Too many people helping on our forums

The current series of articles about "too many" consultants or confidants is easily related to the issue of our Jewish forums.

There are certain cases in which too many people "helping" can also do damage on one of our Jewish forums.

Of course, this does not mean that we want to limit the number of participants or subscribers to our many Jewish forums.

However, it is quite common for subscribers to ask a group for assistance on a troubling issue. This subscriber reveals the necessary information to the group, and asks the subscribers, in their collective wisdom, to help find a solution.

After some discussion, the group usually does make valuable recommendations that are usually of great assistance. The suggestions are valuable, since each posting presented by any subscriber is subject to the scrutiny of all of the others. This procedure serves to we remove the less wise options. As the debate continues, we come closer and closer to the best options that can be of greatest assistance to the subscriber. NOTE TO MYSELF: LINK THIS TO THE ARTICLE ON 'TRUTH'

Our groups are blessed with fine, expert professionals in their fields. The forums share the lay responses of the general subscriber base with the professional background of the experts.

This works because the discussions are shared online by all the participants.

How does an offline response hurt?

The subscriber in need is happy to receive the response of the entire group. However, if he also receives another response, he may be confused. It is as if you are saying to him, Let the group go ahead and talk, but I have something more imoprtant to tell you. I want to bypass the group and tell you my feelings personally.

It's even worse. Your private communication is more difficult for the person to reject. You are trying to create a bond with the person asking the question, and it is as if he "knows" you. You are pressuring him to accept yoru point of view - and thereby to reject the view of the entire group.

That's not fair.

It eliminates the value of the forums, and turns your strengthened point of view into the more powerful one, or the one that is more difficult to reject.

You do have the right to present your contradictory answer in a convincing manner on the group. That would be fair play.

It would also not undermine the value of the group.

After all, this fellow in need came to us because he was confused. The group had been doing its its job properly. It had provided a joint, comprehensive answer, taking into account all of the various concepts presented by all of the other subscribers.

Your second answer only serves to destroy the work of the group. You will leave the person confused, and still not knowing where to turn, and under pressure to accept your point of view.

But what if the group disagrees with my suggestion?

That probably means that your line of reasoning differs from that of the group. That does happen. Not everybody has to agree with you.

However, when you joined the group, you implicitly agreed to abide by the group rules. Confusing the person who is asking for information is not an acceptable option.

This is why you have been asked to respond online to messages on the group, unless specified otherwise.

But don't I have the right to correspond with anybody I want to?

No.

You can chat with anybody you want to. However, our groups are not intended for chatting. They are intended to help people in need. You have no right to interfere with our group process with your own communications.