![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 62. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Racer on April 4, 2006, at 19:44:04
Have you ever considered reducing the block lengths? Not on an individual basis, I don't mean. Just as in maybe changing them all to one week, with a few exceptions that would be considerably longer? (I'm actually thinking lifetime bans...)
It really depends on the purpose of the blocks, of course. If they're meant as a cooling off period, or as a tool to help people learn to modify their behavior, I think a week -- or, really, even a day or two for a first offense -- is probably long enough for that purpose. Having the blocks stretch out, though, doesn't seem to increase the efficacy of the block, do you think? It seems to me that the system of doubling blocks would make sense if each block was for the same behavior, but in many cases it really isn't someone doing the same thing over and over again. I'm not sure it serves a purpose to increase the length of a block when someone maybe has modified the behavior that led to a first blocking, only to engage in different behavior the next time...
If the blocks are punishment, of course, none of that applies...
Anyway, since this has come up more than once now, I wonder if you would be willing to say a few words about your reasoning?
Thank you for your time.
Posted by LegWarmers on April 4, 2006, at 20:11:22
In reply to Dr Bob? About the blocking policies?, posted by Racer on April 4, 2006, at 19:44:04
> Have you ever considered reducing the block lengths? Not on an individual basis, I don't mean. Just as in maybe changing them all to one week, with a few exceptions that would be considerably longer? (I'm actually thinking lifetime bans...)
I think that is a wonderful idea. I've never been blocked but from what I understnad, that are incredibly difficult. When reading posts of posters who have been blocked for extensive periods of time you can often hear the pain in the posts. Its not necessary. You could get your point across with a less severe punishment. you have to have a punishment that fits the crime or else it makes no sense.
crime, mistaken use of the wrong word, whatever...
Posted by Phillipa on April 4, 2006, at 22:55:33
In reply to Re: Dr Bob? About the blocking policies?, posted by LegWarmers on April 4, 2006, at 20:11:22
Punish then slap my hand!!!!Why should it be considered punishment. Some people blocked are very unstable and this could put them over the edge. One day in my opinion is long enough to cool off. If someone can't cool off in a day they need a lot more help than even the outside world can give them. That just my opinion. Love phillip ps maybe then they need a hospital again my opinion only Boy I sure would not want on my conscious someone doing something desperate with no one to talk to first. The question is why are they here?
Posted by Declan on April 4, 2006, at 23:38:37
In reply to Re: Dr Bob? About the blocking policies?, posted by Phillipa on April 4, 2006, at 22:55:33
I don't know why the blocks have to be doubled every time. Maybe they're not, always. But they often are, and while I can sort of see the logic...well, I think it's mistaken. Larry's last block is an example. Or TJs. This way of doing things is arbitrary and counterproductive.
Declan
Posted by special_k on April 4, 2006, at 23:58:21
In reply to Re: Dr Bob? About the blocking policies?, posted by Declan on April 4, 2006, at 23:38:37
he has chilled a bit...
there have been far more same block length as last time blocks...
and as for the 'leniency' that was shown to larry...
my guess would be that larry's being blocked again (in so short a space of time) might be getting bob wondering about the utility of having done that...
sigh.
i agree though.
the majority of blocks are too long :-(
Posted by gardenergirl on April 5, 2006, at 1:46:52
In reply to Re: Dr Bob? About the blocking policies?, posted by special_k on April 4, 2006, at 23:58:21
I tend to agree with folks about long block lengths. I don't know what the intended purpose is, but if it's to modify behavior, I think that blocks beyond a few weeks max gets into a question of diminshing returns.
If it's to protect the community, well...I suppose you could go on the premise that each "infraction" contributes an additive amount of potential harm, and so increased protection by blocking longer could conceivably be warranted. I wouldn't agree with that reasoning, however.
I wonder too if the issues that lead to a long block really stay in the "Babble consciousness" as long as lengthy blocks do. I wonder if non-heated incidents become sort of "fade away" as the topics change and the board archives. And yet a person might be blocked for months. This doesn't make sense to me, but maybe I'm looking at it strangely. Or maybe they stay in the minds of others more than anything does in my noggin.
I know that not everyone agrees.
I wonder if there could be a happier medium than a year cap, though.
gg
Posted by NikkiT2 on April 5, 2006, at 3:34:22
In reply to Dr Bob? About the blocking policies?, posted by Racer on April 4, 2006, at 19:44:04
What about people that are unable "to learn from their block".. or, to put it another way, being serially blocked?
You've seen this place evolve as much as I have, and remember a time pre-blocks and pre-civility, and most of the rules (including lengthening the blocks) has evolved due to specific problems.
I know, for me, if a certain someone had simply been blocked for one week each time they were blocked, I would never have had time to recover from the problems they caused me, and I wouldn't be using this board anymore.
I like that Dr Bob is seeming to be more flexible on block lengths.. For example, Matt's wasn't doubled or tripled, but left at the same length as it had been previously.
I don't really agree with the doubling, as you, in theory, only need 7 blocks (which can be over a long period) to get blocked for a whole year. maybe fairer would be to keep it at one week for first three blocks, and then add one week on each time?
I'm not sure!
Nikki x
Posted by Racer on April 5, 2006, at 23:54:11
In reply to Re: Dr Bob? About the blocking policies? » Racer, posted by NikkiT2 on April 5, 2006, at 3:34:22
> What about people that are unable "to learn from their block".. or, to put it another way, being serially blocked?
>
>Darling Nikki, I do know what you're talking about in the parts that I took out of your post, but I think we'd be on thin ice if we got specific here....
In answer to your question, I think that people who are serially blocked for the same infraction might be better off elsewhere. I think it's fine to keep most blocks to one week, serious infractions a bit longer -- and simply ban other people. Block that IP address into infinity. I ain't got no problem with that.
Maybe a system in place for petitioning for reinstatement, proving that the poster who was banned was serious about abiding by the site guidelines and understood what they were? And then a probationary period in which any further infraction would result in the ban being reinforced, with maybe a "you can reapply in one year?"
And I hated watching what happened, Nikki. You're my buddy, and I care about you and about how you feel. I hated watching that happen.
Posted by greywolf on April 6, 2006, at 0:36:21
In reply to Dr Bob? About the blocking policies?, posted by Racer on April 4, 2006, at 19:44:04
I guess I'm jaded when it comes to civility (probably from spending too much time on Fark), but my sense is that civility is being over-enforced here. I'm not talking about posts that are abusive or threatening or obviously insensitive to someone. Rather, civility seems to sometimes be interpreted to prohibit posts that are pretty innocuous simply because someone else may not like them. That's sounds a little like the heckler's veto to me.
Posted by NikkiT2 on April 6, 2006, at 10:23:36
In reply to Re: Dr Bob? About the blocking policies? » NikkiT2, posted by Racer on April 5, 2006, at 23:54:11
Its OK, I'm not making much sense to myself this week (strong painkillers make my head a little.. interesting!)
OK..
How do you determine what a serious infraction is?! At what point do you "ban their IP into infinity" (you really shouldn't mention the I word around me though.. My head doesn't deal with infinity very well *L*)?
This has been the best suggestion so far though.. standard 1 week blocks.. with rules set down for certain circumstances where they could be longer (ie, threats to a person, release of personal information etc)..
Worth pondering for sure
Nikki x
Posted by LegWarmers on April 6, 2006, at 10:45:53
In reply to Re: Dr Bob? About the blocking policies? » NikkiT2, posted by Racer on April 5, 2006, at 23:54:11
>>What about people that are unable "to learn from their block".. or, to put it another way, being serially blocked?
Its because when punishment far exceeds what the offence deserves, the subject won't learn anything, they will forget why it happened and associate it with other things and they will feel angry.
If the punishment is too harsh, it usually will never prevent anything, sometimes teach ways around it and others ways of offending until that becomes an offence. Severity/harshness of punishemnt has a positive relationship with repeat offending (off the baords, and probably on too)
Posted by NikkiT2 on April 6, 2006, at 11:13:23
In reply to Re: Dr Bob? About the blocking policies?, posted by LegWarmers on April 6, 2006, at 10:45:53
I think you're probably lucky that you've never been repeatedly hurt by someone online
Nikki
Posted by Phillipa on April 6, 2006, at 11:53:53
In reply to Re: Dr Bob? About the blocking policies?, posted by LegWarmers on April 6, 2006, at 10:45:53
Maybe this doesn't fit here at all and I apologize in advance but when someone is put in jail how come they get out and do the same thing over and over like robbery. Some people don't learn. Love Phillipa ps I could name a particular poster from the past and I think you remember him but I won't.
Posted by LegWarmers on April 6, 2006, at 11:57:15
In reply to Re: Dr Bob? About the blocking policies? » LegWarmers, posted by NikkiT2 on April 6, 2006, at 11:13:23
> I think you're probably lucky that you've never been repeatedly hurt by someone online
>
> NikkiMaybe, But I wasn't including in that the grossy inapropriate events that occur. I should have included that in actually. Thsoe people should recieve the year ban or lifetime whatever.... but I was referring more to the regular group of posters who in general isnt out to hurt anyone... but I don't have much online experience so... you have a point.
Posted by LegWarmers on April 6, 2006, at 11:59:47
In reply to Re: Dr Bob? About the blocking policies? » NikkiT2, posted by LegWarmers on April 6, 2006, at 11:57:15
>.... but I was referring more to the regular group of posters who in general isnt out to hurt anyone...
I have let the spelling go and the punctuation go... to fast typing... but grammer! no I can't do that.
That was meant to be **aren't** not ISN'T
Posted by Phillipa on April 6, 2006, at 12:00:27
In reply to Re: Dr Bob? About the blocking policies? » LegWarmers, posted by Phillipa on April 6, 2006, at 11:53:53
My post was to Nikki. Love Phillipa
Posted by LegWarmers on April 6, 2006, at 12:01:30
In reply to Re: Dr Bob? About the blocking policies? » Racer, posted by NikkiT2 on April 6, 2006, at 10:23:36
>
> How do you determine what a serious infraction is?! At what point do you "ban their IP into infinity" (you really shouldn't mention the I word around me though.. My head doesn't deal with infinity very well *L*)?
>
> This has been the best suggestion so far though.. standard 1 week blocks.. with rules set down for certain circumstances where they could be longer (ie, threats to a person, release of personal information etc)..hey! i liked mine too ; ) j/k
>
> Worth pondering for sure
>I agree!
Posted by LegWarmers on April 6, 2006, at 12:03:51
In reply to Re: Dr Bob? About the blocking policies? » LegWarmers, posted by Phillipa on April 6, 2006, at 11:53:53
> Maybe this doesn't fit here at all and I apologize in advance but when someone is put in jail how come they get out and do the same thing over and over like robbery. Some people don't learn. Love Phillipa ps I could name a particular poster from the past and I think you remember him but I won't.
if you really want to know... babble me... because Im sure the rest are sick of me by now lol But there are reasons, its not so much about "not learning" it has a lot to do with rules and .... STOP IT LEGWARMERS
Posted by LegWarmers on April 6, 2006, at 12:04:31
In reply to Re: Dr Bob? About the blocking policies?, posted by Phillipa on April 6, 2006, at 12:00:27
Posted by NikkiT2 on April 6, 2006, at 12:08:49
In reply to Re: Dr Bob? About the blocking policies? » LegWarmers, posted by Phillipa on April 6, 2006, at 11:53:53
>Maybe this doesn't fit here at all and I apologize in advance but when someone is put in jail how come they get out and do the same thing over and over like robbery. Some people don't learn. Love Phillipa ps I could name a particular poster from the past and I think you remember him but I won't.
I think we're on the same wave length ;)
Nikki x
Posted by LegWarmers on April 6, 2006, at 12:12:08
In reply to Re: Dr Bob? About the blocking policies? » Phillipa, posted by NikkiT2 on April 6, 2006, at 12:08:49
>
> I think we're on the same wave length ;)
I wish I was on the same wavelength as someone else...
Posted by Phillipa on April 6, 2006, at 12:33:08
In reply to Re: Dr Bob? About the blocking policies? » Phillipa, posted by NikkiT2 on April 6, 2006, at 12:08:49
Another question seriously not pertaining to me or anyone I know but in general I was thinking bad thing for me to do. If a poster is blocked. And two people can't post from the same computer. While the person is blocked can the other person post from that computer while the other is blocked. That way only one person is posting from that computer during the block? Love Phillipa
Posted by gardenergirl on April 6, 2006, at 14:09:32
In reply to Re: Dr Bob? About the blocking policies?, posted by LegWarmers on April 6, 2006, at 10:45:53
Oh, it warms my heart when someone can use stuff from psychology class in other areas. And when they do it correctly. :)
Not that I can take credit for your brilliance. But having taught this before, it's so nice to see that it actually does get retained.
Yeah LW!
gg
Posted by LegWarmers on April 6, 2006, at 18:06:09
In reply to Re: Dr Bob? About the blocking policies? » LegWarmers, posted by gardenergirl on April 6, 2006, at 14:09:32
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 11, 2006, at 3:55:16
In reply to Re: Dr Bob? About the blocking policies?, posted by Phillipa on April 6, 2006, at 12:33:08
> Have you ever considered reducing the block lengths? ... maybe changing them all to one week, with a few exceptions that would be considerably longer? (I'm actually thinking lifetime bans...)
>
> RacerThis is an important issue, but I don't think there's an easy answer. For one thing, I think some situations are in-between...
> I don't know what the intended purpose is, but if it's to modify behavior, I think that blocks beyond a few weeks max gets into a question of diminshing returns.
>
> If it's to protect the community, well...I suppose you could go on the premise that each "infraction" contributes an additive amount of potential harm, and so increased protection by blocking longer could conceivably be warranted. I wouldn't agree with that reasoning, however.
>
> ggWhy wouldn't you agree? I think I see it as both...
What if block lengths could decrease as well as increase? The duration of a block is based on the duration of the previous block. If it's been a while since the previous block, maybe it could be based on a shorter period of time?
For example, say a poster is blocked for 3 weeks, returns, and the next day posts something uncivil. The standard procedure would be to double the 3 weeks and block them for 6 weeks. If, however, they follow the guidelines for a while before being blocked again, it could be 3 - 1 = 2 weeks that's doubled, and they'd be blocked for 4 weeks.
How does that sound? The question, of course, would be how long "a while" should be...
--
> If a poster is blocked. And two people can't post from the same computer. While the person is blocked can the other person post from that computer while the other is blocked. That way only one person is posting from that computer during the block?
>
> PhillipaIf either of them were blocked, the other would be, too:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20060225/msgs/614125.html
Bob
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.