![[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 RosieOGrady on September 28, 2004, at 21:13:08
Please determine if this person has broken the do not post to me rule.
Please determine if he is making false accusations against me. I feel put down and accused and hurt
I did not ask him to continue to talk to Larry in defiance of the rule. I said "you can talk to ME if you like. The thread had a number of participants not just Larry and Lou! I thought threads were open to all. I feel accused.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20040927/msgs/396562.html
Posted by Lou Pilder on September 28, 2004, at 22:17:40
In reply to Dr BOB PLEASEchek this post, posted by RosieOGrady on September 28, 2004, at 21:13:08
Dr. Hsiung,
In defense of myself, I do not think that I made any statement to anyone that they could not be part of the discussion. The poster could have discussed with others such as Larry or myself. I do not belive that for me not to want to post under those circumstsnces that Scott sees as if I did I would be breaking the spirit of the rule and the rule would be circumvented and Scott complimented me on the fact that I did not take the opportunity to post because Rosie said that I could post to her.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on September 28, 2004, at 22:24:17
In reply to ato Dr. Hsiung, posted by Lou Pilder on September 28, 2004, at 22:17:40
Posted by Lou Pilder on September 28, 2004, at 22:49:36
In reply to Dr BOB PLEASEchek this post, posted by RosieOGrady on September 28, 2004, at 21:13:08
Dr.Hsiung,
When the poster wrote, [..you can talk to me if you like...] after my 3erd post, that would mean that if I did post again, that:
A. It would be my 4th consecutive post
B. My first post [if we consider Rosie's post to constitute a break in the consecutivness.]
Scott has pointed out that he sees that I would be circumventing the rule if I was to reply to Rosie and he agreed with me in my declining Rosie's offer to talk to her, for he sees that as circumventing the rule and breaking the spirit of the rule.
I agree with Scott, and just because Rosie says that I could talk to her, I do not think that the invitation to talk to her allows me to do so without breaking the rule and Scott sees the same. If her post does allow me to talk to her, then it also means that I could talk to Larry or anyone else because the 3 consecutive posts would start over if this is allowed. I do not think that this should be allowed and niether does Scott. I think that for Rosie to have a valid post to allow me to start over , her post would have to be something contributing to the discussion, not just an invitation to talk to her. She also could have started a new thread about something and inviting me to be a discussant in it. She could have replied to another in the thread or made a general comment in the thread.
Lou Pilder
Posted by SLS on September 28, 2004, at 23:38:37
In reply to To Dr. Hsiung,, posted by Lou Pilder on September 28, 2004, at 22:49:36
> I think that for Rosie to have a valid post to allow me to start over , her post would have to be something contributing to the discussion, not just an invitation to talk to her.
That does follow from logic. I doubt this type of situation will arise too often to have to worry about, though. We'll have to see how this new rule will be fare in practice.
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on September 29, 2004, at 0:09:20
In reply to Re: To Dr. Hsiung,, posted by SLS on September 28, 2004, at 23:38:37
Dr. Hsiung,
In this thread Scott has posted in this discussion as a contributor. That is the type of post that I consider to be one to start the consecutive posts over.
I would like for you to understand my point to Rosie. I know that me and you have been adversaries in certian issues. But this time, I would like for us to be in accord.
When I wrote that it would be easy for me and Rosie or any one else to have some type of affiliate to circumvent the rule, I meant that posters could have some sort of system to be affiliated with each other some way in order to post to start any consecutive posts over, thearby circumventing the rule. An affiliat, or in this case, some type of affiliate, means that two people get together in some way. They are affiliated with each other. I did not want it to look like me and Rosie were in affiliation for the purpose of circumventing the rule. It could look like that and I belive that Scott sees that also. One could email the other to do it.
I am sorry thast Rosie took this differently than I had intended and wish you all that you find in this forum the support that you are looking for. As for me, I feel that if rules are made that restrict me from posting, then I can not be the contributor that I want to be.
Best wishes,
Lou Pilder
Posted by SLS on September 29, 2004, at 0:35:24
In reply to Re: To Dr. Hsiung,, posted by Lou Pilder on September 29, 2004, at 0:09:20
Dear Lou,
> As for me, I feel that if rules are made that restrict me from posting, then I can not be the contributor that I want to be.
I would be very sad if you left.
- Scott
Posted by Dr. Bob on September 29, 2004, at 4:36:20
In reply to Dr BOB PLEASEchek this post, posted by RosieOGrady on September 28, 2004, at 21:13:08
> Please determine if this person has broken the do not post to me rule.
He did, but he apologized, too:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20040927/msgs/396588.html
> > Just saying that I can talk to you would be only breaking the consecutivness and I do not want it to appear that you and I could be doing that to overide the rule.
>
> Please determine if he is making false accusations against me.That you tried to circumvent the rule? I thought he was just concerned about appearances...
Bob
Posted by RosieOGrady on September 29, 2004, at 8:55:06
In reply to Re: chek this post, posted by Dr. Bob on September 29, 2004, at 4:36:20
> > Please determine if this person has broken the do not post to me rule.
>
> He did, but he apologized, too:
>
>
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.