![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 50. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by so on June 11, 2005, at 19:14:34
In a recent post you stated that, regarding your adminstrative sanctions, [if it's been a while, I don't necessarily block the poster the next time...]
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050517/msgs/500675.html
I notice that in one recent circumstance, you twice addressed a member within 20 days telling them to "Please be Civil." It seems to me it is very rare that you post such a request to a member within three weeks without imposing sanctions.
Is 20 days the period of time to which you referred when you wrote [if it's been a while]?
Is [a while] an equal period of time for all members, or do some "Very Important Posters" earn privilages that lets them enjoy [a sort of probationary system] not accessible to others?
It seems nowhere in the FAQ do you detail your system of escalating sanctions, or this newly disclosed [sort of probationary system]. Is it likely that you will soon publish details of your sanction policies so new, infrequent or just curious members can learn more about them without posting questions to this administrative board?
Posted by Sabina on June 12, 2005, at 8:30:06
In reply to So's request for Robert Hsiung -- prbtnry.prd, posted by so on June 11, 2005, at 19:14:34
Yeah, Dr. Bob, why don't you publish your plenary civility spreadsheet for us, so that we might gain a deeper understanding of this technical term "awhile". <snort>
Don't get me staahhted.
Posted by crushedout on June 12, 2005, at 9:40:03
In reply to Re: So's request for Robert Hsiung -- prbtnry.prd, posted by Sabina on June 12, 2005, at 8:30:06
Posted by so on June 12, 2005, at 14:52:31
In reply to Re: So's request for Robert Hsiung -- prbtnry.prd, posted by Sabina on June 12, 2005, at 8:30:06
> <snort>
Can you expand on what you mean by "<snort>"? I am unfamiliar with the term as it seems to be used here. I have most often seen that term used in reference to self-titration of certain drugs. I also see or hear it used as a negative reference to police officers, to large people and to wealthy people, but none of those meanings seem to fit here. My lag in appreciating the meaning in this context might derive from the fact that, since learning that the word can sometimes be used that way, I have tried to exclude from my vocabulary such negative usages. I've stricken the usages cited above from my vocabulary primarily because it betrays to some people an inability or unwillingness on my part to articulate the basis for an implicit negative connotation.Is the term intended in this context to imply humor? If so, does the implicit humor rely on satirical wit to expose a perceived flaw in some other statement? I am unfamiliar with that type of wit in this context and I don't normally parse messages here for such usage because I understand certain types of humor to be discouraged at this forum. Could you, if that is the purpose of the statement, please tell me what perceived flaw might be the object of the wit?
If I am to correctly parse the written utterance as wit, could you offer me some advice on how, within the guidelines of this forum, to use sharp wit to expose perceived flaws in another statement? If my effort to understand the term is still way off target, could you help point me in the right direction?
Posted by Phillipa on June 12, 2005, at 18:49:31
In reply to Re: So's request for Robert Hsiung -- prbtnry.prd » Sabina, posted by so on June 12, 2005, at 14:52:31
New posting style? Fondly, Phillipa
Posted by Minnie-Haha on June 12, 2005, at 21:17:25
In reply to Re: So's request for Robert Hsiung -- prbtnry.prd » Sabina, posted by so on June 12, 2005, at 14:52:31
> > <snort>
>
> Can you expand on what you mean by "<snort>"?I have to admit. I've sometimes seen this in posts here on the Admin board, and I've wondered what's being snorted at. Is it a verbal wink and a nudge? What's it directed at? Whom or what does it support? I think I know (sometimes), but it's not always real clear.
Posted by crushedout on June 12, 2005, at 21:22:51
In reply to Re: So's request for Robert Hsiung -- prbtnry.prd » so, posted by Minnie-Haha on June 12, 2005, at 21:17:25
i think it usually signifies laughing in a sort of juvenile way, but that's just my sense.
Posted by Gabbi-x-2 on June 13, 2005, at 3:59:09
In reply to Re: So's request for Robert Hsiung -- prbtnry.prd » Minnie-Haha, posted by crushedout on June 12, 2005, at 21:22:51
>
> i think it usually signifies laughing in a sort of juvenile way, but that's just my sense.Well GG's is a laugh... I know that, as for Sabina's, I don't want to speak for her, but I do know her opinion of the "rules" here (part of why she's not here any more :( well enough to suspect that was a little jab at Dr. bob. Correct me if I'm wrong please Sabina!
Posted by Minnie-Haha on June 13, 2005, at 9:18:03
In reply to Re: So's request for Robert Hsiung -- prbtnry.prd » Minnie-Haha, posted by crushedout on June 12, 2005, at 21:22:51
> i think it usually signifies laughing in a sort of juvenile way, but that's just my sense.
Yes. It was kind of a rhetorical question, and maybe yours was a rhetorical answer! But I was trying to make a point. I think its use on any thread where there's been some contention is risky, because it's hard to tell who or what the snort is directed at or in answer to. There can be a lot of hidden meaning, real or perceived, in such a <snort>. I don't think it's a problem so much when the thread has been light from the start -- say over in social -- and I'm not saying I was offended by this snort. I just took advantage of an opportunity to point out that sometimes I think the snorts here are ill-advised.
Posted by so on June 13, 2005, at 9:46:05
In reply to Re: So's request for Robert Hsiung -- prbtnry.prd » crushedout, posted by Minnie-Haha on June 13, 2005, at 9:18:03
> > i think it usually signifies laughing in a sort of juvenile way, but that's just my sense.
>
> Yes. It was kind of a rhetorical question, and maybe yours was a rhetorical answer! But I was trying to make a point. I think its use on any thread where there's been some contention is risky, because it's hard to tell who or what the snort is directed at or in answer to. There can be a lot of hidden meaning, real or perceived, in such a <snort>. I don't think it's a problem so much when the thread has been light from the start -- say over in social -- and I'm not saying I was offended by this snort. I just took advantage of an opportunity to point out that sometimes I think the snorts here are ill-advised.
>But are they sarcasm? Is sarcasm ever permissible on these boards as permissions are described in the terms of service?
I genuinely don't know which meaning was intended by the colloquial expression, and generally appreciate efforts to support my causes, which the writing could be construed to be for the limited meaning it conveys (though I contemplated that it might be intended otherwise). But in this case, my "cause" is to understand the extent to which terms of service are consistently applied and this expression presents an example of uncertainty over whether those terms are consistently applied on a routine basis.
Posted by Minnie-Haha on June 13, 2005, at 9:53:32
In reply to Re: So's request for Robert Hsiung -- prbtnry.prd » crushedout, posted by Minnie-Haha on June 13, 2005, at 9:18:03
I'd also like to add that I think snorts (not this one, but generally) can be an example of what some might see as uneven administration here. As nonverbal communication, they can carry a lot of meaning (real or perceived), but they usually pass with no comment, or at best a "Let's keep it administrative here."
I also think some people make offensive remarks to others (I have no-one in particular in mind, I'm just sharing what I've noticed in general) here, followed immediately by an apology post, once again with no administrative comment. If this happened once in a blue moon, I wouldn't bring it up, but some do it more often than others, which almost seems like a way to get a dig in without getting a PBC or block.
Just making some observations...
Posted by Minnie-Haha on June 13, 2005, at 9:56:29
In reply to Re: So's reply to Minnie, posted by so on June 13, 2005, at 9:46:05
> > ... and I'm not saying I was offended by this snort. I just took advantage of an opportunity to point out that sometimes I think the snorts here are ill-advised.
>
> But are they sarcasm?Since it's completely nonverbal, it's hard to know.
Posted by Sabina on June 13, 2005, at 14:18:49
In reply to So's request for Robert Hsiung -- prbtnry.prd, posted by so on June 11, 2005, at 19:14:34
Wowza. What an amount of speculation over one small word, written simply to denote that I was laughing when I wrote my post, while so's original post has gone entirely by the wayside. I sincerely hope that Dr. Bob does reply with a sufficient answer. I wasn't going to reply to this thread again, but I want to make certain that my motives aren't called into question - either directly or indirectly. Not many people here know me now, so I don't wish to be misunderstood. Sorry I didn't get back to possibly head this off sooner.
Before I disappear again for an interminable span, allow me to *clarify* for anyone who feels that I may have misused the Admin board, that I have not "made digs" at anyone or cast aspersions on any other possible "negative" usages of the word *snort*. Sorry, but I don't see why I can't laugh while making a humorous, yet valid, point on an Admin thread. I simply found amusing, as I would think any long time poster here would do, the concept that PBC's and blocks will *ever* be equitably distributed: e.g. Zen, for openers. It gave me more than a chuckle...the kind where you're breathing doesn't go quite right and you kind of...snort. That's *all*. The gist of my post - the entire post - was my way of saying to so, Dr. Bob, and whomever: Yeah, we've *all* been down this road a few times before. I'm not the only one who feels that his PBC and blocking practices are beyond the pale of subjectivity.
Most recent anomaly? Pax comes back from a *year* long block only to get blocked for another year with no PBC or Please Rephrase whatsoever. All this, while CutieMcSweetie (made up name and scenario) receives PBC after PBC with no block? Mind you, I don't want *anyone* blocked who will take the opportunity to rephrase and/or apologize. I honestly didn't think my post was obtuse *or* offensive, and didn't expect any commentary or acknowledgment whatsoever.
If anything, I made the same point that's been made time and time again; only this time I was laughing about the subject matter instead of letting it get to me. Guess what? I think that's a step in the right direction, considering that last year I was all in a strop about it. I was fairly angry at Dr. Bob over a particular situation. Now I've accepted that Dr. Bob is making the only decisions he knows how to make. Am I required to understand or agree with his reasoning? No. Can I say so? Because he graciously provides this forum, then yes. Am I allowed to say I'm laughing when I write my comment? We'll see. ;-)
Meanwhile, I'm off to go swimming. Take care, everyone.
P.S. Hi Gabbi!
Posted by Minnie-Haha on June 13, 2005, at 14:46:50
In reply to Re: snort, posted by Sabina on June 13, 2005, at 14:18:49
And I really wasn't talking about your snort in particular. I've just noticed the usage in general is a little shady sometimes.
Posted by Gabbi-x-2 on June 13, 2005, at 15:07:30
In reply to Re: So's request for Robert Hsiung -- prbtnry.prd » Sabina, posted by so on June 12, 2005, at 14:52:31
I didn't think that was directed at you. Sabina's not petty like that.
Posted by Gabbi-x-2 on June 13, 2005, at 15:13:50
In reply to Re: So's request for Robert Hsiung -- prbtnry.prd » so, posted by Gabbi-x-2 on June 13, 2005, at 15:07:30
> I didn't think that was directed at you. Sabina's not petty like that.
I wasn't insinuating that anyone thought she was being that way, it's what I would have thought though, if it had been directed at a posters questions.
Posted by Gabbi-x-2 on June 13, 2005, at 15:15:36
In reply to Re: snort, posted by Sabina on June 13, 2005, at 14:18:49
> Wowza. What an amount of speculation over one small word.
Such a woman of mystery that a mere snort from her is pondered at length :)
HI Bina
Have a good swim!
Posted by Gabbi-x-2 on June 13, 2005, at 15:19:26
In reply to Re: Thanks for the explanation... » Sabina, posted by Minnie-Haha on June 13, 2005, at 14:46:50
> And I really wasn't talking about your snort in particular. I've just noticed the usage in general is a little shady sometimes.
Yeah, I think that's true of any of the emoticons, or little expressions, that's why I'm always screaming "My smilies are always sincere"
I've often seen them placed after comments that seemed barbed to me, and wondered if they were sarcastic.>
>
Posted by Gabbi-x-2 on June 13, 2005, at 20:42:31
In reply to Re: snort, posted by Sabina on June 13, 2005, at 14:18:49
I really like that subject heading and want to keep it going..
Posted by Dr. Bob on June 14, 2005, at 1:22:01
In reply to Re: snort, posted by Sabina on June 13, 2005, at 14:18:49
> It seems nowhere in the FAQ do you detail your system of escalating sanctions
>
> so> Yeah, Dr. Bob, why don't you publish your plenary civility spreadsheet for us
I do think a spreadsheet would be nice. Even if we didn't all agree on it 100%. Would someone like to propose one?
> I made the same point that's been made time and time again; only this time I was laughing about the subject matter instead of letting it get to me. Guess what? I think that's a step in the right direction, considering that last year I was all in a strop about it.
>
> SabinaI'm biased, of course, but good work! Could you comment on what enabled you to take that step?
Bob
Posted by so on June 14, 2005, at 11:34:50
In reply to Re: step in the right direction, posted by Dr. Bob on June 14, 2005, at 1:22:01
> I do think a spreadsheet would be nice. Even if we didn't all agree on it 100%. Would someone like to propose one?
I have one, but it is in the developmental stages. When I release it, it will be GNU licensed so you will be free to download it. As I have developed it as a research tool, it reflects decisions about phrases common to this site, so if you use it, it will be well tuned to this site. I've found little difficulty in classifying isolated phrases, but I have encountered some problems characterizing reasons similar statements are treated one way one time and another way other times. I'm working on secondary algorithms that could measure the extent to which such decisions might be based on member standing or participation, but I have yet found no basis for a standard I can describe in terms that can be compiled into machine language.
Posted by Dr. Bob on June 15, 2005, at 0:39:59
In reply to Re: step in the right direction, posted by so on June 14, 2005, at 11:34:50
> I have yet found no basis for a standard I can describe in terms that can be compiled into machine language.
That's the sticky wicket...
Bob
Posted by gardenergirl on June 15, 2005, at 2:50:12
In reply to Re: step in the right direction, posted by Dr. Bob on June 15, 2005, at 0:39:59
Since Gabbi again has me pegged (thanks, dear), and she is correct, for the record: I do snort when I laugh. Just ask All Done. She got to see and hear it live and in person.
And I tend to laugh a lot. I've got mood reactivity. And holes in my brain to GG filter, so when I find something funny, I usually laugh and/or snort. Sometimes I chuckle, giggle, or guffaw. Tee hee, hee hee, ha ha, etc. are also fair game when I am laughing. I think laughing is one of my better habits.
Oh, and I cry when I laugh. Profusely. Anyone know a good waterproof mascara?
gg
Posted by Gabbi-x-2 on June 15, 2005, at 3:27:27
In reply to Snorting for the record...by GG, posted by gardenergirl on June 15, 2005, at 2:50:12
Sorry for speaking for you. I wouldn't have, but I knew you were away, and I didn't want Minnie's feelings to to be hurt for days.
I hope it's okay.
Posted by gardenergirl on June 15, 2005, at 4:13:35
In reply to Re: Snorting for the record...by GG » gardenergirl, posted by Gabbi-x-2 on June 15, 2005, at 3:27:27
I appreciated it! And you were right both times. Thanks for doing that. :)
But don't you think my subject line is kinda funny? That was half the fun of my post.
gg
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.