![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 15 of 15. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Simcha on February 28, 2003, at 0:53:51
Lou Pilder
Would you please explain {summarize} your requests for more information {data} from all of us {we Babblers}.
Some of us {me especially} wonder what kind of explanations {interpretations} you would like.
Please clarify {that is, make clear} what kind of further data {or explanations} you would like. Please remember to respond {that is, write a response} because to ignore this is not civil {against the Rules of DAS REALM}.
Ja Wol!
Simcha
Posted by Simcha on February 28, 2003, at 1:05:14
In reply to Simcha's request to Lou Pilder, posted by Simcha on February 28, 2003, at 0:53:51
Lou,
I just realized {thought} that you might like {enjoy} some examples of requests {entreaties} you have made.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20030221/msgs/204477.html
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20030221/msgs/202441.html
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20030221/msgs/202538.html
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20030221/msgs/202541.html
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20030221/msgs/202545.html
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20030221/msgs/202557.htmlI just thought it would be kind {civil} of me to provide {give} examples so that you might know {realize} what I'm trying to ask {request}.
Thank You,
Simcha
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 28, 2003, at 7:18:49
In reply to Simcha's request to Lou Pilder, posted by Simcha on February 28, 2003, at 0:53:51
Simcha,
You wrote,[...wondering what kind of explanations you would like...]
Well, any explanation that would give more light on the subject requested would be OK.
IMO, the following, in gereral , would be OK:
1B. [...The answer to your request from me for clarification is:...]
2B. [... I can't answer your request for I need more time to reserch the topic of your request for clarifiction...]
3B. [...I can't answer your request for clarification because I now realize that what I have written could be construed to be inappropriate here and I would like to withdrawal the post...]
The following,IMO,in general, would not be OK:
1C. [...I'm not going to answer your request for clarification because I do not like the way you write here...]
2C. [...I will not respond to your request for clarification.].
3C. [...Sorry, but I will not respond to your request for clarification because it would be {dreadfully intemperate} of me...].
4C. Other responses that could be consrtued as being contemptuous, insolent or impudent.
I believe it is more supportive to be {cooperative}in regards to a person's request for clarification, and responses to those requests could further the goals of the board by increasing the light on the subject in discussion.
Lou
Posted by Dinah on February 28, 2003, at 7:30:51
In reply to Simcha's request to Lou Pilder » Simcha, posted by Lou Pilder on February 28, 2003, at 7:18:49
Lou. :(
I didn't mean to be uncivil to you by saying that giving examples would be intemperate. :( It had nothing to do with you.
It had to do with the fact that I consider further discussion on Dr. Bob's administrative actions to be vaguely uncivil. I thought it seemed ok to congratulate Dr. Bob on a job well done, as opposed to saying - "Oh, good one, Dr. Bob" to a specific post. And giving examples to what I meant would be the latter.
So when I said I couldn't respond because it wouldn't be temperate of me, perhaps the word I should have used was wise.
I don't want to open that can of worms again. But I saw by your inclusion of my remark in your list of unacceptable comments that it had rankled you. And I wanted to clarify that my intent was not in any way to be uncivil to you. It was about my judgement of what I thought was appropriate for me to do, not a judgemnent on what you asked.
:( :(
Posted by Dinah on February 28, 2003, at 7:56:05
In reply to Re: Simcha's request to Lou Pilder » Lou Pilder, posted by Dinah on February 28, 2003, at 7:30:51
It went into far too much explanation.
Lou, I'm sorry that my remark apparently hurt you. That was not my intent.
Seeing my remark on your list made me feel dreadful. It made it clear that I am not resilient enough right now to post. If I post right now, I'll end up with one of those dreadful on board meltdowns, which will cause me immense embarassment later.
So Lou, if I don't respond to any further posts from you on this subject, please know that I intend no disrespect. I just am going to take a beak from the boards until I feel more robust, or at least until my therapist returns from his long holiday weekend.
Respectfully,
Dinah
Posted by Simcha on February 28, 2003, at 7:58:16
In reply to Re: Please ignore my previous post - Lou, posted by Dinah on February 28, 2003, at 7:56:05
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 28, 2003, at 8:01:23
In reply to Re: Simcha's request to Lou Pilder » Lou Pilder, posted by Dinah on February 28, 2003, at 7:30:51
Dinah,
You wrote, [...I didn't mean to be uncivil to you by writing that giving examples to you would be intemperate...].
Well, I did not write that you were , or would be, [uncivil] for not responding to a request for {identification} by writing ,[...No, Lou. I'm sorry, but that would be dreadfully intemperate of me...].
I wrote that [IMO, in general], it would not be [OK} to respond to a request for clarification with that type of answer. Being [uncivil] IMO, in general, is not equivalant to {not OK}.
So if your are thinking that I consider the statement {dreadfully intemperate} to be uncivil, I want to assure you that you do not have to be concerned about that. Being {not OK} or being {OK}, are just [guuidlines for communication, not rules for civility. The reasons that , IMO, that reply would be, in general, {not OK} is another subject.
Best regards,
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 28, 2003, at 8:14:50
In reply to Re: Please ignore my previous post - Lou, posted by Dinah on February 28, 2003, at 7:56:05
Dindah,
You wrote,[...I'm sorry that my remark apparently hurt you...].
Well, I would like for you to know that you should not be concerned about me being hurt by your remark , for no hurt resulted to me by your remark and I also want you to know that you do not have to be concerned that I thought that you intended to inflict {hurt} upon me. One of the {civility} rules here is to [...give the benifit of the doubt...] and I always do so, and that is one of the main reasons that I ask for clarification to posts here, or ask for {identification}, so that those type of concerns can be cleared up and to give that other poster a way to {rule out} any implications that could be misinterpreted. I believe that a request for clarification, or identification, could be a good way to foster {harmony} here and allow any thoughts that the other poster may have that they made a mistake in writing what they did to be allevited.
Best wishes,
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 28, 2003, at 8:34:39
In reply to Re: Please ignore my previous post - Lou, posted by Dinah on February 28, 2003, at 7:56:05
Dinah,
You wrote,[...Lou, if I do not respond, you should know I mean no direspect...].
Well, I would like you to know that {not responding}, is not in the list that I gave here that IMO, in general, would be [not OK]. To not respond is a {privilege},IMO, in general, granted by the 5th amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It is responses that write things like, [...I'm not going to respond to you {because I don't like your such and such...] that I consider to be.IMO. in general,to be [uncooperative or {less supportive}], [but not {uncivil}].
So I want you to know that I would not consider anyone here to be {disrespectfull} for not responding. It is just that some responses for requests for clarification or identification, could be , IMO, in general, to be{not OK}, but not unvivil, and thsat one could, perhaps, consider alternatives to posting [not OK] posts as defined by the administration here, not by me. I was only giving suggestions for improvement and asking for clarification from the admin. if they also could consider some , or all, or none , of my concerns about those type of replys to requests for clarification to be OK or not OK, or , perhaps, uncivil.
Best wishes,
Lou
Posted by wendy b. on February 28, 2003, at 12:17:56
In reply to Re: Please ignore my previous post - Lou, posted by Dinah on February 28, 2003, at 7:56:05
Dinah,
I'm sorry if I have contributed to any bad feelings today, please know my intent was not to harm but to expand a little on the topic of humor vs. irony vs. put-down.
I'm also very sorry you're feeling badly and hope you don't stay away very long...Wendy
Posted by Dinah on February 28, 2003, at 12:22:11
In reply to Re: Please ignore my previous post » Dinah, posted by wendy b. on February 28, 2003, at 12:17:56
And I'm sorry for my previous post.
Posted by Dinah on February 28, 2003, at 12:23:55
In reply to Lou' reply to Dinah's post-2D » Dinah, posted by Lou Pilder on February 28, 2003, at 8:34:39
Thanks Lou. I just have a real problem with feeling like I'm being bad sometimes, when I'm not feeling well.
I appreciate your clarification.
But I'm in no fit state to post, I don't think.
Posted by Dinah on February 28, 2003, at 12:33:56
In reply to Re: Dinah, I hope you are OK... (nm) » Dinah, posted by Simcha on February 28, 2003, at 7:58:16
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 28, 2003, at 12:36:11
In reply to Re: Lou' reply to Dinah's post-2D » Lou Pilder, posted by Dinah on February 28, 2003, at 12:23:55
Dinah,
You wrote,[...I appreciate your clarification...]. and also, [..but... I don't think I am in a fit state to post...]
Well, I feel that [clarification] could be a good thing. I base this on the fact that you indicted that you had such and such of concerns, and then when I addressed those concerns of yours by clarification, you were glad and appreciative. So if anything else that I can clarify could alleviate any of your concerns, I would be delighted for you to request any clarification from me.
Best regards,
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 2, 2003, at 11:36:41
In reply to Simcha's request to Lou Pilder -- Examples for Lou, posted by Simcha on February 28, 2003, at 1:05:14
Simcha,
You wrote,[...I am providing examples {so that you might know what I am trying to ask}...].
I have looked at the examples that you have provided and do not know what {you are trying to ask} by listing those posts. Could you clarify what it is that you are {trying to ask}? If you could, then I could respond to what you are trying to ask, accordingly.
Best regards,
Lou
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.