Letter to the editor in mispahcha

amother

Gold

Mon, Apr 25 2016, 11:23 am

Now I'm wondering if she came in with an Agenda.

To write two blah, non specific titles... like soda for shalach manos... when there were new threads being added by the minute at Purim time, and then a worrying title which said she was hurt... Rolling Eyes

This has nothing to do with Imamother or online forums or anything. If they were titles in Family First, the same thing would happen.

It's like she deliberately posted two vague titles and then one specific, compelling title just to prove a pre-determined point.

Whatever. I just love people with holy agendas.

chagru

Mon, Apr 25 2016, 12:12 pm

Sensationalism sells in the frum publication world as well. When I browse imamother I don't open the threads that are not relevant to me like soda, M Manos (no interest in the MM madness that is so rampant before Purim) I usually browse in the evening to relax and either I open what's relevant if I can help or what's interesting, her title was interesting that I do remember. Her ranting won't change the fact that most ppl are going to get drawn to the interesting titles in threads articles or whatever else

amother

Gold

Mon, Apr 25 2016, 12:51 pm

chagru wrote:

Exactly.

I found it hilarious that she was 'surprised' to find threads dealing with sholom bayis and other sensitive topics.

A- Do you really think an anonymous women's forum is going to be all about recipes, shopping, and knitting projects?

B- Why did she portray that as negative? I think it's one of the greatest things about Imamother - that women can get support and (mostly) helpful advice about things they would never dare talk about in public.

Either way, I think it speaks of a much bigger problem than sensationalism - the fact that many people are missing a very important life skill: discernment. The ability to filter, to use basic common sense - instead of developing a sixth Seichel Sense, let's ban it! Let's say it's dangerous and harmful!

Yups, that will get you far in life.

sprayonlove

Mon, May 02 2016, 9:01 am

Amelia Bedelia wrote:

Can someone post a link to that woman's threads?

http://www.imamother.com/forum.....=coke

This is one of them. She didn't even post her location so obviously she didn't get a lot of replies...

Chayalle

Mon, May 02 2016, 9:13 am

Can someone who has nothing better to do write a response to Mishpacha? Tell them you frequent the sight mentioned by the letter writer; and that on both of her posts, people urged her to post her location, but that she neglected to do so and also ignored that fact in her letter to Mishpacha.

In short, gin10 is as guilty as the imamothers she is vindicating. She totally does not read and respond to HER VERY OWN THREADS. Instead, she totally focuses on her sensational thread.

Case closed.

Your welcome.

watergirl

Mon, May 02 2016, 9:26 am

Also, in the letter to the editor, point out that she did not close her account as she claimed - She may be reading this right now. I just sent her a pm and it sent through. Her letter was totally self righteous. She should be called out on bringing down someones parnassa as well. Everyone knew exactly what website she was referring to in her letter. Not cool.

Last edited by watergirl on Mon, May 02 2016, 10:30 am; edited 1 time in total

luvinlife

Mon, May 02 2016, 9:49 am

noosheen wrote:

am I the only one (and I'm sure I'm not) that did not take the side of the girl (forget her name)in this story 'lightly glazed'? I did not immediately think that her husband was controlling and in the wrong. I thought 1. there are 2 sides of a story and 2. this girl has a unhealthy addiction to her phone.

so, let's not blame this site for people jumping to conclusions. all of us get what we want from ima mother and leave what we don't. I think that the person who wrote the letter to mishpacha exaggerated a bit when she says she posted a few times with no responses here. no responses at all? and she posted the same question a number of times? I highly doubt that, but then again, there ARE 2 sides to every story!!

I agree! it was so clear the husband was not at fault and she was just addicted to her phone

amother

Scarlet

Mon, May 02 2016, 12:02 pm

watergirl wrote:

This is not proof of anything. I pmed a different poster whose account I definitely know is disabled, and it also went through.

The only way you'd know for sure is if it comes up in your SENT-READ mailbox.

eschaya

Mon, May 02 2016, 8:44 pm

The writer failed to recognize that she was comparing apples to peas. Is there some truth to the fact that sensationalism sells? Of course. But that's just one small part of the picture. It's frightening when minimal intelligence is paired with maximal self righteousness.