![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 27 to 51 of 169. Go back in thread:
Posted by PartlyCloudy on August 1, 2010, at 7:37:38
In reply to Re: Why Is Babble Not Babbling?, posted by Dr. Bob on August 1, 2010, at 1:12:44
> > I'm not very funny. I don't think there's much I can personally do attract more people here.
> >
> > pc
>
> It's not just funny posts that attract people. I think being supportive is doing a lot, but if someone wants to do more, they could. As Dinah suggested, they could also be positive about the site and me. They could tell others about the site. They could allow their posts to be shared/tweeted as links to this site. They could share/tweet links themselves.
>I don't feel I can be very positive about the site with the changes that you have instituted and especially with the ones you propose - I find them insupportable. (And so I do no comment on them.) The only thing left for me to do is laugh and and try to derive the support I can from the site from my history here, and protect my privacy, which is actively being eroded in the name of increased traffic.
Sorry I can't support you in this, Bob.
pc
Posted by Dinah on August 1, 2010, at 9:14:17
In reply to Re: Why Is Babble Not Babbling?, posted by Dr. Bob on August 1, 2010, at 1:12:44
Avatars would be no worse than signatures, especially if you made seeing them optional. I'd assume they'd be subject to the civility rules? It's a bit distracting, particularly with the animated ones, but not offensive.
Actually, Babble signatures haven't turned out to annoy me enough for me to turn them off. Which says a lot of positive things about Babble posters to me, given my feelings about signatures on many sites I visit.
Posted by ron1953 on August 1, 2010, at 9:55:11
In reply to Re: being blocked again » Dr. Bob, posted by alexandra_k on August 1, 2010, at 6:52:17
That's often the effect of his interference, isn't it?
Posted by manic666 on August 1, 2010, at 10:44:18
In reply to Re: The Question Remains: Why Is Babble Not Babbling?, posted by manic666 on August 1, 2010, at 3:13:51
Posted by ed_uk2010 on August 1, 2010, at 11:00:17
In reply to Re: The Question Remains: Why Is Babble Not Babbling? » ron1953, posted by sigismund on July 31, 2010, at 15:52:44
> >I think it may be best for me to end my visit to the kiddie pool and head back to deeper waters.
>
>
> Off to Admin then?I'm actually finding this thread quite amusing.
Posted by fayeroe on August 1, 2010, at 15:32:27
In reply to Re: being blocked again, posted by ron1953 on August 1, 2010, at 5:56:23
Posted by fayeroe on August 1, 2010, at 15:38:08
In reply to Re: being blocked again » Dr. Bob, posted by alexandra_k on August 1, 2010, at 6:52:17
Posted by sigismund on August 1, 2010, at 17:05:29
In reply to Re: being blocked again, posted by ron1953 on August 1, 2010, at 5:56:23
>Would someone be willing to show Bob that I'm not concerned about being blocked, and that I am a fully-grown 57-year-old who doesn't jump through hoops for his entertainment.
This is perfectly obvious. To me, anyway.
Posted by sigismund on August 1, 2010, at 17:07:04
In reply to Re: being blocked again, posted by Dr. Bob on August 1, 2010, at 1:11:57
What's wrong with 'the kiddie pool'?
I thought it was (almost) affectionate.
Posted by sigismund on August 1, 2010, at 17:08:38
In reply to Re: being blocked again » Dr. Bob, posted by sigismund on August 1, 2010, at 17:07:04
I think we should try not to take Bob too seriously. Everyone's just beavering away, doing their thing.
Posted by sigismund on August 1, 2010, at 17:11:21
In reply to Re: being blocked again » Dr. Bob, posted by alexandra_k on August 1, 2010, at 6:52:17
Alex, 10/10.
Posted by sigismund on August 1, 2010, at 18:31:17
In reply to Re: being blocked again, posted by ron1953 on August 1, 2010, at 6:04:21
>One more thing: Can someone please tell Bob why "kiddie pool" may be a very fair and accurate characterization of Babble as it now stands.
Fair and accurate is no excuse.
>It also strikes me funny how Bob found exception to the term "kiddie pool" and chose a condescending, talk-to-a-child way of expressing it.
I don't think we should try to deprive Bob of the pleasure of doing what he thinks is right.
Posted by Free on August 1, 2010, at 18:35:31
In reply to Re: The Question Remains: Why Is Babble Not Babbling?, posted by ron1953 on July 31, 2010, at 10:51:01
> I think it may be best for me to end my visit to the kiddie pool and head back to deeper waters.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YiTvgYRUKFg
Posted by fayeroe on August 1, 2010, at 18:43:57
In reply to Re: being blocked again » ron1953, posted by sigismund on August 1, 2010, at 18:31:17
Posted by ron1953 on August 1, 2010, at 20:33:38
In reply to The Question Remains: Why Is Babble Not Babbling?, posted by ron1953 on July 30, 2010, at 10:52:05
C'mon, guys and gals, more suggestions! "Modernization" appears to be a recurring suggestion, and a good one. I think we should slightly modify PartlyCloudy's suggestion - how about "Get Out of Block Free" coupons?
My best suggestion is tolerance and unconditional love, which is not to suggest a Utopian ideal. But it's something worth striving for, and produces genuine, observable results along the way.
Posted by BayLeaf on August 1, 2010, at 21:22:35
In reply to Re: being blocked again » ron1953, posted by sigismund on August 1, 2010, at 18:31:17
I'll just jump in here to suggest that during times of change, and challenge, Bob appears to rachet up the blocks - like he wanted to get rid of fayeroe for something simple, but she apologized. Now Ron for this silly thing. If Bob can block the bright good debaters, changes will slide in more easily.
Posted by Sigismund on August 1, 2010, at 21:43:28
In reply to Back on Toipc: Why Is Babble Not Babbling?, posted by ron1953 on August 1, 2010, at 20:33:38
> "Modernization" appears to be a recurring suggestion, and a good one.
I don't know about modernisation.
It suggests there might be progress.
I suggest a return to traditional values of hypocrisy and leaving well alone.How about some wu wei?
Posted by Sigismund on August 1, 2010, at 21:47:45
In reply to Re: being blocked again, posted by BayLeaf on August 1, 2010, at 21:22:35
> Bob appears to rachet up the blocks
There have been scores of them whom this has happened to.
But the formula is scientific and value free.
Thank God for technology and social science, and the US penal system.
It's been a great success.
Posted by Sigismund on August 1, 2010, at 21:55:49
In reply to Re: being blocked again, posted by Sigismund on August 1, 2010, at 21:47:45
I've got to stop this.
It reminds me of when my father came back with a number of battery cages for the chooks. No more messy unhygeinic walking around the yard. Our chooks would be clean and their eggs would roll down and collect in a neat line.
And then you could feed the chook sh*t to some other animal.
It's like feeding ground up cows to cows.......sensible, rational, scientific, progressive.
I think Bob should be congratulated for keeping traditional values alive.
Posted by ron1953 on August 1, 2010, at 22:52:48
In reply to Re: being blocked again, posted by Sigismund on August 1, 2010, at 21:55:49
As much as I'm tempted, I'm trying to avoid sarcasm, not because it's uncivil, but because it simply doesn't convey well in an online environment.
Posted by Dr. Bob on August 2, 2010, at 0:57:01
In reply to Re: The Question Remains: Why Is Babble Not Babbling?, posted by ron1953 on July 31, 2010, at 10:51:01
> the kiddie pool
Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel 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, and I'm sorry if this hurts you.
I do hope that you choose to remain a member of this community and that members of this community help you, if needed, to avoid future blocks.
More information about posting policies and tips on alternative ways to express yourself, including a link to a nice post by Dinah on I-statements, are in the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#enforceFollow-ups regarding these issues should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Administration. They, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
Thanks,
Bob
PS: According to the formula:
duration of previous block: 1 weeks
period of time since previous block: 0 weeks
severity: 2 (default) + 1 (uncivil toward particular group) = 3
block length = 2.98 rounded = 3 weeks
Posted by Dr. Bob on August 2, 2010, at 0:57:35
In reply to Re: Why Is Babble Not Babbling? » Dr. Bob, posted by PartlyCloudy on August 1, 2010, at 7:37:38
> You don't tell Ron what you find problematic about what he said. This would be direct. Instead you address the rest of the community. That is indirect.
>
> It seems that you are saying that if posters care about Ron and want to help him avoid a blocking then they need to attempt to justify why it is that you think Ron owes you a rephrase or an apology and do what they can to coax him into meeting your demands.
>
> I think that you need to take responsibility for your own actions Dr Bob. You decide whether you will block a poster and you decide how long you will block them for. You decide what they need to do to avoid a blocking (e.g., you decide that apology or grovelling is an acceptable out whereas explaining oneself is not and so on).
>
> alexandra_kYes, if posters didn't want Ron to be blocked, they could've acted. Whether or not they thought the block would've been justified.
Other posters didn't try to help him avoid a block, and I blocked him. I take responsibility for blocking him, and I see other posters as responsible for not trying to help him avoid the block.
Maybe Babble isn't babbling because people see posters not trying to help each other avoid blocks.
> I don't feel I can be very positive about the site
>
> pcAnd, as Dinah suggested, maybe that's another reason.
Bob
Posted by fayeroe on August 2, 2010, at 1:09:38
In reply to Re: blocked for 3 weeks » ron1953, posted by Dr. Bob on August 2, 2010, at 0:57:01
Posted by Dinah on August 2, 2010, at 1:12:38
In reply to Re: Why Is Babble Not Babbling?, posted by Dr. Bob on August 2, 2010, at 0:57:35
> Maybe Babble isn't babbling because people see posters not trying to help each other avoid blocks.
Honestly, Dr. Bob, I think the public requests are more likely to turn people off than the lack of posters urging another poster to repent. I understand your intent, I think. To have posters recognize that they are not powerless in the presence of Bob. But I wish you would listen to the feedback about the wording. I'm all for personal responsibility, and I'm not exactly an anarchist, but even I recognize that there are ways and ways to say something, and the way you're using isn't likely to get the result you want.
I understand what you're saying. I'm just asking you to understand what people are *hearing*.
Posted by fayeroe on August 2, 2010, at 1:30:47
In reply to Re: Why Is Babble Not Babbling?, posted by Dr. Bob on August 2, 2010, at 0:57:35
posters who agreed to help other posters avoid blocks.
As much as I enjoy Ron's posts, he doesn't need my help to avoid a block.I'm sorry, bob, but I didn't sign on or agree to help anyone else avoid a block. I explained this quite clearly to you last week.
I feel absolutely zero responsibility for anything that administration does.
I don't allow anyone else to put their responsibilities upon my shoulders.
And I feel that the statement is manipulative, stomach roiling, disgusting, childish, childish, childish and I feel offended every time I read it.
I want to leave the door open in case I've not made myself clear. If there are questions, please ask them.
"and I see other posters as responsible for not trying to help him avoid the block."
Bob
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Social | 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.