Username change: Floggi becomes Rabelais

Home The Candida Forum Candida Questions Username change: Floggi becomes Rabelais

This topic contains 4 replies, has 4 voices, and was last updated by  Rabelais 4 years, 10 months ago.

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #118711

    Rabelais
    Blocked
    Topics: 3
    Replies: 268


    Hi all,

    On a different forum, American friends told me that in (US?) English, the name Floggi may have a negative and/or non-serious (like in: mocking) ring to it. As English is a foreign language for me, I was not aware of this.

    Right or not, using a username that has a negative or non-serious ring to it does affect how one’s posts are viewed. I would like to prevent that.

    I considered asking Anna to change my username, but that would result in many threads becoming unreadable, because people are referring to Floggi, which would no longer exist after such a name change. That’s why I created a new account. I named it after François Rabelais, who was a great doctor, scholar, and humanist.

    I’m aware that it’s against forum rules (and, for that matter, against commonly accepted rules for decent behaviour) to create duplicate accounts. Therefore, I’m making this change openly, for anyone to see. In addition, I will no longer log in under my old username. Anna, if you’d like to be extra sure, you could even block Floggi’s access to this forum (and you can check that I really am Floggi by checking my IP and my email address, which is highly similar to Floggi’s).

    If my starting over under a new username is still against forum rules, please let me know. In that case, I will of course abide by the rules and continue contributing under my old username, even if it has that negative ring to it.

    #118716

    Dlambo
    Member
    Topics: 0
    Replies: 1

    Rabelais;57232 wrote:
    Hi all,

    On a different forum, American friends told me that in (US?) English, the name Floggi may have a negative and/or non-serious (like in: mocking) ring to it. As English is a foreign language for me, I was not aware of this.

    Right or not, using a username that has a negative or non-serious ring to it does affect how one’s posts are viewed. I would like to prevent that.

    I considered asking Anna to change my username, but that would result in many threads becoming unreadable, because people are referring to Floggi, which would no longer exist after such a name change. That’s why I created a new account. I named it after François Rabelais, who was a great doctor, scholar, and humanist.

    I’m aware that it’s against forum rules (and, for that matter, against commonly accepted rules for decent behaviour) to create duplicate accounts. Therefore, I’m making this change openly, for anyone to see. In addition, I will no longer log in under my old username. Anna, if you’d like to be extra sure, you could even block Floggi’s access to this forum (and you can check that I really am Floggi by checking my IP and my email address, which is highly similar to Floggi’s).

    If my starting over under a new username is still against forum rules, please let me know. In that case, I will of course abide by the rules and continue contributing under my old username, even if it has that negative ring to it.

    Hello Floggi(Rabelais) I am a long time lurker on this website. I have been following the posts here carefully, trying to learn as much as I can.
    A little bit about myself: I am a network security analyst, and have suspected candida for the past couple of years.

    In all my time following this forum, I can not understand your purpose in posting here. It seems you are always trying to debate and cause trouble. It is only certain topics, such as vaccines, and chelation as well.

    I find it interesting that you were on another forum with the same name of “Floggi”. As a network analyst I have a great skill-set when it comes to the internet. I could not find any users on another forum named “Floggi”. If it was there believe me, I would find it.

    I wonder what the real motive is for changing your name, perhaps to hide the post history which it appears you have deleted from?

    I would just like some clarification here, if you are not trying to help people get over candida, why are you here causing mischief?

    I have reviewed the forum rules and am trying to state my opinions without any form of attack. Thank you Anna, and others for the great wealth of information here!

    -Dlambo

    #118717

    dvjorge
    Participant
    Topics: 283
    Replies: 1368

    I am curious about the same thing. I have nothing against him and his opinion about amalgams, chelation, candida, etc. All that is valid, and he has the right to think different about any topic.
    However, people who visit or join this kind of forums are looking for something. It isn’t a secret I am a long time CRC sufferer since I took an excess of antibiotics during 2008. For this reason, I had to research and learn about an intestinal candidiasis ( by the way, my was intestinal/genital, a classic CRC ) to fight for my health. The forums are places where I have learned and shared my experiences and knowledge about it. It is logic, since I have been linked to it since 2008, I have enough experience and acquired knowledge to advice new people in this battle. It doesn’t mean the forum isn’t valuable for me because I still find information, ideas, advice, and knowledge I use to reach my cure.

    I don’t know anything about Floggi. I don’t know if he is sick, if his hobby is to read internet forums and to create controversy, if he is looking for any help, advice, guidance or if he enjoys arguing and contradicting certain topics.

    He isn’t obligated to say what are his reasons here, but it could be good to know them.

    Anyway, we should keep focused on the battle to overcome CRC and forget about the rest.

    Jorge.

    #118718

    TheXtremisT
    Participant
    Topics: 12
    Replies: 126

    Heard that many people had a problem with this guy before, but have not noticed it myself because I’m on here for advice. If I read something that isn’t such, I ignore it. Maybe that means I screened most of his posts.

    But what was the point of making a new thread just to tell us you changed your name?

    #118770

    Rabelais
    Blocked
    Topics: 3
    Replies: 268


    Hi all,

    Thanks for asking your questions. I’ll gladly answer them.

    Dlambo;57237 wrote: In all my time following this forum, I can not understand your purpose in posting here. It seems you are always trying to debate and cause trouble.

    I’m a follower of the ancient Greek philosophers, who taught that debating is the foundation of true insights.

    They learned us that insight is not found in the best answer to a question. Instead, they argued, insight is found in the answer to the best question.

    Gaining insight is, therefore, a matter of asking the best questions. To find the questions, and then to find the answers to these questions, requires debating. Not debating in today’s political sense, where the goal is to score a point and to damage your opponent; instead, it’s debating in a respectful way, as friends instead of enemies, and focusing on the question instead of on the person.

    I found this principle of finding the best question rather than the best answer applied equally well to my career and to my personal quest for insight. That’s why I love to exchange thoughts. Or to debate, as you may call it.

    As to the “cause trouble” part of your statement – ‘trouble’ is nothing but a negative feeling. Someone who introduces new ways to think is often considered a source of trouble. For example, the first ones to bring the message of christianity to new countries were considered a source of trouble by those who objected against these new thoughts.

    Similar things happen on this forum. Some welcome new ways of thinking and new knowledge, some oppose it. The latter group considers the newcomer a source of trouble. The former group accepts, sometimes even welcomes, the new insights.

    Dlambo;57237 wrote: It is only certain topics, such as vaccines, and chelation as well.

    There are many topics where I simply lack knowledge. Sometimes I ask questions there, but most of the time, I just lurk. I certainly do not voice my opinion, simply because a have no opinion because of my lack of knowledge. Whenever I find I have no expertise, I think it’s better to keep my mouth shut.

    In other topics, I do have expertise. In those topics, I will not keep my mouth shut.

    Sometimes I speak out because I think I can offer my opinion, and it’s for others to decide whether to accept or reject that opinion.

    Sometimes I speak out because I think I can really help.

    Sometimes I speak out because wrong information is given. I think I can help by providing the correct information. Or simply by adding information and letting the readers come to their own conclusion. You’ll have seen that I never just provide information in a “that’s just how it is” way. Rather, I try to explain the reasons why I think my information is better than the original information. This fosters debate in the Greek philosophers’ sense.

    Sometimes I speak out because I read something that is potentially (or actually) dangerous. This often comes down to correcting wrong information as in the previous paragraph, the most important distinction being that correcting dangerous information is even more important than correcting information that’s “only” wrong.

    Dlambo;57237 wrote: I find it interesting that you were on another forum with the same name of “Floggi”. As a network analyst I have a great skill-set when it comes to the internet. I could not find any users on another forum named “Floggi”. If it was there believe me, I would find it.

    I use different usernames.

    Still, you might find the word “Floggi” being mentioned. But regardless how sophisticated your skill-set is, you cannot read or search forums that are only accessible to registered users.

    Dlambo;57237 wrote: I wonder what the real motive is for changing your name

    A username is more than just a name. It’s part of an identity. It’s part of how others interpret your words.

    Imagine someone posts with a username like jester_cap, or ubertroll, or teacher_of_dumbos. Even if such a person would write articles that are full of useful information and that are very well thought out, the strange username would greatly reduce the impact of those excellent postings.

    “Floggi” isn’t the worst of all usernames, but it does have something of a negative ring to it. Yet, I want my postings to be considered for their contents, not for the accompanying username. That’s why I decided to change my name.

    dvjorge;57238 wrote: I have nothing against [Floggi] and his opinion about amalgams, chelation, candida, etc. All that is valid, and he has the right to think different about any topic.

    Thanks, dvjorge.

    dvjorge;57238 wrote: I have enough experience and acquired knowledge to advice new people in this battle. It doesn’t mean the forum isn’t valuable for me because I still find information, ideas, advice, and knowledge I use to reach my cure.

    You help others by providing information about the things you know about. I do exactly the same (at least I try). The main difference is that your expertise is about battling candida, whereas my expertise is in different areas. That’s fine, I think. You’ll hardly ever find me objecting about your candida expertise, because you know so much more about that than I do. I just focus on those subjects that I think I know enough about to write about it.

    dvjorge;57238 wrote: I don’t know if […] his hobby is to read internet forums and to create controversy, […] or if he enjoys arguing and contradicting certain topics.

    I think I don’t create controversy. I just write my opinion on those subjects where I have knowledge, and when I find it important to add my information. That’s providing information. Controversy is merely the difference between two opinions, but you cannot say that only one side “creates controversy”.

    As an example, imagine that someone walks into a school and advises all children to eat as much poison ivy as they can. Then the head teacher stands up and explains that eating poison ivy is a very bad idea, and that you’d better not try that. Would that make the head teacher someone who “creates controversy”?

    TheXtremisT;57239 wrote: [W]hat was the point of making a new thread just to tell us you changed your name?

    Creating two accounts is against forum rules. So you can imagine what would have happened if I had switched to the Rabelais account without telling anyone. After a while, people would discover that Rabelais is Floggi, and (not knowing about the background) they would feel betrayed. They would burn me down for creating a duplicate identity.

    Therefore I decided to subject my actions to public scrutiny. No hidden motives, full disclosure of the what and the why, everything in plain sight.

    I know that someone on this forum has had a duplicate account for about a year, and that he actively used both accounts to agree with himself, to support himself, and to jointly attack others (this person may be very thankful that Anna didn’t ban him from the forum; I know of many forums where such behavior would be considered totally unacceptable, and any perpetrator would be banned forever; Anna has really been very forgiving). This person even accused others of having duplicate accounts…

    I do not wish to descend to such levels. I even do not wish to create the remote impression that I might have descended to those levels. That’s why I announced my username change in such an open, public way.

    I hope I have answered your questions. If you’d like to know more, just ask (remember the Greek philosophers: finding the best question is what matters most).

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)

The topic ‘Username change: Floggi becomes Rabelais’ is closed to new replies.