Psycho-Babble Administration | about the operation of this site | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Psycho-Babble is dying - really. What a shame.

Posted by SLS on February 21, 2008, at 5:59:43

In reply to Re: Psycho-Babble is dying., posted by Toph on February 20, 2008, at 21:21:09

> I may be mistaken but the vitality of Psycho-Babble seems to mirror the interest it's founder has in it.

Could be. I haven't been here over the last 1 1/2 years, so I really did not witness those variables that may have affected the membership here.

I have never been blocked, although I did earn a PBC. If I were to be blocked, I don't think I would take it personally. I guess that's a healthy thing, but there are many who are emotionally vulnerable (or even not so vulnerable) whom, having depression, are more likely to take blocks personally.

Is it possible that some people left without earning posting sanctions whom just refused to be treated like children, and suffer punishments from the administration for not being Victorian in their diction? I think these things might be taken into consideration when trying to explain the reduction in posting on the medical board.

The Internet is usually thought of as a place where free speech is advocated. For those people whom subscribe to this idea, this is not an outlet for their freedom of speech. On the contrary, it is a suppression of free speech. Regardless of my personal likes and dislikes, it is I whom chooses to participate here under the current guidelines. It is not my blog board. So, I will try to adhere to the guidelines of the administration.

I haven't gone foraging for a new site. Quite frankly, I don't want to nor or need to. However, I doubt I will participate much here anymore. There is nothing that captures my interest. New and not-so-new people ask the same questions over and over. In the past, I answered these questions over and over. However, I see that I have done this enough to have had my hunger for doing it satiated. Usually, these questions are fielded first by people whom have been here for a little while. But no longer does this segment of the population exist. People leave too soon. So now, we have posters who are in need of questions answered, but no veterans interested in answering them. I think the process of attrition, once started, can be self-perpetuating in a posting community.

I could go on, so I will.

When the enactment of sanctioned guidelines of civility were first enforced, I remember feeling choked. I'm sure many novices come to feel this way as well. The newbies are tolerant of it in the beginning. Thus, the result is that enthusiastic novices feel choked and resentful, and probably leave at that stage of their participation here. I hope Linkadge comes back, as much as I disagree with him. I wish Larry Hoover posted more regularly. I wish the current environment were conducive to my posting more. Perhaps Dr. Hsiung is aiming to produce what he believes is a utopian society. When it comes to human beings having differing opinions, this is hard to accomplish.

There is no more room for passion here. Posts are rewarded for being robotic and without the use of words that demonstrate adversarial content. While I am glad that we don't see the persistent flaming and trolling that once occurred here, I believe the administration is much too intrusive right now. Maybe we should run a social experiment to see how the posting habits change in the absence of such moderation. Afterall, Dr. Hsiung is running a social experiment of sorts. Why not experiment with moderation with the objective of enhancing or optimizing membership participation.

One of the objectives of the civility guidelines is to produce dispassionate content and filter out content that is allowed to be freely adversarial.

Of course, all of this is conjecture on my part.

Apparently, there has been a reduction in posting volume that has been occurring for a long time. Administration ought to recognize this and produce conjecture of their own - and act on it.

Compared to the years between 2000 and 2002, things were very, very interesting, being mostly constructive, and ideal for the synthesis of ideas. People were interesting. Debate was interesting. Most all of the posts allowed for subjective content. Now, everything is to be of an objective nature. Where is the allowance for conflict? Conflict is a healthy thing. Perhaps a less intrusive moderation of free speech would be conducive to attracting new members and prevent old members from emigrating away.

I thought things were pretty cool back in the "old days". Now, things pretty much suck.

I suggest that this post be given a PBC because one could come to the conclusion that my saying that things now suck is an attempt, by insinuation, that Dr. Hsiung sucks. Is this too far a reach?

Hmm.


- Scott

 

Thread

 

Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post


Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.

 

Start a new thread

 
Google
dr-bob.org www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for
in

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Administration | Framed

poster:SLS thread:812972
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20080204/msgs/813875.html