![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 14 to 38 of 38. Go back in thread:
Posted by sunnydays on October 9, 2006, at 7:33:05
In reply to Lou's reply to Dr. Hsiung's reply to Lou (3) » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on October 9, 2006, at 7:04:08
Maybe he's just busy and has been getting a lot of emails. I don't think he has a different standard for you. You just might get a faster response by asking someone else. If you're worried about them not having the authority, maybe you could ask several someone elses.
sunnydays
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 9, 2006, at 17:40:18
In reply to Re: Lou's reply to Dr. Hsiung's reply to Lou (3) » Lou Pilder, posted by sunnydays on October 9, 2006, at 7:33:05
Friends,
It is written here,[...I don't think he has a different standard for {you}...you might get a faster response by asking someone else...them not having the authority, maybe you could ask several...]].
I ask:
A. By what criteria could anyone use to think one way or the other that he has a different standard for me or not? If you could state the criteria that could be used to determine if he has a different standard for me or not, I would appreciate that.
B. How could I get a {faster response by asking someone else?
C. How could asking several members tell me if the post is OK or not in Dr. Hsiung's thinking?
Lou
Posted by alexandra_k on October 15, 2006, at 6:59:30
In reply to Lou's response to aspects of sunnydays' post-wthw?, posted by Lou Pilder on October 9, 2006, at 17:40:18
> B. How could I get a {faster response by asking someone else?
well... someone else might respond more quickly than dr bob is responding at present...
> C. How could asking several members tell me if the post is OK or not in Dr. Hsiung's thinking?
i think he might be trying to encourage you to care about other peoples thought processes on civility too...
some people seem to fairly much agree with bob's judgements about civility and incivility (e.g., the deputies) thus asking someone else who seems to typically agree with bobs judgements might actually be a pretty good substitute for waiting... and waiting... and waiting... for bob to respond...
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 15, 2006, at 7:15:25
In reply to Re: Lou's response to aspects of sunnydays' post-w » Lou Pilder, posted by alexandra_k on October 15, 2006, at 6:59:30
Friends,
It is written here,[...it might be trying to encourage you to care about other people's thought processes...]
The FAQ has a link offerd by DR. Hsiung from another member that writes something like that you can >always< email Dr. Hsiung if you think that {you are not sure}that the post is OK.
I feel that I am an >equal< member here and if others can email DR. Hsiung, that I could be provided the same status here without an additional standard {for me} than others.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 15, 2006, at 7:40:12
In reply to Lou's response to aspects of Alexandra's post-, posted by Lou Pilder on October 15, 2006, at 7:15:25
Friends,
It is written here,[...might be trying to encourage you to care about other people's thought processes...].
My thinking, and how I feel, about adding additional requirements for me to do what others could do according to the policy here in the FAQ without the additional requirement to me, is that to subject me to a higher standard than the other members by having another condition to me than others is not IMO >supportive< nor do I consider it to be >civil.<
I am proud of being in a nation that has a tradition to uphold the freedoms that the country established to promote fairness and respect among our people by having equal opportunity for all. I feel that any rule in a mental-health community that could have the potential to undermine the principle of equality, by imposing an additional requirement to one member, is not IMO supportive to the freedoms established that have kept our country going forward and I honor the role played by Dr. Martin Luther King jr for his life given to promote equality, and I honor the role of all God's children that would not submit to any additional requirement to them than to others.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 15, 2006, at 8:05:15
In reply to Re: Lou's response to aspects of sunnydays' post-w » Lou Pilder, posted by alexandra_k on October 15, 2006, at 6:59:30
Friends,
It is written here,[...he might be trying to encourage you {to care} about other people's thought processes...].
My friends, if you think that the statement in question above insinuates that I am not a caring person here because I am asking for equality in regards to the FAQ policy here, then I ask;
A. By what authority or rational could you think of that could justify anyone to think that one does >not care< about other people's thought processes because they ask for equal treatment?
B. Why would I need to know about what others think as to if I can have equal treatment in reagrds to the FAQ policy here?
Lou
Posted by alexandra_k on October 15, 2006, at 10:35:00
In reply to Lou's response to aspects of alexandr' post, posted by Lou Pilder on October 15, 2006, at 8:05:15
> My friends, if you think that the statement in question above insinuates that I am not a caring person herethat isn't what i meant.
i think he was *requesting* that you ask someone else rather than *requiring* that you ask someone else.
he didn't tell you to stop emailing him - did he?
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 15, 2006, at 11:24:02
In reply to Re: Lou's response to aspects of alexandr' post » Lou Pilder, posted by alexandra_k on October 15, 2006, at 10:35:00
ALexandra_k,
You wrote,[...that isn't what I meant...]
Thank you for clarifying what you wrote. I appreciate that.
You asked me,[...he didn't tell you to stop emailing him-did he?...]
Let us review a little here before I answer that here.
My original request to Dr. Hsiung was for him to review my post before I was to post it so that I could find out if it was OK before I posted it. This is in the TOS here as that in his FAQ one could always do that.
His reply to me was;
[...could you ask if someone else is willing to do that?...]
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin20060918/msgs/688767.html
Then I asked insome way if the TOS here excluded me from the FAQ that says that one can >always< email him to find out if a post is OK.
His reply to me then was;
[...How about {if you ask someone else, see what they say, and then ask me again?...]
My concern here is if this is a condition to me that is not a condition to others and I am awaiting a reply from DR. Hsiung about that.
If it is a requirerment to me that I am to {ask someone else first} before I {can} ask him again, then is that not saying to me that there is a condition to me before I can email him, for his statement to me says [...{how about if you ask someone else {and then} ask me again?...]
As to if this is a request or a requirement, I will answer that in another post.
Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20060918/msgs/693190.html
Posted by Jost on October 15, 2006, at 11:57:39
In reply to Lou's response to aspects of Alexandra's post-, posted by Lou Pilder on October 15, 2006, at 7:40:12
It is written here:
"My thinking, and how I feel, about adding additional requirements for me to do what others could do according to the policy here in the FAQ without the additional requirement to me..."
I believe what was offered was a suggestion, not a requirement.
If you want to know what Bob is likely to think, you have the option, if you so desire, to ask other people, esp. those who tend to be good predictors of Bob's judgments, what they think Bob would think.
That's not a requirement.
Plus the suggestion has been made to others; it's not limited to you.
Jost
Posted by Jost on October 15, 2006, at 12:04:37
In reply to Lou's response to aspects of alexandr' post, posted by Lou Pilder on October 15, 2006, at 8:05:15
It is written:
"if you think that the statement in question above insinuates that I am not a caring person here because I am asking for equality... But what authority...could you think"
The statement you refer to here may suggest that some people (including perhaps Dr. Bob) may (may, since this is conjectural) worry that you don't sufficiently understand the feelings of others.
The reasons for the belief that you don't understand feelings of others is not given. I see nothing in the statement that implies that your asking for equality is the basis, or is at all connected to it.
It is also written:
"Why would I need to know about what others think as to if I can have equal treatment"
Part of the answer is that in order to know if you're being treated equally, you need to know how others feel they're being treated-- otherwise how can you know if there is any equality in the experience of the treatment here?
Jost
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 15, 2006, at 12:25:52
In reply to Lou's reply to Alexandra_k » alexandra_k, posted by Lou Pilder on October 15, 2006, at 11:24:02
Alexandra-k,
The question is if Dr. Hsiung is saying that he is requesting or requireing me to ask someone else before I ask him to say if my proposed post is Ok?
Let us look at another aspect to what I am saying here.
In the following post by Dr. Hsiung in the same thread , he replies to me to ask someone else {for an independant perspective}
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20060918/msgs/688881.html
Let us look at this post from me to him in the same thread.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20060918/msgs/692103.html
In the above post, there are the questions of my concerns, A-D that I am awaiting a reply from him.
He has replied to me twice the same type of reply in regards to me asking someone else {and then} ask him.
I think that there is the potential IMO to think that he is putting a condition in front of me, but not others, before he will tell me if the proposed post is Ok, for he writes, >{and then}< [ask me {again}], yet the FAQ has no condition, for it says that one can >always< send the proposed post ot him to find out if it is OK. Now >always< means that there is that understanding.
A question now IMO is that could a reasonable person have the potential to think that DR. Hsiung is denying me the equal opportunity of the terms of service here, as defined in his FAQ, by writing to me to ask someone else {and then} send it to him.
There is a test to determine if his asking me that, constitutes discrimination. There is also a test to determine if the dialog by him to me in the thread in question constitutes harassment based upon the repeated statements by him to me to do the same thing, before my concerns to him are replied to such as the ones,[...A-D...] in the post cited here, for I feel that if he could reply to those, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
In {C}. I ask if the policy excludes requests from me for to find out if a post is OK before I submit it, that could be a post from me addressing statements that IMO have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings. For his reply to me, to {ask someone else} that could have the potential to cause me, if I have to ask someone else first, to find others that could have a knowlege of that spacific concept.
But the FAQ writes that DR. Hsiung knows it when it can be seen. And others could know it when it is seen also. Which menas that {I} could know it when it could be seen. And if I think it can be seen, then I am asking Dr. Hsiung if he sees it, not if others see it. For I know of others that see it without asking them, and they have published librarys about it.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 15, 2006, at 13:05:37
In reply to Re: Lou's response to aspects of Alexandra's post-, posted by Jost on October 15, 2006, at 11:57:39
Friends,
It is written here,[...I believe..a {suggeation} not a {requirement}...suggestion made to others..not limited to you...].
The statement to me by Dr. Hsiung to [...ask others for an independant perspective...] was made to me in reply to my request to him to review a URL from the Anti-Defamnation League that is their response to the posts here that have statements that accuse Jews and IMO have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings. This is my request and not a request from others here. My request is for him to tell me if he will allow it to be posted as being OK or not. If DR. Hsiung wants to make his determination on the basis of what some others think, that is one thuing. But is not asking me to do that another thing?
Dr. Hsiung's reply is to me is,[...how about you {ask others} and {then} ask me again...]. The TOS in the FAQ indicates to me that Dr. Hsiung has in his policy that [...one can >always< ask me to find out if a post is OK...].
As to if he is saying that he will not allow me to have him tell me if the post is OK before I ask others their perpective, is what is the question here. There are those that think he is making a suggestion. But if someone thinks something, that does not absolutly mean that what they think is {fact}, does it?
There is a test to determine if an administrator's statement to someone is a request or a requirment. This went to many State Supreme courts and the answer may surprise some.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 15, 2006, at 13:48:27
In reply to Re: Lou's response to aspects of alexandr' post, posted by Jost on October 15, 2006, at 12:04:37
Friends,
It is written here by me as to my asking why I would need to know what others think about if a URL from the Anti-Defmation League could be posted here per my request to Dr. Hsiung as OK or not, that could be a response to posts that IMO accuse Jews and could have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings. The policy here is that it is written in the FAQ that [...one can always ask Dr. Hsiung if it is OK...].
The issue that I am aking to be determined by Dr. Hsiung is if he will allow me to send the post in question to him foe a determination with out me having to ask others their perspective.
I feel that if the TOS has the statement in question, that others could send to Dr. Hsiung those type of requests without asking others their perspective, and I am asking Dr. Hsiung to remove any request or if it is a requirement, to me as any condition to allow me to submit my request to him.
A poster here posted,
[...in order to know if you're being treated equally, you need to know how others feel they're treated...].
I have never seen a stipulation or request from DR. Hsiung that one is to ask others their perspective before they submit a request to him for determining in advance if a post is OK. If there is one that anyone knows of, could you post that here? I know of no others that are treated now, or have been treated in the past being asked to find out the perspective of others before they could submit a post for determination to him.
DR.Hsiung writes that he knows it when it can be seen. What I am asking him to see is what has been used for 2000 years by those that want to foster defamation toward the Jews. If he thinks that he does not see it, if he wants to submit my request to others for their considration as to if they can see it and confirm or not that what is in question is or is not a statment that has been used historically to accuse Jews and arrouse antisemitic feelings, that is one thing. But is it not a different thing to ask me to do that before I send it to him?
Lou
Posted by gardenergirl on October 15, 2006, at 20:55:10
In reply to Lou's reply to Alexandra_k- » Lou Pilder, posted by Lou Pilder on October 15, 2006, at 12:25:52
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
"You can also ask another poster to be your "civility buddy" and to preview your posts before you submit them."
It's come up several times before, including: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20031217/msgs/292531.html
gg
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 15, 2006, at 21:18:18
In reply to Asking others to preview posts, posted by gardenergirl on October 15, 2006, at 20:55:10
Friends,
It is written here,[...you can ask (someone)...to preview your posts...].
Well, if this is in response to the overiding issue here in this thread then I have the following response.
People can ask anyone that will hear them what they think of a post. But does that option resolve what is the issue here in this thread?
Theissue here in this thread is my request to Dr. Hsiung to review a post of mine before it is posted to find out if it is OK. His reply to me is to ask other first and then email it to him. The FAQno restriction for asking him, for it says that anyone can always ask him if the post is OK.
Now there are several issues about Dr. Hsiung replying to me with that statement to ask others.
In my reply to him, one of the aspects to the discussion I listed as toif he means that I really do not have to ask others and I have not seen a reply to me from him as to if he mans that.
Also, Dr. Hsiung says that he knows it when he sees it. Others can see it to. zbut what is ther to be seen her? I am asking him to review a link from the Anti-Defamation league as a response to statements that IMO have the potential to accuse Jews and the potential IMO to foster defamtion toward Jews and me as a Jew on the forum if the statement are not sanctioned like other statements of the same nature concerning non-Jews. So there could be two questions, IMO. One is if the statements in question do have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feeling if left unsanctioned, and the other question is if the post that I want to send him is civil.
I think that it is an additional standard to me, if I have to ask others before I send it to him, if the FAQ does not have that same requirement to others, and thearfore I consider it to be discriminatory if I have to ask others before sending it to him, as having two standards here.
If DR. Hsiung wants other's opinions, he could he not ask others after I send it to him?
I know that I can ask others , but {must} I ask others before I send my request to Dr. Hsiung?
Lou
Posted by Jost on October 15, 2006, at 21:24:28
In reply to Lou's response to aspects of Jost's post-, posted by Lou Pilder on October 15, 2006, at 13:05:37
It is written here:
"Dr. Hsiung's reply is to me is,[...how about you {ask others} and {then} ask me again...]."
So I wonder, does the word "again" in this sentence indicate that Bob had already responded to that specific request (ie, about posting the JDL's statement)?
Jost
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 15, 2006, at 21:42:31
In reply to Lou's response to aspects of gardenergirl's post-, posted by Lou Pilder on October 15, 2006, at 21:18:18
Friends,
It is written here about asking others.
Well, if this is in relation to Dr. Hsiung writing for me to ask others before I send it to him, then I have the following puzzle to me.
A. How many others am I to ask?
B. What am I to ask them?
C. Do the posters have to be a cross-section of the more knowlegable population here?
D. Do I ask them by email or babblemail or on the board?
E. Is this something that could constitute a vote as to if the post is civil or if the statements that I would like to post the response to have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings or not?
F. What kind of bias factor, if any, can be used for the population?
G. Does Dr. Hsiung seek a concensus to make decisions as to if posts are civil or not here?
H. If not, then why am I asked to ask others before I send it to him when the consensus was published in 1947 and has been taught in schools since then, books have been written, movies made, amd the Pope recently repudiated any doctrine that has the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings?
Lou
Posted by alexandra_k on October 15, 2006, at 21:43:11
In reply to Lou's response to aspects of gardenergirl's post-, posted by Lou Pilder on October 15, 2006, at 21:18:18
you want to know whether something you want to post is likely to be considered civil or not.
> it says that anyone can always ask him if the post is OK.
sure, anyone can ask him, but if you are wanting a timely response...
> if he means that I really do not have to ask others and I have not seen a reply to me from him as to if he mans that.would it have helped if he has said 'pretty please with sugar on top'?
> Also, Dr. Hsiung says that he knows it when he sees it. Others can see it to.
yes. hence you might get a more timely response that is in line with bob's response if you were to ask someone else.
> what is ther to be seen her?
i thought you wanted to know whether your proposed post is likely to be considered civil.
> I am asking him to review a link from the Anti-Defamation league as a response to statements that IMO have the potential to accuse Jews and the potential IMO to foster defamtion toward Jews and me as a Jew on the forum
that doesn't involve your accusing other people of making statements, or your making statements yourself that have the potential to accuse Jews and the potential to foster defamation etc etc - does it? i would say that not only are OTHER people not allowed to do this, but YOU are not allowed to do this either.
> One is if the statements in question do have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feeling if left unsanctioned
so you don't think they would have the potential to arouse antisemitic feeling if they were sanctioned?
> and the other question is if the post that I want to send him is civil.
right. and he requested (pretty please with sugar on top) how about you ask someone else FIRST and see what they have to say.
> I think that it is an additional standard to me, if I have to ask others before I send it to him
he didn't say you HAVE to ask others, he REQUESTED you to ask others:
how about you do x
don't do ycan you hear the difference?
> I know that I can ask others , but {must} I ask others before I send my request to Dr. Hsiung?
you don't have to Lou,
but then Bob doesn't have to respond to your every request either...
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 15, 2006, at 21:55:08
In reply to Re: Lou's response to aspects of gardenergirl's po, posted by alexandra_k on October 15, 2006, at 21:43:11
alexandra-k,
Please do not post to me.
Lou
Posted by gardenergirl on October 15, 2006, at 22:17:20
In reply to Re: Lou's response to aspects of gardenergirl's po, posted by alexandra_k on October 15, 2006, at 21:43:11
> you want to know whether something you want to post is likely to be considered civil or not.
>
> > it says that anyone can always ask him if the post is OK.
>
> sure, anyone can ask him, but if you are wanting a timely response...I think that's a very good point. To take it up a bit more...
I've not seen anything anywhere that says one cannot email Dr. Bob with a question. Still, Dr. Bob, like all of us likely has to prioritize the demands on his time. What seems important and urgent to one person may not hold the same importance and urgency to Dr. Bob, and there's nothing wrong with that. Even if he views something as important, he may not have time to get to something in a timeframe that others might expect. And while that might be disappointing to some, it's certainly within his rights to manage his own time and obligations.
I agree that it's quite likely that asking someone else to consult about a post before posting will lead to faster response time versus waiting for a reply from Dr. Bob.
I rely on a couple of trusted folks when I need a "civility consult". I almost always get a very quick reply.
gg
Posted by Dr. Bob on October 16, 2006, at 10:24:57
In reply to Lou's response to aspects of gardenergirl's post-B, posted by Lou Pilder on October 15, 2006, at 21:42:31
> The TOS in the FAQ indicates to me that Dr. Hsiung has in his policy that [...one can >always< ask me to find out if a post is OK...].
Could you point out where exactly it indicates that?
> A. How many others am I to ask?
> B. What am I to ask them?
> C. Do the posters have to be a cross-section of the more knowlegable population here?
> D. Do I ask them by email or babblemail or on the board?
> E. Is this something that could constitute a vote as to if the post is civil or if the statements that I would like to post the response to have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings or not?
> F. What kind of bias factor, if any, can be used for the population?
> G. Does Dr. Hsiung seek a concensus to make decisions as to if posts are civil or not here?
> H. If not, then why am I asked to ask others before I send it to him when the consensus was published in 1947 and has been taught in schools since then, books have been written, movies made, amd the Pope recently repudiated any doctrine that has the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings?Could you ask one other person what they think about you posting that URL? And do so off the board, since asking on the board would mean posting the URL...
Would anyone like to volunteer to be asked?
Bob
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 16, 2006, at 11:07:48
In reply to Re: Lou's response, posted by Dr. Bob on October 16, 2006, at 10:24:57
> > The TOS in the FAQ indicates to me that Dr. Hsiung has in his policy that [...one can >always< ask me to find out if a post is OK...].
>
> Could you point out where exactly it indicates that?
>
> > A. How many others am I to ask?
> > B. What am I to ask them?
> > C. Do the posters have to be a cross-section of the more knowlegable population here?
> > D. Do I ask them by email or babblemail or on the board?
> > E. Is this something that could constitute a vote as to if the post is civil or if the statements that I would like to post the response to have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings or not?
> > F. What kind of bias factor, if any, can be used for the population?
> > G. Does Dr. Hsiung seek a concensus to make decisions as to if posts are civil or not here?
> > H. If not, then why am I asked to ask others before I send it to him when the consensus was published in 1947 and has been taught in schools since then, books have been written, movies made, amd the Pope recently repudiated any doctrine that has the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings?
>
> Could you ask one other person what they think about you posting that URL? And do so off the board, since asking on the board would mean posting the URL...
>
> Would anyone like to volunteer to be asked?
>
> BobDR. Hsiung,
You asked me to point out where your FAQ says that members can ask you if a post is OK
Your FAQ has a section titled,[...How do you enforce these policies?...]
In that section ,you write,[...I do recommend these tips on {how to avoid being blocked}. You click on your offered link and up comes a post from a member that reads,[...You can always email DR. Bob...if you are not sure if something is OK...]
The link for your FAQ is;
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html
The page has the link at the bottom and you write,[...I do recommend these tips on {How to avoid getting blocked}...] and you click on that offered link to have your tip that you recommend, (You can always email DR Bob if your not sure if something is OK)...]which is #6 in your tips.
Lou PIlder
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 16, 2006, at 11:36:28
In reply to Re: Lou's response, posted by Dr. Bob on October 16, 2006, at 10:24:57
> > The TOS in the FAQ indicates to me that Dr. Hsiung has in his policy that [...one can >always< ask me to find out if a post is OK...].
>
> Could you point out where exactly it indicates that?
>
> > A. How many others am I to ask?
> > B. What am I to ask them?
> > C. Do the posters have to be a cross-section of the more knowlegable population here?
> > D. Do I ask them by email or babblemail or on the board?
> > E. Is this something that could constitute a vote as to if the post is civil or if the statements that I would like to post the response to have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings or not?
> > F. What kind of bias factor, if any, can be used for the population?
> > G. Does Dr. Hsiung seek a concensus to make decisions as to if posts are civil or not here?
> > H. If not, then why am I asked to ask others before I send it to him when the consensus was published in 1947 and has been taught in schools since then, books have been written, movies made, amd the Pope recently repudiated any doctrine that has the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings?
>
> Could you ask one other person what they think about you posting that URL? And do so off the board, since asking on the board would mean posting the URL...
>
> Would anyone like to volunteer to be asked?
>
> Bob
DR. Hsiung,
You asked me if I could ask one other person.
If you are saying that you will not tell me if it could be OK to post the proposed URL before I post it, unless I ask one person first, then I have already written about that. Here is a link
Lou PIlder
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20060918/msgs/694965.html
Posted by Dr. Bob on October 16, 2006, at 12:28:12
In reply to Lou's reply to Dr. Hsiung- » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on October 16, 2006, at 11:07:48
> > > The TOS in the FAQ indicates to me that Dr. Hsiung has in his policy that [...one can >always< ask me to find out if a post is OK...].
>
> Your FAQ has a section titled,[...How do you enforce these policies?...]
> In that section ,you write,[...I do recommend these tips on {how to avoid being blocked}. You click on your offered link and up comes a post from a member that reads,[...You can always email DR. Bob...if you are not sure if something is OK...]I see, it's a post from Tabitha, and she says "Dr Bob or a deputy":
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20060622/msgs/671005.html
Bob
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 16, 2006, at 13:33:06
In reply to Re: Lou's reply, posted by Dr. Bob on October 16, 2006, at 12:28:12
DR. Hsiung,
YOu wrote,[...the posts says that she says {Dr. Bob or a deputy}.
Are you saying that because it says that one can always email Dr. Bob or a deputy that they can not email you?
And anyway, the recommendation by you does not have any attatchment that you will not make the determination requested , {unless the requester asks someone else first}.
And also, your policy also writes that the deputies {do not have to intervene}, so if that policy also can be used by the deputy in this respect, then could not the policy by you that says that one can always email the deputy to find out if something is OK also allows the deputy to not respond to the requestor's request?
And does not the determination in this case depend on your approval? If it only depends on the approval of a deputy, then I could send it to one of them, if they have to make the determination. But I also could send it to you, and is that not my choice according to your policy because it says,DR. Bob{or}a deputy?
Lou Pilder
This is the end of the 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.