![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 18 of 18. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Dinah on December 30, 2002, at 11:21:25
I guess this probably belongs on Admin, but I would suspect that there are no changes that could make the faith board viable.
As it stood before, I sometimes felt like I had to post on the faith board to defend my God, as there was some fun being had at His expense. And I felt as compelled to defend Him as I do to defend Dr. Bob, George Bush, little people, Muslims, and anyone else when I feel they are being unfairly treated.
Now I feel compelled to post sometimes to defend diversity and tolerance.
Damn OCD.
But I never post on the faith board for the sheer enjoyment of it. Would I like a board where finer theological points could be discussed in a civil yet invigorating way? I certainly would. I love theology. But I suspect this is not the place. I actually suspect there is no such place. If anyone knows of any, let me know. Wouldn't it be great if we could just compare notes on what our religions teach us without judgement for other religions? That would be so eductional. Sometimes we are insulated within our own faith from other beliefs. Of course, a lady in my church once told me that she felt lucky in comparison with me. That if she knew more facts about her religion it might lessen her faith. So perhaps I'm not in the majority in thinking that it would be interesting.
Would I like to see a place where the impact of religion, pro and con, on our lives and our illneses could be respectfully and civilly discussed? Sure, but I suspect this is not the place. Feelings run too high.
Would a relationship board that included faith be any better in this respect? I suspect not. Religion is not a topic that fits well within the civility guidelines of this site. Most religions do seem to have a, if not "my way is the only way", then at least "my way is the best way", mentality. And religious thought seems to stir up a lot of animosity among nonbelievers, who can be every bit as dogmatic as believers. I truly wish there could be a tolerant live and let live attitude, but that seems to be the minority position towards religion.
Plus, a lot of the social board deals with relationships. "Social" "Relationships" Makes sense to me.
I dunno. We've tried out various incarnations of the faith board. None have helped it grow in a vigorous manner. Is it doomed? Perhaps, perhaps not.
Posted by Dinah on December 30, 2002, at 11:28:08
In reply to Re: An idea for the Faith Board y/n? » Phil, posted by Dinah on December 30, 2002, at 11:21:25
Geesh, Dr. Bob. I wish you hadn't posted those readability links. I'm ruining my self image for verbosity, arcane language, and convoluted sentence structure.
Anyone have any ideas on how I could make my posts less readable?
Posted by IsoM on December 30, 2002, at 13:00:25
In reply to Re: Seventh grade?!!!, posted by Dinah on December 30, 2002, at 11:28:08
Yes, Dinah - don't use that readability calculator. All tests like that are flawed & can only calculate readability by:
1. judging which words you select
2. deciding if 'it' thinks your sentence structure is passive or not
3. judging whether your punctuation is correct or not.
4. using a spell-checker1. From an above post from Jonathan, this calculator graded the word "bad" to be at a 5th grade level but "idea" to be 13.4. I'm sure if he had used the word "malevolent" instead, he would've had a high grade. But as you can see, the word "bad" was the best choice.
2. As Beardy knows, passive verbs don't carry the same force in a resumé, but are well suited for communicating in a polite manner with others.
3. To judge whether punctuation is correct, the program must follow pre-determined examples. There's too many times that these programs will tell you that "...it’s fragrance is..." should be changed to "...its fragrance is..."!
4. Spell-checkers are good. When I'm working on a document that I wish to save or that's important, it's often caught my words with juxtapositioned letters (e.g. ohme instead of home). But spell-checkers often assume an unknown name is incorrectly spelled, marks acronyms, foreign expressions, & slang as incorrect most times, so it's hardly foolproof itself.
So in all seriousness, Dinah, don't bother using the readability calculator. I easily understand your posts. I'm sure others do too.
Posted by Phil on December 30, 2002, at 19:20:25
In reply to Re: An idea for the Faith Board y/n? » Phil, posted by Dinah on December 30, 2002, at 11:21:25
I had it on admin but no feedback. Ended up not getting a whole lot of feedback on PSB.
It would be a relationships board, not a faith board. You could talk about: aging parents, rel. with money, with kids, husband, kids teacher, God, yourself, your boyfriend, or how you feel you're getting along here. Just with those examples, God's is one relationship out of nine. So every ninth poster may say God, but it's about your relationship to whatever you call God, not your beliefs about your religion.
It's 'only focus is relationships'. Faith or spirituality would be mentioned in the guidelines as one type of relationship.
It made a huge difference in the meetings I used to go to. There's was a different energy in the room at relationship meetings and it could be the same 20-30 people that were at an open meeting the previous night.
It's very possible that someone who came here for PB but is having difficulty in a R. would feel very at ease posting there. If he looks at PSB, he'll think everyone here knows each other.
I also thought we could let the poster decide whether they wanted feedback or just wanted to vent. A poster could check O feedback or O no feedback. It would be a listening board as much as anything.
In that case, it would be like Al-Anon, as an example, in that nobody interrupts the person speaking and when the person gets it all out, we say thank you. Anyone else have a relationship issue they would like to 'share?'
It's Dr B's board so he'll do what he thinks is best. This change would make the Admin board slow down a bit, don'tcha think?
I know more people would go there than to faith...I try to avoid that board at all cost. There's no way to keep tempers down, I just don't go there cause sometimes, if someone is talking about my beliefs in a negative way, I post pretty much how I feel, in a subtle way, and I get blocked.Sorry this is so long, I can't seem to organize my thinking lately.
Posted by Tabitha on December 30, 2002, at 19:52:59
In reply to Re: An idea for the Faith Board y/n? » Dinah, posted by Phil on December 30, 2002, at 19:20:25
the no feedback option is interesting. would anyone be allowed to post "thank you", or would the topic just stand alone?
I enjoyed that feature of 12-step groups a lot. Sometimes it would have been nice if there was a little period of silence after a share, instead of the next person jumping in right away.
Posted by Phil on December 30, 2002, at 20:41:53
In reply to Re: An idea for the Faith Board y/n?, posted by Tabitha on December 30, 2002, at 19:52:59
I dunno, what do you think?
Posted by Dinah on December 30, 2002, at 21:03:46
In reply to Re: An idea for the Faith Board y/n? » Dinah, posted by Phil on December 30, 2002, at 19:20:25
Hi Phil, I was just commenting on the portion of including one's relationship with God in any board. I think there is just too much controversy involved and bad feelings would be stirred up. Perhaps even more than on a board devoted to faith, since now people can avoid the faith board if they wish to. A board which included faith discussions with other discussions would lessen that option.
I think Dr. Bob would like the Social board to be more widely used for a lot of purposes. And if it is perceived as a club with everyone already knowing one another, that's a shame. I know he's always trying to divert various discussions from the meds board to Social. Perhaps the Social description and/or name should be changed to reflect the fact that serious discussion is welcomed there?
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 30, 2002, at 21:08:50
In reply to Re: An idea for the Faith Board y/n? » Phil, posted by Dinah on December 30, 2002, at 11:21:25
Dinah,
You wrote,[...is this the place to discuss...I suspect not...if anyone knows the place...]
I believe that [this is the best place] to discuss faith,IMHO. I base this a lot on Phil's perceptions about [relationships and faith.] I believe that they are tied together as he has indicated.
Dr. Bob has stated that the faith board is in the state of flux. So I think that we should[flux] the faith board, not discard it.
Lou
Posted by Dinah on December 30, 2002, at 21:45:28
In reply to Re: An idea for the Faith Board y/n? » Dinah, posted by Lou Pilder on December 30, 2002, at 21:08:50
Posted by Phil on December 30, 2002, at 22:36:46
In reply to Re: Seventh grade?!!!, posted by Dinah on December 30, 2002, at 11:28:08
Posted by rayww on December 31, 2002, at 10:49:57
In reply to Re: An idea for the Faith Board y/n? » Phil, posted by Dinah on December 30, 2002, at 11:21:25
> Would I like to see a place where the impact of religion, pro and con, on our lives and our illneses could be respectfully and civilly discussed? Sure, but I suspect this is not the place. Feelings run too high.Since bipolar does affect and is affected by spirit, Yes.
> Plus, a lot of the social board deals with relationships. "Social" "Relationships" Makes sense to me.
>
Exactly. Relationships can be discussed on social. People need help in identifying spirit, and that is a category too. If we are to heal and grow in four basic areas, http://scriptures.lds.org/query?words=wisdom+stature they need to be at least identified. 1.Mental 2.Physical 3.Spiritual 4.Social> I dunno. We've tried out various incarnations of the faith board. None have helped it grow in a vigorous manner. Is it doomed? Perhaps, perhaps not.
Have I killed it?
Instead of "incarnation" try "resurection"
Resurrection: the act of rising from the dead, from Latin - to rise again
Incarnation: Embodiment of a deity or spirit in some earthly form
Posted by BeardedLady on December 31, 2002, at 13:34:49
In reply to Re: Seventh grade?!!! » Dinah, posted by IsoM on December 30, 2002, at 13:00:25
> 2. As Beardy knows, passive verbs don't carry the same force in a resumé, but are well suited for communicating in a polite manner with others.
Passives are sometimes better, as they take the blame off one and put it on another. "Ten points will be deducted for lateness" sounds like they simply come off, so it's not my fault. But my students would be upset if I said, "I will deduct ten points for lateness."
> 3. To judge whether punctuation is correct, the program must follow pre-determined examples. There's too many times...
Contractions often bring the points down, and it's easy to make an error in subject/verb agreement when you use them. That sentence should have said, "There ARE too many times."
>...that these programs will tell you that "...it’s fragrance is..." should be changed to "...its fragrance is..."!
"It's" is a contraction for "it is." You don't mean "It is fragrance is," do you? Hence, "its fragrance is" is correct, and the program was right.
> 4. Spell-checkers are good. When I'm working on a document that I wish to save or that's important, it's often caught my words with juxtapositioned letters (e.g. ohme instead of home). But spell-checkers often assume an unknown name is incorrectly spelled, marks acronyms, foreign expressions, & slang as incorrect most times, so it's hardly foolproof itself.
Yes, my students wrote about the National Riffle Association, and spell check couldn't help a bit. Instead of that silly readability thingie, we should have a spell checker on here, like we do on Outlook.
> So in all seriousness, Dinah, don't bother using the readability calculator. I easily understand your posts. I'm sure others do too.Yeah, why fret about another thing? What I don't get is why a psychiatrist would add this to a site intended to support a group of people already suffering from social phobia, anxiety, depression, and self-esteem issues.
Dr. Bob, did you think this through before jumping on the technology? Did you ask yourself whether this was necessary or whether it would make people uncomfortable to learn that, according to some machine, they write on a third grade level (even though there's nothing at all wrong with that)?
It seems to me there are some things we can do without. It's important to consider context. Were this some sort of writing improvement bulletin board, there might have been a place for the readability ratings.
beardy
Posted by Dr. Bob on December 31, 2002, at 14:08:48
In reply to Iso, Dinah, Dr. Bob » IsoM, posted by BeardedLady on December 31, 2002, at 13:34:49
> Most religions do seem to have a, if not "my way is the only way", then at least "my way is the best way", mentality.
It's seemed like that to me, too. But there's more than *just* that to post about...
> And religious thought seems to stir up a lot of animosity among nonbelievers, who can be every bit as dogmatic as believers.
That's why I wanted to try having it be more explicitly supportive...
> I think Dr. Bob would like the Social board to be more widely used for a lot of purposes... I know he's always trying to divert various discussions from the meds board to Social. Perhaps the Social description and/or name should be changed...
>
> DinahIt's not so much that I'd like it to be used for more topics, it's just the "other" or "miscellaneous" board here. It's only a small change, but how about:
> > This [PSB] is a message board for general discussion and support, including "just" being social.
----
> I also thought we could let the poster decide whether they wanted feedback or just wanted to vent. A poster could check O feedback or O no feedback. It would be a listening board as much as anything.
> In that case, it would be like Al-Anon, as an example, in that nobody interrupts the person speaking and when the person gets it all out, we say thank you. Anyone else have a relationship issue they would like to 'share?'
>
> Phil> I enjoyed that feature of 12-step groups a lot. Sometimes it would have been nice if there was a little period of silence after a share, instead of the next person jumping in right away.
>
> TabithaBut even the way it is now, people aren't interrupted (not by others here, anyway) while they type in their posts... "No feedback" would mean no way to post a follow-up? What someone just responded in a new thread?
----
> we should have a spell checker on here, like we do on Outlook.
I wouldn't want to make people self-conscious about their spelling...
> Did you ask yourself ... whether it would make people uncomfortable to learn that, according to some machine, they write on a third grade level (even though there's nothing at all wrong with that)?
>
> BeardedLadyIf people don't want to know, they don't have to use it. If there's nothing wrong with it, then the problem lies elsewhere, anyway. And actually the idea was to use it to compare groups rather than individuals.
Bob
Posted by Phil on December 31, 2002, at 18:26:39
In reply to Re: PBF, PSB, feedback, spelling, and readability, posted by Dr. Bob on December 31, 2002, at 14:08:48
I've got to take my cat to his Pilates class, he's a blimp.
I'll give my depressed answer concerning the faith board...whatever.
Posted by Noa on January 1, 2003, at 14:11:05
In reply to Re: An idea for the Faith Board y/n? » Phil, posted by Dinah on December 30, 2002, at 11:21:25
As I said on PSB, I have no objections to a relationship board, although I also see no reason why one wouldn't want to bring up relationships on PSB. I think of "Faith" as different than "God" and more broad a topic than "religion". I am eager to take part in chat on the faith board that is not dogmatic, etc. I also know, however, that the general topic of religion-faith-God tends to bring out strong opinions and dogma. I often just skip a lot of posts that don't interest me. In fact, I skip most of them if I feel they are too long and preachy (no pun intended).
Also, having a faith board helps to keep these intense exhchanges off the other boards, which I believe is important because in the past, such exchanges have become very disruptive to other topics.
So, I don't have such high expectations of what I'll find on the faith board (I am an interested, but somewhat detached participant), but I like having it, I like being able to have some discussions on topics related to faith.
So, I tend to think there is a need for a faith board.
Posted by Phil on January 1, 2003, at 17:24:04
In reply to Re: An idea for the Faith Board y/n?, posted by Noa on January 1, 2003, at 14:11:05
Noa, What you said about the posts being on PSB again changed my mind, too. I'm not upset about the PBF really. I do like to talk about faith and look forward to doing that.
Now is probably a good time because my faith has left me. Actually, I left it and right now, I could use it.Phil
Posted by Noa on January 2, 2003, at 12:49:49
In reply to Re: An idea for the Faith Board y/n? » Noa, posted by Phil on January 1, 2003, at 17:24:04
On the other hand, maybe I spoke too soon? I had been away and was new to the faith board. I think there is some good conversation there, but you are right that it can become dominated by "preachers" which is not my idea of what the faith board should be about. I think if people decide to ignore the posts that really bother them and start new threads that are more in line with what we want to discuss, maybe it will get better. But like I said, I think I missed a lot of the action that prompted your initiative.
Should we pick this up on PSF?
Posted by Phil on January 2, 2003, at 18:34:45
In reply to Re: An idea for the Faith Board y/n?, posted by Noa on January 2, 2003, at 12:49:49
Sounds good to me.
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.