![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 39. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by SLS on June 20, 2009, at 6:44:41
For reasons that I can only guess at, there isn't much interest at the moment in participating in these "Rules" threads. However, there are a few changes that seem appropriate to me to be implemented.
1. I think the formula for levying blocks creates blocking periods that are too long. I think the maximum period of time that a block be instituted be far less than it is now. There must be a declared maximum, regardless of recidivism, instead of the unrestricted escalation up to a year that we have now. Parking tickets carry the same fine, even if one earns a thousand of them. There might be a need for exceptions, but I can't think of any right now.2. The punishment should fit the crime. I think there should be a different set of maximum block lengths prescribed for different infractions.
I'll try to think of more later.
- Scott
Posted by rskontos on June 20, 2009, at 9:10:19
In reply to Rules - Recommended Changes, posted by SLS on June 20, 2009, at 6:44:41
Scott
I read your rules thread with interest. I just unfortunately think when it comes to changes proposed by anyone other than Dr. Bob himself it rarely happens.
I think the discussion above was a good one with merit. I just thought that I am sure all of us Babblers are listening but the one that has the power to change things may or may not be here.
I did not want you to think there isn't much interest. I left for about 3 months due to a deep discussion regarding rules and lengths of blocks. It has been my observations that PBC's are not used now just blocks. And is my opinion the blocks are now more severe in lengths to certain people than ever in the past.
I do applaud your efforts and if I can help I will join in.
rsk
Posted by SLS on June 20, 2009, at 9:17:43
In reply to Re: Rules - Recommended Changes » SLS, posted by rskontos on June 20, 2009, at 9:10:19
Thanks.
It means a lot to me.
- Scott
Posted by Bobby on June 20, 2009, at 11:34:46
In reply to Rules - Recommended Changes, posted by SLS on June 20, 2009, at 6:44:41
I agree Scott. some blocks in the past have reminded my of "certain religious" laws. Steal a piece of fruit and they chop off your hand----and you know it escalates from there. there must be a set of rules to keep order----no question about that. however, taking out an eye for looking at a naked woman should not be a starting point. I don't have the answer---and even though this is not a Democratic site---the participants should have some influence. If it weren't for them/us--there'd be no site at all. And I'm aware that things can get a little helter skelter at times---but I can't help but have pity on poor Lou and Alex. Lou especially should be the poster child for this lobby.I'm going to enjoy my weekend before it vanishes---I suggest y'all do the same!
Posted by Nadezda on June 20, 2009, at 12:02:41
In reply to Rules - Recommended Changes, posted by SLS on June 20, 2009, at 6:44:41
I entirely agree with your points about the punishment fitting the crime, and the need for a limit on the length of blocks, unless someone is extremely and uncontrollably disruptive.
It's unnecessarily hurtful to everyone, and of course especially to the person who's blocked-- but really to the rest of us, who are deprived of the person's participation and also the chance for a rectification of the situation-- through perhaps a cooling off period.
Plus I find the way blocks are calculated to be completely unmindful of the type of infraction, and the harshness of the penalty, which amounts to complete isolation from the community, for long periods of time, often for exceptionally minor offenses, if they're committed in a certain cascade-- especially now that chat is pretty much deserted.
I really regret the impact these blocks and the pain they cause have on the community and feel that, overall, they weaken instead of strengthening us.
Nadezda
Posted by Frustratedmama on June 20, 2009, at 18:55:24
In reply to Re: Rules - Recommended Changes » SLS, posted by Nadezda on June 20, 2009, at 12:02:41
Unfortunately, I don't know the current rules to reply here- however, I have been reading the posts. I will read up on the rules and regulations so I can respond with an informed opinion. I agree that the "punishment should fit the crime" though. In other words, if someone offends another poster by just stating an opinion or feeling - a warning (and/or apology) is all that is probably needed. However, I would imagine that there are probably concerns that would warrant a need for a block- haven't seen anything yet- but I am new here. OK- I will go read and get back to you! :)
Posted by Frustratedmama on June 20, 2009, at 19:06:35
In reply to Re: Rules - Recommended Changes » SLS, posted by Nadezda on June 20, 2009, at 12:02:41
B = 1 + (SD - 1) * exp(-P/r)
B = block length
S = severity
D = duration of previous block
P = period of time since end of previous block (in weeks)
r = 24 / ln 2 ~ 35
Ok so this is the formula, right? Sounds like the severity determines the block (in addition to the repeat offenders....) sounds like it's an equation that takes into consideration the crime and punishment- but I don't know if it is working based on what I read above. How do others feel?
Please let me know if I am interpreting this wrong- of course I have not history of this so my interpretation is speculation based on what i found in the policies..... Scott, feel free to babblemail me if you want to and maybe I could get more information from you to help support your cause... I know you have been supportive of me and others so I trust you must have a concern with the rules or you wouldn't have posted. Let me know what I can do!
Thanks
FM
Posted by fayeroe on June 20, 2009, at 20:55:05
In reply to Rules - Recommended Changes, posted by SLS on June 20, 2009, at 6:44:41
> For reasons that I can only guess at, there isn't much interest at the moment in participating in these "Rules" threads. However, there are a few changes that seem appropriate to me to be implemented.
I can't speak for everyone here but from the discussions that I, and some of my friends have had..it is "been there, done that". Or "nothing changes, things remain the same".After one has begged, cajoled, pleaded, argued and cried for change here and is met with some silly questions about why we want change...we quit.
He pays the cost to be the boss. Not really, but that is what he must believe. No posters, no $$$$.I'll never comment upon this subject again.
For the posters that still have hope, I wish you good luck,
Pat
>
>
>
Posted by fayeroe on June 20, 2009, at 20:58:44
In reply to Re: Rules - Recommended Changes, posted by fayeroe on June 20, 2009, at 20:55:05
I can be found on the Politics Board, talking to myself. Ciao!
Posted by yxibow on June 20, 2009, at 21:41:24
In reply to Re: Rules - Recommended Changes » SLS, posted by rskontos on June 20, 2009, at 9:10:19
> Scott
>
> I read your rules thread with interest. I just unfortunately think when it comes to changes proposed by anyone other than Dr. Bob himself it rarely happens.
>
> I think the discussion above was a good one with merit. I just thought that I am sure all of us Babblers are listening but the one that has the power to change things may or may not be here.
>
> I did not want you to think there isn't much interest. I left for about 3 months due to a deep discussion regarding rules and lengths of blocks. It has been my observations that PBC's are not used now just blocks. And is my opinion the blocks are now more severe in lengths to certain people than ever in the past.
I agree, as I said in an earlier post, these arcane, well let's see, you've been a felon for 1 week, times 75 in the past, subtract it by 2, multiply it by the distribution under the bell curve, no posting for 47 years.And I leave when that happens to someone. Months. Its not worth it. And when I'm blocked for a week, I leave. I'm not going to just watch the board, I have other things to do that can better occupy my time
-- Jay
Posted by Phillipa on June 20, 2009, at 22:05:02
In reply to Re: Rules - Recommended Changes » rskontos, posted by yxibow on June 20, 2009, at 21:41:24
Same here can't defend self and feel like a kid with face against a glass window and can't get it. Phillipa
Posted by floatingbridge on June 20, 2009, at 23:54:34
In reply to Rules - Recommended Changes, posted by SLS on June 20, 2009, at 6:44:41
Scott, I like what you wrote here, and I'd like to second these changes. Maybe these changes alone would be enough?
> 1. I think the formula for levying blocks creates blocking periods that are too long. I think the maximum period of time that a block be instituted be far less than it is now. There must be a declared maximum, regardless of recidivism, instead of the unrestricted escalation up to a year that we have now. Parking tickets carry the same fine, even if one earns a thousand of them. There might be a need for exceptions, but I can't think of any right now.
>
> 2. The punishment should fit the crime. I think there should be a different set of maximum block lengths prescribed for different infractions.
>
> I'll try to think of more later.
>
>
> - Scott
Posted by floatingbridge on June 21, 2009, at 0:32:26
In reply to Rules - Recommended Changes, posted by SLS on June 20, 2009, at 6:44:41
I've just read through the policies and am wondering what is a PBC. Are they, as one poster above mentioned, no longer used?
Following is a quote I found from the Policy section on Civility. I agree with this quote up to a point (and that is allowing people to be 'uncivil'.). What constitutes infraction incurring incivility can be parsed out later. What I like here is the idea of a flexibility and humanity--other posters in other threads above have made this same point. At the same time, I also like the sense of safety and community that a moderated board provides."Part of learning how to deal with others might just be for people to be uncivil, have that pointed out by Dr. Bob and other members, and then work on appropriate alternate behaviors, and then keep posting. I have seen that happen many times here. There is the possibility for growth in this setting, kind of like group therapy, and I think people should take advantage of that. Sort of like practice here, before going to the "outside world" and dealing with the humans in our family and work lives. I would encourage people to ignore posters who press their buttons."
Posted by yxibow on June 21, 2009, at 1:30:42
In reply to Re: Rules Recommended Changes question and comment, posted by floatingbridge on June 21, 2009, at 0:32:26
> I've just read through the policies and am wondering what is a PBC. Are they, as one poster above mentioned, no longer used?
>
>
> Following is a quote I found from the Policy section on Civility. I agree with this quote up to a point (and that is allowing people to be 'uncivil'.). What constitutes infraction incurring incivility can be parsed out later. What I like here is the idea of a flexibility and humanity--other posters in other threads above have made this same point. At the same time, I also like the sense of safety and community that a moderated board provides.
>
> "Part of learning how to deal with others might just be for people to be uncivil, have that pointed out by Dr. Bob and other members, and then work on appropriate alternate behaviors, and then keep posting. I have seen that happen many times here. There is the possibility for growth in this setting, kind of like group therapy, and I think people should take advantage of that. Sort of like practice here, before going to the "outside world" and dealing with the humans in our family and work lives. I would encourage people to ignore posters who press their buttons."I agree, if I think I am reading right what you are saying that this is a place where one should feel safe, just like in a therapist/doctor's office, but at the same time, some brief introduction to what one might see in the outside world, people are rough and "uncivil", whatever that exactly means is up to the beholder.... in the "outside world".....
..... and it is sort of CBT therapy in a way not to totally "press someones buttons" but yes, to be contrite occasionally because well, some people are just sh*tty out there, to put it mildly....
...I've had people "befriend" me because I've said too much "serious" stuff online....
...I find that the people I chat with outside here online who have or have experienced mental illness themselves are much more likely to be receptive and not "befriend" you whether they are local or long distance buddies.
So I think its a balance.-- Jay
Posted by SLS on June 21, 2009, at 6:12:17
In reply to Re: Rules Recommended Changes question and comment » floatingbridge, posted by yxibow on June 21, 2009, at 1:30:42
> > Following is a quote I found from the Policy section on Civility. I agree with this quote up to a point (and that is allowing people to be 'uncivil'.). What constitutes infraction incurring incivility can be parsed out later. What I like here is the idea of a flexibility and humanity--other posters in other threads above have made this same point. At the same time, I also like the sense of safety and community that a moderated board provides.
> >
> > "Part of learning how to deal with others might just be for people to be uncivil, have that pointed out by Dr. Bob and other members, and then work on appropriate alternate behaviors, and then keep posting. I have seen that happen many times here. There is the possibility for growth in this setting, kind of like group therapy, and I think people should take advantage of that. Sort of like practice here, before going to the "outside world" and dealing with the humans in our family and work lives. I would encourage people to ignore posters who press their buttons."
>
>
>
> I agree, if I think I am reading right what you are saying that this is a place where one should feel safe, just like in a therapist/doctor's office, but at the same time, some brief introduction to what one might see in the outside world, people are rough and "uncivil", whatever that exactly means is up to the beholder.... in the "outside world".....
>
> ..... and it is sort of CBT therapy in a way not to totally "press someones buttons" but yes, to be contrite occasionally because well, some people are just sh*tty out there, to put it mildly....
>
> ...I've had people "befriend" me because I've said too much "serious" stuff online....
>
> ...I find that the people I chat with outside here online who have or have experienced mental illness themselves are much more likely to be receptive and not "befriend" you whether they are local or long distance buddies.
>
>
> So I think its a balance.
>
> -- Jay
This sounds pretty healthy.Twinleaf-like.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on June 21, 2009, at 6:17:41
In reply to Re: Rules - Recommended Changes » rskontos, posted by yxibow on June 20, 2009, at 21:41:24
> And when I'm blocked for a week, I leave.
Sorry, Jay.Now *that* is against the rules of civility.
(It will earn you an extra week).
All kidding aside, you would be missed incredibly. Who else would there be to shovel all of the snow?
- Scott
Posted by BayLeaf on June 21, 2009, at 9:23:25
In reply to Re: Rules - Recommended Changes, posted by fayeroe on June 20, 2009, at 20:55:05
remember those learned helplessness experiements?
i am a worn dog. i give. can't even try.
sending my best fresher pups.
Posted by SLS on June 21, 2009, at 10:14:53
In reply to Re: me too, out of steam after many years » fayeroe, posted by BayLeaf on June 21, 2009, at 9:23:25
> remember those learned helplessness experiements?
I can understand this.
At first, though, it seems counterintuitive that those posters who become the most vocal and impassioned when someone is blocked from posting are now the most silent in offering their views regarding posting rules, even when asked directly.
Learned helplessness is just like depression, though. There is not enough psychic energy to deal with issues for which there is no longer sufficient emotional arousal. Resignation will take away motivation to fight.
- Scott
Posted by floatingbridge on June 21, 2009, at 11:08:07
In reply to Rules - Recommended Changes, posted by SLS on June 20, 2009, at 6:44:41
Posted by SLS on June 21, 2009, at 11:45:03
In reply to Scott, so what is a PBC? (nm), posted by floatingbridge on June 21, 2009, at 11:08:07
A PBC (Please Be Civil) is a formal warning. The next similar infraction along the same thread usually earns a posting block.
- Scott
Posted by zenhussy on June 21, 2009, at 12:43:24
In reply to Re: me too, out of steam after many years » BayLeaf, posted by SLS on June 21, 2009, at 10:14:53
>>>Resignation will take away motivation to fight.<<<
So you view admin as a fight? Could you elaborate or clarify?
Posted by Deputy 10derHeart on June 21, 2009, at 14:42:08
In reply to Re: Rules Recommended Changes question and comment, posted by floatingbridge on June 21, 2009, at 0:32:26
> Are they, as one poster above mentioned, no longer used?
(rskontos wrote:)
>It has been my observations that PBC's are not used now just blocksNothing has changed as far as use of PBCs. Deputies have asked posters to be civil 8 times in the month of June, and Dr. Bob asked one poster to 'please rephrase..." a part of a post (sometimes referred to as a PRT=Please Rephrase That)
The only thing posters may have noticed recently is Dr. Bob trying different methods to avoid PBCs, blocks altogether, and to encourage posters to work things out in the thread, amongst themselves. You'll find plenty of threads/posts on this Admin board discussing that issue - pro and con. (Not sure if there are any "pro," actually) In those threads, the deputies have not been acting, whether or not we see uncivil posts, once Dr. Bob has engaged the posters. Sometimes, it is many days, even weeks, before Dr. Bob is able to find the time to look at those threads again. That is unfortunate, but true.
In general, deputies will ask a poster to please follow the civility guidelines **at least** once, sometimes 2 or more times before resorting to a block. I know I can speak for all of us when I say our focus is on **asking** a person to follow the guidelines, and/or teaching what they are when there is confusion. That is the goal. None of us likes resorting to blocks. We use our best assessment of the poster and posts, taking into consideration whether they are new, are trying to post civil posts but misunderstanding the guidelines, etc. The times you may see no PBC before a block are with long time posters just coming off a block, who may post in basically the same uncivil manner that resulted in that block, the idea being they know what is and isn't civil, so..... Or, perhaps when a poster posts uncivil things, and immediately says, "I don't care about the XXXX civility rules," or, "I know this isn't civil so block me..., " or words to that effect. I that covers 98% of the times deputies block without a prior PBC.
We consult with each other in most cases, about PBCs, whether things are uncivil or not, whether it is appropriate to block, etc. This may not happen if only one deputy is available for hours (say when something is escalating quickly) or a day or more, etc. We alert Dr. Bob if we feel unable to act in a given situation. We also alert Dr. Bob on anything we've done but feel needs a look by him, to be sure we've applied the guidelines the way he would like. He can, of course, reverse, change, cancel or do anything he likes after any deputy action. Even though he is not here as frequently as we (the deputies) would like, these are still his boards, his guidelines.
Hope that helps answer some questions for the newer posters. As I posted to Scott above, I personally wish to stay out of these threads about rule changes, etc., as I think it's better not to have deputy input...and to just "listen" (i.e. read) what posters have to say. But, I'll do my best to answer any specific questions about current admin policy, if any more come up.
-- 10derHeart
Posted by rskontos on June 21, 2009, at 14:51:56
In reply to use of requests to be civil (PBC, etc.) » floatingbridge, posted by Deputy 10derHeart on June 21, 2009, at 14:42:08
You know actually this was very helpful to know why sometimes I have seen blocks without a PBC and wondered how it escalated straight to a block. I knew about the blocks after coming off after a block and the times when like you mentioned when someone blatantly says "I don''t care about the @@@ rules."
So this did clarify quite a bit for me.
I just do so hate for blocks though. I think they must be hurtful.
rsk
Posted by floatingbridge on June 21, 2009, at 15:56:35
In reply to use of requests to be civil (PBC, etc.) » floatingbridge, posted by Deputy 10derHeart on June 21, 2009, at 14:42:08
Hi Deputy 10derHeart,
Your post is very helpful in my understanding of current discussion and also in the forming of my own opinion. I realize now that I have seen these PBC's.
Thank you for interjecting,
Candace
Posted by 10derHeart on June 21, 2009, at 16:23:48
In reply to Re: use of requests to be civil (PBC, etc.) » Deputy 10derHeart, posted by floatingbridge on June 21, 2009, at 15:56:35
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.