Monday, March 4, 2013

Makes Me Think - Post Removed

Sheep follow.
Black sheep think.

[Post removed]- Comments still available (see below)

11 comments:

  1. Respectfully, this is one of those I *do not* follow in cyberspace. She's one of those "Shilling For Clients in Cyberspace." Her "Recent Posts" follow what ever ACoN "Hot Topic" of the week that makes her look so "Au Current" a la "Take a Look at the *MOST" followed topics" and then puts a Post out there.
    Jonsi, I hear ya.
    I advised Lisette at "House of Mirrors" about her oh-so-current "Posts" that were hi-jacked from Lisettte. Please be advised we did not know one another then or now.
    She's a sham. Sorry to say, she goes down the ACoN Blogs and puts out a Post that's just BS. She knew I caught on to her and finally allowed
    Comments." (Likely self-generated..)
    I notified Q about another Link that was bogus. And now I'm notifying you of the same. When Lisette/HOM took a Sabbatical, this "Blogger"/ impostor started using your Posts to generate "Hits" and "Call for a Consult."
    Please don't feel you have to Post this Comment. Just take it in. I've been watching this unfold for a couple of years. IMO, I'd unlink her in a heart-beat or less. She's been playing you and other ACoNS for far too long.
    FWIW,
    TW

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Damn it. I knew of some of the others but I had no idea she was doing it too.

      Damn damn damn. I trust you. Where does she use my posts to generate hits?

      You know what...it's kind of funny because I thought it was a coincidence that this most recent post dealt with triangulation.

      I have no problem with people using my posts as talking points, doing re-posts, talking about them, sharing them, whatever. I have a problem if people are being sneaky about it or are using what I have to say for their own profit. That's just shitty.

      Thanks for the heads-up. I'm not sure how I want to handle it yet.

      Delete
  2. Thanks for posting this. I've been watching for a few years. When Lisette from HOM took a break, this "Dr. Lewie-Loonie" started following your Posts and not simply riffing off them, but shilling for clients.
    I'm truly sorry. I go down the links on your Blog as well and then it became, "Huh. This is the Topic de Jour." And I'll be damned she picked right up on those Posts that had the most Responses and put out a Post that appeared "Au Currant." Initially, there was no place for Comments. So I made it plain that Shilling For Clients In Cyberspace was not cool. Or ethical. And watch for "Professionals" who leave no space for responses. Guess what changed?
    So then she "allowed" Comments (and likely self-generated.) I was not shy on calling her on her shyster-ism without calling her out by name. As I told Q: It's really flattering to be asked to Link. But listen up closely: Before you link, look closely and follow from their initiation and follow forward. And refuse to Link for awhile.
    Your work-and yes, it *is* YOUR work should NEVER be used by some bogus "shrink." Ahhh, sorry, but NO. Our suffering and experiences is not located here for you to PROFIT from. We give what we give FREELY. To help one another, not to make $$$.
    So if you're a genuine Mental Health "Expert" your life is centered on your IRL Practice. Which has no room left over for "Cyber-Shilling." If the Legal implications are not enough to make you back away from Shilling for Clients in Cyberspace, your ethics are lacking.
    Linking with one of us to "add" to your (non-existant) IRL "Practice" tells me my credit card has far better uses. And your "Credentials" are bogus.
    TW



    TW

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I blog for self-care reasons and if it helps others I consider it a bonus. Unfortunately, the world is full of those who want to profit from the misery of others. Narcs in sheep's clothing!

      Delete
  3. Yah, this person contacted me on my old blog and asked me some strange questions about my experience. It all rang wrong with me. I never wrote her back.

    The point is still true. I just dislike the person pretending to originate it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Another reason I am feeling so blessed to have found YOUR blog Jonsi...you are the real deal...and again... YOUR post is spot on...

    ReplyDelete
  5. Don't know if I am being ultra paranoid...but did you see this? http://blog.thenarcissistinyourlife.com/2013/03/04/are-you-at-the-breaking-point-with-narcissistic-spouse.aspx?ref=rss
    Kind of strange...after I came here for advice...popping up so suddenly...I looked for days about info on "what to do" or "how to handle" ACON DH...and found nothing...until today...I think TW is absolutely right...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry anon, I lost this comment in my email and didn't find it until today.

      A really great point - she's got a whole bunch of stuff up right now about "how to handle ACON husbands." I've definitely learned that there is no such thing as coincidence w/ narcs, or in life in general.

      Delete
  6. OK, instead of sending that as a "Comment" I should have sent you-Jonsi-an email. But I didn't and that's on me. I'm sorry. This is on me.
    And I *did* try to respond on your (ACoN) sites and others about "Beware-look at these so-called PRO's" and I didn't as clearly as I *should* have. I spoke directly to the lack of "Comments" re: this individual and volia, "Comments" were solicited. (And likely self-generated.)
    The reality is, I failed you guys.
    And I hope you'll forgive me. I failed all of us "ULB's" spectacularly. Please take my apology in the very real sense in which it is conveyed. I *should* have done this sooner. And I didn't. From now on, I'll send an email-and PLEASE, have one attached to your Blog, OK?
    And for this, guys (gals) I AM responsible. Please don't respond-I'm absotively responsible. Please accept my apology FWIW. Your Posts come from a place of not only experience, but *integrity.* And your heart, which touches mine deeply.
    I know now I should have responded with as much integrity as you all have.
    See you on your next Post.
    Please, let's move on, OK? Again, I'm sorry which sounds (and is) cheap in the cyber-sphere. What cha see is what cha get. And I failed spectacularly. And there's no getting around that reality.
    TW

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Failed us? Oh good lordy lord, T-Dub. Stop that! You haven't failed anyone - you've been a failsafe more times than I can count. If I missed this, it's only because my eyes weren't open or I wasn't paying attention or I missed some clue, or hell, you already pointed it out and I just lost in somewhere in the vortex of my brain.

      Fuck nuts.

      I started reading your comment and then just started responding without reading the rest. Then I saw that you asked me not to respond.

      Crap. Nope, gotta just say it. I see nothing for you to apologize for. I was over the issue before it even started. T-dub, I look up to you - you see shit coming miles before anyone else, it always seems. You see crazy like my mother sees crazy, with some sort of sixth sense (or maybe just experience-based knowledge, I don't know).

      Seriously, no apologies needed.

      Delete
  7. Well she's going off my reading list, not that I'd been keeping up with her anyway. I find it interesting she is licensed as a marriage and family therapist (MFT) when she could (if she took and passed the exams) be a licensed psychologist. MFT and psychologists are licensed by different boards and California (which is where she lives) and the state requires anyone who wishes to be a licensed psychologist to have a doctorate degree. MFTs need at least a masters degree and most MFT degree programs that I know of are for masters. So it seems like an odd choice to me.

    This of course isn't to say MFTs can't have doctorates or be great therapists too, but as I said, I personally find it an odd choice. And while it is legally acceptable to offer "telephone consultations" (she makes clear that it is NOT psychotherapy in her ToS to keep things legally clean), and perhaps not an ethical violation in the eyes of the state or any professional organizations she might belong to, I find it morally dubious.

    Perhaps sometime I will see if I can get her book through the library and examine it.

    ReplyDelete