Internet Safety & Your Role As A 7 Cups Listener

@Laura Hey there! I hope more awareness is created among members to not disclose their personal information. I was listening to a member who was made to believe that she's talking to a girl and had sent her picture to the listener who turned out to be a guy. She's reported him but he can be back anyway.

Thank you soso much for this thread @Laura. It?s supremely helpful.

This is such an insightful post and reminds us of so many of the risks that entering into offsite connections can have. However I would question a few things. In the past I have been asked by a member if the site has an option to voice chat or video call, when they discover that it does not offsite contact is suggested. I do not think that the majority of these guests and members have concerning motivations, but the concern will always be there. I have also encountered situations in which members have become worried that I will delete my account for site related reasons (eg. Conflict with another listener or perhaps another member starting to harass me). So they would like offsite contact information so that the long term relationship we have built up is not lost over something like that. I also have found at times and I become frustrated by the confines of the site, because it does not allow me to support a member in a way that best fits their needs, for example helping a member with social anxiety who wanted to practice conversational skills with a listener who would not judge and whom they trusted. Overall though I do believe the potential for harm is greater than that for benefit but it is not simple.

I think I explained this rather well in a previous post a long time ago but I'll have another go at it.

Honestly, we can do whatever we choose. The chat windows are encrypted and if a listener and member or listener and listener willingly exchange information and are willing to suppress that they did it, then it is what it is. I am not naive. I am sure that many have done this.

But consider this scenario.

7cups says "yeah, it's safe if, after a period of time, you meet up with a member or want to exchange info." The next thing you know, and this is dramatic, but whos to say in this world it couldn't happen? Said listener gets shot deadbecause said member finds said listener at their house and, for whatever reason, did the unthinkable.

Who's liable?

See, with the policy as it is, it's a no brainer. It's on the listener. It's on the member. The policy has to be what it is because the blood cannot be on this communitieshands. Yes, I am sure that the leadership and management care. I care. I don't want anyone endangered, stalked, or hurt. But at the end of the day, another important reason is liability.

Now can you exchange policy as long as no one knows? Sure. You can also be 10 sheets to the wind and take chats. Both are against policy and if leadership finds out theymust take the appropriate action.

Kind of like sports or cards, in reality, you can do anything you want as long as you assume the risk and no one else finds out, from speeding in your car to doing Cocaine at work.

Thanks!

Chiming in, to agree with @Kash216 Thank you @Laura for sharing thiswith the 7 Cups community.

@Laura

Thank you for this post... Couple of questions and comments though - I feel this is kind of saying, you can share your social media, if you're an adult listener, to another adult listener, but 7 Cups takes NO responsibility. if you're reported for it, you will receive a warning from you. This I have no problem with!

Question: If we received a warning, does that act as a behavioural report on our account (one which may stop us gaining a positionlike group mod or anything like that...)

Secondly: I find the bit about teens extremely patronising - in a way, I can see why you have to say it, but at the same time, you trust us to listen to people. You trust us to do many of the same things adults do, yet, you don't trust us to share social media with other teens we may choose?

And finally, there are people on 7 Cups I trust more than people I have on Facebook in real life... Ishould have the choice of who I trust enough to share with...

That's all!

hey @mobbsy just a reply regarding your interpretation of the rules and how it applies to teens. at least as *I* read laura's post, it's saying that adults aren't allowed to exchange info either. I think she's just saying there are heightened safety concerns about teens. Personally, the teens I know are mature, capable, responsible, etc.. Even so, I still think there are some decent reasons to have heightened safety concerns about teens. it's not because i think you are stupid or incompetent when compared to adults--it's just because everyone in the world goes crazy when any teen gets hurt by some breach in internet privacy/safety. The site has to cover its behind, and trying to keep teens from starting relationships irl with 40 year olds and keeping them from getting stalked makes sense to me as one part of that.

Okay that's all. =^D

I'm not going to comment on the bit about teens, because I always get enraged by it as we're treated like that often...

However, with regard to what you're saying about adults not being allowed to share social media, I feel it's a very round about say of Laura saying this... she didn't say that they aren't, but that if they do, it's basically their own problem... I don't really feel the post has particularly helped clarify much if I'm honest...

Fair enough about the teen thing, @mobbsy Sorry if I voiced things in a way that was enraging. I was just trying to say that y'all are cool in my book. If you wanna PM me, I'd be curious to hear how teens are getting patronized.

I took the quote of the listener guideline as an indication that it was still in force, but I'm sure Laura will reply to your post soon and then we kind find out for official! :)

@JustinRarr - sorry, it wasn't aimed at you at all... it's just generally around the site, unintentionally, or intentionally, things aimed at the teens I find are done in a more partonising way... Not your fault at all... Cheers for your offer!

Yeh, I look forward to hearing about it - otherwise I feel it could've been: forbidden for everyone. It doesn't really need the separation of teen and adult if it's not allowed for everyone...

@Mobbsy, I always enjoy your opinions on things but I have to respectfully disagree with you on this - yes you are trusted to belisteners and moderatorsand all the rest butas teens the owners of this website havea duty of care to keep you as safe as you can possibly be. This is the same in any community like this the worldover. Some people do not have the best of intentions and perpetrators are masters of deception and manipulation. Teens are incredibly vulnerable on the internet.This is notscare mongeringnor is itpatronisingbut it issimple fact. You may think you know someone and you may think they are your friendbutthey could be someone completely different towho they say they are.I have seen this happen at7cups, andI've supported someone through this, it is very real and it can be devastating.Yes, the same threat exists on the adult side and we are asking everyone to be extracautious and to be sensiblebut we have to ensure optimalsafety on the teen side, given how much more vulnerable teens are (and I mean that in termsof being atarget rather than inmaturity) whichis why a watertightrule is inplace.

@Soulsurfer

I'm sorry, but just because I'm a month under 18, doesn't mean that I'm at any higher risk than someone who is a month older than 18... that's where the problem lies with me. In this kind of community, and online like this, it doesn't matter that I'm under 17 and someone isn't, when we may just be 2 months separated in age...

I promise I'm not attacking you here @mobbsy, but I just wanted to bring up the point of legality. Even if you are a month under 18 and may not have something magical that happens when you're a month older than 18 that makes you more capable, it's still a legal thing. You still can't buy cigarettes in the U.S., even if really there is no change physically/mentally/emotionally in the month before it's legal.

This is the same idea that is presented at 7 Cups, legally they could get into a ton more trouble if you're a teen doing this rather than an adult doing it.

@MobbsyI can see a lot of teens feel the way you do, that they are mature enough to be treated the same as the adults. The simple fact is that in an adult-teen friendship it is the adult who is responsible for everything and thus receives full blame when things go wrong. This is the case in real life, I am sure you have seen it in the news enough times when a couple in love run off, due to age the adult gets labelled as a groomer. Having any sort of negative label attached to yourself as an adult can seriously affect your career. Friendships change and people fall out, we never know how a relationship will turn out, but all it takes is for one to go badly and some allegations made and a person's life could be destroyed. I know you mentioned teen-teen sharing, as you also said you will be 18 soon, this would then put you into the bracket of an adult sharing with a teen!

@Sarah @Maygun

I'll address you both at the same time as I feel the comments are on the same issue. It's not about adult-teen sharing that I've got the problem, it's more about the separate rules for teens and adults.

From the way I read Laura's post, it's saying that adults shouldn't share social media, but they can, and if they do, they'll receive a warning... However for teens, she has uncategorically said don't share with anyone. I don't have a problem with the adult-teen rule, I'm fine with that, but I do have more of an issue with the split with teen-teen rule...

@Mobbsyit is like I stated, teens grow up! What may have started as a teen-teen friendship will change to a teen-adult friendship. There are so many legalities surrounding the age of consent.

@Sarah - I'd be interested to know which legalities these are, considering, with parental permission, we're allowed to listen on here... so surely, with parental permission, we should be allowed to add other teens on social media...

@Mobbsy - I am truly sorry that this has caused you to feel so enraged. I've noticed from all your comments and replies that the common theme is that you feel aggrieved that Teens and Adults have separate rules. I'm a little confused as to why this is a problem. It is not unfair, concerns about safety are never unfair. I know you don't like the rule and you don't have to like it but I'm surprised you don't see the importance of it or accept it. I think it's worth highlightingthat in almost every country in the world and in other online communities Adults and Teens have different rules. Why is it that Under 18's are not allowed to drink (in some cases Under 21/23's), that they aren't allowed to buy cigarettes, that they aren't allowed to vote?Are you saying that this is an injustice on behalf of law enforcement and the government? That teens should be allowed to do what adults do? That if your parents consent to you drinking or smoking that you should be able to do it? Of course not and it's no different in this community. Teens, in general (and I'm not implying you necessarily), are more vulnerable. Having the rule protects you and others, and you need more protection than adults regardless of whether you are 16 or a week away from 18. For those that are more vulnerable it can be very difficult to say no when you feel like you have to do something because it's a social norm and "everyone is doing it" This is why the rule is watertight for teens.

@Mobbsy, anyone can come out here, start an account as a teen, and chat with you or any teenage female.

ANYBODY!

Think about that, while you read this:

https://www.dosomething.org/facts/11-facts-about-human-trafficking

If you think the teens (and adults for that matter) are not vulnerable to this sort of thing, then we must have a talk. I work for an organization that deals with such things (Withheld due to disclosure of my residential location).

I hope you see the adults are not overreacting in all of this.

Perhaps i'm being all angsty teenager-y and should listen to the adults, but I agree with @Mobbsy here

I'd like to remind everyone that the teen side is a big part of this site and without it we'd have a lot less traffic and recognition. Teens go through a lot of things and having this on-demand support is essential. As adults, i'm sure you wouldn't be able to provide the support necessary for adults and teens. We need teen listeners, right? Just like we need adult ones. We've been entrusted with (pretty much) all the responsibilities you have... except this one?

Im not disputing that adult-teens shouldn't have relationships and i don't think many teens would see that as an okay thing to do, what I think is being said here is it's unfair to say that we're unable to handle ourselves. Personally, my parents know who I speak to online and they allow me to meet people I met through the internet as long as they know who they are and where I will be. They trust my judgement. I think the parental consent rule should apply here. If adults only get a warning for this, it shouldn't be the case that teens with parental consent get suspended or worse. It's concerning that if someone was a few months older, they would still have their accounts or no behaviour reports.

Its quite a big inbalance. I understand you want to protect us and yourselves legally but most teens 16-18 have good judgement and know when somethings not quite right or what to do if they get themselves in trouble. By asking us to have parental consent before using this site they are basically giving up all responsibility for us as our parents agree to us using this site and anything that happens here.

Also, regarding the teen-teen turning adult-teen, the biggest age gap will be under 2 years max between any teens, I don't think thats really a major issue as long as the off site contact isn't for authority and the participants are all peers?

Just my two cents

I think the problem is even though they are a 2 year gap, 18 is still legally an adult. If anything happens, things go south and someone accuses another, the 18 yr olds life is almost ruined, at least for a bit. Say they get accused of something- having an alleged harm charge affects everyones view of you. What if the 18 yr old and teen develop a friendship then relationship IRL and end up having sexual relations? That's still considered rape I think,depending on country or area. They could be on sex offender list for life. I guess it depends honestly, that's all I'm saying is it's risky even if they are technically still teens and it's only a new age, it's an important legal one at least.

Wonderful post @Laura! I'd love to see a similar one in the member forums too as it's becoming increasingly common for members and guests to share social media while moderators aren't around!

Very good idea @Chrissy!

Thanks @Laura! This was very informative.

There are two things that bother me here.

First, stereotyping all listeners into the categoriesof off-site bullying, stalking, etc., seems unfair. I would bet everything in my bank account that the portion of those listeners who do this is verysmall compared to the overall number offering their services on here. They can be dealt with individually once reported.

Secondly, this site is really nothing more than a neutral meeting space where a service is offered and a service is received (i.e., given by listeners, received by members). What it should not be is a site that tries to dictate what we can and cannot do outside of this site. Today's society depends on having healthy online relationships, I agree. But you are only allowing us to do 95% of our jobs on here by not condoning that long-term friendship off-site.

As stated in another post - licensed professionals are held to the oath of not continuing friendships outside of the "office." This site makes it very clear that we are not offering professional services and that we are not to use or professional licenses to offer that type of counseling service,so naturallywe should not have to be held to those same standards. There needs to be some leeway here, some free will to do as we please with regard to whom we befriend and whom we do not.

It is truly unfair for the site to harp on the fact that we are not all of these things, but then manage uslike we are these things. It's just plainly and simply not right.

Another person a few days ago said it best - simply place a disclaimer in the Terms of Service saying that off-site communications or behaviors are not your legal problem and that you do not promote or endorse such things. That would be all you needto release yourself from liability should something go wrong.

As a final thought - why are listeners not able to connect with members off-site, however, 7 Cups of Tea itself is free to create social media accounts for members and listeners to interact with each other over? Does this not seem incredibly contradictory? Since the chats on this site are supposedly not monitored, ANYTHING you are worried about happening off-site could happen on here, also. The only thing that changes is the medium and the site - so I would like people to consider this thought.

I forgot to mention that even though I sound a little harsh about the adult side of things - I do think it is a good idea to discourage adult and teen interaction off-site. This just goes without saying and I think most parents would agree, also.

Good points. One thing for the last:

I thought it was hilarious and then sadly, so very telling when a joke "I hate you" could not be typed into chat. Maybe that's monitoring. To filter words or phrases just like that.

As a moderator , I take this rule very seriously and I am happy you made a post about it! We never know who is behind their screen. This is indeed because we want to procect our safety that we should never share any form of social medias. ^_^

@Ace13

It's very true that we don't know who's on the other side of a computer screen. And, as someone who was raped by someone I had grown to trust online (though I recognize this was years ago and there are now more ways to find out if someone is who they say they are), I wouldn't want anyone to go through that experience. Particularly after connecting viaa site they also trust.

Just chiming in here on this issue. This comes up every 3-4 months, so let me share with you all what we learned last time. There were a group of folks that were in regular contact outside of 7 cups. They had a number of conflicts outside of 7 cups that ended up spilling into 7 cups. People were hurt. They asked us to intervene and address the issues. We couldn't do anything, b/c all of the behavior happened outside of 7 cups. For this reason, and the other reasons outlined by Laura, we ask you to not have contact with other members outside of 7 cups. Thanks!

I think that wanting to be the police of everyone is just not possible or beneficial. I also thing that restricting these off-site friendships because the site doesn't want to deal with the aftermath is a slightly weak reason. Fights, disagreements, and even crime occurs inside of bars and stores also, but it doesn't mean the police restrict entering such venues.

I think there is room for compromise here, at least. If the issue comes up every "3-4 months," it's worth considering a compromise and not sticking to a "my way or the highway"stance.

@Kyle2003

In response to this, I think it's important to acknowledge that using the police is a bit broad.It isn't a collection of places that is being enforced, nor is it every single scenario. Police cannot restrict individuals from entering certain places, but the places certainly can.

If you think about it, the administration is the "management."7Cups is an"establishment,"and listeners are the "patrons." Every establishment has their own guidelines, and if the patrons choose to disobey the guidelines and disrupt the peace, the management can choose what the consequences are as a result. From there, the patrons have to accept the consequences, whether it's being given a warning or being banned from that particularestablishment. Does everyone start bar fights? Well, no. But that wouldn't stop the establishment from having protocol regarding violence.

No, not everyone will have problems with offline contact. I believe the staff are well aware that these things happen regardless of the rules. It's just good to clarify their stance on the situation just like how establishments clarify their stances of violence by saying "No fighting."Just like patrons in a bar can choose to disregard the rules and start a fight, we can choose to disregard the rules on 7cups and go against them. We'll just have to accept what happens as a result. Maybe nothing will happen, and we'll have a great conversation. Maybe we'll have a little tussle and part ways without the management having to do anything. Ormaybe we'll end up starting a bar fight that damages the establishment and requires the management to act to ensure that the least amount of damage occurs.

I think I understand what you are saying, but metaphorically it still does not sound correct.

The establishment can restrict access into their own place if I am violating a law or being non-respectful or disruptive, but they cannot restrict their customers from entering other places out of worry that they may be hurt. If I meet someone at the bar and want an outside friendship, I am free to go with that person to another bar or talk to them on social media. I dare say the bar still cannot restrict my patronage because of this, as that would be discrimination and there would be no reasonable legal grounds for this to hold up.

To put this into context here, 7 Cups is the establishment, yes, but they cannot restrict my use of other social media outlets and whom I decide to befriend simply out of a fear that I will become abusive. They are not a legal authority and I am positive that the Terms of Service, as currently written, would not hold up to that battle considering the multitude of other contradictory information given on the forums as some other forum posters have brought attention to.

Legally, the key word is "reasonable," and in this case the key phrase to consider is, "is there a reasonable threat of harm to those who engage in outside friendships or communication from 7 Cups?" I would say no, as the datawill certainly prove to be minimal in those cases that have already happened as compared to the overall number of listeners vs member, and again, since the chats here are not monitored, the threat of harm here remains equal to that outside of this site.

You may be thinking that it sounds absurd to think of everything in a legal context here, but the reality is that this is all about legality. That said, you cannot violate a law to enforce a law. This site is a platform to conduct business only, it should not serve as a ruling authority on whom consenting adults may or may not communicate with off-site.

If you are found to be connecting off site with another listener, I will send you a warning to remind you that this is not appropriate, compromises your personal security/ safety and should be stopped. How it will be managed is discussed in our listener community guidelines.

I find this really contradictory to the fact that there is an entire section for planning meetups:

https://www.7cups.com/forum/ListenersOnlyForums_38/ListenerMeetups_341/

This is sending very confusing mixed signals to me!

It's also mentioned on the blog:

https://www.7cups.com/blog/post/60/Listener+Meetup!.html

While I believe internet safety to be incredibly useful and absolutely necessary when it comes to listener-member relationships, I have to say I disagree with listener-listener relationships.

A lot of us have put time and effort, hours upon days upon weeks, getting verified and generally becoming better people with better listener skills. I would be honored to meet anyone who has the same passion as me and who puts the same effort in that I do.

Also this is a confusing rule considering the Social Soldiers Program. We create Twitter accounts that have referral links along with our listener names. Anyone could easily find my social media that way. I guess I'm just confused as to why create programs that reach out to social media, but then forbid us from using it to connect with each other.

As a disclaimer, this is written by me as me, not as mentor evelyne.

I have a ponderance to bring up. Firstly, I totally understand your reasoning andI fully100% support no adult/teen listener to teen social media sharing and no listener/member sharing. I can see both sides of the issue, and I can see why you ask for no contact outside 7cups. As per Glen's post, I was around when that fiasco happened, and it was indeed a lesson on what happens when things go wrong.

So my question I suppose is this:

In this day and age, is it feasible? With everyone connecting online and such, so many online friendships can happen, and honestly people can probably share social media all the time and just not tell anyone. I feel like this might push people towards doing so because a limit has come down. If we're 18+, should we be able to make our own decision, or is it like work where sometimes you've just got to follow the rules whether you agree or not?

On the other hand, I understand it causes problems, and that it is 100% true we don't really know who the other person is. It can also create a ton of drama outside 7cups. It might be a better business move to have this stance because human relationships are so complex and things could swing this way or that in no time.

But since this comes up every 3-4 months, would it be possible to make compromises? Like, say, have an official stance, but say that anything offsite 7cups is not liable for? I saw Laura said that in this post, but I meant in like the TOS or something. I'm really just thinking outloud at this point, but only because I guess I feel strongly about internet friendships because so many people, including me, grew up making amazing friends on the internet. Also because as someone else mentioned, part of Laura's post does look like it says no we don't want you to but if you do its on you.But, again, I guess it'strue we don'treally know them, and anyone can be anyone on the internet. I don't know, anyone have any thoughts?

I hope this was constructive enough and not seen as an attack or anything :)I tried to add a solution, but I couldn't figure out how to flesh it out or put it in words. The tone is positive though. I just have a mad headache and am trying to keep it concise because my brain hurts.

@EvelyneRose - I really like your post, I don't find it attacking at all and you raise some great points, thank you :) I certainly have absolutely no doubt in my mind that teen listeners and listener-member interactions should never happen offline, for reasons already discussed. I especially like @RocketMom's description below of the complex emotional relationships between listeners and members which I don't believe has been addressed yet, only really the safety aspect. ButI myself am always somewhat confused about the outcry over not allowing listeners to share social media handles and make offline contact. I think it would be highly irresponsible of 7cups management to even consider allowing this to happen purely from a safety perspective. I know that many others, including you, have mentioned that you are left confused by what the rule really means since the rule clearly states that you are not allowed to go offline with other listeners yet if you do its on you, the individual. I can try and clear this up purely from what I think @Laura means in her post. You're welcome to correct me Laura! The rule has not changed. We, as listeners, are still prohibited from sharing details that would lead to offline contact but on the adult side it's very difficult to enforce that rule, and thus it seems reasonable and fair to give warnings rather than outright bans, unless of course the infringement of this rule leads to something quite severe. 7cups needs to be seen as protecting anonymity, one of its core principles, and one on which the website was founded. Furthermore it needs to be seen to be ensuring the absolute safety of its listeners. History also dictates that when 7cups listeners have gone offline the results have been pretty devastating, as @GlenM has already described. So, I fully support the rule being in place. However, in reality, that is not stopping anyone from sharing their details, and keeping it quiet, but that is a risk YOU take. If you take that risk and then you have drama with another listener offline, don't bring it online and certainly don't expect admin to have to mediate it. I am certainly in no way condoning going offline with another listener, I'm merely stating my interpretation of the rule, it's in place for a reason but it's very difficult to enforce, purely from a resource perspective but also because many reports received even now are here-say with no hard or fast evidence. Admin certainly don't have the time to be policing it all. As far as a compromise, I haven't thought about this much but there may be one whereby listeners who have been here for say 3 months and over, are allowed to request a PRIVATE conversation with other listeners (so in effect like a skype group chat) but it would be in a special chat room on 7cups and there would still be chat room rules to adhere to. I'm only thinking out aloud here but I'd be interested to hear if others have ideas about what a compromise would mean for them.

no no i totally understand, I actually completely understand both sides so this is kinda hard

Just as @EvelyneRose had a disclaimer, I also do: I don't mean to offend anyone with this post....these are just my thoughts.

Iagree with many things that have been said?both for and against outside interactions?in this thread. And, I understand the idea of compromise, etc. and see how that could be beneficial. I certainly think if this comes up every 3-4 months, it indicates that this topic continues to be something that needs to be actively addressed so maybe there is a better way to address it.

What occurs to me as I read this thread is this: No, we are not professionals on this site. And, I very much understand the lack of congruence between emphasizing that we are not professionals and yet insisting we act as such. And, at first, I was thinking, I agree! Either we (and, subsequently, our behaviors) are held at a professional level or we?re not. But, then as I thought more about it, I started to shift that thought. Before I explain, I want to make sure I'm on the same page as others who read this--I honestly do not fully understand 7 Cups policy on listener-listener interactions outside 7 Cups. So, I am referring primarily to listener-member/guest interactions in this post.

As a psychologist (so, yes, a professional), it is drilled into us from day 1 that having non-therapeutic relationships with our clients is considered a conflict of interest. It is unethical. And, at first, I thought it was just about the legalities of things. But, with time, I have seen how important it is regarding the relationship--and how having a friendship or interaction outside of the therapy relationship can be very harmful. When I work with clients, they see me in a certain way...and they come to depend on that perception and it impacts how we interact in therapy (or, in my case, during testing). The majority of my clients have NO CLUE that I've struggled with depression. Some have figured it out and a few (after consulting with supervisors) clients I have shared that information with. But, those were carefully thought out situations. Because, what if my client's perception of me as a hugely stable person (with just "normal" emotions) is something they lean on when they're struggling. I don't want to change that. So, if I were to just readily tell my clients about my depression, that may have a positive impact on some (who can use it for strength) but may have a negative impact on others. And, honestly, you can insert a client?s perception about any aspect of my life?doesn?t have to have anything to do with mental health?it could be related to religion, political beliefs, or, heck, the kind of car I drive.

So, let's pull it back to the listener-member/guest relationship. Yes, these relationships are more casual. We are more likely to let them into who we are personally than in a psychologist-client, or therapeutic, relationship. But, that doesn't change the fact that, over time, we have created a relationship with them that is built on the computer being between us. They have certain perceptions of us and we have certain perceptions of them. And, continued interactions are based on those. Suddenly changing that perception by meeting outside of 7 Cups or whatever could seriously impact the relationship. It may impact how we interact with them and vice versa. We may feel more judgmental (without meaning to) after interacting outside of 7 Cups. They may feel more vulnerable and less willing to open up after interacting outside of 7 Cups. Yes, there is a potential for the relationship to change in a positive way following an outside interaction but it's far more likely that it will change in another way. Plus, we are not there to be their "best buddy." Yes, we are there to support them and listen to them but a friendship implies that the relationship is a two-way street. As listeners, we can use our experiences as examples but we should not be burdening members/guests with current problems?that is one big difference between listener-guest/member relationships and friendships (is that correct admins)? So, meeting outside of 7 Cups is very likely to change that dynamic.

I saw somewhere that someone used an example of how one benefit of interacting outside of 7 Cups would be to help a member with social anxiety by meeting them and doing things around others and such. Yes, that could definitely be an amazing thing. But, even as a psychologist, I wouldn't risk how many problems or situations I couldn't account for (including changes in the dynamics of the relationship) outside of the office to do aninvivoexposure with a client. I know that some clinicians do but they have A LOT of experience before doing it.

So, basically, that was a very long-winded way to say that, with respect to listener-member/guest interactions outside of 7 Cups, I think it is very risky to think that there would not be negative impacts. And, I am not referring to safety (as I did in a previous post this afternoon). I am referring to the emotional well-being of the guest/member and that, my friends, needs to be one of the primary concerns when considering these issue (in my opinion). So, rules and safety aside, let?s think about what is best for who we are all devoting so much of our time and energy to help.

(I would really appreciate feedback from @Laura @Heather @GlenM @Jake as I do not think this angle has been discussed yet?it has primarily been focused on rules and safety and legality?though I could have completely missed someone who did discuss it and in that case I apologize for beating a dead horse.)