![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 55. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Damos on February 6, 2006, at 20:21:10
Dr Bob,
I don't usually comment much on blocks and stuff because in the majority of cases I can (come to) understand them. Don't necessarily agree with them, but can understand. The ones on Politics are the ones that cause me the most trouble though, and quite frankly this one has me beat.
For me Gabbi's "?" pretty well sums it up. Teejay, AuntieMel and Cricket have already expressed their thoughts over on Politics and I can only echo and support those.
Blocks hurt, a lot, and I would respectfully ask that you reconsider.
Thanks,
DamosPlease take good care Alex, you're being here means a lot to a lot of people.
Posted by ClearSkies on February 6, 2006, at 22:20:58
In reply to Alex's block - Dr Bob, posted by Damos on February 6, 2006, at 20:21:10
I think that this may come under the nebulous "getting blocked again for doing pretty much the same thing you were blocked for the first time". Where the block did not have that desired effect of having someone perhaps rethink how they might have expressed an opinion in a manner that could not be interpretted as uncivil. Instead the block put a poster into "suspend", and they continued their behaviour as previously, irregardless of the civility rules.
Just my take
ClearSkies
Posted by zenhussy on February 6, 2006, at 23:15:47
In reply to Re: Alex's block - Dr Bob » Damos, posted by ClearSkies on February 6, 2006, at 22:20:58
>>> Where the block did not have that desired effect of having someone perhaps rethink how they might have expressed an opinion in a manner that could not be interpretted as uncivil.
is that the purpose of blocks? is that interpreted as uncivil by Dr. Bob or by his deputies or the community? there still appear to be many threads discussing differences in opinion about what civility means here in babble world.
>>> Instead the block put a poster into "suspend", and they continued their behaviour as previously, irregardless of the civility rules.
interesting observations you've shared here.
> Just my take
> ClearSkies
Posted by James K on February 7, 2006, at 1:44:13
In reply to Re: purpose of blocks as defined by? » ClearSkies, posted by zenhussy on February 6, 2006, at 23:15:47
If you are reading this know I care.
My wife thinks I should just stay off of the political board altogether. I've expressed that maybe we shouldn't have one before because we lose some of our best. But I want to keep working at it. There must be a way to make this work better. Dr. Bob, if you read this particular post, I'm going to be asking you some specific questions later about how an idea can be expressed civilly along the way. Or your deputies at least. I like the civility rules, but I think in regard to the politics board either they aren't being used quite right all the time, or we need some more concrete instruction some times. I have read the faq, and I understand the blatant violations like sarcasm or posting hateful things. The grey areas are throwing me off though. I'll try new ways and I hope I pull it off. I hope a post like this is the correct use of the admin board.
thank you,
James K
Posted by Gabbix2 on February 7, 2006, at 13:40:01
In reply to Alex's block - Dr Bob, posted by Damos on February 6, 2006, at 20:21:10
>>
> For me Gabbi's "?" pretty well sums it up. Teejay, AuntieMel and Cricket have already expressed their thoughts over on Politics and I can only echo and support those.
>
Yeah, I would have said more, but you know then our Alex would come back in two weeks, and find some philisophical reason why there was really no mistake in the block, but we were all just making Dr. Bob the villain, because we were upset that she was blocked.
And then I'd think to myself "ALEX I HATE YOU"
and fantasize about bonking her over the head with a spongey bat.
And then we'd be fine.
This way the whole ugly scene was prevented. : DSorry, about the block there, Alex
You've got my e-mail I think?
Posted by sleepygirl on February 7, 2006, at 15:38:25
In reply to Alex's block - Dr Bob, posted by Damos on February 6, 2006, at 20:21:10
~posted by the association of sleepy people for the liberation of alexandra~
Posted by crushedout on February 7, 2006, at 16:00:40
In reply to FREE ALEX, posted by sleepygirl on February 7, 2006, at 15:38:25
can somebody point me to the thread please?
Posted by 10derHeart on February 7, 2006, at 16:43:31
In reply to lol, sleepygirl!!!, posted by crushedout on February 7, 2006, at 16:00:40
Sure...anything for you :-)
Posted by crushedout on February 7, 2006, at 17:20:00
In reply to Re: lol, sleepygirl!!! » crushedout, posted by 10derHeart on February 7, 2006, at 16:43:31
she was blocked but i do think it illuminates the absurdity of having a politics board given this community's rules. although it certainly does provide a mental challenge for folks who are looking for that sort of thing.
speaking of mental challengess, i think if i could understand clearskies' post i would agree with her. :)
Posted by Gabbix2 on February 7, 2006, at 18:15:11
In reply to i can see why, posted by crushedout on February 7, 2006, at 17:20:00
Yeah, I'm starting to see it that way too.
It wasn't so much the one post, but the continuing comments about the U.S.
That would have been the last one I'd have picked but.. ?
It's even hard to explain what I mean without using the *wrong* kinds of words.
I think it does make the idea of a politics board kind of funny though.
Posted by Damos on February 7, 2006, at 20:00:12
In reply to Re: i can see why » crushedout, posted by Gabbix2 on February 7, 2006, at 18:15:11
In all honesty all I expected was a reply from Bob saying; "Thanks, but the block stays." Or one of his wonderfully carefully worded explanations that leaves you more dazed and confused than you started out, and questioning the question you asked.
Thank you all. The deeper truth behind my concerns is slowly revealing itself as I half hoped it might.
Gabbi, you are so right that this would have been the last one I'd have picked and that was part of my concern. I have personally felt/sensed for a while that certain subjects may have been 'unofficially' declared taboo, and that some PBCs and blocks have had more to do with this than any perceived incivility in the particular post. If this is the case, then it concerns me greatly. I may very well be wrong, as I quite often am. However, if I am just the tiniest bit right, how does any babbler then protect themselves from crossing lines they can't see; the hurt of being blocked, and the hurt others that care for them experience from their absence? Particularly on a Politics board.
To me, the possibility of using PBCs and blocks in an attempt to stop people talking about things you don't want talked about, in effect censoring discussion; or worse yet because you don't like the way I question and challenge certain things is a squirmy, squirmy can of wormies. Again, particularly on a Politics board. It becomes about what you like or don't like and not about 'civility' at all.
Maybe it's just our part of the world, but tilting at institutional windmills, barbecuing the occasional sacred cow, and having a healthy disrespect for most things and the ability to 'take the piss' out of all we hold dear are considered essential parts of a healthy, robust society. I can pretty much guarantee that if people had a go at Australia's Prime Minister, most of our institutions and some of our behaviour at home and abroad; that Declan and I would probably join in the bagging because we most likely agree, and because (in my personal opinion) a fair bit of it is absurd and ridiculous and unjustifiable and just plain stupid when you really seriously begin to question it.
So, if as I am increasingly personally feeling, America, the American 'ideal', all her institutions, office holders and actions are beyond question and criticism (by any babbler), then let's just say so. Personally I don't give a 'rats' one way or the other. Politics as such just doesn't interest me that much. What I do care about is the welfare of my fellow babblers. What I do care about is the personal discomfort that is necessary to healthy dialogue where you open up your assumptions, judgements and certainty about things to be seen by others, questioned, challenged and just maybe even changed a little as something new and important emerges - shared meaning, shared understanding, or just agreement to disagree - sigh. These things matter to me. The revealing of deeper truths and meanings matter to me. Is the process unnerving, unsettling and uncomfortable? Abso-bloody-lutley and that's why we shy away from 'real' dialogue so often. Because it makes us uncomfortable. But is it important? Yes! Yes! Yes! Just so incredibly so.
I am now stepping down from my soap box, with any luck never to return. Normal Damos programming will resume shortly (I hope). Thanks for listening.
Bob, if I've overstepped then I apologise and will take it on the chin. I hope I haven't
(((((Babblers))))) you all mean so very much to me.
Posted by crushedout on February 7, 2006, at 20:46:31
In reply to A very un-me post, posted by Damos on February 7, 2006, at 20:00:12
I would agree with you that it would be messed up, Damos, in a First Amendment-y kind of way, if Dr. Bob were to block someone for saying X about George Bush but if someone else said the same thing about Bill Clinton or the mayor of New Orleans or whomever, he didn't do anything about it.But that's not how it works, I don't think. The point is you can't say X about anyone (and X is something that could make them feel put down, etc.). So you could say, I don't think George Bush's policy is a good idea, that's fine. You're discussing his policy. But if you call him a nincompoop or a hypocrite or whatever for having that policy, you've broken the rules. And that would be true if you were talking about Bush or Kermit the Frog, it wouldn't matter.
Personally, I don't have any interest in participating in a Politics board where I'm not allowed to call Kermit a nincompoop if he's acting like one, but that's just me.
Posted by ClearSkies on February 7, 2006, at 22:34:19
In reply to Re: A very un-me post, posted by crushedout on February 7, 2006, at 20:46:31
i think the politics board is just too hard for me to use.
gymnastics required with a dictionary and thesaurus strapped on like a holster
maybe it's a board that could be gracefully retired
as it is something that is just too difficult to express how we feel about it without offending some soul somewhereok if anyone makes sense of THIS post you win the prize at the bottom of the cereal box
CS
Posted by Damos on February 7, 2006, at 23:21:47
In reply to Re: A very un-me post, posted by ClearSkies on February 7, 2006, at 22:34:19
ClearSkies, thank you for your posts on this thread. I've got a lot of respect for you and always really appreciate your opinion and contribution (on all threads). It's just plain nice knowing you're around. What you've said made a lot of sense and really got me thinking. So thanks okay.
I'm with you on that board just being way to much effort.
Babbling with you is it's own prize.
(((((CS)))))Hate being a pop in, pop out poster.
Posted by Damos on February 7, 2006, at 23:24:50
In reply to FREE ALEX, posted by sleepygirl on February 7, 2006, at 15:38:25
Can I join? They seem like such lovely people. Did I see you say you weren't well somewhere else? Hope you're feeling better real soon. A sprinkling of magic make it better dust is on it's way.
(((((Sleepygirl)))))
Posted by Damos on February 7, 2006, at 23:26:51
In reply to Re: lol, sleepygirl!!! » crushedout, posted by 10derHeart on February 7, 2006, at 16:43:31
The idea of providing a link never even occurred to me. Either that or it was just a sneaky way to get you to post on the thread.
Love and hugs,
Damos
Posted by sleepygirl on February 7, 2006, at 23:29:01
In reply to A very un-me post, posted by Damos on February 7, 2006, at 20:00:12
>>Maybe it's just our part of the world, but tilting at institutional windmills, barbecuing the occasional sacred cow, and having a healthy disrespect for most things and the ability to 'take the piss' out of all we hold dear are considered essential parts of a healthy, robust society.
I wholeheartedly agree Damos, and I do not understand Alex's block.
I am certainly not wise to most things political (why I can't post on politics board), but I have been known to email the white house - (the things I do when I get annoyed ;-)) - of course then my paranoia ensued
These are scary times, and it would be dangerous not to question them. Unquestioned ideologies can be dangerous in my opinion - not sure if PB can be the forum for political discussion as it is.
I don't understand.
Posted by Damos on February 7, 2006, at 23:33:51
In reply to Re: A very un-me post, posted by crushedout on February 7, 2006, at 20:46:31
Hey Crushed :-) been a long time. Hmm, yeah, u-huh. What you said is exactly how I understood it is 'supposed' to work. Thanks for making it so simple and clear.
Hope you're doing well.
Posted by Damos on February 7, 2006, at 23:37:35
In reply to alexandra-k, I will miss you, posted by James K on February 7, 2006, at 1:44:13
Thanks James, I know she'll appreciate your thoughts. Know you've been doing it tough and saw your apology above. It would've taken a lot to post that mate and it means a lot that you did. Hope you're here with us a long time.
Take care okay.
Posted by AuntieMel on February 8, 2006, at 10:01:58
In reply to Re: A very un-me post, posted by ClearSkies on February 7, 2006, at 22:34:19
Hi there CS
That is one thing that is different between us, isn't it? I like debate and you can't stand it.
<note to anyone reading. CS and I have talked about this many times, in a friendly way>
I think maybe one reason I like it is because I, myself, don't get upset when someone disagrees with me. Even if they are impassioned and technically uncivil. In fact, that is what I *hopes* happens on the political board. Otherwise, what good is it.
Others (you, I believe?) find debates to be too much like fights. Issues are a matter of *feeling* instead of (just) thinking for them.
Neither is right or wrong. Just different.
<how are you doing these days?>
Posted by AuntieMel on February 8, 2006, at 10:04:05
In reply to Re: A very un-me post, posted by ClearSkies on February 7, 2006, at 22:34:19
I don't think Alex should have been blocked either.
And since she was talking to me, that should count for something, right?
Posted by ClearSkies on February 8, 2006, at 10:57:19
In reply to Re: One more thing » ClearSkies, posted by AuntieMel on February 8, 2006, at 10:04:05
> I don't think Alex should have been blocked either.
>
> And since she was talking to me, that should count for something, right?Therein lies the rub with civility and blocks. Once they start, they seem to keep coming unless the style and content of the communication is altered. Unfortunately, it didn't matter that Alex was conversing with you at the time- according to Dr Bob and his his rules, she broke them. And the block is a done deal.
Though as we saw with Larry Hoover, these things are no longer set in cyber-stone. This is progress.<I am oodles better today. I don't care if it's hypomania, I will take it after all this gloom.>
ClearSkies
Posted by Dinah on February 8, 2006, at 11:09:22
In reply to Re: A very un-me post, posted by ClearSkies on February 7, 2006, at 22:34:19
I just don't want to see it back on Social.
It hurt me a lot sometimes to stumble across those things on Social.
Posted by AuntieMel on February 8, 2006, at 11:15:10
In reply to Re: A very un-me post » ClearSkies, posted by Dinah on February 8, 2006, at 11:09:22
But - I was one of those lobbying for the politics board, so I'm prejudiced.
It's fine with me to have our own corner. We just need to work harder on sticking to the issues.
Posted by ClearSkies on February 8, 2006, at 11:43:13
In reply to Re: A very un-me post » ClearSkies, posted by Dinah on February 8, 2006, at 11:09:22
> I just don't want to see it back on Social.
>Dinah - what is "it" that you don't want to see?
> It hurt me a lot sometimes to stumble across those things on Social.
Do you mean upsetting threads? There's no such thing as a block-proof board, is there?
I don't think I'm following you here. I'm confused.
ClearSkies
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.