Happy to offer a free virtual session for founders if there is interest here, as our work is always gifted.
Happy to offer a free virtual session for founders if there is interest here, as our work is always gifted.
I find it concerning you list experience providing psychotherapy in clinical practice on your CV. These terms are strongly associated with someone who has specific training, a license, and is answerable to an ethics board. It may give a mistaken impression to someone who is considering working with you.
Converse curiously; don't cross-examine.
Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.
Don't be curmudgeonly. Thoughtful criticism is fine, but please don't be rigidly or generically negative.
Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
I know it feels important to protect vulnerable people from being harmed by frauds, and related concerns. But we can safely assume that HN readers are reasonably competent and discerning adults, who can make up their own mind about these things.
All that said, I too disagree with this point:
> But we can safely assume that HN readers are reasonably competent and discerning adults, who can make up their own mind about these things.
On the contrary, we can safely assume HN readers include teens and younger.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4653053
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22883469
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5947260
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14137926
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34059645
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=135494
I simply opened the HN search, did not change any defaults, and searched “I am” then 14 and 12. I didn’t even click through the second page of each. Those posts are old (they were ordered by popularity by default) but the point stands.
Even regarding adults I must disagree. Bad actors often actively try to hide their actions, so finding and reporting what could be harmful is useful and a service to the community. We all have our blind spots and are gullible in certain areas, or may just be having a lazy day and not doing due diligence. The HN community is in no way immune to human faults and biases.
I’m just one data point but I didn’t find your parent post disrespectful or unreasonably negative, and their questions were valid. It didn’t feel like a post deserving of rebuff.
Regarding the age of HN users: yes I know it's not the case that 100% of participants are mature adults; when I make a comment like that I have to ask myself "do I really need to couch this with the concession that this is not a 100% watertight assumption?" Evidently yes :)
I think it's important to defend against hostile comments towards people sharing unconventional healing techniques on HN. People who share these concepts can be vulnerable to attack from people who feel very emboldened by their faith in mainstream approaches and allegiance to orthodoxy. I know it can be exasperating, trying to be heard when faced with attacks like that, no matter how well-intentioned, well-researched and conscientious you are. We don't want HN to be a place that allows hostile treatment towards marginal voices to go un-defended, because it's usually the case that transformative ideas start out as fringe ideas, and risk being lost altogether unless someone makes the effort to advocate for them, often at great personal cost.