![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 136. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:39:56
Should the whole word be XXXXX'd out?
Just in this context because to the casual reader it may appear that someone was calling the poster whose name appears after that the antichrist. Even though that was not the intention of the person who posted the heading.
Posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:40:20
In reply to POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:39:56
IMO. Yes.
Posted by malthus on January 22, 2005, at 17:47:01
In reply to Re: POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist » alexandra_k, posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:40:20
Please "X" it completely out Dr. Bob. It is disturbing on many levels.
malthus
Posted by Fallen4MyT on January 22, 2005, at 17:50:47
In reply to POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:39:56
I would like it xxxxx'd out as I did from day one..It makes someone feel to quote the civil rule
" Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down."
having that word by my name would make me feel that way and more I know the poster who posted it meant no offense at all...still....I wish to have it xxxxed out Dr Bob please. Thank you
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 22, 2005, at 17:51:26
In reply to Re: POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist » alexandra_k, posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:40:20
It is questioned here if the whole word should be deleted.
I would preferr to have dialog with anyone here concerning the word. You see, I have been revealed a revelation that includes the word. The bible has the word in it in only 2 books. The writer was a jew. I feel that if what I have been revealed about the word is allowed to be posted here, that that could have the potential to benifit the forum
Lou
Posted by Fallen4MyT on January 22, 2005, at 18:11:41
In reply to Lou's rsponse to the poll-, posted by Lou Pilder on January 22, 2005, at 17:51:26
I just want AngelGirl back and the word that bothered her taken down.
Posted by Fallen4MyT on January 22, 2005, at 18:26:31
In reply to Re: Lou's rsponse to the poll-, posted by Fallen4MyT on January 22, 2005, at 18:11:41
sorry when i said taken down to be clear now i meant by x;s or y's ....z's.. no not z's folks will think that mean's sleep .....
> I just want AngelGirl back and the word that bothered her taken down.
Posted by malthus on January 22, 2005, at 19:22:28
In reply to Lou's rsponse to the poll-, posted by Lou Pilder on January 22, 2005, at 17:51:26
> It is questioned here if the whole word should be deleted.
> I would preferr to have dialog with anyone here concerning the word. You see, I have been revealed a revelation that includes the word. The bible has the word in it in only 2 books. The writer was a jew. I feel that if what I have been revealed about the word is allowed to be posted here, that that could have the potential to benifit the forum
> Lou
>
Lou: From what I understand, Alexandra_k initiated the poll (thread) to determine how many posters want the word XXXXXX'd out.In my opinion this is not the appropriate thread to discuss what the word means, what has been revealed to you about the word, or how the meaning of the word can benefit the forum. Perhaps the "Faith" board would be a better venue for that discussion.
malthus
Posted by Atticus on January 22, 2005, at 20:08:56
In reply to POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:39:56
Deep-six the word with xxxxxx's. This isn't just some humble little "obscenity." I was raised Irish Catholic, and this is a word with truly malicious power when directed at a Christian as devout as Angel Girl. Why do you insist on leaving up a post that you KNOW is causing her great pain and may well cause her to leave the site entirely for good. Please provide me with a SINGLE justifiable reason for leaving the heading up. Just one. I bet you can't. Atticus
Posted by Jai Narayan on January 22, 2005, at 21:31:27
In reply to Re: POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist » alexandra_k, posted by Atticus on January 22, 2005, at 20:08:56
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 22, 2005, at 23:19:55
In reply to X it out please Dr. B....please for us all (nm), posted by Jai Narayan on January 22, 2005, at 21:31:27
Yes Dr. Bob please, I just don't see an excuse for letting Angel Girl suffer two agonizing situations; The original subject heading, and the fact that the person who has the power to ease her mind is refusing to.
Posted by rainbowbrite on January 22, 2005, at 23:56:37
In reply to POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:39:56
it seems like the only fair thing to do to x it out.
Posted by KaraS on January 23, 2005, at 1:13:55
In reply to POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:39:56
> Should the whole word be XXXXX'd out?
>
> Just in this context because to the casual reader it may appear that someone was calling the poster whose name appears after that the antichrist. Even though that was not the intention of the person who posted the heading.
There is no justifiable reason for not XXXing it out. It will cost you nothing, Dr. Bob, and it would ease Angel Girls' pain immensely. I am at a total loss trying to understand why you have let this unnecessary situation go on for so long.
Posted by NikkiT2 on January 23, 2005, at 1:56:18
In reply to Re: POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by KaraS on January 23, 2005, at 1:13:55
I also think it should be xxxx'd out. This is about alot more than what is written in the bible.
Nikki
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 23, 2005, at 7:09:16
In reply to POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:39:56
> Should the whole word be XXXXX'd out?
>
> Just in this context because to the casual reader it may appear that someone was calling the poster whose name appears after that the antichrist. Even though that was not the intention of the person who posted the heading.Alexandra_k
In the poll here that you have innitiated, the question mark next to the word that you are asking Dr. Hsiung to delete or "X out" is not shown. I am requesting that you start a new poll with the question mark included. You have written,[...to the casual reader it may appear that someone was calling the poster...the antichrist...even though that was not the intention of the person posting the heading...].
I think that if the question mark was included, that your statement could take on a different perspective to the casual reader.
Lou
Posted by NikkiT2 on January 23, 2005, at 7:12:57
In reply to Lou's request for an inclusion-caslrdr » alexandra_k, posted by Lou Pilder on January 23, 2005, at 7:09:16
Lou, even WITH the question mark, it is still able to be seen as offensive. With the question mark I see it as you asking whether she could be the antichrist.
Can you simply accept that you have done wrong here, and maybe just move on, or even maybe help us to get Dr Bob to change the offensive word to xx's.
Nikki
Posted by Dinah on January 23, 2005, at 8:07:57
In reply to POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:39:56
Dr. Bob, if XXXX'ing the entire word in a subject line is not something easily done, would it be so bad to just delete those posts with that word in the subject line? Possibly repost them with another title so as not to lose the content? They might be out of order, but with proper explanation, the archives wouldn't suffer too much.
If XXXX'ing the word out isn't impossible, it would seem to be the kind and compassionate thing to do.
Posted by coral on January 23, 2005, at 8:10:52
In reply to POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:39:56
Posted by Larry Hoover on January 23, 2005, at 9:31:38
In reply to POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:39:56
Absolutely. XXXXX it out. Technical feasibility should not even be a criterion, Bob. If X'ing isn't an easy solution to impliment, then you have to do what is feasible to make that disappear.
Lar
Posted by NikkiT2 on January 23, 2005, at 9:43:50
In reply to Re: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist? YES!!!!!, posted by Larry Hoover on January 23, 2005, at 9:31:38
Dr Bob had the ability to add the [*], so he must have the ability to change the rest of it to x's
Nikki
Posted by Willow.H. on January 23, 2005, at 10:08:31
In reply to POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:39:56
yes, please xxxxx it.
Posted by alexandra_k on January 23, 2005, at 13:29:12
In reply to Lou's request for an inclusion-caslrdr » alexandra_k, posted by Lou Pilder on January 23, 2005, at 7:09:16
I agree with Nikki.
>Lou, even WITH the question mark, it is still able to be seen as offensive. With the question mark I see it as you asking whether she could be the antichrist.
And I would like to request that this thread be reserved for VOTING on the poll.
There is already a thread for 'Lou's Response to the Poll' and I would request that you post your concerns there.
You are most welcome to start another poll with a question mark if you would like.
I apologise for not including the question mark. I was trying to be careful, but in hindsight I was not careful enough.
Posted by sdjeff on January 23, 2005, at 17:52:09
In reply to Re: POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by Willow.H. on January 23, 2005, at 10:08:31
I am not a religious person, but due to the implications that word suggests even to me, I feel it should be x'd out.
Posted by Angel Girl on January 23, 2005, at 18:51:56
In reply to POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:39:56
I want to express my thanks and gratitude for the initiation of this poll and for the positive posts in reply to it on my behalf to have that word x'd out from beside my name.
You have all shown me great love and compassion for my feelings. I can't thank you enough.
AG
Posted by alexandra_k on January 23, 2005, at 20:13:04
In reply to Re: POLL: XXXXXing, posted by Angel Girl on January 23, 2005, at 18:51:56
I guess that means you are voting for it to be XXX'd out then :-)
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.