personalities” and “identities”

But let’s back up a bit and talk about diagnostic criteria and the like.

So to start, you need a little info here: The DSM-IV is short for the Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, version 4. It is a publication of the APA – the American Psychiatric Association. The major international organization is called ISSTD which stands for the International Society for the Study of Trauma and Dissociation. The ISSTD uses the DSM-IV published by the APA as the diagnostic criteria for DID in the North America, Europe, and Turkey (i.e., lotsa places outside the US. [free link at the bottom of the linked page points to the childrens’ doc and not the adult’s (bug in new website), but I have the adult copy with this reference from their old website if anyone wants it.] Here is the PubMed reference).

The DSM-IV – the codes for psychosis and dissociative disorders are not the same.

So, let’s assume she supports multiplicity. I think. So based on her quotes up there, she says that multiplicity is more than one PERSON in a body.

But then contradicts herself on the main page:

“The American Psychiatric Association (ISSTD) removed “Multiple Personality” from it’s diagnosis categories with the idea that humans can never have more than one personality in one body, ie, it’s belief that multiplicity does not exist.”

(Ok, lemme interject something here – she likes the ICD-10. Speaking of REMOVING things, the ICD-9 lists DID, and the REMOVED DID in ICD-10. And she is all bent that the DSM-IV removed MPD that was in the DSM-III. How’s that for irony! The ICD-10 ALSO removed any reference to personalities, which they had in the ICD-9. We should be all pissed off that the ICD-10 is dissing US!)

(2008 ICD-9-CM Diagnosis 300.14 Dissociative identity disorder (not that ICD-9 and DSM-IV share the same diagnostic code. It was ICD-10 that moved away from these codes.)

“A dissociative disorder in which the individual adopts two or more distinct personalities. Each personality is a fully integrated and complex unit with memories, behavior patterns and social friendships. Transition from one personality to another is sudden.”

Now, all the ICD-10 says is that MPD is a subset of F44.8: “Other dissociative (conversion) disorders” There is no more description of that particular category.

<Gee, looks like upgrading to the ICD-10 is just as “evil” as upgrading to the DSM-IV. Doncha just love the “present only one side of the story thingie?>

Anyway, her quote above says that “multiplicity” is the same as “more than one PERSONALITY in one body.”

Which is it – “persons” or “personalities”? Are they the same? (That is the CRUX of this.)

<Huh? Am I missing something here?>

Further, as justification for her conflicting psychosis thing, she says,


<Oh, so clearly this is my problem. I can’t read right.>

Where the heck did she come up with this? I am confused by her logic, perhaps due to my own delusions. But definitely by a few of my distinct “identities.” But not my “persons” ??? What is the difference? Am I just reading that bizarrely written sentence about psychosis all wrong?

Hmmm. So let’s compare “people” and “personalities” (her terms) and “personalities” and “identities” (DSM terms).

Relevant section of the DSM-IV – Diagnostic criteria for 300.14 Dissociative Identity Disorder states,

“The presence of two or more distinct identities or personality states (each with its own relatively enduring pattern of perceiving, relating to, and thinking about the environment and self).”

No one (and no diagnostic criteria) refutes this by saying that more than one PERSON exists in the same body. (Unless someone can get me a reference, and I ask that with no sarcasm.)

But, as to “personalities” as she says on her main page, isn’t that what the DSM-IV says right up there?

Okay, but let’s just consider her “people” thing. The DSI-IV also uses the term “identity”. So, DID has “distinct identities.” How is this different from distinct “people”?

So, a thought experiment. Let’s just say that two people could exist in the same body. How is this different from several “identities” who have different names, different likes and dislikes, different hobbies, etc.? Is she falling under the mistaken impression that those with DID have two dimensional “parts” that just perform one function? That don’t have an ENDURING existence?” Well, what *I* got sure proves that wrong! (And I am sure Kate will provide a MUCH better sarcastic remark that I ever could…although she is MUCH MORE than just her witty repartee.)

<Maybe I really AM a multiple. Surprise!>

<But wait, she says she has references that multiplicity is a psychosis too. So, I am STILL PSYCHOTIC! Yes!>

How are “people” (her term) different from “identities” (DSM)?

These “people” she talks about…if she REALLY wants to make a big enough division between “people” and “identities” using the “enduring perceiving” description, then do these “persons” have different driver’s licenses? Different social security cards? After all, “identification” cards refer to “identities”….that DSM term, which she rejects.

I am not trying to be a smartass. I probably should not have gone off on the tangent . But this seems to be hair-splitting to me – and likely the basis for how this whole thing got started.

(And if I am accused of playing word games, go find her post where she plays word games to “prove” that those with DID are delusional and psychotic. Hell, she may have deleted it, but again, I have a print out I can scan and provide as a reference.)

Sheesh. Again, why can we all just get along rather than this internal division?

<Pun intended, dear?>

Right. So, anyone else find the humor (and ridiculousness) in this? It just keeps getting better and better.

<Someone please get the popcorn.>

– ∞ –

See also:

List of all posts
Standard Dislaimer: Read now and again before flaming



  secretshadows wrote @

Oh, wow! I had such a similar experience about a month ago. I was on a site for about a year that was run by a therapist, and you know…there were things I knew were messed up about her all along, but I stayed because I met some really good people there. I just tried to disregard the therapist, as much as that’s possible. I really don’t want to get into all she did that concerned me because I could easily write as much as you did.

The point is she went too far and crossed the line in a major way, and when I spoke up about it, there was instant backlash. I tried to talk reasonably with this woman, but there was no doing such a thing because the woman has no reason. Ever notice how sometimes you get to see someone’s true colors when they get ticked off at you??? Well, I saw hers.

I have my own support forum that I run. It’s only been up for about 4 months. It’s small (21 members so far), but in 4 months we have over 2100 posts. I never mentioned my site to her; didn’t think it was important. Didn’t try to conceal it in anyway, but somehow she found out about it and she was livid. She sent me a very nasty email, and accused me of God knows what because she kept saying things like, “Oh, I see how you are.”, “Now things are clicking into place.”, “It makes me wonder about you.” Just lots of implied stuff.

She was upset because there were some people that were members of her site and mine. And she accused me of “stealing” her people when only 2 of them were current members of her forum. The other few people that were from that forum had left that forum 6 months ago, before I ever even thought of creating the site, and I had kept in touch with them through IM. Like I’m going to create a site and not have my friends in it…..duh….I told her I was in no “competition” with her and that our sites are completely different. Mine is a site for survivors run by survivors, hers is therapist run. That’s offering two different things. The two cannot “compete.”

Anyway, to cut this short, right after I got the nasty email form her, I got a barrage of spam hitting my email account that is associated with my site. This is a new account created especially for the site I have and I had yet received a single piece of spam. Now suddenly I was getting multiple spam emails every 15-30 minutes. Grrrrrr……..Then she harassed the members on my site that she knew and tried to explain to them the dangers of talking with group members outside of group, as well as the dangers of talking with people who are no longer part of the group. C-U-L-T????? I also got an email that same day telling me that a new account has been created and blah blah blah……the knew account was (myname) !!! On top of that, I got another one alerting me to check Google. I knew what that meant, my site was now listed on Google. I had tried to keep it off the search engines, and she knew that. It just pissed me off. I have still not found a way to get it off. My only saving grace is that you can only find it by searching it’s exact name which doesn’t include anything anyone would probably search. It was horrific. She attacked me and my site.

I protected the site and locked it down to new members for awhile because I thought she could just be crazy enough to try and register under a funky name to destroy the site form within. I mean, you just don’t know.

And like the forum you speak of, this woman has CLIENTS!!!! Real life clients and an office and she’s in private practice doing therapy with people who are predominately DID.

She is very egocentric. She tells people that she is the only one that can help them. She “gets” in with people by appealing to their little alters and then she has them wrapped and they will follow her and it is just sick sick sick.

I better stop before I have my own little rant, as if I haven’t already. Good grief!


  Tigerweave wrote @

I was having fun reading it up until the end. Especially the bit about dictatorship and losing people, or having members fall silent. Reminded me of more than one place I have frequented online that that has happened to.

Sad, and frustrating, as her behaviour and her unprofessionality unhelpful at best, and downright damaging to people who have already been through far more than enough hurt.

  emilylonelygirl wrote @


Sadly, I am not surprised this happened to you. Rants are welcome here if they are based on real experiences or my own vent-rants. Thank you for not posting this woman’s website or name – to me, that shows you are “above” the pettiness. Also, not to mention that it keeps her off your site. GOOD LUCK on your site!

“See the true colors” … yup. I have been accused of sometimes showing my “true colors” when I am drunk. But since I have a wonderful alter who is the one who sometimes CAUSES MOSTLY HARMLESS EVENTS when I am drunk…yeah, it looks like my un-drunk colors are different. If only they knew… (!!! :0) ) But mine are not vindictive or petty.

As for the spam.
– I see you have a gmail address…there is a “report spam” button (I’ve never tried it). – You can also go under Settings-> filters and create a new rule that redirects all her emails to a folder (or just delets it) Gets them out of your inbox.

Hope these help…

Regarding getting your account of Google. If you have a real website rather than a pre-made one, there is a file called robots.txt. You can configure it to tell search engines to ignore your site. Takes a while to work, but it does. Google robots.txt for more info on how to do that…I have used it and it works.

Thanks for writing!

  emilylonelygirl wrote @

Hi Tigerweave,

Sad that you had this experience as well. I don’t run a forum for general stuff, but I do answer questions that come my way. People can ask me specific questions, and I have responded with researched results – click on my “Dear Ms. DID” category and you will find a few.

There are also a couple tagged “vent-rant” – these are the ones where I respond on MY site stuff I read on other forums and an unable to contact the author, or when I get comments that are themselves vent-rants that I FEEL like responding to.

But regardless, I make it clear with my tags and our lovely use of sarcasm to make it clear which is which.


  secretshadows wrote @

Thanks for your advice. I was told about the robots.txt thing, but I am I need the “How to do that for Dummies” version. LOL

I do not have a gmail account. That was created by someone who was ticked off at me. Actually, I just changed the email address associated with my forum. It was the easiest solution.

It effected me a lot when all this happened. I wigged out internally over the fact that at least at one point I actually trusted this person. And I have to admit is scared me when I was being attacked and my site was as well. Part of me was strong and taking action to secure my site like a mother hen. Then another part of me was falling apart at the seems. There was so much betrayal there.

I have been on other forums as well, and I just have to say, there’s a lot of crap out there. There are some good ones, but you sure do have to weed through the crap to get to them. That is why I created my own. I was sick of the crap.

If anyone is interested, my site is, and I can promise you I am no freak, and I don’t play games. Geez……it’s ridiculous how some people behave.


  emilylonelygirl wrote @


CONGRATS on your website! I just took a look and will come back later to check it out in more detail.

Here is a note that will make you smile…As of today (July 24, 2008):

– Your forum has 21 registered members, and a total of 2196 posts and was started in April 2008.

– This other website has a total of 53 members and 695 posts and was started in October 2006.

I guess people have figured out where the GOOD forum website is located – and only after a few months in operation!

Way to go girl!


  secretshadows wrote @

My website was started on April 6th 2008!


  secretshadows wrote @

I was confused that you got October 2006…hmmm……where did that come from? Anyway, I went on my site real quick and yes, we have 21 registered members who have made 2196 posts to date with an average post count of 20.22 per day. That is kind of cool. And to think we are rather selective as to who we let in. We don’t just take in any “Joe Blow” off the street. There’s a registration process. Maybe that’s why, though.I would say the people we have on our site are truly serious about their own healing. They are not about playing games, or drama, etc.

I don’t mean to use this topic promote my site or anything, so if you want you can take it off and keep the information to yourself. That was not my intent, just so you know.


  emilylonelygirl wrote @


Well, I was being sloppy – I switched the start dates on your two sites. I will go back up there and fix it!


  Disabled Chat wrote @

I have Bell’s Palsy and enjoy your blog very much. First time I’ve commented, but have been reading here and there.
Great blog. I enjoy reading it every chance I get and value your opinions!

  annenco wrote @

Wow! I have heard some scary stories about a few message boards out there…but wow. I saw one somewhere that was therapist run but the idea of that just weirded me out to begin with. I mean, maybe there are some good ones out there but…don’t think I’m gonna go looking in that realm.
I think I know where she came up with the DID = Delusional idea. Been meaning too look more into that site as it seems maybe more than a little sketch to me. There are all kinds of bizarre arguments over terms out there and I get unnecessarily p*ssed over it all lol. It’s not psychosis and it’s not delusional, she’s so mixed up and …yeah…refraining from some snide comments. Sounds like a follower of a certain well known someone anyway or at least read way too much of that site as well.

  emilylonelygirl wrote @

Hi Disabled Chat,

I am happy that you dropped by and are enjoying the banter and info here. I have met some great folks as a result of this blog, and I am pleased when anyone with other challenges finds this stuff useful. I hope other folks come as well!


  econmommy wrote @

New around the blogosphere. Found your blog while surfing around. I love the playful sarcasm. Thanks for the link to the other forum (secret shadows). I’ll be checking it out. Memories of my childhood are like swiss cheese. Lots of dark holes. Getting lots of flashbacks lately. Nice to we’re not alone.

Scary that this woman is treating people, given her attitude toward the subject, her demeanor, and her apparent lack of understanding and empathy. Even “very many years” of experience, research, and education don’t fill the need to be compassionate, supportive, and caring about the people one proposes to help.

  emilylonelygirl wrote @

Hi Econmommy

Welcome – I am glad you are enjoying what you read. I have such a good time writing sometimes, and I am glad others can get something out of my (sometimes) warped sense of humor.

Swiss cheese – great analogy. Actually, a wonderful one! I always felt like I had gaps, but the swiss cheese thing is more like 3D gaps, and since there are several of us….I like it!

You said it right – if there is no compassion, all the education and training in the world means nothing.

My best

  Lonni wrote @

Hi Emily!

Ignore ANYONE who disagrees with you, wants to argue with you or takes joy in trying to stifle you! Who appointed ANYONE to have dominion over you? What makes them right and you wrong? The one who has the biggest tantrum wins?

Dismiss her as easily as she has dismissed you (and many others undoubtedly, who didn’t agree with her) She is the QUEEN of her world – it’s her right —– and you are the QUEEN of yours. You can dismiss any subject that isn’t loyal – just as she does!

In the long run, you don’t stress out, live happily ever after and she goes on and on looking for people to slander, slag and rag on! She won’t live long with that level of stress – oh well, I won’t miss her, will you????

Put yourself FIRST IN YOUR LIFE and BE HAPPY!!

  kermitmuppet wrote @

Hi again,
I was a very active member on an english forum, when i was found out id been abused. The moderator would allow bullying and wouldnt allow people to ask questions about healing!
Also im damn sure she logged in under different names to upset the harmony and spoil what we did have.
Some real bad stuff went off there, to the point that the charity that put its name to the forum dissosociated themselves from it. She now runs it on her own.
I would never go on a forum again. Im very open on my blog, but i dont feel vunerable anymore, unlike alot of survivors. Ive reached a point strength.
But many survivors and people with d.i.d. are still searching and very vunerable to suggestion etc.
I believe some of these sites are started by people to suck in all the vunerable people, so they feel like they have power.They know what people they will attract and feed off their troubles.
Thats why id never go on one again!

  emilylonelygirl wrote @

Hi Kermitmuppet

Yeah, that is sad. I have never really participated in an online forum for very long, and never one for any mental health issues. Honestly, I was unaware of all the politics that take place on many forums. Now that I have surfed some of them for curiosity and for my research for this blog, I see that many have some useful and friendly support, but most are like diaries of people just capturing what happens during their days.

While this is fine, I see moderators kind of expecting people to check in all the time, even if they have nothing to say. In fact, I saw one forum that required you to log in at least every week or they would delete your account. Odd.

But, there are many types of forums. We just need to “lurk” for a while to check out how a new forum feels before joining.

My best

  John Davis wrote @

Thanks! Really funny. I wish i could spend my time on writing articles…just have no time for it.

  emilylonelygirl wrote @

Hi John

Glad you liked it – I had a blast writing at after I got done being a little pissed off at the balls on this woman.

I don’t have time to write these, either. It has become part of my therapy.


  emilylonelygirl wrote @


I am sorry I missed your comment in the flurry. I am interested that you have an idea about her DID=psychosis thing. I have seen many sites that promote multiplicity, but generally not to the EXCLUSION of DID.

Please write back!


[…] <Perhaps we should give Stephen King a call -”A strangled flush in the night gave way to the wafting malodorous hint that the Blog That Shat Pearls of Pain was to “[reep] havoc … stalking a family member …”> […]

  Shasta wrote @

You are obviously psychotic or else you would not accept the delusion that she is wrong. My feeling (taking ownership of my emotions here) is that there is probably some double-countertransferrence going on here which, simply put, means that she reminds you of my mother.

I do not expect you to accept this right now. You are still in deep denial. In fact, it may be so deeply buried in your subconcious that you are not even aware of it. Well what do you expect? That is why its called subconscious! Duh!
If you would quit being so resistent you would see that a social worker, throughly trained in reseach and in the subtlties of the DSM-IV is far more qualified to understand you than you are.

I am not saying that you should accept a moderator’s word for anything.Of course you cannot accept this moderator’s word for anything simply because she is a mental health professional. Neither she nor any of her colleagues are in any position to make a definitive diagnosis of your psychosis until they meet with you face to face and make a thorough assessment of of your insurance policy.

My feeling (and, again, I take ownership of this) is that your “disagreements” with this person are really desperate cries for help. What you need is a good therapist who can show you that all your opinions about psychology are the result of irrational thinking. From now own let the mental health professionals do your thinking for you. It will make the healing process much easier.You would probably avoid being banned too.

  camigwen wrote @


My feeling …is that there is probably some double-countertransferrence going on here which, simply put, means that she reminds you of my mother.


You had me laughing my ass off after the first paragraph! You have a very fine control of sarcasm in a way I just looooove.

Although, perhaps a little is actually true (that whole subconscious thingie). I’m not sure what flavor of transferrence it is, her slamming me under the guise of supposed expertise DOES make a little psychotic, so perhaps a self-fulfilling prophesy?

Thanks for the excellent laugh this morning!


  belle wrote @

hi . my friend sent your blog my way- and i wanted to write to you because of a commonality we share – abusive moderator/administrator !

thank you for writing your experiences . i wanted to leave mine for you too ! i’m sorry you had to deal with such an awful person.

all the best,


  Emily’s Camigwen wrote @

Hello Belle

I am sorry to hear your experience – I read your entry and it hit pretty close to home. I don’t the forum you talk about, which is good, but I am VERY GLAD to see you take your experience and review the terms of service and agreements associated with that forum’s service provider.

I have not had the experience where a moderator posted my private comments publicly, but I have read the terms of another unrelated blog that spoke for your (the poster’s) rights to the content of their comments. We reserve the rights to our comments, and by posting, we grant that forum non-exclusive rights to display our comments on their blog. We may remove this right at any time. I have not explored this with a lawyer, but I am pretty certain that this gives you the right to have your comments removed from the forum. That likely refers to PMs as well, to prevent a person/harasser from using them in public after you leave/are banned from a forum.

Now, this may not actually PREVENT them, but you can request after it happens that the infor be removed. And as you did, I would quote the relevant portion of the Terms. I bet every Terms has information about the Rights of your words.

Go On Girl! I love when people fight back with the law (of course, when the law is reasonable)

Truth! Goodness! Chocolate! (Oh wait, gotta watch the comments from the peanut gallery.)


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s