![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 8 of 8. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by jay on July 6, 2002, at 4:10:39
Just a note to all of the trouble on the boards lately. People leaving..people holding a grudge...people arguing...fighting..people showing disrespect to others..etc.I am far from perfect...so far I forget what the word means..heh. But, it seems so easy for folks to type a hot-headed message, press send, and blast anyone/everyone for this, that, yadda, yadda.
Well...being a Canadian..I would like to show my support for the "Psycho-Babble Peace Keepers". I *strongly* believe in the United Nations concept, and think it would work great here. Work problems through in a *non-violent*, non-aggressive way.
Maybe we can contribute to learning ways of non-violence, and how to solve things in a peaceful way. It has worked for the U.N. in keeping peace (sometimes) in certain parts of the world. I think it can work for us on here.
So, where do we go with this? Well, how about folks sign-up for a tour of duty as a PB Peacekeeper. People others can turn to when they feel 'stuck' in a confrontation. What we will need is a rotating group of folks..hopefully everyone gets a chance...to help 'mediate' problems. People will have to stick by an objective and strict peace-keeping philosophy.
Despite what anybody thinks, there is *always* a peaceful sollution to conflict. No, it's not idealistic..it is included as part of the UN Peacekeeping Charter.
So...I hope to hear what others have to think, and how we can make PB as close to 100 percent a positive experience as possible. I am willing to give much time and effort in this cause, and I would greatfully welcome others who would be interested in this...and especially your thoughts, Dr. Bob. If it reduces 'banning' folks, and leads more to positive resolution, doesn't that sound great? Thoughts?
In Peace..:-)
Jay
Posted by fi on July 6, 2002, at 18:00:53
In reply to *Psycho-Babble Peace Keepers*..PLEASE read, posted by jay on July 6, 2002, at 4:10:39
Its an intriguing idea, and commendable that you are keen to make things run more smoothly. I'm more of an old cynic, so I would suspect that anyone mediating, unless it was actively sought by both parties, would come in for some of the flak Dr Bob gets, at least sometimes.
Some posters seem keen to be allowed to say whatever they want, however upsetting or uncivil it might be, particularly if they also see freedom of speech as the highest priority.
On the other hand, where it is differences of opinion rather than upset re Dr Bob's PBC, maybe it would sometimes be helpful. Hard to predict.
I suppose there is nothing to stop anyone either attempting to mediate, or asking for others to mediate, without actually needing a new structure.
My concern would be that (as with UN peacekeepers) the folk genuinely wanting to be helpful and mediate might get a hard time, unless invited into a dispute with both sides willing to listen.
Fi
Posted by katekite on July 6, 2002, at 18:48:14
In reply to Re: *Psycho-Babble Peace Keepers*..PLEASE read » jay, posted by fi on July 6, 2002, at 18:00:53
Agree with Fi that it would be a nice thing to have if both parties wanted the intervention.
Seems like many of the arguments have on one side someone who is already breaking dr. bob rules, such as strong language etc. Which bodes poorly for them accepting any determination from a mediator.
Both sides need to have some faith of beneficial intent in any mediation.
But then, I'm a cynic.
kate
Posted by Zo on July 6, 2002, at 21:46:04
In reply to *Psycho-Babble Peace Keepers*..PLEASE read, posted by jay on July 6, 2002, at 4:10:39
> People leaving..people holding a grudge...people arguing...fighting..people showing disrespect to others..etc.
Jay,Can I ask you, and those who have called this is "animosity towards Bob," to take a look at just two of the many people presently concerned enough to speak out? Iso and I are not kids, we are not rebellious teens, we are moms, and I don't know about Iso, but I'm a grandmother. I think we are both older than Bob. We do know a thing or two. I am a non-practicing therapist. I do know a thing or two.
KK. Dear KK departed in such sorrow and regret. Distressed to discover how little her presence meant to the Admin--far less than that of a disruptive member who never fit within site guidelines in the first place. So much so, that the Admin was willing to let her walk, rather than take a look .
A level of unresponsiveness and unaccountability that is not what I want in an Admin, and maybe not what you want either.
But the inevitable result of Admin who has restricted himself to Admin of Uncivil. No matter how good a job he does at that. . .there are certain gaps?
Anything that provokes a valued, loved member into, finally, leaving, contains a lot of valuable info on how to better Admin of the group.
I can't blame people for not wanting to get involved--you risk PBCs which lead to Blocking which leads to red-flagging *all* future posts for Bob's scrutiny. . it is easier to just go along.
But, if you are the sort of poster who can successfully go along, or whose post have not attracted Bob's attention, please respect those who have a different experience here, and deal with it differently.
I’ve watched Admin take no action with a member who upset a lot of people--as well he might, his is opposed to the purpose this group holds ----when it would have been a kindness to gently but firmly show this member the door. . .because THAT would be GUIDING him toward that which he wants! A group where he is appreciated and respected in a way that cannot happen here! This is guidance that member is not getting! His needs aren't being met by Admin either!
And making a whole new board doesn’t solve that problem, iIt is a best a temporary fix. It's also a guarantee this person is going to know more rejection and more pain.
Sorry, Bob, you tried--maybe next time include the actual welfare of the actual person? Thanks!
Please be more sensitive, the the future, with your response to those of us who are upset by another member. “Don’t read him” doesn't not qualify as a responsive response. I could go to back my ex if that was all I wanted.
I am ALREADY upset and hurting, so telling me not to be is. .. kinda invalidating, no? Pretty unwilling to give it any thought?
And this lack of concern makes me feel even worse. Excuse me? Am I invisible, my support of others invisible? But this upsetting member has his own board created for him?
This is how some of us feel. (No, I don't want my own board!)
It's almost as if you trust your most valued posters to take it in the ear--and come back for more. You've been really approving of me when I gracefully accepted a block.
I could just kick myself, now. You'd think I was old enough to stop taking that bait. Still, I expect a nice man has my interests somewhere on his scope. Stupidass me.
He is thinking about what works for *him,* he couldn't be less eager to hear your ideas. Mostly he is busy noodges everything towards one resut: approval of him.
The fact that he does this would put any sane person off. The fact that he thinks he *must* force reality this way, to find approval--these things that are free! that require no force!---is well nigh unto delusional. To me.
How is it that Bob, in this case, misses the most obvious thing? --If you treat people well, they will give you approval. If you don't, they will be resentful and angry, and eventually leave.
Oh, and you have to treat them well by *their* definition. No fair imposing your own.
This is useful feedback.
But many guys are more fond of their peice of paper, the sense of Control it gives them. . .and frequently let people walk, just as long as they're still In Charge.
Because people are walking, and being let walk, this tells me something about where you're at, Bob. It tells me that ownership of the site, and/or our function as guinea pigs, is more important to you than the feelings *or* presence of anyone here. I realize that is not what your *words* tell me.. . .but what is that saying?
Listen to what men *do*, not what they say.
Jay, you and the Peacekeepers got your work cut out for you. Good luck! ;-)Zo
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 7, 2002, at 3:24:14
In reply to Re: *Psycho-Babble Peace Keepers*..PLEASE read » jay, posted by Zo on July 6, 2002, at 21:46:04
> Dear KK departed in such sorrow and regret. Distressed to discover how little her presence meant to the Admin--far less than that of a disruptive member who never fit within site guidelines in the first place. So much so, that the Admin was willing to let her walk, rather than take a look .
First, just to get this out of the way, "disruptive" wasn't civil and "never fit within site guidelines" was exaggerating. I blocked you for 2 weeks last time, so this time it's for 4.
Now let me say that my blocking someone doesn't mean I don't value their presence. Being blocked just means I think they've crossed the line too many times. There have been people who contributed a *ton* -- and whose presence I valued a lot -- but who didn't always follow the rules, and they were blocked.
> It's almost as if you trust your most valued posters to take it in the ear--and come back for more. You've been really approving of me when I gracefully accepted a block.
I really do appreciate it when people trust that I'm doing my best to be fair and to do what I think will be good for this community as a whole...
Bob
Posted by jay on July 7, 2002, at 5:05:36
In reply to Re: *Psycho-Babble Peace Keepers*..PLEASE read » jay, posted by Zo on July 6, 2002, at 21:46:04
Zo:I do hear what you are saying, and I realize something like this is a big task. All's I am calling for is some objectivity. Say before someone is 'banned', somebody who is "good" in mediation could be a, well, mediator. I am an MSW level social worker, and I hate even saying that on here, because my belief is it doesn't matter..period. But, I'd like to think I could help in bringing people together in a democratic fashion. It really isn't a hard thing to do either.
One thing I might suggest, is to ask Dr. Bob instead of just a ban, there be some private communication with the person, and an attempt to look into the problems.
Second, though, this *is* Dr. Bob's 'virtual hangout'. If he has a code of civility, and doesn't like certain words used, that is just something we will have to live with. If somebody came into your home, and talked in a way you found offensive, doing whatever they please, I am sure you or anyone would be ticked, and do have a right to ask that person to leave.
There are *tons* of ways for people to get along and communicate. I've seen past sworn enemies, especially in families, reconcile in a simple group family session. It doesn't always work out...but no harm in trying, especially if many things *do* work out.
Anyhow..I hope you catch my drift. I know very well we can develop much more peaceful relations on the boards. It's that control over our behaviour that I think can also help us in our 'real' lives.
Questions...thoughts?
Peace,
James
Posted by Lini on July 7, 2002, at 20:44:39
In reply to Re: blocked for 4 weeks » Zo, posted by Dr. Bob on July 7, 2002, at 3:24:14
Whoo boy Zo, a man can only take so much! ;)
I knew a block was in the works, but I didn't know it was going to be for 4 weeks. Jeez. That is a long time to have to stand in the corner.
Hope you'll keep a watchful eye during your "hiatus" and return just as passionate as ever . . .
-L
Posted by shar on July 8, 2002, at 0:55:55
In reply to Re: *Psycho-Babble Peace Keepers*..PLEASE read » Zo, posted by jay on July 7, 2002, at 5:05:36
This is the end of the 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.