![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 13 to 37 of 136. Go back in thread:
Posted by KaraS on January 23, 2005, at 1:13:55
In reply to POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:39:56
> Should the whole word be XXXXX'd out?
>
> Just in this context because to the casual reader it may appear that someone was calling the poster whose name appears after that the antichrist. Even though that was not the intention of the person who posted the heading.
There is no justifiable reason for not XXXing it out. It will cost you nothing, Dr. Bob, and it would ease Angel Girls' pain immensely. I am at a total loss trying to understand why you have let this unnecessary situation go on for so long.
Posted by NikkiT2 on January 23, 2005, at 1:56:18
In reply to Re: POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by KaraS on January 23, 2005, at 1:13:55
I also think it should be xxxx'd out. This is about alot more than what is written in the bible.
Nikki
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 23, 2005, at 7:09:16
In reply to POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:39:56
> Should the whole word be XXXXX'd out?
>
> Just in this context because to the casual reader it may appear that someone was calling the poster whose name appears after that the antichrist. Even though that was not the intention of the person who posted the heading.Alexandra_k
In the poll here that you have innitiated, the question mark next to the word that you are asking Dr. Hsiung to delete or "X out" is not shown. I am requesting that you start a new poll with the question mark included. You have written,[...to the casual reader it may appear that someone was calling the poster...the antichrist...even though that was not the intention of the person posting the heading...].
I think that if the question mark was included, that your statement could take on a different perspective to the casual reader.
Lou
Posted by NikkiT2 on January 23, 2005, at 7:12:57
In reply to Lou's request for an inclusion-caslrdr » alexandra_k, posted by Lou Pilder on January 23, 2005, at 7:09:16
Lou, even WITH the question mark, it is still able to be seen as offensive. With the question mark I see it as you asking whether she could be the antichrist.
Can you simply accept that you have done wrong here, and maybe just move on, or even maybe help us to get Dr Bob to change the offensive word to xx's.
Nikki
Posted by Dinah on January 23, 2005, at 8:07:57
In reply to POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:39:56
Dr. Bob, if XXXX'ing the entire word in a subject line is not something easily done, would it be so bad to just delete those posts with that word in the subject line? Possibly repost them with another title so as not to lose the content? They might be out of order, but with proper explanation, the archives wouldn't suffer too much.
If XXXX'ing the word out isn't impossible, it would seem to be the kind and compassionate thing to do.
Posted by coral on January 23, 2005, at 8:10:52
In reply to POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:39:56
Posted by Larry Hoover on January 23, 2005, at 9:31:38
In reply to POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:39:56
Absolutely. XXXXX it out. Technical feasibility should not even be a criterion, Bob. If X'ing isn't an easy solution to impliment, then you have to do what is feasible to make that disappear.
Lar
Posted by NikkiT2 on January 23, 2005, at 9:43:50
In reply to Re: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist? YES!!!!!, posted by Larry Hoover on January 23, 2005, at 9:31:38
Dr Bob had the ability to add the [*], so he must have the ability to change the rest of it to x's
Nikki
Posted by Willow.H. on January 23, 2005, at 10:08:31
In reply to POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:39:56
yes, please xxxxx it.
Posted by alexandra_k on January 23, 2005, at 13:29:12
In reply to Lou's request for an inclusion-caslrdr » alexandra_k, posted by Lou Pilder on January 23, 2005, at 7:09:16
I agree with Nikki.
>Lou, even WITH the question mark, it is still able to be seen as offensive. With the question mark I see it as you asking whether she could be the antichrist.
And I would like to request that this thread be reserved for VOTING on the poll.
There is already a thread for 'Lou's Response to the Poll' and I would request that you post your concerns there.
You are most welcome to start another poll with a question mark if you would like.
I apologise for not including the question mark. I was trying to be careful, but in hindsight I was not careful enough.
Posted by sdjeff on January 23, 2005, at 17:52:09
In reply to Re: POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by Willow.H. on January 23, 2005, at 10:08:31
I am not a religious person, but due to the implications that word suggests even to me, I feel it should be x'd out.
Posted by Angel Girl on January 23, 2005, at 18:51:56
In reply to POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:39:56
I want to express my thanks and gratitude for the initiation of this poll and for the positive posts in reply to it on my behalf to have that word x'd out from beside my name.
You have all shown me great love and compassion for my feelings. I can't thank you enough.
AG
Posted by alexandra_k on January 23, 2005, at 20:13:04
In reply to Re: POLL: XXXXXing, posted by Angel Girl on January 23, 2005, at 18:51:56
I guess that means you are voting for it to be XXX'd out then :-)
Posted by Atticus on January 23, 2005, at 20:55:49
In reply to Re: POLL: XXXXXing » Angel Girl, posted by alexandra_k on January 23, 2005, at 20:13:04
Doc,
I cannot fathom why you have failed to respond to this poll in any way, shape, or form. It really does make me furious; it makes me feel upset, like you're just sitting back, watching this unfold like a tinhorn god, and f*cking with all of us through your lack of responsiveness and inaction just to see how far this will go. I feel like a dog or cat that's being mercilessly teased. Are we, in the end, just your lab animals after all -- despite all of your protestations to the contrary? I'm really beginning to believe so. Atticus
Posted by jujube on January 23, 2005, at 21:11:52
In reply to Dr. Bob: POLL on XXXXXing, posted by Atticus on January 23, 2005, at 20:55:49
I would think that, given the nature of this site and the reasons people frequent, and continue to frequent it, a subject line that has caused a poster such emotional distress would be taken care in such a manner so as to alleviate any emotional suffering on the part of that poster. That this situation has been allowed to fester and cause even more angst is beyond me. Removing the offending word is not only the civil and practical thing to do, but also the humane thing to do. Have the people not spoken?Please don't ignore people's pleas.
Posted by jujube on January 23, 2005, at 21:33:42
In reply to Re: Dr. Bob: POLL on XXXXXing » Atticus, posted by jujube on January 23, 2005, at 21:11:52
Posted by Angel Girl on January 23, 2005, at 22:31:50
In reply to Re: POLL: XXXXXing » Angel Girl, posted by alexandra_k on January 23, 2005, at 20:13:04
> I guess that means you are voting for it to be XXX'd out then :-)
HAHAHAHAHA!!!! That would definitely be YES YES YES!!! XXXXXX that dang word out PLEASE Dr. Bob. Can you not see that it is upsetting to more than myself? It is such a powerful word.
AG
Posted by alexandra_k on January 23, 2005, at 22:39:36
In reply to Dr. Bob: POLL on XXXXXing, posted by Atticus on January 23, 2005, at 20:55:49
Hmm. Maybe 'petition' would have been better than 'poll'.
Deep breaths Atticus, wait and see... wait and see...
Don't you dare get yourself blocked.
Posted by Angel Girl on January 23, 2005, at 22:40:04
In reply to Re: Dr. Bob: POLL on XXXXXing » Atticus, posted by jujube on January 23, 2005, at 21:11:52
I am overwhelmed by the support that has been shown to me in this poll. To see words of such passion and conviction helps me to feel like maybe people actually do like me, that I am a likable person afterall.
Dr. Bob, that word is extremely upsetting to me but I strongly believe that it is very upsetting to others here as well.
Please hear our pleas. Why is it so hard for you to show us the support that we are looking for? I can not understand even one reason why that word needs to remain in that subject line with my name. It has now archived but my feelings remain unchanged.
AG
Posted by verne on January 23, 2005, at 23:14:51
In reply to Re: Dr. Bob: POLL on XXXXXing, posted by Angel Girl on January 23, 2005, at 22:40:04
Lou apologized. The word was asterisked.
Being offended to the nth degree is offensive in itself.
verne
Posted by Angel Girl on January 23, 2005, at 23:19:00
In reply to Re: Dr. Bob: POLL on XXXXXing, posted by Angel Girl on January 23, 2005, at 22:40:04
I can no longer do this. I've taken several Xanax, but not enough to overdose, so don't worry. I feel like I am now having a nervous breakdown. I can't take anymore. I'm so sorry that I have let you all down. I appreciate all your loving support but I've had more than I can deal with. I'm without a T for 3 more weeks.
Please read:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050116/msgs/446547.html
I'm soooo sorry I've failed y'all.
AG
Posted by Kenny Koala on January 24, 2005, at 6:45:11
In reply to POLL: XXXXXing [*]ntichrist, posted by alexandra_k on January 22, 2005, at 17:39:56
Excuse my stupidity, but how is Antichrist a swear word?
Posted by nikkit2 on January 24, 2005, at 6:54:25
In reply to Excuse my stupidity,, posted by Kenny Koala on January 24, 2005, at 6:45:11
Its not a swear word per se, but it you have to agree, that using a subject like that looks like you are suggesting someone is the Anti Christ, especially for a Christian, is pretty offensive, no?
Nikki
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 24, 2005, at 6:58:58
In reply to Excuse my stupidity,, posted by Kenny Koala on January 24, 2005, at 6:45:11
> Excuse my stupidity, but how is Antichrist a swear word?
>Kenny,
Thank you for entering this discussion.
Lou
Posted by Kenny Koala on January 24, 2005, at 8:24:22
In reply to Lou's response to Kenny Koala's post-nwligt » Kenny Koala, posted by Lou Pilder on January 24, 2005, at 6:58:58
> > Excuse my stupidity, but how is Antichrist a swear word?
> >
>
> Kenny,
> Thank you for entering this discussion.
> Lou
>Thanks Lou! :)
There would be thousands of words that could be given the xxxxx treatment, why should this one be singled out for special treatment?
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.