This is not the question. Public figures remain free to decline to engage with any one of their fans or their critics tho they might get criticism if they never engage with any of them. Stalking does not become OK if they decline to do this. https://twitter.com/gregblives/status/971136459674501120 …
I think he's a decent guy who has a mental illness and it is manifesting in the form of ideologically-zealous obsessive stalking. I very much doubt he can see his behaviour for what it is. It needs to be stopped tho.
-
-
So, it's a problem when he releases information without consent about other people (when he sees it to be relevant), but it's not a problem when you release information about his mental illness without his consent? What's the relevant disanalogy here?
-
Huh? I don't have any information about his mental illness. I don't know if he's even been diagnosed with one. If he isn't concerned about his own behaviour, he won't have sought help for it. I want him to do that. It's more charitable than assuming malice.
-
It could be charitable. But yet again, claiming individuals are mentally ill is a time-tested rhetorical device to inoculate people from considering whether there are merits to a person's ideas. It can be, in cases, ad hominem. C.f., the NRA and the Parkland shooting.
-
Of course. But if you think there is merit to this behaviour when it's not caused by mental illness, I don't know what to tell you. To me, it's clear it's wrong and the two explanations are deliberate malice or mental illness.
-
I don't remember saying that there's merit to the behavior. I'm curious as to how you think I did. I said that saying "X has mental illness" can be a tactic to stop taking anything that the person says seriously. That's a different claim than what you seem to attribute to me.
-
I'm saying that if we agree the behaviour is bad, suspecting mental illness as the cause is mitigating rather than a tactic to stop people considering whether the behaviour has merit. You said ideas but it doesn't matter whether you agree with ideas or not. Its the behaviour.
-
1/2 And, again, I don't remember at any point endorsing the behavior. Lot's of people engage in bad behavior, sometimes they don't realize/haven't thought about what ways this might be bad, later - in moments of reflection - the do realize, and they change their behavior.
-
Nor am I claiming you did. I hope that will happen. We all hoped he'd lose interest eventually but it's been escalating for months. I'm going to leave it here tho. I hope it's illness and that he recovers from it with the support of his friends who are telling him this.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
That’s the weird thing. I understand how in the moment he may think what he did was justified (heated disagreement), but upon further reflection it should be clear that type of behavior isn’t OK.
-
He's not well. He's obsessing about this *all the time*. Stalker mentality is very weird. Kind of get locked into a world of your own warped perception of what is happening. For Phil, I think its a battle of good and evil. That's why it's dangerous.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.