![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 68. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Nickengland on January 8, 2006, at 12:16:45
I've noticed that since the block - which was done to promote a civil atmosphere....the atmosphere from what I'm reading has actually become more 'uncivil' than it was previously before the block was issued? - Or in otherwords a very different level of 'civilness'
This is just my opinon, and of course I respect the fact that others may think the atmosphere is now more 'civil'
Its really weird lol its like one minute the board was operating on some level of civilness - and now its operating completely differently?
Has the block been for the good of the group?
I guess what i'm getting at is, is who felt put down by Larry post, compared with the amount of people who feel put down since he's block..
I can clearly see whats going on, but making sense of it, well i'm just beginning to I think.
Posted by Phillipa on January 8, 2006, at 12:57:21
In reply to Larry's Block and a civil atmosphere, posted by Nickengland on January 8, 2006, at 12:16:45
I agree. It has become more uncivil here lately. Fondly, Phillipa
Posted by zeugma on January 8, 2006, at 13:08:23
In reply to Larry's Block and a civil atmosphere, posted by Nickengland on January 8, 2006, at 12:16:45
what you are seeing, Nick, is what happens when civility is privileged over truth.
the objection will be raised that truth is subject to interpretation, it is a rationalization for judgemental behavior, etc.
to this i would say that words are empty if no truth is in them.
and that we are all wasting our time.
-z
Posted by Nickengland on January 8, 2006, at 13:14:22
In reply to Re: Larry's Block and a civil atmosphere » Nickengland, posted by zeugma on January 8, 2006, at 13:08:23
Hello zeugma,
There is truth in your message :-)
Kind regards
Nick
Posted by zeugma on January 8, 2006, at 13:43:30
In reply to Re: Larry's Block and a civil atmosphere » zeugma, posted by Nickengland on January 8, 2006, at 13:14:22
Posted by Jakeman on January 8, 2006, at 14:01:09
In reply to Larry's Block and a civil atmosphere, posted by Nickengland on January 8, 2006, at 12:16:45
> I've noticed that since the block - which was done to promote a civil atmosphere....the atmosphere from what I'm reading has actually become more 'uncivil' than it was previously before the block was issued? - Or in otherwords a very different level of 'civilness'
>Good point. I wonder how many others will get blocked because of the "uncivil" atmosphere that ensued from the first block. It's all quite ridiculous in my opinion.
warm regards ~Jake
Posted by alexandra_k on January 8, 2006, at 14:10:46
In reply to Re: Larry's Block and a civil atmosphere » Nickengland, posted by Jakeman on January 8, 2006, at 14:01:09
it happens as something of a repeating pattern methinks.
the group starts to feel frustrated with a poster...
one person says something uncivil to them
(and then that can lead to a torrent of that)
dr-bob steps in with a blocking...
the group turns on dr-bob
over and over
interesting...
my guess is he is willing to put up with people being mad at him
so long as people leave one another alone
so long as it stops people expressing frustration for larry and / or deneb
a bullet..
so to speak
Posted by zeugma on January 8, 2006, at 14:32:40
In reply to Re: Larry's Block and a civil atmosphere, posted by alexandra_k on January 8, 2006, at 14:10:46
the group starts to feel frustrated with a poster...
one person says something uncivil to them
(and then that can lead to a torrent of that)
dr-bob steps in with a blocking...
the group turns on dr-bob
over and over
interesting...>>
is that what you honestly see happening here? People turning on Dr.Bob because he's done something in their eyes *insert civil word here*, and wanting to make him the scapegoat? or people upset for a good reason? because their sense of decency is offended (and i am not using decency in which it is legal for a man to go topless in my state but a woman cannot, that is what many think of when they think of 'decent', but that's not what i mean)?
maybe the civility rules do not accomplish what they are intended to do.
but i don't see people turning on Dr.Bob. i see people questioning the validity of the enterprise itself, the therapeutic principles behind it.
and i also disagree with your definition of uncivil. when i read the thread through in which larry made his 'uncivil' remarks, i commented that reading it through caused symapthetic nervous activation. stomach tightness. heart racing. perhaps larry felt those very same things as he wrote what he wrote? and for the same reason? because things were being said that provoke such reactions? and note that this is a physical reaction and not a judgement. there is a difference. a big difference.
this is why Thorazine came in so handy for pdocs the world over. those autonomic reactions are an obstacle to civil behavior. perhaps when prescribed in the massive dosages favored by American psychiatrists until fairly recently, these drugs ceased to be 'neuroleptics', 'antipsychotics', or whatever other terms were used to describe them perhaps in such massive dosages they were- 'civility-inducers'?
Oh yes, they were major tranquillizers.
-z
Posted by alexandra_k on January 8, 2006, at 14:40:06
In reply to Re: Larry's Block and a civil atmosphere » alexandra_k, posted by zeugma on January 8, 2006, at 14:32:40
> is that what you honestly see happening here?
yep
> wanting to make him the scapegoat?
i'm not meaning to comment on what people intend or what people consciously think they are doing. i'm just commenting on a process that does seem to happen over and over...
there is some hostility towards a poster...
that is expressed...
that person is blocked (to curb the hostility to that poster)
the hostility becomes directed at dr-bob.that makes no mention of what people think they are doing or what people think they are trying to do or whether people have legitimate points or not...
it is just descriptive about where the hostility is directed.
because these 'legitimate points' have a funny way of arising when people are involved in the above process and not arising at other times where people are more cool calm and collected.
> perhaps larry felt those very same things as he wrote what he wrote?
perhaps he did. i think that is fairly irrelevant with respect to what he did in fact say, however.
i think...that people might be thinking (consciously or unconsciously) that in order to show larry proper support... one must be mad at dr-bob...
whereas before...
it was about deneb.
thats all i'm saying...
Posted by alexandra_k on January 8, 2006, at 15:02:01
In reply to Re: Larry's Block and a civil atmosphere » zeugma, posted by alexandra_k on January 8, 2006, at 14:40:06
and of course...
you can still sympathise with larry and his hurts
while having sympathy for deneb and her hurts
they aren't mutually exclusive...
and one can still sympathise with larry and his hurts
while having sympathy for the point that what he said was uncivil
they aren't mutually exclusive either...
but i think people often think that they are.
and that to 'support' someone or show sympathy to them means... to rail against their supposed persecutors...and round and round we go.
thats where i had some trouble last time...
i wanted to support larry...
but i also agreed with his block.and that led to hurt feelings.
and...
round and round we go...
Posted by zeugma on January 8, 2006, at 15:26:28
In reply to Re: Larry's Block and a civil atmosphere » zeugma, posted by alexandra_k on January 8, 2006, at 14:40:06
i think...
that people might be thinking (consciously or unconsciously) that in order to show larry proper support... one must be mad at dr-bob...
whereas before...
it was about deneb.
thats all i'm saying...>>
Is it?
Because it seems you said more than that.
And think of the maxims I am flouting now (see above discussion of Grice.) Sorry for the offputting jargon for those who don't feel like wading through speech act theory and related topics, but when someone so theoretically inclined says they are 'just being descriptive,' I know she's not talking about the scenery. [That last was meant for anyone not caught up in academic quibbling, enjoyable though it is, as you and I are. I was making a generalization that an awful lot of baggage is carried along in that word 'descriptive.'I did not mean to address you in the third person in your presence, so to speak. It doesn't sit well with me. My own notions of decent behavior I suppose.]
And... It's not my wish to make anyone uncomfortable here. That's why I'm only discussing those points of your post that I quoted above,and not even all of that, but just your last sentence. And your use of the term 'descriptive.' To say anything else would be to say too much, and at this point I would rather be unintelligible than convey a meaning I don't intend to that might hurt someone's feelings. And hopefully, that conveys the desired message.
Think of the parts of your post that I am not discussing, alexandra. That's what I mean.
-z
Posted by alexandra_k on January 8, 2006, at 15:56:37
In reply to Re: Larry's Block and a civil atmosphere » alexandra_k, posted by zeugma on January 8, 2006, at 15:26:28
> Think of the parts of your post that I am not discussing, alexandra. That's what I mean.
okay.
do you follow quine at all on how the analytic / synthetic distinction is ultimately untenable?
i'm thinking the civil / uncivil distinction might ultimately be untendable in just the same way, you see...
of course... just because the distinction breaks down... just because there are funny borderline cases where we don't know what to say and where there is no principled way of deciding... just because if you are determined you can cast much language as uncivil or theorietic doesn't mean the distinction is totally without use.
most people would agree that 'proton' is theorietic.
while 'brown' is descriptive
most people would agree that 'you are an *ss' is uncivil
while 'i disagree' is civil
(examples - i'm just using those as examples)sometimes...
i think we focus overly on the borderline cases the hard cases and think that because of that the distinction is of no use...
but...
we overlook the clear cut cases.
are there clear cut cases do you think?
or would you prefer babble to be a free for all where anything goes?
Posted by alexandra_k on January 8, 2006, at 16:04:44
In reply to Re: Larry's Block and a civil atmosphere, posted by alexandra_k on January 8, 2006, at 15:56:37
i wasn't meaning to IMPLY anything about peoples intention / motivation either.
i was meaning to DESCRIBE
its something i do sometimes...
i find i'm feeling really hurt / upset about something...
and i start to go 'why am i so upset'?
and of course...
thats the fun bit IMO...
trying to figure it out.
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 8, 2006, at 17:49:46
In reply to Re: Larry's Block and a civil atmosphere, posted by alexandra_k on January 8, 2006, at 14:10:46
> it happens as something of a repeating pattern methinks.
>
> the group starts to feel frustrated with a poster...
>
> one person says something uncivil to them
>
> (and then that can lead to a torrent of that)
>
> dr-bob steps in with a blocking...
>
> the group turns on dr-bob
>
> over and over
>
> interesting...
>
> my guess is he is willing to put up with people being mad at him
>
> so long as people leave one another alone
>I'm not sure how you can think that not hurling paint by number insults is leaving one another alone.
"In fair Verona, where we lay our scene,From ancient grudge break to new mutiny,Where civil blood makes civil hands unclean"
Do you think that its some sort of mindless energy that simply needs to be released and so it's done in the direction of Dr. Bob?
I don't think it is.
I really don't understand why you think punishment in this case is helpful. This isn't education, it's punishment. This is a real community to many and so being excommunicated can be devastating.
I don't agree with, in principal calling people manipulative. I think it can give people the idea that it's okay to shoot off to anyone who annoys them, or who's behaviour they do not understand.
In the case of Larry and deneb they had a relationship, it wasn't a case of getting fed up and spouting off.
A simple reminder to Lar to be careful, and letting him know what it could look like to others, would have been more than sufficient.
Dr. Bob has done that for others who have insulted each other but obviously have an understanding between them.
What's the point of a 6 week block? Is it Because those are the rules? Is it because "I'm doing it this way because this is the way I do it?"
Maybe people are upset because they know how much it can hurt, and because hurting Lar doesn't help the situation at all.
As Dr. Bob always says "Two wrongs don't make a right"
And maybe blocking people for infractions like swearing, and messing up wording when one is overwrought.. on a board for the mentally ill, is a bit like opening a hospital for Anorexics and kicking them out on their as* if they skip dinner.
You yourself called me manipulative..you jumped to an incorrect conclusion, no not with that exact word, but you did.
"Gabbi only asks me not to post to her because she doesn't like it when I disagree with her and wants me to shut up"
Amazingly nothing happened, and you know what? I lived through it.
Posted by alexandra_k on January 8, 2006, at 19:20:35
In reply to Re: Larry's Block and a civil atmosphere » alexandra_k, posted by Gabbix2 on January 8, 2006, at 17:49:46
> Do you think that its some sort of mindless energy that simply needs to be released and so it's done in the direction of Dr. Bob?
> I don't think it is.displacement.
i dunno. just thinking really...
> I really don't understand why you think punishment in this case is helpful.well... i guess 'punishment' has negative connotations for many of us. because... it was administered erratically. because... it was too severe (abusive) etc. but technically speaking the point of punishment is to decrease the probability of that behaviour being repeated. not just by the person who was 'punished' but the rest of the forum learns vicariously too...
> This isn't education, it's punishment.
it is an attempt to show the community that it is not appropriate to say that someone is 'manipulative', 'playing games', and 'making me sick' yeah. that is what it is. the aim being... a reduction (or cessation) of people saying those things.
and i guess it is up to us to have a think about how helpful / harmful it may or may not be to endorse those thoughts...
> This is a real community to many and so being excommunicated can be devastating.
i know blocks hurt :-(
they hurt me a great deal :-(
but i guess i hope...
that i learn from them.
and i guess i hope...
that they prevent me harming someone else.
and that if i do harm someone else in that way...
that there will be consequences for me which shows the person i hurt...
that what i said to them was inappropriate.> I don't agree with, in principal calling people manipulative. I think it can give people the idea that it's okay to shoot off to anyone who annoys them, or who's behaviour they do not understand.
right.
> In the case of Larry and deneb they had a relationship, it wasn't a case of getting fed up and spouting off.
hmm...
i don't think i'd take it that way.
if you called me manipulative...
i'd be hurt and pissed off.
even though i know you are my friend.
i would be hurt and pissed off.
i might start to doubt my own intentions...
i might start to see my behaviour in that way...
i might...
hurt more because of it.other people reading the boards don't necessarily know anything about larry and deneb's relationship either.
they just see the words.
and whether those words were considered acceptable or not...
> A simple reminder to Lar to be careful, and letting him know what it could look like to others, would have been more than sufficient.
> Dr. Bob has done that for others who have insulted each other but obviously have an understanding between them.does he tend to do that less when people have racked up a number of blocks?
i don't know.
to me...
it was the you are making me sick comment.
sorry but...
i don't think that is appropriate
i do not.
> What's the point of a 6 week block? Is it Because those are the rules? Is it because "I'm doing it this way because this is the way I do it?"maybe it is about the blocking system... this is the way the blocking system goes... thus people can predict that if they get blocked again this is the block length they are facing...
you would think people would learn to be more careful when they appreciate that their next block could be the same (if they are lucky) and that it is mroe likely to be doubled or tripled.
> Maybe people are upset because they know how much it can hurt, and because hurting Lar doesn't help the situation at all.
i don't think the point of delivering a block as a consequence is to hurt larry.
i don't.
i think the point is to deliver a fairly predictable consequence for saying what he said.
so we know that if we say that...
we will get blocked too.
hence if you don't want to get blocked...
then don't say it.
so the point in delivering the punisher...
is so that people won't say that to one another on the forums.
or they will say them less than they would if there wasn't a punisher after his having said that.thats how blocks benefit the forums as a whole.
because we are all supposed to learn that that is not appropriate.
and if peopple didn't say those kinds of things...
the forum would be more supportive than if people did say those kinds of things...> As Dr. Bob always says "Two wrongs don't make a right"
i don't see how larry was wronged...
> And maybe blocking people for infractions like swearing, and messing up wording when one is overwrought.. on a board for the mentally ill, is a bit like opening a hospital for Anorexics and kicking them out on their as* if they skip dinner.
in dbt you have to committ to working towards reduction of SI.
SI is typically the problem, yes.
but if you do not commit to working on reducing it then you are kicked out of dbt.
if our mental health issues makes us prone to lashing out at others...
then i guess we can make a committment to learning more appropriate ways of behaving...
or we can persist...
let the blocks stack up...
get blocked for lengthy periods of time.yup.
> You yourself called me manipulative..
?
did i?> "Gabbi only asks me not to post to her because she doesn't like it when I disagree with her and wants me to shut up"
can you give me the context there?
i do believe there was a greater context of my saying that i was struggling with how to see your request...
that that was how i was seeing it...
that i appreciated that wasn't so helpful...
and that i was trying to hit upon a more charitable way.
which i do believe people helped me with.> Amazingly nothing happened, and you know what? I lived through it.
maybe because i was trying to hit upon a more charitable interpretation?
maybe because... i accepted a more charitable interpretation once i found one?
Posted by wildcard on January 8, 2006, at 19:21:33
In reply to Larry's Block and a civil atmosphere, posted by Nickengland on January 8, 2006, at 12:16:45
yeah b/c a 6 week block is BS...imo
Posted by wildcard on January 8, 2006, at 19:24:53
In reply to Re: Larry's Block and a civil atmosphere » Nickengland, posted by Jakeman on January 8, 2006, at 14:01:09
hey there jakeman! yeah, i foresee blocks too! i wondered which you felt was ridiculous, the original block, the response of that block or both? just wondering...
Posted by wildcard on January 8, 2006, at 19:35:16
In reply to Re: Larry's Block and a civil atmosphere » alexandra_k, posted by Gabbix2 on January 8, 2006, at 17:49:46
you are absolutely correct and am willing myself to take a block over this non sense. Some are able to see a broader picture than others. We are all different. As I stated before, Lar was the one that convinced D to make an appt.. They didn't have a relationship is news to me.
Posted by Jakeman on January 8, 2006, at 20:05:00
In reply to Re: Larry's Block and a civil atmosphere » Jakeman, posted by wildcard on January 8, 2006, at 19:24:53
> hey there jakeman! yeah, i foresee blocks too! i wondered which you felt was ridiculous, the original block, the response of that block or both? just wondering...
hey there wildcard! All of it- the original block, the response to that block, and blocks resulting from various side arguments about the response to the block. I think I got that right.
Posted by wildcard on January 8, 2006, at 20:09:22
In reply to Re: Larry's Block and a civil atmosphere » wildcard, posted by Jakeman on January 8, 2006, at 20:05:00
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 8, 2006, at 20:17:03
In reply to Re: Larry's Block and a civil atmosphere » Gabbix2, posted by alexandra_k on January 8, 2006, at 19:20:35
> it is an attempt to show the community that it is not appropriate to say that someone is 'manipulative', 'playing games', and 'making me sick' yeah. that is what it is. the aim being... a reduction (or cessation) of people saying those things.
>
And how often does Larry do this?
Rhetorical question.Do we need to be protected from Larry?
Larry who we all know is completely thoughtless, posts without thinking, and runs around like a crazed dog randomly insulting people just for the hell of it.
>
> it was the you are making me sick comment.
>
> sorry but...
>
> i don't think that is appropriateThat isn't what he said and I think rewording his post is not appropriate especially when it makes such an enormous difference in the interpretation.
He said "Helping you has made me sick"
There's a HUGE difference there.Yeah, it would hurt me too.However, it's like saying "This is draining me"
People have said that.
I've been hurt or angered by what people have said here.
Why don't we just have a rule that says "content free posts only" no one will get hurt.
Everyone will feel safe.> maybe it is about the blocking system... this is the way the blocking system goes... thus people can predict that if they get blocked again this is the block length they are facing...
>Okay
"we shoot people for that in these parts.. that's the way it is..you know the consequences deal with it.. you won't be doing that again now will you"
> you would think people would learn to be more careful when they appreciate that their next block could be the same (if they are lucky) and that it is mroe likely to be doubled or tripled.
>Oh and just how likely is Larry going to run into this situation again?
There is just as much chance that it will make him less likely to reach out to someone in need.
He's more careful with his wording than just about anyone here. It's hardly a pattern that needs breaking.
> > Maybe people are upset because they know how much it can hurt, and because hurting Lar doesn't help the situation at all.
>
> i don't think the point of delivering a block as a consequence is to hurt larry.So? The fact is it DOES HURT
"Sorry, I didn't mean to hit you with the door, that wasn't my intention.."
> i think the point is to deliver a fairly predictable consequence for saying what he said.
> so we know that if we say that...
> we will get blocked too.
> hence if you don't want to get blocked...
> then don't say it.
> so the point in delivering the punisher...
> is so that people won't say that to one another on the forums.
> or they will say them less than they would if there wasn't a punisher after his having said that.
>
> thats how blocks benefit the forums as a whole.
>
> because we are all supposed to learn that that is not appropriate.
>
> and if peopple didn't say those kinds of things...
> the forum would be more supportive than if people did say those kinds of things...
>Now
That reminds me of a cartoon I saw:"I don't care if this is the first time you've been late to work in 30 years.. what would it be like if *everyone* was late for work?"
So there's no room at all for wisdom here.
It's like a computer.
The fact that Lar doesn't go around randomly calling people manipulative, and insulting people doesn't enter the picture.
As Dr. Bob always says "Two wrongs don't make a right"
>
> i don't see how larry was wronged...
>
Obviously.
> in dbt you have to committ to working towards reduction of SI.
> SI is typically the problem, yes.
> but if you do not commit to working on reducing it then you are kicked out of dbt.Committing to working on it....
So Larry after 3 years of posting here, who is relied upon for his support, and has never called someone names, has to commit to working on this issue..suddenly after 3 years.That's not even rational.
> if our mental health issues makes us prone to lashing out at others...
> then i guess we can make a committment to learning more appropriate ways of behaving...
> or we can persist...
> let the blocks stack up...
> get blocked for lengthy periods of time.
>
> yup.
>
Bob's way is not the authority on appropriateness or civility. He's the authority here.
> maybe because i was trying to hit upon a more charitable interpretation?
>
> maybe because... i accepted a more charitable interpretation once i found one?And somehow
Although I was offended and frustrated and angered .. and ready to leave the board because of that issue..this maybe.. this maybe that applies to you, that allowed you to avoid any punitive action
This maybe... with all it's extenuating circumstances and possible explanations does not apply to Larry.
That's unbelievable
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 8, 2006, at 22:56:27
In reply to Re: Larry's Block and a civil atmosphere » alexandra_k, posted by Gabbix2 on January 8, 2006, at 20:17:03
>I was being facetious in the following paragraph. However I don't think that's considered okay here.
So if it isn't, sorry.> Larry who we all know is completely thoughtless, posts without thinking, and runs around like a crazed dog randomly insulting people just for the hell of it.
Posted by alexandra_k on January 8, 2006, at 23:03:10
In reply to oh » Gabbix2, posted by Gabbix2 on January 8, 2006, at 22:56:27
((((gabbi)))))
(i have chosen to take deep breaths and step back so i won't be continuing our discussion...)
but i wanted to give you a hug.
we do fight sometimes...
sigh.
you know i love ya really - right?
xxx
Posted by wildcard on January 8, 2006, at 23:15:37
In reply to oh » Gabbix2, posted by Gabbix2 on January 8, 2006, at 22:56:27
facetious...(sp)
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 8, 2006, at 23:16:12
In reply to Re: oh, posted by alexandra_k on January 8, 2006, at 23:03:10
yeah sis
We have an inexplicable bond.
It's a funny one. If we knew each other in real life we could have those spongy bats you know the ones you can hit someone over the head with, but not hurt them.
Every once in a while we'd just get up and silently bash each other on the head, and go back to our discussion.(((Alex)))
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.