![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 194 to 218 of 275. Go back in thread:
Posted by Jakeman on June 8, 2006, at 22:17:14
In reply to Re: Dr. Bob? 3rd request. Re: blocked for 4 weeks » Jakeman, posted by teejay on June 4, 2006, at 17:57:59
I'm afraid you are right. I have been completely ignored by our moderator.
regretfully, Jake
> I'm afraid you appear to be wasting your breath
Posted by Dinah on June 9, 2006, at 10:01:10
In reply to Re: Dr. Bob? 3rd request. Re: blocked for 4 weeks » teejay, posted by Jakeman on June 8, 2006, at 22:17:14
It's his practice to leave the longest threads for last, and he was up late moderating.
Maybe he left this one for last, and decided to sleep on it.
Posted by teejay on June 9, 2006, at 21:41:48
In reply to Re: Dr. Bob? 3rd request. Re: blocked for 4 weeks » teejay, posted by Jakeman on June 8, 2006, at 22:17:14
> I'm afraid you are right. I have been completely ignored by our moderator.
>
> regretfully, Jake
>
>
> > I'm afraid you appear to be wasting your breathYup, this is Dr Bobs worst hour IMO. He really has let himself down here. The thread is truly massive and the opinion overwhelming yet he remains silent.
I've made up my mind now, and I'm pretty sure others have too. PB isnt the place I thought it was.
Posted by Dr. Bob on June 10, 2006, at 1:20:55
In reply to Re: BOB said that????????????? » zazenduck, posted by Dinah on June 5, 2006, at 11:36:49
> With respect, you seem rather biased in the way you police your 'sensitivity to feelings' rule. Let me give you an example; I spoke resently on a thread about iraq and saddam where I said his sons were purported to be blood thirsty monsters ... This went unchallenged but you can be sure if I suggested donald rumsfeld was a blood thirsty war monger (for example) that I'd have fallen foul of potentially upsetting people.
>
> TJI'm not sure it's necessarily the best rationale, but I try to minimize how much I police and sometimes I think there's more potential for upset than other times.
--
> I don't get you Bob, you come acrosss nice sometimes but I feel you really seem to have issues of omnipotence and I feel its hurting people.
> I wish I could duct tape your mouth shut for 2wks. and see how you like it :-(
> It hurts.
> It really f*cking HURTS- DO YOU HEAR ME ?????????????
>
> MuffledI hear you. If I'm omnipotent, then that means you're impotent. I'm sorry you're hurting.
--
> The thing is, that the Christian notion of God as some universal thing that affects ME, whether I believe in him or not-- THIS is so intrusive on my own personal beliefs. By simply saying that I have no God, no God watches over me etc etc I will offend any true believer in the Judeo-Christian concept of God. We simultaneously offend one another, simply by saying something about our own personal beliefs. Whether or not we phrase it in "I" language or not. It's a lose-lose situation.
This kind of thing has been coming up, so I'd like to distinguish between disagreeing, being sensitive and respectful, and language that could offend others.
If one person likes the Cubs and another person says they prefer the White Sox, I'd consider that a disagreement. If the first person is a real fan, they may be offended (caused to feel vexation or resentment by violation of what they consider proper or fitting). But I wouldn't consider the second person to have been insensitive or disrespectful. Saying the first person's team stinks I wouldn't consider sensitive, however, and saying the first person shouldn't be a fan I wouldn't consider respectful.
Here, "language that could offend others" usually has a very specific meaning: words and phrases considered often or usually disparaging, obscene, offensive, or vulgar by Merriam-Webster OnLine:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
> Bob, I'm concerned that certain religions may be given preference in terms of what is deemed "civil" on the faith board.
>
> llrrrppThey may, and we've discussed that. Different points of view are fine, and in fact encouraged, but freedom of speech is limited here.
--
> Just wondering. Are you willing to reconsider this block or not. Yes or no. Otherwise this debate could go on forever.
>
> JakeYes, but my mind hasn't been changed yet. Maybe it's a debate that *should* in some form go on forever?
--
> As far as I know, based on past practice, it is possible in the face of a Please Rephrase to apologize for any offense and withdraw the statement.
>
> If that's what one wishes to do, it seems like a safe option.
>
> Is this true, Dr. Bob?
>
> DinahThat's been my past practice, but rephrasing may be a useful exercise, so I've considered being more insistent. What do you think?
--
> can anyone tell me the rationale for blocking babblemail, along with public posting, during a block?
>
> LarThe idea is to increase the incentive to be civil.
--
> I don't recall Dr. Bob saying that. If anyone has links?
>
> DinahI don't recall doing so, either. Maybe it was someone else? I'd also be interested in links...
Bob
Posted by Deneb on June 10, 2006, at 2:32:07
In reply to Re: truly massive thread, posted by Dr. Bob on June 10, 2006, at 1:20:55
> > It really f*cking HURTS- DO YOU HEAR ME ?????????????
> >
> > Muffled
>
> I hear you. If I'm omnipotent, then that means you're impotent. I'm sorry you're hurting.((((((((((((((((((Dr. Bob))))))))))))))))))))
You care Dr. Bob, don't you? You really do care. :-) I'm so happy you care. :-)
I love you Dr. Bob. I just love how you care about us. You care enough to read hundreds of posts a week. You care enough to stay with us for 8 years. You care enough to do all this for free and even use your own money to support the site.
I love how you don't mind that I love you. I love how you don't hold my past behaviours against me. I'm glad you don't freak out easily. I'm glad you're back. You wouldn't abandon us, would you? You always come back.
Deneb*
Posted by Dinah on June 10, 2006, at 8:24:46
In reply to Re: truly massive thread, posted by Dr. Bob on June 10, 2006, at 1:20:55
> > As far as I know, based on past practice, it is possible in the face of a Please Rephrase to apologize for any offense and withdraw the statement.
> >
> > If that's what one wishes to do, it seems like a safe option.
> >
> > Is this true, Dr. Bob?
> >
> > Dinah
>
> That's been my past practice, but rephrasing may be a useful exercise, so I've considered being more insistent. What do you think?I think that past practice has been sound, to tell you the truth. Sometimes there may not be a good way to rephrase (although I suppose you must have thought of one before you asked) while remaining true to yourself and your beliefs. But sometimes in that situation, a request to rephrase can also serve as a reminder that it may not be necessary to always state *all* of your beliefs, and to regret having stated these particular ones here for any distress they may have caused others. In which case a statement to that effect would be perfectly truthful.
Granted it, like an apology, could be more a mere matter of form than of true regret. But you can't conclude that it necessarily would be.
I think, FWIW, you ought to leave the option in place to allow a graceful withdrawal and save insistence for any cases where "Please rephrase" and withdrawals have been used so extensively that you believe insistence on a rephrase to be more appropriate.
Dinah
Posted by AuntieMel on June 10, 2006, at 10:32:17
In reply to Re: truly massive thread, posted by Dr. Bob on June 10, 2006, at 1:20:55
> If one person likes the Cubs and another person says they prefer the White Sox, I'd consider that a disagreement. If the first person is a real fan, they may be offended (caused to feel vexation or resentment by violation of what they consider proper or fitting). But I wouldn't consider the second person to have been insensitive or disrespectful. Saying the first person's team stinks I wouldn't consider sensitive, however, and saying the first person shouldn't be a fan I wouldn't consider respectful.
>But Alex was blocked for saying "I think the world would be better without religion"
That statement is similar, at least in wording if not in subject matter. It is a disagreement, and a person who is religious might feel offended, but the statement itself isn't offensive. And I didn't think it was disrespectful, either.
Now, as it turns out, there were a couple of people who *were* offended by the statement. But I'm sure that is a consequence that wasn't intended. By blocking Estella there is no chance for those involved to discuss it and 'right' the 'wrong.'
And that is what I sometimes have problems with. Blocks turn into an "I win" instead of allowing adults to come to terms with each other.
Posted by AuntieMel on June 10, 2006, at 10:38:27
In reply to I have been asked to come here and apologise, posted by NikkiT2 on June 5, 2006, at 0:56:50
You got babblemail asking you to apologize.
I made one flippant (not meant to be mean) remark, and several come down hard on me and I even got my first DNP.
One person (Thank you Gabbi) came to my defense here. And one person (Thank you Verne) emailed me support.
Yes, you do find out who your friends are.
Posted by Gabbi~G on June 10, 2006, at 19:18:38
In reply to Re: You find out who your friends are, don't you » NikkiT2, posted by AuntieMel on June 10, 2006, at 10:38:27
You're very welcome Auntie Mel.
That Verne.. he's a mensch isn't he?
Posted by zazenduck on June 11, 2006, at 16:31:57
In reply to please be kind to each other, posted by agent858 on June 4, 2006, at 23:11:32
I think you need to address the problem of excessive block lengths. It's not really about continuing this argument case by case indefinitely until the person blocked comes back or chooses not to come back after the block is up. I think it would be useful to allow all blockees back to discuss this. Even if you limit them to posting on admin until the questionof reforming the guidelines is settled.
(I know how much my opinion counts with you :)
>
> He is idiosyncratic. Some of his decisions are unfair. Some people not even being warned while another person is blocked for one year FOR EXACTLY THE SAME THING. That is not fair. A certain degree of unfairness is inherent because he is not perfect he is a human being.
>
> My bone of contention is that GIVEN THAT A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF UNFAIRNESS IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE PRESENT MEASURES NEED TO BE TAKEN TO REDUCE THE DETRIMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF THAT. What does that mean? That means reduced sentences for blockings ESPECIALLY when there are infractions OF THE SAME KIND that have gone unremarked. If we see something we want to make sure he sees, then we can email him a link or post something to admin. If nobody notices when x says ‘sh*t’ while y gets blocked for saying ‘sh*t’ then IMO the appropriate response is ‘sorry that there was an unfairness here’ and the block should max at one or two weeks. It is still an unfairness. It is still an injustice. But it is about minimising the negative impact of the injustice.
>
Posted by zazenduck on June 11, 2006, at 16:47:46
In reply to Posting while blocked » Larry Hoover, posted by Dinah on June 5, 2006, at 11:29:42
But the problem as I suspect you are aware is that Bob can't really tell when the poster is blocked if he is using Earthlink or AOL or other big providers because they have thousands of ISP numbers and the users get a different one each time they go online.And a fairly large percentage of a board this big may be using the same service. So he's really just guessing ......or someone may notice similiarity in vocabulary and make accusations....but that's just accusing someone and accusations without proof are not in the service of a healthy community. And people can end up being blocked for something they didn't do. Personally I would volunteer to serve time for most of the people given long blocks but it would be nice to volunteer rather than be blocked because of someone else's unsupported suspicions. I think it's less than optimally open and honest to let it be thought that Bob actually KNOWS when someone is posting from the same computer much less is the same person. :)
I think honesty and openness promotes civility.
> I don't see the not posting while blocked rule as preventing civility. It seems perfectly common sense to me.
Posted by zazenduck on June 11, 2006, at 17:16:26
In reply to Suspected of Posting while blocked, posted by zazenduck on June 11, 2006, at 16:47:46
But I could be wrong that's just what I was told.
On wiki all aol people get each others messages by isp number
It's a little unnerving until you realize what is happening
And I wonder if it doesn't happen here. I have no faith in Bob. I don't trust him.
I feel bad for people who get erased
It reminds me of the USSR-the second death when people were erased from photos after their fall from grace/execution etc.
I think it is time for me to leave. I think it would be kind to allow voluntary blocks. This place is SO VERY UNHEALTHY for me.
Posted by Dinah on June 11, 2006, at 17:24:30
In reply to Re: Suspected of Posting while blocked » zazenduck, posted by zazenduck on June 11, 2006, at 17:16:26
I would hate to see you leave. I enjoy having you here, and I enjoy your posts. And I'm sorry you find pain here.
It's been my experience that pain is often a byproduct of human interaction. But perhaps that's due to my nature.
However, many people, myself included, have found a way to block themselves by changing their passwords to a string of unmemorable characters, and then changing their email addresses also to a string of unmemorable characters so that a password reset won't work. At that point, only Dr. Bob can help you unless you reregister with a new name. If you really wish to block yourself, that generally is an effective way to do it.
I always try to pass that on to people who express a wish for a voluntary block. It beats some of the alternatives.
Posted by zazenduck on June 11, 2006, at 17:37:18
In reply to Re: truly massive thread, posted by Dr. Bob on June 10, 2006, at 1:20:55
If civility supposes that," said Mr. Bumble, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands, "civility is an *ss- an idiot.
>
> I hear you. If I'm omnipotent, then that means you're impotent.
>
> --
>Happy trails Babblistos!!!!!!
Posted by zazenduck on June 11, 2006, at 17:46:19
In reply to Mr Bumble splains to Bob » Dr. Bob, posted by zazenduck on June 11, 2006, at 17:37:18
Block me I am tired of the bullying here.
It's not about how I feel. It's about what I see going on. I see people bullied. I see bullies. I think Bob is a bully.
I think Bob is unfit to be at the centre of what ever it is he is at the centre of!
I think Bob is undeserving of compassion and does not call forth feelings of sympathetic sadness!
Posted by Dinah on June 11, 2006, at 17:48:19
In reply to defeated by the asterisk machine, posted by zazenduck on June 11, 2006, at 17:46:19
Please just use the password reset method of exit, if you must leave?
There is a benefit to leaving the door open, you know.
Not only for you, but for those who care about you.
Posted by teejay on June 11, 2006, at 20:54:28
In reply to Re: truly massive thread, posted by Dr. Bob on June 10, 2006, at 1:20:55
DR Bob,
doubt we will ever see totally eye to eye on some of your issues (although I admire the utopia you try to achive) but thanks for the reply even if it took a truly enormous groundswell of opinion to actually draw you into a reply. ;-)
I do hope you review the politics board though as I genuinely feel hat politics requires a slightly different moderating approach to the other boards PURELY becauses politics as a topic is often at least a bit divisive, and to remove that element of divisiveness destroys the whole idea of politics.
regards from an inebriated, but truly and completely chilled out TJ (wish I could feel this relaxed all the time)
Posted by zazenduck on June 11, 2006, at 21:12:04
In reply to Re: truly massive thread, posted by teejay on June 11, 2006, at 20:54:28
This is the thread that never ends, yes it goes on and on my friend. Some people started posting it, not knowing what it was, and they'll continue posting it forever just because...This is the thread that never ends, yes it goes on and on my friend. Some people started posting it, not knowing what it was, and they'll continue posting it forever just because...This is the thread that never ends, yes it goes on and on my friend. Some people started posting it, not knowing what it was, and they'll continue posting it forever just because
totally uninebriated myself but faking it till I make it
i wanta feel as relaxed as you
>
> regards from an inebriated, but truly and completely chilled out TJ (wish I could feel this relaxed all the time)
Posted by teejay on June 11, 2006, at 21:32:03
In reply to Re: truly massive thread » teejay, posted by zazenduck on June 11, 2006, at 21:12:04
Yo, my friend, not sure what has made me soooo chilled out but think its a combo of sheer bloody mindedness to beat this affliction (I dont joke here) aligned with skullcap ( a couple of caps a day for some weeks) and a few bottles of wine to prevent me from dwelling on that that should not be dwelled upon.
I'll have a relapse at some point, of that you can be sure, but its times such as these that keep me focussed through the bad times.
TJ (who wishes you nothing but the very best of halth)
Posted by Jakeman on June 11, 2006, at 21:38:56
In reply to Re: my logical brain is confused » Dr. Bob, posted by AuntieMel on June 10, 2006, at 10:32:17
Good point. I've come to accept that Dr. Bob has his own issues about being in control here and there's nothing that any of us can do about it.
warm regard, Jake.
> And that is what I sometimes have problems with. Blocks turn into an "I win" instead of allowing adults to come to terms with each other.
Posted by muffled on June 11, 2006, at 21:58:15
In reply to Re: my logical brain is confused, posted by Jakeman on June 11, 2006, at 21:38:56
Bob HAS changed some things.....
But I STILL disaggree with some stuff.
Like Alexs' block,(and others).
The thing that bugs me MOST right now is how Bob doesn't really seem to feel the need to fill us in on why he does what he does. he gives these cryptic one liners worthy of a p-doc all right.
We obvo feel VERY strongly bout some stuff and he just fluffs it off.
I'm just trying to pretend there is NO Bob.
I'm the opposite of Deneb ;-)
I'm tired of this fight.
I'm tired of Bob.
I'm not tired of the wonderful people of babble.
God almighty, I just hope i don't get blocked :-(
Especially at the wrong time :-(
Though theres never a right time.
LEAVE babblmail ON I say.
Its all so awful.
Makes me want to hide too.
Sh*t.
Posted by muffled on June 11, 2006, at 22:12:52
In reply to Re: truly massive thread, posted by teejay on June 11, 2006, at 20:54:28
I hear you. If I'm omnipotent, then that means you're impotent. I'm sorry you're hurting.
***I'm not hurting NOW, just scared you GONNA hurt me you so and so.
And just cuz you omnipotent DOES NOT make me impotent..... though I feel I am walking into a trap even as I say this.......
But the problem IS you DO control my potential access to a support network for me. I'm most likely to get blocked when I am screwed up and NEEDING some help from like minded people.
And if over something trivial, well, that JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
If you actually DID care bout us (nice thot, sigh), then you would care bout how blocks hurt us and isolate us at the worst times sometimes.
Arrrggggghhhhh,I'm not expressing myself well, I kinda a bit messed right now :-(
I am wasting my breath anyways......
I just an uneducated, mental ill, stupid piece of nothing anyways, my words are sh*t.
Posted by Declan on June 11, 2006, at 22:41:57
In reply to Re: truly massive thread » zazenduck, posted by teejay on June 11, 2006, at 21:32:03
Ah, the best of halth to you TJ, and may you feel so for longer than you expect.
(Skullcap's OK, hey? )
Declan
Posted by Dr. Bob on June 12, 2006, at 4:56:10
In reply to PBC Bob......calling me impotent......, posted by muffled on June 11, 2006, at 22:12:52
> I think, FWIW, you ought to leave the option in place to allow a graceful withdrawal and save insistence for any cases where "Please rephrase" and withdrawals have been used so extensively that you believe insistence on a rephrase to be more appropriate.
>
> DinahThat sounds reasonable to me, do others agree?
--
> > If one person likes the Cubs and another person says they prefer the White Sox, I'd consider that a disagreement. If the first person is a real fan, they may be offended (caused to feel vexation or resentment by violation of what they consider proper or fitting). But I wouldn't consider the second person to have been insensitive or disrespectful. Saying the first person's team stinks I wouldn't consider sensitive, however, and saying the first person shouldn't be a fan I wouldn't consider respectful.
>
> But Alex was blocked for saying "I think the world would be better without religion"
>
> That statement is similarSorry, similar to what?
> that is what I sometimes have problems with. Blocks turn into an "I win" instead of allowing adults to come to terms with each other.
>
> AuntieMelI agree, they may, and they may also be more likely when people have difficulty coming to terms with each other...
--
> I'm not hurting NOW, just scared you GONNA hurt me you so and so.
> the problem IS you DO control my potential access to a support network for me.
>
> muffledI think that's a better way of putting it, I have power and you're vulnerable. Which I know can be scary.
Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on June 12, 2006, at 4:57:26
In reply to defeated by the asterisk machine, posted by zazenduck on June 11, 2006, at 17:46:19
> I think Bob is a bully.
Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down.
But please don't take this personally, either, this doesn't mean I don't like you or think you're a bad person.
If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please first see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#enforceFollow-ups regarding these issues, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
Thanks,
Bob
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.