Member and Mods: discussion & debate

"This happens in the collective. It affects everyone. If it isn't discussed in the open, how can the members know that censorship is occurring. If one is censored, all are censored." quote sas from above post.

I was censored. I was, also,  told there isn't a rule re: number of post .  Mods--We think that 1-3 posts is truly maximum. Eighteen should not be necessary for you to get the information out there " . But there is no rule. It was there choice to delete my post b/c they decided I was spamming.

My post went to only threads that were usual posting threads. Some were frequent. Some less frequent. Spamming is indiscriminate posting. Mine were not.  The mods deletions were not based on a rule. It was based on discretion.

Why is this dangerous? Anything at any time, can be censored for whatever reason the Mods want too.

Breastcancer.org is a 501c-3 approved charitable organization.  The courts have upheld that 503c-1 in regard the the Freedom of Speech,   "The Free Speech Clause provides such expansive protection that the courts have noted only a few narrowly drawn categories of speech not protected. These include “fighting words” (i.e.,close-quarter communications that would immediately provoke a fight), “obscenity” (i.e., depictions of hard-core sexual acts), child pornography, and words that create a “clear and present danger” to public safety (e.g., falsely shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theater).²²  All other speech – and especially religious speech – is protected." None of these were breached in any of my communications.

 Mission statement(?)"Breastcancer.org is a nonprofit organization dedicated to providing the most reliable, complete, and up-to-date information about breast cancer and breast health as well as an active and supportive online community. As a nonprofit, Breastcancer.org relies on donations to ensure that we can provide our valued resources free of charge. Please help us continue to provide these resources to others by making a donation at any level to Breastcancer.org."

If this is BCO's mission statement, my action to disseminate information ,(in)"the most reliable, complete, and up-to-date information about breast cancer and breast health ", meets their mission

This is from the Terms of Use: "Breastcancer.org disclaims any duty but reserves the right to monitor online communications and to edit, abridge or remove content that Breastcancer.org, in its sole discretion, determines to be harmful, offensive, unlawful or otherwise in violation of these Terms of Use. Breastcancer.org does not guarantee that it will post every message submitted, and reserves the right to disclose any message submitted as necessary to satisfy applicable law, regulation, legal process or governmental request.

My opinion is that the section negates the law re: free speech by including  "Breastcancer.org, in its sole discretion".  Changes the meaning entirely.  Discretion is arbitrary, it's not bound by rules. I have been told by other members and it was stated in a post above that it's their site -their rules. I assert that  there action in regard to me are questionable by law b/c of the 501c-3 requirement to "expansive protection" within the Free Speech Clause. The language in the Terms of Use makes discussion problematic b/c of the verbiage "in it's sole discretion." Again, the rules of being a 501c-3 approved charitable organization take precedence. If that be true, then the burden on them is to not be arbitrary in their discretion. 

This is from the Terms of Use, Acceptance of Terms: "Breastcancer.org may change these Terms of Use at any time. The changes will appear in these Terms of Use, and your use of the Site after any changes have been posted will constitute your agreement to the modified Terms of Use. Therefore, you should read these Terms of Use each time you access the Web Site, before you begin using it."

Broad statement that is scary. One day something's okay, next day it isn't. No clue why the language was accepted in the original request for 501c-3 approval.

Right now there is heated debate on "Baubles for Boobs".  The members are freely stating their opinions to the use of the term. I support their right to do so. I stated my opinion in a post regarding a beneficial organization, and how to use Social Workers to find money. I then disseminated to areas of best viewing within my scope. I was deleted. How we members approached an area of concern is different. The outcome was different too.

For those that believe the PM's shouldn't have been made known. Freedom of speech. Take the time to read a generic Sunshine Law.

There have been few postings, but many viewings 800 in 54 hours. What number I account for I don't know. Now there could be many reasons for no interaction.

1. this issue is of no concern

2. the Mods do not want to respond---reason unknown

3. Viewers think I'm wrong, but don't want to get involved

4. viewers think I'm right , but don't want to get involved.

5. fear of retribution

sassy

Wrenn  I'm basically done. This will go no where, but I've said what I wanted to say. I've helped thousands of people with info. here and the real world.

What the Mods assume is everyone is good at searching. I can search, and I can teach. Two strengths. Can't change a tire. Does it say anything about me? Nope.

2ta, ah-hah

LilacI wasn't spamming by the real definition. Actually, here there is no definition. It's what anyone thinks it is. Even me.  Hmm discretionary . Here we chose our favorite threads. My sending of the info was to my friends and chosen threads .

On the web. spamming is indiscriminate sending of junk mail to unknown thousands.

Even when I posted in early feb. re the CYP system. I used the word spam. Was it a correct use of the term  Debatable.  

Hi doctoring , disastering, and sleepless

Here's one of those spamming things. This was done within my sphere

I know I put this in here somewhere, but just in case. It's a repost of something I wrote for someone else sassy

In case you don't have this link. It's a drug site that is great even though it was done by the government. Why is it GREAT! 1. after putting the drug name in the search box and the list is pulled up, the first drug manufacturer is the one that originated the drug. 2. importance---all the pre-approval clinical trial documentation is there 3. all post marketing data is there 4. hyperlinks throughout to connect within the report for easy referencing between topics.

http://dailymed.nlm.nih.gov/dailymed/about.cfm?CFI...

Here's another thing I spammed within my sphere

Feb 24, 2014 10:23AM sas-schatzi wrote:

Hi reposting this on some threads, may be old news to some, but to good of info not to pass this on,Sassy

Bluebird144…NJJoined: Apr 2013Posts: 393

13 hours agoBluebird144 wrote:

Knitted Knockers Charities is a non-profit that exists to provide free patterns for knitters and crocheters to be able to make knockers and help mastectomy patients get freeKnitted Knockers made by volunteers.

I love my Knitted Knockers! They are light and soft and warm. Unlike my silicone prosthetic which is heavy and cold when first worn, then it later causes me to sweat.

I wear my knitted knockers inside a regular bra or tucked in the pocket of a mastectomy bra. They are beautiful, and a godsend to those of us with an uneven mastectomy scar.

Knitted knockers website:

http://www.knittedknockers.info/

This was not spammed, but shows intent of recognizing the common problem sassy

sas-schatzi…     FLJoined: May 2009Posts: 10,014  

Post a reply         

Aug 18, 2012 02:37AM, edited a few seconds ago    by sas-schatzi

-It is not uncommon, when people put in an uncommon situation, to act uncommonly. Now I've never said that before, but let's analyse it. It is "not uncommon", many people do it.

The "uncommon situation" I have never experienced it before. Other phrases used, "it's out of my frame of reference", "I'm clueless". All of these mean, I don't know anything about the problem. I must seek someone that does. I have a plumbing problem, I call a plumber. I have an electrical problem, I call an electrician. I have a, physical problem, I call a doctor. In each situation, I am trusting that the person that I am calling, will correct my problem to the level of working order, before the problem existed.

Here on BCO our problem started with Breast cancer. This is our common beginning.  Then because of the initial problem, other problems may and do occur.

From our common beginning, uncommon things occur. In these uncommon situations, I am trusting that the Doctor that I am going to will give me the best information. Doctors refer me to other doctors in specialty areas, when the problem presented to them, is uncommon to their knowledge base. I then go to the specialty doc trusting that their knowledge is the best up to date information available. That what they recommend, will correct my problem, do me no harm, and bring me back to the level of health, I was before the problem occurred

. Why do people "act uncommonly"?  Applying this to our common problem of BC, if I seek information and treatment intervention, and I perceive the information given or the treatment rendered, has caused a problem, I begin to lose trust. When trust is lost or questioned. My action changes. I then seek new information. Until I have enough new information to allow me to trust again. My action may appear to be an uncommon response, to those that have more knowledge than I.

Here on BCO, I come seeking new information to validate what the information or treatment, I am receiving is correct. When a problem is posted by a member, other members respond.  Until I can trust again that my information and treatment is correct, I will seek answers. I will pick and chose the answers that resolve my question.

A reminder that BCO management team monitors areas of concern of members. Out of this monitoring, many artcles have been added to the educational material on the main board. Reading the articles on the main board should be a first step. Then coming to the discussion board for further discussion of your problem is helpful. The interaction with others that have a common experiences, validates what we know. We then can begin to trust again.

Common Law copyright allrights reserved. Aug 2012

This is my spam outside of my sphere.

Feb 25, 2014 07:33AM sas-schatzi wrote:

I've spammed this around the boards, hopefully, the mods will get that now is the time to get our MO's and PCP's to take our care seriously by protecting us from injury by drugs and or drugs that aren't working for us because of our genetics.

----------------------------------------------------------

Hi Folks, I haven't posted here before, but recently found out some info that has pissed me off in re: the drugs given to me during treatment for BC. I was almost killed  with my one and only chemo. Taxotere was the culprit. I "failed" all three AI's b/c of s.e.'s. All of this could have been avoided had my MO paid attention to the Cytochrome450 genetic testing. Of the six genes tested, I have abnormalities in three. All are major players in the drugs I was given. Had I been tested, it would have been known. The drug choice and /or dosage modifications could have been made

Rather than rewrite the details here The link below will take you to a thread that has the posts that I have written in the last few days.

I'm not trying to sell Genelex. Other laboratories are doing genetic testing. But Genelex is the only company right now that provides the application of the genetic results to the drugs we are taking. Other companies, I'm sure are trying to build the same business model. It's the future of drug administration.

Why? Patients will no longer except being experimented upon with drugs that can harm them. If the docs won't do this because it's the right thing to do it. Then we have to PUSH them into doing the right thing.

http://community.breastcancer.org/forum/73/topic/7...