Dear NYT readers

[...]

my method i will use to take my life was the same method i was going to use before i even joined this website. i came to this conclusion via my own research via multiple different sources. i joined this website to talk, to vent, to comfort myself, to get through the days with however little less mental torment. if not for this site i would have probably spiralled by now and acted on impulse and ended up seriously hurt and in a psychiatric ward. instead i am able to keep calm and make it until my chosen date. i love this place and maybe that makes me fucked up but i truly do.

 

[wickedbyessie]

Email this to [email protected].

my method i will use to take my life was the same method i was going to use before i even joined this website. i came to this conclusion via my own research via multiple different sources. i joined this website to talk, to vent, to comfort myself, to get through the days with however little less mental torment. if not for this site i would have probably spiralled by now and acted on impulse and ended up seriously hurt and in a psychiatric ward. instead i am able to keep calm and make it until my chosen date. i love this place and maybe that makes me fucked up but i truly do.

Email this to [email protected].

 

[...]

Email this to [email protected].

Email this to [email protected].

done

 

[wickedbyessie]

done

Spread the word. They can't ignore massive amounts of people who actually do contemplate suicide telling them what resources actually help, and what types of things (like their coverage) harms.

 

[Chinaski]

I'm absolutely not sure this is a good idea, and am very curious as to why this is being so heavily encouraged by a new member, who made this debut post:

Post in thread 'NYT story megathread' https://sanctioned-suicide.net/threads/nyt-story-megathread.79116/post-1418461
The story has been and gone, there is nothing to be gained by emailing your suicide intent to a media which has already revealed itself to have no intention of giving you a fair hearing, please act with caution and common sense.

 

[wickedbyessie]

I'm absolutely not sure this is a good idea, and am very curious as to why this is being so heavily encouraged by a new member, who made this debut post:

Post in thread 'NYT story megathread' https://sanctioned-suicide.net/threads/nyt-story-megathread.79116/post-1418461
The story has been and gone, there is nothing to be gained by emailing your suicide intent to a media which has already revealed itself to have no intention of giving you a fair hearing, please act with caution and common sense.

I say this truly with respect, but isn't it better to speak up than to do nothing as they basically go undercover here in a private space and then exploit it for a story? That is hugely what's wrong with the world. I am new here you are right. I agree with what you said about caution. But being silent on this doesnt exactly feel productive…

 

[Chinaski]

I say this truly with respect, but isn't it better to speak up than to do nothing as they basically go undercover here in a private space and then exploit it for a story? That is hugely what's wrong with the world. I am new here you are right. I agree with what you said about caution. But being silent on this doesnt exactly feel productive…

They've already been undercover, they're very probably still around, and there is absolutely nothing that can be gained from a suicidal person outlining their intent as a letter to the editor. There is no positive PR that can be clawed back, there is no persuasive argument they'd be willing to entertain and, frankly, why would they? On the one hand they have grieving parents and a convicted predator, that's not going to be counterweighted by suicidal emails.

The point of this site is that these thoughts and feelings can be expressed without an applied label or judgement, that goes out the window when you start emailing it to the *actual new York times*

 

[RainAndSadness]

I agree with @Chinaski. They've established their motive when they framed the website in such a horrible light and even more so when they attacked the site administrators on a personal, intimate level. These people don't have any noble intentions and reaching out to them, at this point, isn't gonna achieve anything. These journalists missed to pick up anything positive from this community and I believe that was purely intentional.

 

[wickedbyessie]

They've already been undercover, they're very probably still around, and there is absolutely nothing that can be gained from a suicidal person outlining their intent as a letter to the editor. There is no positive PR that can be clawed back, there is no persuasive argument they'd be willing to entertain and, frankly, why would they? On the one hand they have grieving parents and a convicted predator, that's not going to be counterweighted by suicidal emails.

The point of this site is that these thoughts and feelings can be expressed without an applied label or judgement, that goes out the window when you start emailing it to the *actual new York times*

I should clarify, I'm not advocating to email ones suicidal intent to the editor. I am advocating to let them know they made a destructive oversimplification of a website that actually allows a group of people who are rarely fully seen and heard, to be seen and heard. The letter I wrote to them (attached to my post) explains what I'm trying to get at. They hyperfocused on people using the site for step-by-steps, and are publishing this story most likely in some weird attempt to "decrease suicide occurrence", but the way I see it is that they should be flooded with messages from people whose reprieve they just picked up and crumbled. They think it's helpful but to the actual people implicated (SS users and people contemplating ctb), it's not helpful. Classic colonizer mentality where intention doesn't = impact. Just disappointing. But that's still me believing they think they're trying to help. Maybe you're right and it was intentional. But why would they do that to intentionally harm people?

 

[...]

response back

 

[Chinaski]

I should clarify, I'm not advocating to email ones suicidal intent to the editor. I am advocating to let them know they made a destructive oversimplification of a website that actually allows a group of people who are rarely fully seen and heard, to be seen and heard. The letter I wrote to them (attached to my post) explains what I'm trying to get at. They hyperfocused on people using the site for step-by-steps, and are publishing this story most likely in some weird attempt to "decrease suicide occurrence", but the way I see it is that they should be flooded with messages from people whose reprieve they just picked up and crumbled. They think it's helpful but to the actual people implicated (SS users and people contemplating ctb), it's not helpful. Classic colonizer mentality where intention doesn't = impact. Just disappointing. But that's still me believing they think they're trying to help. Maybe you're right and it was intentional. But why would they do that to intentionally harm people?

Yeah I'm still saying it's perhaps wise not to do this.

 

[WrongPlaceWrongTime]

View attachment 80760
response back

There's the answer to the question of whether they will ever hear us out. They might as well have a bot automatically spamming that number in our mail

 

[wickedbyessie]

View attachment 80760
response back

Wow. I am so sorry and grossed out that these are the people influencing the masses.

 

[Ashu]

These normtards have no concept of our truth, and they don't want to.

 

[Marktheghost]

View attachment 80760
response back

Doesn't sound very helpful to me.

 

[wickedbyessie]

View attachment 80760
response back

Lmao just forwarded my letter directly to that lady ^