![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 64. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 29, 2004, at 6:36:34
Dr. Hsiung,
I am requesting that you write a procedure that one could follow here to have a post addressed by someone outside of the forum when a request for you to address a post has gone unaddressed.
These posts in question could be of the nature that there is a statement that could have the potential ,IMO, to arrouse antisemitic feelings or to have the potential, IMO,to remind jews and others of the horrors of nazism, or to have the potential to be accusitive or defaming to a poster.
If you could give the email address of someone, let's say another psychiatrist in your office, that could act in an emergency to address a post that could have the potential to cause harm emotionally or psychologically to another poster when , let's say, 12 hours have passed without you addressing the post in question, could that be something that you could implement here? If so, I would appreciate that there could be moderation to posts of the nature in question and feel safer here knowing that a post could be adressed inyour absence.
Lou Pilder
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 29, 2004, at 7:38:48
In reply to Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-honz, posted by Lou Pilder on November 29, 2004, at 6:36:34
Dr. Hsiung,
In the event that there is no one in your office, or any other person, that could address a post of the nature in question in case of your absence, could it be possible that a poster here could invoke a "halt" to the thread that has the post in question on let's say, for a 12 hour basis? I feel that that could be a temporary solution to stop the potential for any more posts of the same nature being added to the post in question.
Lou Pilder
Posted by Toph on November 29, 2004, at 10:18:02
In reply to Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-~1 » Lou Pilder, posted by Lou Pilder on November 29, 2004, at 7:38:48
Hi Lou,
If you are referring to my reference to the halocaust, I'm sorry if you find it offensive. I am reminded of the statements of a holocaust survivor I heard in nearby Skokie who said we must never allow the memory of this horrible time to fade. And, more importantly, she said, "it was the indifference and tacit consent of many otherwise caring people to the small individual injustices that led to the genocide that followed."
I can't seem to get Bob's ear about this small injustice that he has recently perpetrated on Susan. You seem adept at getting a prompt reply from him for your concerns. How do you do it?
-Toph
Posted by NikkiT2 on November 29, 2004, at 14:49:57
In reply to Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-honz, posted by Lou Pilder on November 29, 2004, at 6:36:34
I'm sorry you feel so much pain for what you went through during the holocaust. I guess my two Aunts are incredibly lucky for not carrying their pain with them anymore..
But there are many many other terrible things that have happened in the world, and I feel we should be able to discuss them. Take 9/11 as an example.. I lost friends in that, and also lost a building that was *incredibly* special to me, being the place where my husband proposed to me. If 9/11 were never mentioned again, it would be forgotten, which I think would be a much worse crime.
What about the IRA bomb that broke my lounge window I live so close to where it went off? Should no one here ever mention bombs or windows incase it triggers some pain in me?
Talking about the holocaust is not being antisemetic, or nasty in any way to someone of the Jewish faith.. Its something that must never EVER be forgotten so that it can never happen again.
Also, 12 hours seems a terrible short time frame for expecting Dr Bob to do something about it. Heck, I sleep for more than 12 hours every friday night!! I think 48 hours would be a much more reasonable request.. though only if the rest of us here can also get threads closed down if they cause us any upset.
Nikki
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 29, 2004, at 15:08:36
In reply to Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung » Lou Pilder, posted by Toph on November 29, 2004, at 10:18:02
Toph,
You wrote,[...he inexplicably blocked her...It seems so caprecious to me...In Auchwitz the guards used to execute people at random...to maintain...fear.Perhaps there's some of that going on here. Whenever things get ...unruly-exterminate someone-not because it is justified, but because you can...]. Then you wrote to me, [holocaust surviver who said...indifference...to the small ...injustices that led to the genocide...] and, [...this small injustice that he (Dr Hsiung) has...perpetrated on Susan...].
After reading both of your posts, I have some questions that if they are answered, could allow me to have a better understanding of your two posts . Could you examine the following and perhaps answer some of the questions that I have? If you could ,then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
A. Are you saying that Dr. Hsiung acted in a caprecious manner, such as what you think concerning Susan here, and this could lead to another nazi holocaust?
B. Are you saying that Dr. Hsiung singled out Susan randomly to create an atmosphere of fear here?
C. Are you saying that The block of Susan is equivalant to the extermination of a person?
D. Are you saying that Dr. Hsiung can do unjustified things to posters here?
Lou
Posted by Toph on November 29, 2004, at 15:33:51
In reply to Lou's reply to Toph-fer-extrm » Toph, posted by Lou Pilder on November 29, 2004, at 15:08:36
> Toph,
> A. Are you saying that Dr. Hsiung acted in a caprecious manner, such as what you think concerning Susan here, and this could lead to another nazi holocaust?
> B. Are you saying that Dr. Hsiung singled out Susan randomly to create an atmosphere of fear here?
> C. Are you saying that The block of Susan is equivalant to the extermination of a person?
> D. Are you saying that Dr. Hsiung can do unjustified things to posters here?
> Lou
>
Hello Lou,A. Hyperbole is a form of metaphor that I used to demonstrate what can happen when a harm is left unremedied. The Nazis exaggerated the notion to German citizens that Jews were sub-human among other atrocious stereotypes to desensitize the populice to the final solution - just to show how hyperbolic exaggerations can be effective.
B. I don't know how Bob thinks. That's what bothered me so, he didn't seem to be applying a consistent standard here.
C. It could have a similar effect (again, metaphorically speaking), yes indeed.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20041122/msgs/421415.htmlD. Absolutely, just like you or I could.
Thanks for your interest in my posts, Lou.
-Toph
Posted by Noa on November 29, 2004, at 19:38:17
In reply to Toph-fer-extrm's reply to » Lou Pilder, posted by Toph on November 29, 2004, at 15:33:51
I'd like to weigh in on this one. I didn't see the original post you wrote, but if it is accurately quoted in this thread ("...In Auchwitz the guards used to execute people at random...to maintain...fear.Perhaps there's some of that going on here. Whenever things get ...unruly-exterminate someone-not because it is justified, but because you can..."), I think there is an issue with it and I'd like to explain why I see it this way and why this mention of the Holocaust is not in the same category as the duty to remember that was conveyed by the Survivor you mentioned.
The reason I believe this is that when I read your post, the comparison to the horror of Auchwitz comes across to me as one that is way out of proportion to the question of whether Dr. Bob was fair in blocking someone from this board, and therefore comes across to me as not acknowledging the magnitude of the Holocaust. To me, the Holocaust (which hits home in a personal way for me, but I would say that other major tragedies-- including, all too unfortunately as we know, other genocides that have occured and are still occuring--would also fall into this category) is so serious that invoking it as an analogy need be reserved for rare and serious occasions, lest the analogy come across as trivializing it or dismissing the magnitude of the tragedy. Which is to say that I agree with the Survivor you mentioned who said we should never forget, but I also feel strongly that something like this needs to be treated with a great deal of respect.
I don't think it was your intent to trivialize what happened at Auchwitz or in other settings during the Holocaust, but I hope that I have explained well why the effect of the use of the analogy COULD come across that way.
I also want to say that I really do not believe Dr. Bob's decision on blocking deserves to be compared to the unimaginable terror perpetrated by guards at Auchwitz, or that his intentions deserve to be seen in such an evil light. You have a right to express your opinion about Dr. Bob's decision and even what you think his intentions might be (although when assuming intentions, we all get into very tricky territory, especially using this form of communication), but I think it would come across better to me (and others?) if you would express these without invoking such powerful and painful images.
This is all, of course, JMO, but I hope that I have adequately explained why I do think the reference to Auchwitz might be problematic in this instance.
Noa
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 7:06:40
In reply to Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-honz, posted by Lou Pilder on November 29, 2004, at 6:36:34
> Dr. Hsiung,
> I am requesting that you write a procedure that one could follow here to have a post addressed by someone outside of the forum when a request for you to address a post has gone unaddressed.
> These posts in question could be of the nature that there is a statement that could have the potential ,IMO, to arrouse antisemitic feelings or to have the potential, IMO,to remind jews and others of the horrors of nazism, or to have the potential to be accusitive or defaming to a poster.
> If you could give the email address of someone, let's say another psychiatrist in your office, that could act in an emergency to address a post that could have the potential to cause harm emotionally or psychologically to another poster when , let's say, 12 hours have passed without you addressing the post in question, could that be something that you could implement here? If so, I would appreciate that there could be moderation to posts of the nature in question and feel safer here knowing that a post could be adressed inyour absence.
> Lou PilderDR, Hsiung,
In relation to my request to you to establish a procedure that one could put a halt on a thread when you are not available , I think that if this could be done that those posters that wanted to not have a halt on the thread could start a new thread and continue with what ever was the topic. The original thread then could be reopened when you return to the monotoring of the board.
It could work something like this:
A poster does not want a thread to continue and posts something like:{...Please do not continue responding to this thread}.
At that point, if you approve of this, no one is to post on that thread, but they can start a new thread. When you return to monotoring the board, you either lift the halt or affirm it. If you lift the halt, then there could be a discussion as to the merits of whatever the thread and its reason to have the halt
I feel that this could be a supportive procedure to use if:
A. The poster emails or posts on the administrative board a request for you to intercede in a post and , let's say 12 hours lapses and you do not respond.
B. There is {reasonable cause} to invoke the halt
C. No other poster has responded to show that what is posted could be considered to be unacceptable in relation to the guidlines of the forum.
Lou Pilder
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 7:52:02
In reply to Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung for a halting procedur » Lou Pilder, posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 7:06:40
Dr Hsiung,
In relation to one needing {reasonable cause} to invoke a halt to a thread, an example could be what Noa posted in this thread .
Noa posted one of the greatest posts,IMO, that I have ever seen on an internet mental-health forum. I will be circulating noa's post widely among my collegues so that if they ever need to respond in a like manner, they have noa's post as an example. I will be having it put in a newsletter that goes all over the world and will be presenting it to the Anti-defamation league to be published. I will ask noa's permission to do so first.
Lou Pilder
Posted by Toph on November 30, 2004, at 8:49:51
In reply to Re: Toph-fer-extrm's reply to » Toph, posted by Noa on November 29, 2004, at 19:38:17
Noa,
If both you and Lou took issue with my using the Holocaust as an analogy it is enough for me to regret that I used it. That you took the time to write such a thoughtful opinion indicates how serious an indescretion this was on my part. I confess that Lou's (in my experience) indiscriminate objections to all things anti-semetic may have contributed to my discounting his objection to this post. I apologize to you both and anyone else I may have offended. Growing up in a large family I learned that making a lot of noise gets you attention, even being told to shut up is sometimes better than no attention at all. I'll try to be more careful next time.
-Toph
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 9:16:08
In reply to Re: Toph-fer-extrm's reply to, posted by Toph on November 30, 2004, at 8:49:51
Toph,
You wrote,[...Lou's...indiscriminate objections to all things anti-semitic may have contributed to my discounting his objection to this post...].
Could you clarify what you mean by,{indiscriminate objections to all things anti-semitic},perhaps by citing an example? If you could, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
Lou
Posted by Toph on November 30, 2004, at 9:27:09
In reply to Lou's response to Toph's post-iotatas » Toph, posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 9:16:08
Lou,
How about this thread? I used the Holocaust as an anlogy that I have now admitted was probably insensitive and for this I have apologized. But you, Lou accused me and countless others of being anti-semetic which offends me. Unless, perhaps, when you ask Bob to determine for you whether someting is anti-semetic you are simply making noise like I did to get his attention.
-Toph
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 9:49:10
In reply to post-iotatas » Lou Pilder, posted by Toph on November 30, 2004, at 9:27:09
Toph,
You wrote,[How about this thread?...you accused me and countless others of being anti-semitic...], and,[...you are simply making noise...]
I do not believe that I have accused anyone in this thread. Could you list any of posters names that you referr to as {countless others}? If you could, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
Thank you for your apology to what you posted about the Holocaust by the Nazis in Auchwitz.
Lou
Posted by Toph on November 30, 2004, at 10:15:56
In reply to Lou's response to Toph-yamobas » Toph, posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 9:49:10
Your welcome, Lou.
-Toph
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 10:46:05
In reply to post-iotatas » Lou Pilder, posted by Toph on November 30, 2004, at 9:27:09
Toph,
You wrote,[Unless...you ask Bob to determine...whether something is antisemitic...you are simply making noise...to get his (Dr. Hsiung's) attention...].
When I look at this , as a whole, there is a procedure for posters to request a determination as to acceptability. But there is a restraint to prohibit more than 3 of these requests involving the same poster to be posted on the administrative board. That leaves a request via email to Dr. Hsiung for a determination and I am suggesting another procedure to be implemented so that if Dr. Hsiung is unavailable to respond to email requests that a poster could halt the thread.
This thread was initiated by my request to Dr. Hsiung to establish a procedure for posters to halt a thread when Dr. Hsiung does not address the post in question and there has been an attempt by either email or posting on the admnistrative board to address the post in question.
There could be posts that could have an adverse effect on some posters in relation to psychological or emotional or psychiatric issues and being that this is a mental health forum chaired by a psychiatrist, it is my opinion that a procedure for posters to halt a thread that has a post that IMO has the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings or to have the potential IMO to remind jewish people and others of the horrors of nazisim , or have IMO the potential to be defaming or some other good cause, could be a supportive measure here. If there was a poster wanting a halt to a thread, the others in the thread could start another thread. I feel that my suggestion here could have the potential to be a good suggestion.
I do not feel that I am [...simply making noise...to get (Dr. Hsiung's) attention...] because I think that my suggestion has merit here and could be a good contribution to the managment of this site.
As far as asking Dr. Hsiung to determine if something is antisemitic, I do not believe that I have asked him to determine if something is anti-semitic, but to determine if something {has the potential.IMO. to arrouse antisemitic feelings} or has the potential IMO to remind a jewish person of the horrors of nazisism or to have the potential to be, IMO, defaming to another poster and such . A poster could post something that has the potential IMO to arrouse antisemitic feelings and that does not mean that the poster is antisemitic and I do not belive that I posted that a poster was antisemitic.
Noa's post brought this out when he/she wote about,{powerfull and painfull images} in your post. These powerfulll and painfull images have the potential to remind jewish people and others of the horrors of nazisim and it is my deep conviction that statements of that nature are not supportive on a mental health forum in a diverse population as we have here.
Lou
Posted by Toph on November 30, 2004, at 10:53:26
In reply to Lou's reply to Toph-smntgdha » Toph, posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 10:46:05
Lou,
I'm not sure I understand or agree with many of the things that you say, but I wish to God that I had more of your passion.
-Toph
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 11:00:57
In reply to smntgdha's reply to » Lou Pilder, posted by Toph on November 30, 2004, at 10:53:26
Toph,
You wrote,[....I am not sure...or agree with...things you say...].
Could you list any of these things that you are not sure that you agree with me about? If you could, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
Lou
Posted by Toph on November 30, 2004, at 11:31:38
In reply to Lou's reply to Toph-iansoa » Toph, posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 11:00:57
> Could you list any of these things that you are not sure that you agree with me about?I could, but I prefer to get back to work. Have a nice day, Lou.
-Toph
Posted by NikkiT2 on November 30, 2004, at 12:47:48
In reply to Re: Toph-fer-extrm's reply to » Toph, posted by Noa on November 29, 2004, at 19:38:17
Noa,
I should have expanded further to say that I did feel that linking Dr Bobs actions and those of the Haulocaust was wrong.. But I don't believe that threads should be locked down after twleve hours only for one subject. There are many subjects out there that hurt alot of us a great deal, and my point was bascially whether we allow locking down of threads for *all* subjects that cause hurt, as we can't really allow that for only one subject - how ever awful it was.
Does that make more sense?
Nikki
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 13:56:25
In reply to Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung for a halting procedur » Lou Pilder, posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 7:06:40
Dr. Hsiung,
I have considered my first draft of my proposed halting procedure.
As I have had time to look at my proposal, there could be more definition to the original proposal.
At first, I thought that waiting some time, let's say 12 hours, for you to address the post in question would be needed. I now consider any time period to not be relevant, because if there is a halt,it is because one does not want other posts of a similar nature to continue and one in the thread could start a new thread.
Also, I suggested that {reasonable cause} be stated. I think that there could be a list of these causes formulated by you in advance which could give more definition to the proposal.
Lou Pilder
Posted by pegasus on November 30, 2004, at 15:23:29
In reply to Lou's summery toDr.Hsiung-procedure to halt thread, posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 13:56:25
Lou,
I don't follow why it would be better to stop the discussion in one thread, but allow it to continue in a new thread. Wouldn't the potentially problematic content still be on the forum? What's the advantage of jumping it into the second thread? I'm just not getting the point, I think.
pegasus
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 15:52:44
In reply to Re: Lou's summery toDr.Hsiung-procedure to halt th » Lou Pilder, posted by pegasus on November 30, 2004, at 15:23:29
pegasus,
That is a good observation. But could there be some introspection by the posters in the thread, after the halt is posted, that could, perhaps, alter the new posts in the new thread?
Lou
Posted by AuntieMel on November 30, 2004, at 16:58:37
In reply to Lou's reply to pegasus- » pegasus, posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 15:52:44
before one of us gets in trouble.
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 17:08:27
In reply to Let's put a halt to this thread, posted by AuntieMel on November 30, 2004, at 16:58:37
One aspect of this thread is thatI have proposed to Dr. Hsiung that he write a list of just causes for one to post a halt to a thread. So after one posts a halt, the other posters could examine the list of just causes for a halt to be posted and if they wanted to start a new thread they could post accordingly. If this thread had a halt posted to it, what could be a just cause for the post of the halt?
Lou
Posted by AuntieMel on November 30, 2004, at 17:30:52
In reply to Lou's response to an aspect of this thread-jstcaus, posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 17:08:27
It's simple. Like I said, so one of us doesn't get in trouble. It's an emotional topic for me too. I have visited Auschwitz twice and I still can't find words to describe the experience.
So - a breather seems to be in order.
Go forward in 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.