![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 44 to 68 of 304. Go back in thread:
Posted by Sigismund on April 7, 2009, at 0:34:58
In reply to Re: Blocks, posted by Sigismund on April 6, 2009, at 23:44:10
>he appeared on that thread subsequent to the block something like 15 times.
Might have been 10.
Posted by myco on April 7, 2009, at 0:40:29
In reply to Re: Blocks, posted by Sigismund on April 7, 2009, at 0:34:58
I dunno...i'm new here...I dont know who that is or in what context that issue is from. I just know it's obvious things need a change. There needs to be middle ground for admin and posters to meet at. It's healthy to be able to obtain a compromise and tiring to see back and forth. Some issues are easily solved...logical issues. Anyway...i've added more than my two cents here. I'm done with the debate now.
> >he appeared on that thread subsequent to the block something like 15 times.
>
> Might have been 10.
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 7, 2009, at 1:23:26
In reply to Re: an opportunity » Dr. Bob, posted by zenhussy on April 6, 2009, at 22:42:20
> Maybe it's not surprising if administrators don't readily let go of something that makes them feel good?
Maybe posters want me to feel good and that's why they're not trying to help their fellow posters avoid being blocked? But if blocking people really made me feel good, I would've blocked them already.
Maybe myco's right and we'll never reach a middle ground. OTOH, change is slow.
Bob
Posted by verne on April 7, 2009, at 1:54:08
In reply to Re: Blocks » Sigismund, posted by myco on April 7, 2009, at 0:40:29
You say, "maybe posters want me to "feel good". Previously, you said that some frustrated posters were "longing" for you.
Posters want to make you "feel good"? That they long for you?
What more can be said? Go "bridge over the river Kwai" and deny the truth and block everyone?
I wish you well, King Rat.
(before you block me forever, at least see the movie: if you aren't "King Rat", I'll never come back.)
Posted by seldomseen on April 7, 2009, at 8:05:29
In reply to Re: an opportunity, posted by Dr. Bob on April 7, 2009, at 1:23:26
My babblemail is on, and if anyone wants to email me with a post, I'll do my best.
I promise that I will not attempt to censor the post in any way, but rather try to help the poster communicate what they want to say.
IMO asking for help or being offered help is not shameful.
I don't know if anyone wants my help, but it is available.
Seldom.
Posted by garnet71 on April 7, 2009, at 9:27:16
In reply to Re: an opportunity, posted by Dr. Bob on April 6, 2009, at 22:12:39
> Focusing on me is itself top-down...
That's the point - it doesn't appear anyone wants to focus on you. Bottom up would entail members' creation of content and rules. That's partly what members here are trying to do.
> It seems not to be working this time...
Of course its not going to work in this context-members are not going to police themselves using mob mentality tactics at your "direction". Applying more subtle, community-based 'keeping people in line' natural group mores to resolve future situations could very well work; but in this case--the situations are already tainted. And low morale is contagious-but you would know the dynamics of organizational psychology.
> So no one's going to try to help Jade and now Verne avoid being blocked? Because that wouldn't feel supportive?
Again, this approach wouldn't be effective in this context. See paragraph above.
How about letting members resolve the issues on our own (w/o being coerced by Administrators) unless intervention is necessary, rather than immediately blocking members for perceived insults, etc.?
Jade and Jan/Phillipa did just that; unfortunately, you lost a supportive member from the blocking (Jade). Blocking Jade did not resolve the situation - the 2 members resolved the situation w/o 'direction' from administrators. We are all adults here. I also think blocking would cause people to be less likely to want to resolve the issue with the other person with whom they had conlict with, as opposed to having forum access where they can discuss the situation, interact about the situation, hear other community members opinions on the situation, apologize if necessary, and resolve the situation, in the open, on the forum.
I personally don't even care because the way I see it - if I don't want to use this forum, I can just go somewhere else...But what bothers me is seeing others hurt, and it sux to lose good members who have provided experienced advice and support.
Posted by garnet71 on April 7, 2009, at 9:33:29
In reply to Re: an opportunity, posted by garnet71 on April 7, 2009, at 9:27:16
Posted by fayeroe on April 7, 2009, at 10:05:37
In reply to Re: Blocks » verne, posted by myco on April 6, 2009, at 23:20:44
You sure hit the nail on the head......I believe that playing with the poster's emotions has a huge payoff for the administration. Been that way forever.
Wait until Bob really gets his groove on...he answers all the questions with questions. You ain't seen nothing til you see him work that one to death.
Posted by fayeroe on April 7, 2009, at 11:24:24
In reply to Re: Blocks, posted by verne on April 7, 2009, at 1:54:08
> You say, "maybe posters want me to "feel good". Previously, you said that some frustrated posters were "longing" for you.
The first thing I thought of when I saw the "longing" post was "how over the line is that?" and the next was "what has he been smoking?"
I guess Bob is lonely.
>
> Posters want to make you "feel good"? That they long for you?
>
> What more can be said? Go "bridge over the river Kwai" and deny the truth and block everyone?
>
> I wish you well, King Rat.
>
> (before you block me forever, at least see the movie: if you aren't "King Rat", I'll never come back.)
>
>
Posted by JadeKelly on April 7, 2009, at 13:49:34
In reply to Re: an opportunity, posted by Dr. Bob on April 7, 2009, at 1:23:26
Bob, clearly from the statements below you need to cut some apron strings. Posters are not here to "make you feel good" or "long for you".
>
> "Maybe posters want me to feel good and that's why they're not trying to help their fellow posters avoid being blocked? But if blocking people really made me feel good, I would've blocked them already." *Now you're shaming them?*For one, were not used to being in an environment where we can help our fellow poster. Its called a block, Bob. And two, did you hear us tell them NOT to help us? I like help when its freely given.
**************************************************
>
" we'll never reach a middle ground. OTOH, change is slow" Bob
**************************************************I DO NOT EXCEPT THAT ANY MORE AND NIETHER WILL THEY. STOP ALREADY, BOB. STOP. ITS TIME. TAKE A LEAP OF FAITH, YOU CAN DO IT.
No More Bob,
Its time. And you know it. This has become abusive on this Admin board and it needs to stop.
THE NEW RULE BOOK
Can we get this out to at least one or two key posters on each board (active on that board)??
This draft will be reviewed by the posters AS/IS and a rough draft that Posters will polish into a final draft will be given to you when they are done. Unless there is some fatal flaw in their new policies and rules "book", No Changes By You.
Okay, here is what we want. I don't think I've seen that yet. No more questions from you Bob, the deputies can take a break from all they do. And stand by for real emergencies.Whats been missing is a formal list of new policies that posters are willing to follow. Bottom up Bob. Are you enlightened enough to give this a try for two months? Three if its going well? No more talking. This is going to happen.
As soon as Garnet or Fay or Sigismund or whoever has time, they can run it by the posters, I'll email everyone I know, as a rough draft that they, posters, will polish into a final draft.
Okay, here is what we want. I don't think I've seen that yet. But I've sure been hearing it. The boards will get together, come up with new rules they are willing to follow, and here they are. I'm just giving this as an example.1. No Blocks unless someone has been warned by a mini deputy on their board and the behavior is so out of line he/she needs a week off. This will be held for extreme cases.
2. Blocks will no longer last more than one week.
Anyone currently over a week is back now.3. No notify button. Posters are voted in to be mini deputies of their board. You'll call (Admin) if you need them for an emergency. Still no blocks longer than a week.
4. All this crazy punishing for how posters word something will end. Unless someone's getting cussed out or humiliated, You can talk to each other like adults, and take a break from that person if mini dep says so. Then make them talk about it, when they cool down. They both take 15 min off maybe.
Bob, its time you show some respect and confidence in your posters. They are quite capable of doing this as we've learned the last two weeks. Unless you just enjoy blocking and controlling people,
What do you have to lose?? So lets start with those posters. Sigismund is really looking forward to having Zazenducke back. Along with anyone over a week.
Thanks Bob ;-)
Your a gentlemen and a scholar!Y
Posted by myco on April 7, 2009, at 14:11:55
In reply to Re: Blocks, posted by fayeroe on April 7, 2009, at 11:24:24
It is unfortunate here but I think this debate/issue, as tough as this sounds, should just be put aside...put away for now. You're providing him with endless entertainment you know. He can practice little tricks etc to get people riled up and see what he can get them to do or how they might react...in a way manipulate posters here for some purpose...perhaps just jollies or perhaps theres a plan. I dont know, I dont care either. Please dont give admin the satisfaction people. We, after all, do have the right to not use this board. I know it helps alot of people who need a "base" but there are other more friendly boards out there that arent used as a tool for someone to gain something really...merely set up to provide assistance to those in need.
These are just my observations...both sides can be played. But why? it will get nowhere for the poor poster who is trying hard to put together a reasonable "bargain" to help out the board. He is happy the way it is going. He wants the civil laws to stand and doesnt feel the need to change anything if he can get people sidetracked and all messed up in their own thinking. I have read many good examples here on how to fix things, at least partly, with logical simple ideas. But these arent addressed...its more fun to play and try to poke holes in those ideas. From one perspective this comes off as manipulative. But hey...these are only my opinions and we've all got one. So why get worked up about it.
sillyness
Posted by JadeKelly on April 7, 2009, at 14:13:07
In reply to Re: *********THE NEW RULE BOOK************, posted by JadeKelly on April 7, 2009, at 13:49:34
If bob gets to question each new rule, discuss, ad nauseam, again, every thing that will happen some time (never) I give up. There is no need for all this hostility any longer. Just Stop Today.
New Rules. Dont ask him, tell him. This is on him. He should have taken care of this a LONG time ago. If you don't want to do it, cool. But think of ALL the friends that are gone. And it will continue.....Make this place awesome again! Then I'll be jealous I can't come in! Jade Oh! Wait, one week rule!!!!
Posted by myco on April 7, 2009, at 14:17:27
In reply to Re: No Negotiating except among posters, or, posted by JadeKelly on April 7, 2009, at 14:13:07
*hugs* jjjjade. Glad we're on track here.
>
> If bob gets to question each new rule, discuss, ad nauseam, again, every thing that will happen some time (never) I give up. There is no need for all this hostility any longer. Just Stop Today.
> New Rules. Dont ask him, tell him. This is on him. He should have taken care of this a LONG time ago. If you don't want to do it, cool. But think of ALL the friends that are gone. And it will continue.....Make this place awesome again! Then I'll be jealous I can't come in! Jade Oh! Wait, one week rule!!!!
Posted by fayeroe on April 7, 2009, at 14:23:21
In reply to Re: No Negotiating except among posters, or » JadeKelly, posted by myco on April 7, 2009, at 14:17:27
Jade, Myco is trying to help. I don't see any hostility in his post. Just frank talk of how he sees Bob.
It is his sandbox. (Bob's, not Myco's :-) )
Pat
Posted by seldomseen on April 7, 2009, at 15:49:30
In reply to Re: *********THE NEW RULE BOOK************, posted by JadeKelly on April 7, 2009, at 13:49:34
I would agree with some of what you said, but would maintain that the way things are worded - even punctuated - can make a huge difference in how a post is interpreted.
Consider the following sentences
Woman, without her, man is nothing.
Woman, without her man, is nothing.
Two sentences are just slightly different, but with carry entirely different meanings.
Also without the typical non-verbal cues associated with talking to people, it is virtually impossible to determine intent, tone or rationale behind a post. Therefore, I think the way in which we phrase things here is very important. Basically, we are operating blind.
Seldom
Posted by JadeKelly on April 7, 2009, at 17:04:41
In reply to Re: *********THE NEW RULE BOOK************ » JadeKelly, posted by seldomseen on April 7, 2009, at 15:49:30
>Seldom, are you still operating as a go between for Bob? Its fine if you are I would just want to know.
I would agree with some of what you said, but would maintain that the way things are worded - even punctuated - can make a huge difference in how a post is interpreted.
>
> Consider the following sentences
>
> Woman, without her, man is nothing.
>
> Woman, without her man, is nothing.
>
> Two sentences are just slightly different, but with carry entirely different meanings.
>
> Also without the typical non-verbal cues associated with talking to people, it is virtually impossible to determine intent, tone or rationale behind a post. Therefore, I think the way in which we phrase things here is very important. Basically, we are operating blind.
>
> SeldomHi Seldom,
My mother is a librarian and I'm usually very anal about my spelling. My time is limited, I was thinking that most things had been discussed a hundred times, so even with my spelling, bad grammer, etc., you guys would word it how YOU want it. I've been up all night, not 'cause of Babble but I am tired. I did not presume that what I wrote would be final. In which "rule" did I actually change the meaning or intent? I'll fix that now as time is of the essence, and then you can proof the final draft. Would that be okay? I believe I did say that it was a rough, rough draft. No debating the issues with Bob any longer is my only request. I just spent two weeks emailing back and forth with him for NOTHING. No One ever says "here's what we want"
I have many people that want this. Do you? Do you have blocked friends? Which board do you hang at the most? I had wanted to get to know you as I believe we have something in common with our sons. One week block, maybe I'll be back!
Posted by myco on April 7, 2009, at 17:37:13
In reply to Re: *********THE NEW RULE BOOK************, posted by JadeKelly on April 7, 2009, at 17:04:41
This is good wording. d/r also had some good wording. Logical advice and questions here.
So we have here some straight up logical easily dealt with questions that will the bring the board closer to an agreement.
I would like to see admin address each question thoroughly not vaguely not by throwing questions back and turning them around on the posters.
Issue number one...two...three....provide answers.
Example, from my own experience ok. A joke can and should be posted in any context, including "dirty" if the poster so chooses as long as the subject line indicates its potential to cause offence. I raised this point but it was not addressed at all...not even mentioned in his response. That is a logical easy to deal with question...how much more simple.
Both Jade and d/r had simple addressable issues as well nicely laid out and yet none were addressed accordingly...just spit back at the poster or completely ignored. How does that indicate to anyone that there is any cooperation available from admin?
It's all turned back around. Thats why I mentioned is it worth it. I agree fight to get people back sure and change the block rules to less time...I remember some poor poster, if memory is working, got blocked for a bizarre 52 weeks? lol I mean why...lol. And what was even more bizarre was some formula posted to calculate such a punishment. I dont know....i dont see that as logic myself but hey...
dont read me wrong posters...i am in defense of you but its not getting very far. time for alternative solutions ya know
my own passion to see something change keeps dragging me back into this debate lol
m
Posted by BayLeaf on April 7, 2009, at 20:48:34
In reply to Re: Blocks, posted by fayeroe on April 7, 2009, at 11:24:24
> You say, "maybe posters want me to "feel good". Previously, you said that some frustrated posters were "longing" for you.
----------------------------
I probably missed something, but what I recall from the "longing" post, was less literal. I thought he was talking about triggering old longings for someone from our past. Like when Bob is missing from Babble, it might trigger me missing my mom/dad when they took off when I was a kid. I did not think he meant we were longing for him.
Posted by rskontos on April 7, 2009, at 23:24:59
In reply to Re: an opportunity, posted by Dr. Bob on April 7, 2009, at 1:23:26
Dr. Bob, in my humble opinion around here change is at least administratively is non-existent.
rsk
Posted by rskontos on April 7, 2009, at 23:33:26
In reply to Re: Blocks, posted by BayLeaf on April 7, 2009, at 20:48:34
I like the new proposed rules basically. I think something is needed. Change.
And it Twinleaf I believe that was blocked for 52 weeks. I miss her. I miss HappyFlower, I miss so many I can't name all for fear of forgetting some. Zaze, she almost always comes back and then wham Bob will block her again. I hate that.
I think, in my humble opinion, when I was first here in 06 things weren't this bad. Blocking I mean.
And there was much more action on the boards. oh well,
I guess Dr. Bob did not know how not mess with a good thing.
rsk
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 8, 2009, at 1:04:53
In reply to Re:for what is worth,, posted by rskontos on April 7, 2009, at 23:33:26
> This debate has become divisive.
>
> Sigismund> > It seems not to be working this time...
>
> Of course its not going to work in this context-members are not going to police themselves using mob mentality tactics at your "direction". ... the situations are already tainted.
>
> garnet71I didn't mean to suggest mob mentality tactics. But I did suggest a direction. I wonder if following a suggestion of mine is seen as shameful. If that's how this is tainted. Maybe it's more important to resist me than to keep each other from being blocked.
> He can practice little tricks etc to ... see what he can get them to do or how they might react...in a way manipulate posters here for some purpose...perhaps just jollies or perhaps theres a plan. I dont know, I dont care either. Please dont give admin the satisfaction people.
>
> I have read many good examples here on how to fix things, at least partly, with logical simple ideas. But these arent addressed...its more fun to play and try to poke holes in those ideas.I did have a plan: to manipulate you into keeping Jade and Verne from being blocked. But it seems not to be working.
I suppose I feel posters aren't following up on my good ideas and posters feel I'm not following up on their good ideas. Like myco said before, a stalemate.
> Example, from my own experience ok. A joke can and should be posted in any context, including "dirty" if the poster so chooses as long as the subject line indicates its potential to cause offence. I raised this point but it was not addressed at all...not even mentioned in his response.
>
> mycoI did say:
> If you post it, a subject line that alerts others to the content does help.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20090331/msgs/889023.html
> I miss [Twinleaf]. I miss HappyFlower, I miss so many I can't name all for fear of forgetting some. Zaze, she almost always comes back and then wham Bob will block her again. I hate that.
>
> rskWould anyone miss Jade? Would anyone miss Verne? If so, this is an opportunity...
Bob
Posted by Deputy 10derHeart on April 8, 2009, at 1:29:42
In reply to Re:for what is worth,, posted by rskontos on April 7, 2009, at 23:33:26
> And it Twinleaf I believe that was blocked for 52 weeks.
Twinleaf was blocked for 12 weeks on 2/25.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20081228/msgs/882365.html
>I miss HappyFlower,
Happychaitea was blocked for 14 weeks on 2/27.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20081228/msgs/882969.html
> Zaze, she almost always comes back and then wham Bob will block her again. I hate that.
Zazenducke was blocked for 52 weeks on 2/26.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20081228/msgs/882715.html
Just wanted to clarify, and also post these because from time to time people who are missing fellow posters ask when blocks started, or when they will be up, so maybe this will be useful in that area.
-- 10der
Posted by zenhussy on April 8, 2009, at 2:22:53
In reply to Current block lengths » rskontos, posted by Deputy 10derHeart on April 8, 2009, at 1:29:42
Posted by Sigismund on April 8, 2009, at 2:54:11
In reply to Current block lengths » rskontos, posted by Deputy 10derHeart on April 8, 2009, at 1:29:42
>> Zaze, she almost always comes back and then wham Bob will block her again. I hate that.
Yep, and it won't take much either.
Posted by Sigismund on April 8, 2009, at 4:17:02
In reply to Re: an opportunity, posted by Dr. Bob on April 8, 2009, at 1:04:53
Bob, have I got this right?
You are saying that if I really care about Jade and Verne's oncoming blocks, that is, if I want to show my care and concern, that I should approach them and advise them on the form their apology and rephrasing should take?
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.