![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 11 of 11. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by mist on August 14, 2002, at 14:31:40
For the most part blocks don't seem to serve a useful purpose. My impression is that most posters here are sensitive to getting a PBC and blocks are not necessary except for the most egregious civility violations, which are rare. Blocks are often overkill and create more problems than they solve. So I'm sincerely wondering, what purpose are they supposed to serve?
Posted by Greg on August 14, 2002, at 15:17:40
In reply to What purpose do blocks serve?, posted by mist on August 14, 2002, at 14:31:40
If I knew I had done something really worth being blocked for, then the time away would feel deserved (albeit somewhat like a child being put on a timeout :)) and would give me some cooling off time. It would still be embarrassing and hurt my feelings though, but that's just me.
If I didn't feel like I deserved it, I would just spend the time being angry, bitter and frustrated. Definitely not emotions to force on someone with depression. That's one of the reasons why I think it has to be looked at very carefully before it's done to anyone here.
You've been around a long time, remember when he used to block people permanently? That was harsh...
Hope you're well.
Posted by oracle on August 14, 2002, at 15:20:32
In reply to What purpose do blocks serve?, posted by mist on August 14, 2002, at 14:31:40
There needs to be consequences for bad actions or there is no way to control these actions.
Posted by shar on August 14, 2002, at 17:07:52
In reply to Re: What purpose do blocks serve?, posted by oracle on August 14, 2002, at 15:20:32
> There needs to be consequences for bad actions or there is no way to control these actions.
I agree with this statement. Blocks came about many moons ago (it's all in the archives) and when a lot of people were getting hurt (posters hurting other posters).
Like everything, it used to be simple and now it's not. Now there are PBCs in the equation to keep track of, and different issues at hand. Plus, a lot more admin discussion of whether a block is appropriate, etc.
But, the bottom line is, having a consequence here is a good thing, in general, in my opinion. And a block is a reasonable consequence, in my opinion. And being able to state one's opinion about someone getting blocked is a good thing, in general, in my opinion.
Shar
Posted by Greg on August 14, 2002, at 17:40:47
In reply to Re: What purpose do blocks serve?, posted by shar on August 14, 2002, at 17:07:52
And having you around is a very good thing, in my opinion. :)
Posted by tina on August 14, 2002, at 22:06:04
In reply to Re: What purpose do blocks serve? » shar, posted by Greg on August 14, 2002, at 17:40:47
Are you two sure you emphasised that enough? LOL
Posted by shar on August 15, 2002, at 2:20:24
In reply to In my opinion......Greg/Shar, posted by tina on August 14, 2002, at 22:06:04
> Are you two sure you emphasised that enough? LOL
I believe, in general, we probably did, in my humble opinion.....
8-)
Shar
Posted by Phil on August 15, 2002, at 6:55:28
In reply to Re: In my opinion......Greg/Shar » tina, posted by shar on August 15, 2002, at 2:20:24
I haven't read the messages here but I can tell you that good blocking is essential. You have to have it. Otherwise, your quarterback would get creamed every play.
Always happy to help,
hut hut
Posted by Cam W. on August 15, 2002, at 9:45:22
In reply to Re: In my opinion......Greg/Shar, posted by Phil on August 15, 2002, at 6:55:28
.... and blocking can keep your hats in pristine condition.
.... I know, I know .....administrative issues (but I'm in one of those moods). - Cam
Posted by Dr. Bob on August 15, 2002, at 10:40:20
In reply to Re: In my opinion......Greg/Shar » Phil, posted by Cam W. on August 15, 2002, at 9:45:22
Posted by mist on August 15, 2002, at 11:42:05
In reply to What purpose do blocks serve?, posted by mist on August 14, 2002, at 14:31:40
I see the points expressed on this thread about it being theoretically a deterrant but I wonder how effective it is. I think blocks should at least be used more sparingly and some should not be as long as they are. It also should depend on the motive of the poster. Otherwise a lot of ill-will is generated with not much gained and over time that can erode trust. In some cases it seems that a more "educational" measure might be taken. Some posters seem to have good intentions but don't seem to get what is and isn't civil (even when it probably is obvious to others in a particular post--because in other cases it isn't that obvious nor would everyone agree on it). So maybe more explanation of what was wrong and why would help in some cases.
> You've been around a long time, remember when he used to block people permanently? That was harsh...
I don't remember. I read the site more sporadically in those days (started in latter half of 2000) and was usually in a depressive fog. It does sound harsh, although I suppose it depends what they did. I think there are some violations that do warrant very long blocks or permanent bans, but they are serious ones where the poster is acting deliberately and could do a lot of damage if left unchecked.
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.