Post by: Anonymous on April 23, 2006, 11:03:00 AM
Heh heh.
Post by: Anonymous on April 23, 2006, 11:06:00 AM
Better copy it before it gets taken down....
Quote
Which do you trust more for residential programs for at-risk teens?
A. State run programs 2 (1%)
B. Private state funded programs 1 (1%)
C. Private parent choice programs 41 (24%)
D. There should not be any residential programs for these students 124 (72%)
E. Unsure 5 (3%)
Total Votes: 173
View previous polls
Post by: katfish on April 23, 2006, 02:08:00 PM
http://www.strugglingteens.org/cgi-bin/ ... 222#000015 (http://www.strugglingteens.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=001222#000015)
http://www.strugglingteens.org/cgi-bin/ ... forum;f=12 (http://www.strugglingteens.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=forum;f=12)
Post by: katfish on April 23, 2006, 11:23:00 PM
A. State run programs 2 (1%)
B. Private state funded programs 1 (1%)
C. Private parent choice programs 48 (25%)
D. There should not be any residential programs for these students 135 (71%)
E. Unsure 5 (3%)
Post by: Anonymous on April 24, 2006, 03:00:00 AM
Post by: OverLordd on April 24, 2006, 08:43:00 AM
Post by: Nihilanthic on April 24, 2006, 12:49:00 PM
Quote
On 2006-04-23 11:08:00, katfish wrote:
"LOL- that's the funniest sh-t I've seen in quite some time!!! ah ha ha ha ha! I think we all should just invade struggling teens- take these monthly polls and make our point on their forums- politely, of course... so as not to get the boot. WE have the stronger arguement
http://www.strugglingteens.org/cgi-bin/ ... 222#000015 (http://www.strugglingteens.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=001222#000015)
http://www.strugglingteens.org/cgi-bin/ ... forum;f=12 (http://www.strugglingteens.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=forum;f=12)"
Uh, no. Forum invasions get nothing done except inflame people and piss them off. Plus, you cant invade a closed forum that lon or another admin has to sign off on personally.
Also, giving them recourse to start *MORE* ad hominem attacks and basically resort to emotional appeals or attacks on the poster doesnt make you win, it makes them close up and not listen to anything except what they want to hear.
Going down BELOW the level of the person youre debating doesnt get very far.
Post by: Nihilanthic on April 24, 2006, 12:54:00 PM
Post by: Anonymous on April 24, 2006, 12:55:00 PM
I wonder how long it will take them to try to get this removed from the internet :roll:
Post by: TheWho on April 24, 2006, 02:13:00 PM
Post by: Anonymous on April 24, 2006, 02:16:00 PM
Quote
On 2006-04-24 11:13:00, TheWho wrote:
"Why would someone want to remove the results from being viewed?"
Come on Who, you're smarter than that. Why do you think? :roll:
Post by: TheWho on April 24, 2006, 02:55:00 PM
Quote
Which do you trust more for residential programs for at-risk teens?
A. State run programs 2 (1%)
B. Private state funded programs 1 (1%)
C. Private parent choice programs 48 (25%)
D. There should not be any residential programs for these students 135 (71%)
E. Unsure 5 (3%)
Just a first cut at looking at the results.
I am not familiar with the people doing the survey, but I think the results are interesting and tell a little about the industry, what we don?t know is how the survey population is broken out (parents of kids, kids, at-risk kids, interested third parties)
Assume your survey population was ?All Parents of at-risk teens?
I see the results as saying:
71% or more of the parents feel they should work their kids issues at home and are willing to do so.
25% of the parents either tried unsuccessfully (originally part of the 71% previously) to work the problems at home or felt they could not be successful and did not attempt initially and chose a private out placement for their child as they saw their attempts not working(i.e. local therapist, counseling, personal/ family, lifestyle changes).
Only 2% were willing to trust the state and their regulations/ oversight (or lack there of) or their children. I believe this is the most interesting result, no trust in oversight at all.
Assume your survey population was ?Not parents of at risk teens?
I see the results as saying:
25% of the at risk teens would trust their parents to chose a residential program
71% would not want to go at all.
Assume your survey population was ?A mix of parents and teens?
I see the results as saying:
Greater than 25% of the respondents see a benefit of a residential treatment plan of some type. Which I see as high. Every parent I have spoken to attempted to solve the issues at home or locally, so over 25% of the respondents have passed this point and are actively looking for outside help. I would have guessed this to be down around 15%.
If this was a controlled study it would be interesting to see how many parents in the (71%) group would be successful working the issues at home and how many moved on to consider placement after their attempt failed in follow-up surveys.
How do others see this?
Post by: Anonymous on April 24, 2006, 02:59:00 PM
Quote
On 2006-04-24 11:55:00, TheWho wrote:
How do others see this?
"
As intended propoganda set up by a referral service. I'm quite sure they intended for mainly program parents to respond. Usually the MO over there is to delete anything that doesn't jibe with their belief that programs save kids.
Post by: Troll Control on April 24, 2006, 04:00:00 PM
Quote
Come on Who, you're smarter than that.
No he isn't.
Post by: Anonymous on April 24, 2006, 04:02:00 PM
Quote
On 2006-04-24 13:00:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Quote
Come on Who, you're smarter than that.
No he isn't."
Yes he is, he's just got blinders on. I have hope that he may be one of those who wakes up from dreamland someday.
Post by: Anonymous on April 24, 2006, 04:59:00 PM
You idiot, what's really going on is-
No. No, I'm going to see if someone figures it out. I seriously can't believe this. On any other forum on Earth, someone would have, long since. Jesus fuck, you're all morons.
_________________
"'What do I care?' I live here, asshole!"[ This Message was edited by: Paul Smith on 2006-04-24 13:59 ]
Post by: Anonymous on April 24, 2006, 05:06:00 PM
Yeah, when you're being twits, it's my forum. Right. Paul's an extra special asshole.
Here, let me help the slow class figure it out. *click*
What are the poll results NOW?
Post by: TheWho on April 24, 2006, 05:09:00 PM
Quote
On 2006-04-24 13:59:00, Paul Smith wrote:
"Paul just gawks at TheWho. He can't be that stupid. Nobody can. Paul's tempted to unleash the PT9K on his ass, but this isn't translatable stupidity.
You idiot, what's really going on is-
No. No, I'm going to see if someone figures it out. I seriously can't believe this. On any other forum on Earth, someone would have, long since. Jesus fuck, you're all morons.
_________________
"'What do I care?' I live here, asshole!"[ This Message was edited by: Paul Smith on 2006-04-24 13:59 ]"
Relax, you saw the survey too, but no one has interpreted the results. What trend do you see that the rest of us do not?
Its raw data !!! We all see diferent results, thats the beauty of it.
What do you see?
Post by: Anonymous on April 24, 2006, 05:11:00 PM
Post by: Anonymous on April 24, 2006, 05:14:00 PM
I love Luke so much. In an entirely heterosexual way, mind you.
Post by: TheWho on April 24, 2006, 05:40:00 PM
Quote
On 2006-04-24 14:11:00, Luke Stephens wrote:
"I SEE MYSELF CLICKING RUN ON MY FUCKING MACRO PROGRAM TO MAKE THE RESULTS WHATEVER I PLEASE, IDIOT!
"
Oh my, I am a little embarrassed, but just to intrigue my sense of fair play. adjust your macro to force the results to say,
A 1%
B 1%
C 1%
D 96%
E 1%
Then hit the "run button", lets see how that works again, to make it easy for you:
Set your population to 100 that way your macro should be simple:
1,1,1,96,1
Post by: Anonymous on April 24, 2006, 05:45:00 PM
When he said "whatever he pleased", he meant that he could add as many votes as he wanted. Not subtract. Subtraction would take real hacking, which is probably extremely easy, given what they (and you, but 'you' obviously fall into the category of 'they') really know about computers, but seriously isn't worth it. Even Luke and I have to acknowledge some laws sometimes.
I'm out of here for now. You've already made a fool of yourself. You don't need my help.
Post by: Troll Control on April 24, 2006, 05:46:00 PM
Quote
On 2006-04-24 13:02:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Quote
On 2006-04-24 13:00:00, Anonymous wrote:
<
Come on Who, you're smarter than that.Quote
No he isn't."
Quote
Yes he is..."
No, he isn't.
Post by: Anonymous on April 24, 2006, 05:52:00 PM
Post by: Anonymous on April 24, 2006, 05:52:00 PM
Post by: TheWho on April 24, 2006, 05:55:00 PM
Quote
On 2006-04-24 14:45:00, Paul Smith wrote:Run out the back door if you like, Okay -- I'll make it
"Paul just shakes his head and sighs.
When he said "whatever he pleased", he meant that he could add as many votes as he wanted. Not subtract. Subtraction would take real hacking, which is probably extremely easy, given what they (and you, but 'you' obviously fall into the category of 'they') really know about computers, but seriously isn't worth it. Even Luke and I have to acknowledge some laws sometimes.
I'm out of here for now. You've already made a fool of yourself. You don't need my help.
"
Even easier, When it hits 400 (population) make the results:
4,4,4,384,4
See how that macro works !!!
Post by: Programmie-Trans 9000 on April 24, 2006, 06:01:00 PM
TARGET ACQUIRED
Quote
TheWho really meant to say...
I have absolutely no clue what a macro is or does, but I'm going to pretend I have some idea what I'm talking about, because the people who control my pitiful life keep accidentally letting me near the computer.
TRANSLATION COMPLETE
SWEET JESUS YOU ARE AN IDIOT
HAVE A NICE DAY CITIZEN
Post by: TheWho on April 24, 2006, 06:13:00 PM
Quote
On 2006-04-24 15:01:00, Programmie-Trans 9000 wrote:Only time will tell. The results stand at 1%,1%,16%,80%,2% with a population of 310. I may not be an expert, but you will need to prove the macro works and you can make the results what you want, balls in your court.
"ACTIVE MODE CONTINUING
TARGET ACQUIREDQuote
TheWho really meant to say...
I have absolutely no clue what a macro is or does, but I'm going to pretend I have some idea what I'm talking about, because the people who control my pitiful life keep accidentally letting me near the computer.
TRANSLATION COMPLETE
SWEET JESUS YOU ARE AN IDIOT
HAVE A NICE DAY CITIZEN
"
Translation: "You need to prove to me you can control the results"
Post by: Anonymous on April 24, 2006, 06:30:00 PM
Neither Paul, nor I, nor our bot need to prove anything whatsoever to you, programmie. But just so the computer-illiterate parents reading this board don't get confused as to which one of us knows what the hell he's talking about, I'll throw another 100 votes to D.
Post by: TheWho on April 24, 2006, 06:31:00 PM
Quote
On 2006-04-24 14:11:00, Luke Stephens wrote:
"I SEE MYSELF CLICKING RUN ON MY FUCKING MACRO PROGRAM TO MAKE THE RESULTS WHATEVER I PLEASE, IDIOT!
"
Sorry, Luke, I just noticed you were 16, I'll back off. I think what you were trying to say is you are voting for one of the categories more than once. I might have done that at 16 also, kind of a power thing, anyway, the polls realize this when they put them out in the public forum and take that into account, that is one reason I provided 3 different scenarios. There are many more variables like the one you provided.
Have fun
Post by: TheWho on April 24, 2006, 06:33:00 PM
Post by: Anonymous on April 24, 2006, 06:41:00 PM
And no, they don't take it into account. If they took it into account, they wouldn't have it this easy to fuck up in the first place.
You're still an idiot.
Everyone else, if you ever need to prove TheWho is an idiot, link to this thread.
Post by: TheWho on April 24, 2006, 07:05:00 PM
Quote
On 2006-04-24 15:41:00, Luke Stephens wrote:So you outsmarted the internet polling system at age 16, clap, clap by voting several times, no one ever thought of that before, I guess you are smarter than me after all, you are a shoe in for becoming a programmer someday.
"No, you're backing off because I'm systematically owning your ass. Votes added. Close enough for government work. Heh.
And no, they don't take it into account. If they took it into account, they wouldn't have it this easy to fuck up in the first place.
You're still an idiot.
Everyone else, if you ever need to prove TheWho is an idiot, link to this thread.
"
You win
Post by: kristiesprout on April 24, 2006, 07:28:00 PM
|
ONLINE NOTIFICATIONS
Post by: Anonymous on April 24, 2006, 07:44:00 PM
Heh heh.
show some respect fellas... not that opinion has much to do with efficacy...
Lon's very dramatic about this whole thing- and (if what he's saying is true)that's just a big bummer for us, stupid thing to do... in a very tiny insignificant way...
Post by: Troll Control on April 24, 2006, 07:45:00 PM
This is an internet poll. It's no surprise that the results can be manipulated.
Compare this with the type of lying that programs do when dealing with the lives of children. "We feed them properly," "We don't lock them in isolation rooms," "We don't use LGAT seminars," "We're licensed," "We're accredited," "No severly disturbed kids are admitted," etc.
Let us not forget, Kristie, your company SELLS the lies above - the kind that hurt children.
Post by: katfish on April 24, 2006, 07:51:00 PM
I don't know how many different ways the importance of efficacy can be made... RTC's don't work--- and it appears that these unregulalted RTC's are breeding ground for John Mercer's of the world. Do you understand the significant damage John (and other people from other schools)have done to so many girls- doesn't this concern you in the least - taking even the most recent example of suicide given this poor girl was tromented at MMS (I have documentation) then harrased/threatened later for criticizing the school's abuse?
Doesn't it bother you that you and your father know so little about mental health and nothing is known about the way these places affect kids (except what many of us share on various sites), but that you continue to blindly support schools anyway and mislead parents?
Do you not consider this at all?
Even if a school helps 99 and harm 1, that would be unacceptable in the mental health field-- Thank god some of the wiser figures out there are taking positions on this like the ABA most revently. Most reasonable folks would stop and reconsider their position and reasoning on such an issue, given such outcry that has and will continue to develop... there's just to much harm being done to justify an unregulated industry- end of story. [ This Message was edited by: katfish on 2006-04-24 16:57 ]
Post by: Anonymous on April 24, 2006, 07:52:00 PM
Post by: Anonymous on April 24, 2006, 07:55:00 PM
Oh man.. hahahaha... he really thinks that an ISP is gonna... hahaha..
Why not just post a big sign on the front page saying HELLO, I AM A COMPLETE DOUCHEBAG, AND I KNOW NEXT TO NOTHING ABOUT COMPUTERS?
Thread of the century!
Post by: katfish on April 24, 2006, 08:04:00 PM
Liars are evil= bah... lying is what humans do, period. Lon needs to get of his moral high horse.
Post by: 69 on April 24, 2006, 09:15:00 PM
Quote
# We are sending a complaint to the owner of that IP number,
pointing out that one of their customers had abused their Internet
privileges.
:rofl: Freeping a poll is illegal now? This was too funny, thanks for posting it.
If the personal freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution inhibit the
government's ability to govern the people, we should look to limit those guarantees.
--President Bill Clinton
Post by: Nihilanthic on April 24, 2006, 09:17:00 PM
"Internet priviladges"
Uh, no, its not a priviladge. Its a service that someone paid for, provided by a company. But, it comes accross like someone talking down to a child they dont like. Well, it most likely was a teenager.... but still.
Also, the funny thing, is that if the code was written in such a way you could click it all you want, it wasnt abused. Its just a naive poll! It didnt check for the IP or a cookie, and.. well, the inevitable happened.
Furthemore if they just told a specific group of people to take the poll and say whatever, thats just swaying the pollers, not abusing the interent or the poll. :lol:
Post by: OverLordd on April 24, 2006, 10:11:00 PM
Post by: OverLordd on April 24, 2006, 10:29:00 PM
Post by: Anonymous on April 24, 2006, 10:48:00 PM
I'd give it a C, but it deserves a B- for pure silly humor.
It's a shame that you have to say that one of us is imaginary, though. Being incorrect just never works with this sort of thing.
Post by: Anonymous on April 24, 2006, 11:29:00 PM
And you still are. (You meant 'under the impression'.)
I, too, have a point to make.
Check your PMs.
Post by: Anonymous on April 25, 2006, 02:20:00 AM
100 vote/mo.? Nothing, why care?
Arent you american? get some sleep
Post by: MightyAardvark on April 25, 2006, 08:26:00 AM
You've just given this guy another forum to beat his drum and spout his lies.
Why don't you just shut up and stop sabotaging the work we are trying to get done?
Post by: Troll Control on April 25, 2006, 09:00:00 AM
However, that does supply ammunition for Lon to use hyperbole and ad hominem attacks effectively. Remember, the people that read his site are very closed-minded and will see this as absolute evidence that "You kids need SERIOUS HELP!" As ridiculous as that conflation is, it becomes a referendum on your character for many, a fight that is best avoided when the facts are already on your side.
This:
Quote
"Holy crap, this guy's going spazoid over some kid fucking up his poll results, which he should have secured better in the first place"
was a quite ridiculous hyperbolic response to a what amounts to a silly prank that was eagerly encouraged by a pro-program parent that posts here, egging the boy on as it were.
Seriously, this is much to do about nothing.
Post by: Anonymous on April 25, 2006, 09:42:00 AM
Post by: Anonymous on April 25, 2006, 09:52:00 AM
Quote
On 2006-04-25 06:42:00, Anonymous wrote:
"As if Lon and his crew already don't have enough ammunition for ad-hominem attacks? I agree, this is much to do about nothing. This only matters to those who inhabitate the small universe of strugglingtrolls and it seems some here too. If the fate of the anti-program crowd's argument rests on what Lon thinks of us and if someone clicks on a poll a bunch of time I'd say we are in trouble! :wink: "
Yeah, I hate trolls, but if the Program losers didn't have something to bitch about they'd make something up. All the survivors should know that since that's been the Program losers' modus operandi from day one.
Need to fill a bed? Don't have enough *real* addicted kids? Redefine "addictions" as the kid who's smoked pot once or twice, or the girl (never a boy) who's slept with two boyfriends--or even one.
Kid progressing through the Program while his parents still have equity in their house for more months of tuition? Make up a few infractions and kick him down a few levels.
Program losers lie. It's what they do.
Julie
Julie
Post by: Anonymous on April 25, 2006, 05:11:00 PM
You are a miserable person.
Post by: Anonymous on April 25, 2006, 05:24:00 PM
Post by: Anonymous on April 25, 2006, 05:29:00 PM
Post by: Anonymous on April 25, 2006, 06:11:00 PM
Post by: Anonymous on April 25, 2006, 09:55:00 PM
Fuck it. No sense in dragging anyone into a royal flamewar (didn't we just have one of those?). The average comments page on an Internet article/blog featuring details of the abuse (the rage shows right through the page!) wakes up more people than months of Fornits being up ever will. I'm not completely leaving- Luke and I might be back to unexpectedly slam someone's ass- but there's simply not much of an audience here. The anonymi make Fornits seem far, far bigger than it really is.
As to the rest of you separate human beings reading this, shut the fuck up and start mailing your public servants. It's an election year, y'know.
_________________
"'What do I care?' I live here, asshole!"[ This Message was edited by: Paul Smith on 2006-04-25 18:57 ]