03-17-2011, 12:01 AM
Enchantra wrote:Gonzo wrote
Dat -
I would say when FW was around, being the person you refer to, she was very effective. In fact, her stalking continues to remain effective because you still react with immediate anger at the mere mention of her. Perhaps you don't see your reaction as being the thing she stalked. That is, have you ever examined why you reacted?
A good analogy of stalking of this sort is fishing. In order to catch the fish, the right bait must be used and patience exercised. FW had an uncanny knack of perceiving which bait would work with which fish. Out of all those she "caught", however, perhaps only two learned anything from the lesson. The remainder, realizing they had been conned, responded only with self-righteous anger and resentment.
So mind games equal stalking? Do I have that right? So I would be correct in saying that manipulating another to the point of emotional re-action is stalking, yes?
And if she were still on these forums (FW) and continuing her multi-personality-disordered mind-effing and posturing, would you say she was a master stalker?
Just trying to get this right!
(PS some people were not angry with FW for her antics, but see her as a sick individual with too much time on her hands and a dire need for medication. )
Yes. You have it right. Also a means of dismissing the effectiveness of what she revealed and continues to reveal. The two most prevalent excuses were it was purely an ego trip on her part and that she was deranged. What continues to be ignored by many are their own reactions to her doings. Why did anyone bother to respond to her? What caused the urge to post? It's far easier to dismiss her as deranged rather than examine one's own motives.
Dat -I would say when FW was around, being the person you refer to, she was very effective. In fact, her stalking continues to remain effective because you still react with immediate anger at the mere mention of her. Perhaps you don't see your reaction as being the thing she stalked. That is, have you ever examined why you reacted?
A good analogy of stalking of this sort is fishing. In order to catch the fish, the right bait must be used and patience exercised. FW had an uncanny knack of perceiving which bait would work with which fish. Out of all those she "caught", however, perhaps only two learned anything from the lesson. The remainder, realizing they had been conned, responded only with self-righteous anger and resentment.
So mind games equal stalking? Do I have that right? So I would be correct in saying that manipulating another to the point of emotional re-action is stalking, yes?
And if she were still on these forums (FW) and continuing her multi-personality-disordered mind-effing and posturing, would you say she was a master stalker?
Just trying to get this right!
(PS some people were not angry with FW for her antics, but see her as a sick individual with too much time on her hands and a dire need for medication. )
Yes. You have it right. Also a means of dismissing the effectiveness of what she revealed and continues to reveal. The two most prevalent excuses were it was purely an ego trip on her part and that she was deranged. What continues to be ignored by many are their own reactions to her doings. Why did anyone bother to respond to her? What caused the urge to post? It's far easier to dismiss her as deranged rather than examine one's own motives.