All the problems we have seen lately on curezone boil down to a single problem:
"Giving someone the benefit of the doubt!"


The Free Dictionary says this about it: "Giving someone the benefit of the doubt is to believe something good about someone, rather than something bad, when you have the possibility of doing either."

The concept of giving or not giving the benefit of the doubt is very important when it comes to replying to any message on CureZone.

We all agree that a poster behind the name "#461" is totally extreme when it comes to not giving the benefit of the doubt. "#461" believes that everyone who disagree with her must be paid by big pharma to hold those beliefs they hold.


In reality, if you have been reading messages on curezone for some time, you can easily come to conclusion that no 2 prominent posters on CureZone would ever agree 100% on anything, not even 90%, hardly ever 80%.

It is even not easy to find people who agree 60% on anything!


What that means is that people have different opinions about different therapies, and we just have to accept that there could be hundreds or even millions of people out there who disagree with our own opinion, even when not a single one of those people have any direct or indirect economic interest in disagreeing with us.


Yes, a person does not need to receive money from anyone (Big Pharma, parazapper, vitamin producers ... ), in order for him/her to disagree with our own opinion.

If you tried herbs, and herbs you tried have not provided any relief to your symptoms and health problems, you have at least 95% right to believe that herbs are not the real answer for the problem you are facing, and that does not mean that you are paid by Big Pharma to hold those beliefs. It may just be that your personal beliefs are 99% based on your own personal experience, and possibly on the personal experience of other people around you.


If you tried different zappers, and zappers you tried have not provided any relief to your symptoms and health problems , you have at least 95% right to believe that zappers are not the real answer for the problem you are facing, and that does not mean that you are paid by Big Pharma to hold those beliefs.


If you tried different prescription medications, different doctors and different mainstream therapies, and those mainstream therapies you tried have not provided any relief to your symptoms and health problems , you have at least 95% right to believe that prescription medications and "Big Pharma" are not the real answer for the problem you are facing, and that does not mean that you are paid by Parazapper or Hulda Clark to hold those beliefs. It may just be that your personal beliefs are 99% based on your own personal experience.


So, we all have to become more flexible, less extreme, especially those who have been involved in the latest name calling debates, and we all have to learn how to "believe something good about someone, rather than something bad, when we have the possibility of doing either."


We have to learn to give someone the benefit of the doubt even when we are 100% sure that that person is a "pharma shill" or when we are 100% sure that everything that person says is just inspired with his desire to sell his parazappers to us.

The reality is, most people are good.
Whenever we make an assumption that someone is not good .... we may be wrong.

How many innocent people ended up on a death row just because someone was 100% sure they were guilty?

How many witches were burned because someone was 100% sure they were witches?

How many innocent people are serving a prison sentence right now because a policeman or a judge or a jury member is 100% sure they are guilty? (far less then the number of those who should be serving the sentence but are walking free, may be your answer. And my answer to that would be " two wrongs don't make right! " )


I believe that #461 is a good and sincere person, who is just unable to see that what makes her call others "pharma shills" is the same thing that makes them call her "paranoid".

All that names calling comes from inability to accept the possibility that other people may have experiences that are totally opposite to our own experiences.


I believe that parazapper is a good and sincere person who sometimes uses personal attacks as a way to defend himself from attacks.

I believe that lordcooler is a good and sincere person who sometimes uses personal attacks and ugly words that we would rather not like to see on CureZone Forums , just because those words may be normal on some other forums or circles where he used to post before.


I believe that sdrt123, david1o1, WhoAreYouNormally, SHARKMAN, etc are all good and sincere people who have their own doubts about different therapies discussed and who get carried out into name calling debates.



If we can learn to give other people the benefit of the doubt, we would hardly ever feel the urge to call them names.


Read also this:
//www.curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=1772458#i




Webmaster

Thank you,

I agree absolutely that this needs to stop and this is not the first time that I have had groups of people gang up against me but it is definitely the worst.

:- For the record, every time 461 accuses someone of being an employee working for a cartel

It is almost always in response to someone attacking their post and I can back this up with a lot of examples.

Some of the following posters have commented that they did not think that some other posters had made defamatory or inflammatory comments that deserved my responses but I must disagree with that. If someone calls me a liar or even implies such it is definitely personal. Some of the past attacks have conditioned me to have knee-jerk reactions. Sorry, I do not like responding in such ways.

I very strictly do my best to be as completely honest and fair as I can.

As for those who promote drugs, it is also their right to do so. I have not had a history of attacking them unless I have been attacked by them first.

Also, the only post that I have made on the Rx forum was in reaction to defamatory posts that some of those followers had made regarding zappers failing to work for anyone. I will note, that I was very careful not to actually list ParaZapper successes, only those from other zappers. Those show plainly that most any zapper can be successful at least some of the time.

I just got tired of the perpetuation of the lie that zappers do not work. Zappers have helped many thousands of people, many who have never even heard of the CureZone.

Also, what you say about people claiming to be cured but still claiming to be looking for a solution is very much to the point.

As for those who are afflicted, I am in great hopes that they find their answers. That however becomes very difficult when people cause such dissent and commotion.

What is needed is a peaceful co-existance and acceptance that what does not work for one person might work very well for another.

If you used a zapper and did not get good results, that is fine for someone to fairly speak out about and even Dr. Thiel's study points out that not everyone has good results. At the same time, is also points out that for some reason, most participants did have notable improvement.

Also, if there is a model of zapper that you tried and did not like, first tell the manufacturer in all fairness. At least twice a year, we send out a newletter giving updates to our customers and at the same time, asking what needs to be done to improve our products and saying that if you have any issues, please contact us.

It is fair to say that you do not like the long wires, or that you do not like that they are permanently attached to the zapper, or that you prefer alligator clips. But, it is completely unfair to call any product junk without a fair offering of why that is your opinion. That is nothing but abusive.

Sadly, in some cases, there is not much that we can do to correct an issue from as long ago as 12 years. We have made a lot of improvements since the CCa and it is extremely unfair for someone to post an implication that our current products as junk. As far as that goes, we have hundreds of testimonials that claim that that person was wrong.

Even when I am critical of a competitor's product, I try to post as fairly as possible and include visual documentation or at least a good description of the issues. This is fair.

Also, repetitive requests for information that is not legal to be supplied is harassment. Some people waste a lot of forum space as well as my time and the time of others, forcing people to respond to that same harassment over and over and over and over. In fact, there are probaly over 25 and possibly 50 discussions where Davidlol posts the exact same statements repeatedly. He is disrespecting others who are here by telling them that they are too stupid to see that I do not post any claims where ParaZapper is sold. He would be doing a better service to zapper users by posting a bit about each and every zapper that he has used, giving both pros and cons of each.

If Davidlol was really interested in the reasons that I am not answering his request for proof, he would read the letter that was sent to me by the FDA. And then if he is smart, he might even read between the lines.

If you used a zapper and it did not do anything, please specifically post a fair disclosure of your experience. That is welcome. But bashing a product that you have not even bothered to try is completely out of line and is harassment.

The same can be true for pharmaceuticals. Post about your own experience. That is fair. But be fair in that post, If you had out of norm experiences, people deserve to know about that too, regardless of the product that was used.