![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 9 of 9. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by ZeeZee on December 29, 2002, at 12:17:05
This inflammatory statement was posted earlier in this same thread and yet nothing was mentioned of it - however, you felt the need to block Alan for 2 wks? this harldy seems even handed to me.
Re: No TD from benzos
Posted by syringachalet on December 27, 2002, at 20:26:37In reply to Re: No TD from benzos » Guy, posted by Alan on December 27, 2002, at 18:50:30
It is apparent the all medication questions should be forward to Alan who is all knowing and has nothing better to do with his day than to belittle the efforts of those who care enough to post here... Alan, get a life...
Posted by Dinah on December 29, 2002, at 13:12:33
In reply to Alan blocked for 2 wks?, posted by ZeeZee on December 29, 2002, at 12:17:05
I have to agree here, Dr. Bob. I was reading bits of the meds board where I knew you had been on the board, and assuming you had decided on a different administrative approach, because of posts like the ones cited above that weren't flagged by you. Alan responded to a few different posts in such a way that I thought he deserved a "Thanks for being civil".
I think his overall civility to fellow in the last few days well overshadows a statement about another site.
Posted by ZeeZee on December 29, 2002, at 13:21:15
In reply to Re: Alan blocked for 2 wks?, posted by Dinah on December 29, 2002, at 13:12:33
Posted by Dr. Bob on December 29, 2002, at 17:22:35
In reply to Alan blocked for 2 wks?, posted by ZeeZee on December 29, 2002, at 12:17:05
> This inflammatory statement
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20021223/msgs/133415.html
> was posted earlier in this same thread and yet nothing was mentioned of it
Well, Alan had in fact taken it OK, and her next post:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20021223/msgs/133505.html
was about working together, so I thought I could let it go.
> however, you felt the need to block Alan for 2 wks?
>
> ZeeZee> Alan responded to a few different posts in such a way that I thought he deserved a "Thanks for being civil".
>
> I think his overall civility to fellow in the last few days well overshadows a statement about another site.
>
> DinahOops, I did also mean to thank him for how he responded to syringachalet, better late than never?
But I don't think being civil in general should mean it's OK then to be uncivil. Especially in this case, when we'd already been over an issue so often...
Bob
Posted by ZeeZee on December 29, 2002, at 17:35:55
In reply to Re: Alan blocked for 2 wks, posted by Dr. Bob on December 29, 2002, at 17:22:35
Oops, I did also mean to thank him for how he responded to syringachalet, better late than never?
>Not only do you owe him that, syringachalet's response was totally uncalled for and deserves a PBC at the least.But I don't think being civil in general should mean it's OK then to be uncivil. Especially in this case, when we'd already been over an issue so often...
>I totally disagree with your view and see nothing offensive or uncivil in his post. Is it possible you are responding to something from the past rather than the present?
Posted by Dinah on December 29, 2002, at 18:05:30
In reply to Re: Alan blocked for 2 wks, posted by Dr. Bob on December 29, 2002, at 17:22:35
And thanks for explaining.
Posted by Dinah on December 30, 2002, at 1:01:14
In reply to Re: Fair enough » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on December 29, 2002, at 18:05:30
I didn't mean that the way it sounded. I just appreciated Dr. Bob's explanation.
Posted by Zo on February 5, 2003, at 14:31:16
In reply to Re: Alan blocked for 2 wks, posted by Dr. Bob on December 29, 2002, at 17:22:35
Hi Bob,
Admittedly, don't read the board as consistently as I once did, so may well have missed something, but here's my question.
> Well, Alan had in fact taken it OK. .This seems to suggest that it is taken into consideration whether the person to whom an uncivil remark ("Get a life") was directed "takes it okay". . . the poster gets a free pass, so to speak.. .. ?
Conversely, then, if the person is hurt or angered by the same (or very similar) words, then the poster has been officially Uncivil, and receives the mark in your notebook that tallies into warning/blocking. . .?
Thanks for your help,
Zo
Posted by Dr. Bob on February 5, 2003, at 20:46:26
In reply to Re: Question? » Dr. Bob, posted by Zo on February 5, 2003, at 14:31:16
> Admittedly, don't read the board as consistently as I once did
That's OK, thanks for stopping by...
> > Well, Alan had in fact taken it OK. .
>
> This seems to suggest that it is taken into consideration whether the person to whom an uncivil remark ("Get a life") was directed "takes it okay". . . the poster gets a free pass, so to speak.. .. ?I take it into consideration, but that doesn't necessarily mean a free pass...
> Conversely, then, if the person is hurt or angered by the same (or very similar) words, then the poster has been officially Uncivil, and receives the mark in your notebook that tallies into warning/blocking. . .?
Likewise, I take that into consideration, but it doesn't necessarily mean a black mark. Sorry if this is vague, it would be nice to have a formula to plug all the factors into...
Bob
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.