Morning Glory

Sometimes we start having conflict in forums.
That is how this forum began. I noticed you all needed a safe place to post and you were fighting an uphill battle.

Is there a need for another separation? Is there enough division to warrant a solution? Are there enough members on each side of the fence who would participate if we find a solution.

I welcome your input.

andyh

thanks for this MG

whilst I can see that the philosophical differences between 12-Step & Secular are probably always going to lead to conflict, I don't think that is necessarily the case between the Secular methods/techniques. I'd like to think that they have sufficient in common - self-empowerment, rationality, etc. - that they can all rub along together, so long as members exercise some tolerance & restraint.

I'd be disappointed if SC was sub-divided. I come here to hear others' views, hopefully in a constructive environment, & I think to have each program in its own little echo chamber would diminish the value from what we have currently, or what we would have if we were without the conflicts.

tyler

Could you be more specific. I guess I don't read all of the threads, but I haven't noticed a great deal of conflict in the limited time I have been back. There has been some somewhat "spirited" discussion in the Freedom Model thread, but I haven't noticed anything particularly out of line. I appreciate the latitude you have allowed in this thread. IMHO we are all adults here and as long as the discussion is respectful debate is good as it can open eyes and minds to new concepts that may not have been considered. Just my 2 cents!! Take care.

D122y

Morning,

Conflict is addiction. Emotion and analysis. I don't want to be limited to having to agree w someone because i am reading the AA forum.

You disagree....then go post somewhere else.

The BB is like the bible in that it was written by man therefore misinterpreted.

Secular sobriety is the same.

If it was not for the tough love some AA folks dealt me, i would have fully relapsed when i was thus far twice brought to the brink.

Let us all stay together. The admins are doing a great job of policing us that cross the line.

Thanks.

JeffreyAK

Could try it and see how it works? There is already an open alcoholism forum, which is non-denominational including all flavors of secular where sometimes-very-different perspectives are shared, so that's already a melting pot. There is then a targeted 12-step sub-forum, and also a secular 12-step forum that mostly does not get used. If you were to merge 12-step and secular 12-step, then it would make sense to create a targeted RR sub-forum, and maybe even allow 12-step topics to be discussed there if peace can be kept? That would leave secular recovery unchanged, but presumably it would evolve to something focused on general secular recovery and less on RR ideology, which moves to the RR sub-forum.

ru12

I sure hope we don’t need to split this forum into warring tribes. We all have a similar goal to help people find a way to stop using. I’ll try to remember that when I post.

biminiblue

I follow threads all over the site and I use different things from different methods. I know you had a bit of a battle years ago between the different factions, but it seems to work now.

I think every methodology will have a range of personalities who can get triggered and/or over-zealous at times. I haven't seen that in Secular very often - but I'm sure I miss stuff so who knows? I think there are already enough sub-fora on SR.

Totally your call. Secular is secular. So is the alcoholism section.

fini

i think more sub-divisions would be detrimental to open discussions. i find the limitations on discussions quite strict as it is.

tyler

One of the things I have always liked about this forum is the fact that we can have open and rational discussions. This has helped me as I can pick ideas from various different programs that help in different ways instead of having to go "all in" on one particular program.

That said, if one particular method is dominating all of the discussion, I don't see the harm in creating a sub-forum to direct discussion there. I would just hate to see this place devolve into a forum where people care more about defending their method as the "one true" solution instead of offering insight and information that could help many.

daredevil

Secular debates aren't so much merit-based as they are discussions on the philosophical nuances of the overarching frameworks of the approaches. Any devolution would detract from healthy discussion within the parameters of the rules.

Carlotta

Personally, I don't see the need for a subdivision.
We have a report button and also an ignore feature which I have no problem using when an individual shows a pattern of being rude and overbearing.

AlericB

I agree and unfortunately that is already happening with the way AVRT is currently being represented here.

It's becoming very difficult for anyone to post about their personal views and feelings without it being immediately dismissed as 'AV'. This must be very off-putting for any newcomer wishing to talk about their experiences.

It's also difficult to discuss and learn about any other method without distracting accusations of it being a symptom of 'collective AV'.

It's chief proponents here say that they have to 'necessarily expose AV' wherever they find it, which is pretty much everywhere that is not AVRT as it means to them. Because of this I think the only way this can be checked is for AVRT to have it's own sub-forum in Secular and the topic made off-limits in the rest of the forum.

Btw I am not anti-AVRT by any means and I learnt a lot from earlier contributions, particularly those from Terminally Unique. I am talking about its representation on the whole since.

RecklessEric

I'm glad this thread was opened.

Personally, I enjoy debate and relish discussing nuance and interpretation.

I've noticed some posters becoming a little... maybe evangelical about their chosen methods and others being clearly irked by this.
It doesn't bother me personally.

AlericB

It doesn't bother me personally either but I object to anyone trying to take ownership of other people's experiences and trying to shut down or drown out debate over other models that may really help other people.

Carlotta

I completely get you Aleric and I am with you on that.
Once again, I agree with you, especially when the tone used is very patronizing.


The thing is that AVRT is a good method which has really helped many people quit. Also, not everyone who practice AVRT is a patronizing jackass.
Far, from it... there are quite a few AVRTer who are very helpful and ready to explain their method and help newcomers.

It would be a shame if AVRT could only be mentioned or discussed in some obscure sub-forum, who knows how many newbies who could have benefited from it would miss out.

I really don't like the idea of throwing the baby out with the bathwater because of the behavior of a couple of individuals this is why my take on it is to just put that person on ignore or use the report button if they are way out of line.

tomsteve

if that is going to occur, then the other recovery method forums should be off limits,too. there has been some seriously sick bashing of other methods and their members in other sub forums here dedicated to those recovery methods.
it is quite sad to read the patronization of non members because non members are concerned about misinformation about recovery in general. im personally glad i myself was ridiculed and patronized- i can take it.
newcomers,though,looking for help and asking questions.....

Morning Glory

The only reason I made 12 steps off topic in this forum is because the problem was really, really bad on both sides. I had to close the forum down for 3 days to let everyone calm down. I don't think we are there yet.

Dropsie

Good on you for asking the question.

I think AlericB hit the nail on the head with his comment.

I just wish sometimes everyone was a bit more open minded about the pros and cons because lets face it, everything in life has them.

That said, I personally don't see the benefit in further division.

Maybe a course in active listening??

soberlicious

I joined SR 4 years after I quit, specifically for the secular forum. I like the way ideas are debated here. Is there a bad problem here? I haven't seen disrespect, name calling, ridicule, etc. I've seen direct challenges to ideas, yes. Is that what makes some people uncomfortable? I've said things like "I disagree" and then tell why I disagree and it's like I drown a bunch of kittens or something.

What gives? What should someone like me do when contributing? Not ask questions? Not challenge an idea? Not disagree? That is how I offer support to others trying to end an addiction, because that's what saved my life. Everyone's support doesn't look the same.

Well, I don't think we can group all who are quitting in the same bucket. Who is going to determine what is "off-putting" to an entire population of people who have wildly different personalities and communication styles?

I appreciate your efforts here, MG. Not an easy task.

JeffreyAK

I'm not criticizing any approach or philosophy, just stating my personal impression. A central part of RR seems to be examining and criticizing other approaches to addiction recovery as "recoveryism" or "collective AV", especially but not limited to 12-step approaches, and that can quickly turn into a group attack or at least perception of attack on people who don't subscribe to RR philosophies, which are pretty outside the mainstream even among secular approaches (which is perfectly fine if that's what works for you, I'm a strong believer in doing what works for you). Polite discourse on a forum requires tolerance of different approaches, but that's hard to achieve when a central part of your approach involves dissecting those different approaches and laying them out for what they supposedly are, recoveryism and collective AV. I think that's part of the reason for the history of this forum, that fundamental mismatch between the need for tolerance and the RR emphasis on a critical dissecting outlook. Which is why I think a dedicated RR sub-forum, where such dissecting is tolerated even if it's not tolerated anywhere else, isn't necessarily a bad idea. There's a line somewhere, and certainly calling out people individually as "the voice of the collective AV" (a RR follower in this forum did exactly that to me last year) crosses that line, but if people can keep the dissecting cordial and objective, clinical if you like, then it might serve the desires of the RR followers here while containing that sort of us-against-them dialog to one particular place.

I don't know what's best, but it does seem to me that there's a fundamental mismatch involved.