![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 17 of 17. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by zazenduckie on March 26, 2007, at 8:42:30
In reply to Re: blocked for week » Declan, posted by Dr. Bob on March 25, 2007, at 7:40:30
While acknowledging the effort you've made to apprehend Declan by inserting the brackets and editing, I suggest that the original text may yet contribute to our effort at grasping Declan's meaning.>>>Maybe the problem is not Bush so much as the mindset that made him possible
Might not Bush supporters rather than being offended be gratified that he is not being called "the problem" ?
What do you suppose this mindset is? And why would it necessarily be offensive to anyone if it were a problem? Isn't it possible that a mindset could be a problem and make something possible which is itself not a problem? What does mindset mean to you Dr Bob?
I would seriously like to know. I'm often not quite sure what Declan means but I would never *ss*m* he meant something uncivil unless I was sure what he was saying. I see by the ellipse and brackets that you were trying to make clear what you interpreted as uncivil but I just don't get it. I hope you decide to explain.
And welcome back to the admin board!
> > Maybe the problem is ... the mindset that made [Bush] possible.
>
> Please be sensitive to the feelings of others (such as supporters of Bush).
>
Posted by zazenduckie on March 26, 2007, at 9:24:09
In reply to Re: Declan's block » Dr. Bob, posted by zazenduckie on March 26, 2007, at 8:42:30
mind-set [mahynd-set]
1. an attitude, disposition, or mood.
2. an intention or inclination.
Posted by Iwillsurvive on March 26, 2007, at 11:47:46
In reply to Re: Declan's block » Dr. Bob, posted by zazenduckie on March 26, 2007, at 8:42:30
Now this IS interesting to me as well.
WHY a block? This to me would have been one of those shocking, painful, out of the blue type blocks.
I guess to keep it simple, I would ask, why a block rather than a please be sensitive? or civil? or rephrase? cuz really, I dunno politics, but what he said isn't the end of the world for gosh sakes???!!! Surely not a thing worthy of BANISHMENT?????
So mebbe I am missing something here?
But unless I can get some understanding of this, I am pretty pissed off about it.
Posted by Dinah on March 26, 2007, at 11:53:52
In reply to Re: Declan's block=Dr. Bob, posted by Iwillsurvive on March 26, 2007, at 11:47:46
If someone has already received warnings, Dr. Bob doesn't consider it necessary to give it in each and every case thereafter, since he believes that the poster has had reason to become familiar with the civility rules.
While Dr. Bob *can* choose to give another PBC, it isn't required.
Posted by Iwillsurvive on March 26, 2007, at 12:02:41
In reply to Re: Declan's block=Dr. Bob » Iwillsurvive, posted by Dinah on March 26, 2007, at 11:53:52
> If someone has already received warnings, Dr. Bob doesn't consider it necessary to give it in each and every case thereafter, since he believes that the poster has had reason to become familiar with the civility rules.
>
> While Dr. Bob *can* choose to give another PBC, it isn't required.**Dinah, I understand you just trying to do the rules and help Bob out, and thats good cuz bob never f*cking here, but truly, banishment is sh*t to people who been like I am. Its a black cloud of stinking rotten flesh that covers our body and soul with the stench of the truth of who we are.
But bob don't get that.
Mebbe he bnever been there. I glad of that. But I wish to hell he'd understand it just some is all.
I think bob has put the deputies in a HARD place and its NOT FAIR, speclly if he not gonna be adninistrator but just be GONE.
INMO
Posted by karen_kay on March 27, 2007, at 9:51:22
In reply to Re: Declan's block » Dr. Bob, posted by zazenduckie on March 26, 2007, at 8:42:30
just plain sucks!
Posted by Meri-Tuuli on March 27, 2007, at 16:54:29
In reply to Re: mr bob!!!!!!! » karen_kay, posted by fayeroe on March 25, 2007, at 19:57:26
I feel bad that I was the one who started this thread that got you blocked. Personally, I am having trouble seeing how what you said was uncivil, or how it came to be that a block was decided for you but anyway. I hope you come back soon!
Kind regards
Meri
Posted by fayeroe on March 27, 2007, at 16:54:30
In reply to Sorry Declan, posted by Meri-Tuuli on March 27, 2007, at 8:23:16
> I feel bad that I was the one who started this thread that got you blocked. Personally, I am having trouble seeing how what you said was uncivil, or how it came to be that a block was decided for you but anyway. I hope you come back soon!
>
> Kind regards
>
> Merii see no merit in his being blocked. period. if he was blocked, all of us should have been.......xoxoxo pat
Posted by karen_kay on March 27, 2007, at 16:54:30
In reply to Re: Sorry Declan, posted by fayeroe on March 27, 2007, at 8:43:45
agreed pat!
Posted by karen_kay on March 27, 2007, at 17:05:54
In reply to Re: blocked for week » Declan, posted by Dr. Bob on March 25, 2007, at 7:40:30
now, why would poor mr declan get a block and not me? if we must move this darling, i'm afraid i'll have to ask you to move this for me to admin. but, i'm afraid we may need to discuss this further. no wine this time dear. might need some good, old fashioned vodka to figure this one out!
regards!
kk
Posted by fayeroe on March 27, 2007, at 17:05:54
In reply to mr bob!!!!!!! » Dr. Bob, posted by karen_kay on March 25, 2007, at 19:20:51
> now, why would poor mr declan get a block and not me? if we must move this darling, i'm afraid i'll have to ask you to move this for me to admin. but, i'm afraid we may need to discuss this further. no wine this time dear. might need some good, old fashioned vodka to figure this one out!
>
> regards!
>
> kk
>
>
clapping of hands in delight! well put, kk, well put!
Posted by greywolf on March 27, 2007, at 19:26:22
In reply to Re: Declan's block » Dr. Bob, posted by zazenduckie on March 26, 2007, at 8:42:30
I understand the need for the civility rules, and I think they are necessarily tighter here than on sites that don't have a mental health focus.In my opinion, a politics board naturally conflicts with rules designed to enforce needed sensitivity in a community where (1) some people truly need that extra bit of gentleness and (2) some people inevitably don't understand that fact. The recurring controversy of the perceived validity or invalidity of particular blocks says more about the ill-fit of the politics board than it does about the members who have been blocked.
Posted by 10derHeart on March 27, 2007, at 20:51:30
In reply to Re: Declan's block, posted by greywolf on March 27, 2007, at 19:26:22
> In my opinion, a politics board naturally conflicts with rules designed to enforce needed sensitivity in a community where (1) some people truly need that extra bit of gentleness and (2) some people inevitably don't understand that fact. The recurring controversy of the perceived validity or invalidity of particular blocks says more about the ill-fit of the politics board than it does about the members who have been blocked.
You make a valid point. The thing is, the Politics boards was created at the request of posters who felt frequent distress over the ummm...."spirited" political discussions on Social, back before the last U.S. presidential election.
So, if Dr. Bob were to decide to eliminate the Politics board, I suppose the same sort of threads would begin to appear on Social again, particularly since we are again headed into another election season.
Of course, civility rule violations could and would be handled just as they are with any posts in those threads. But the issue was more that some posters felt entirely unwelcome and uncomfortable on a Social board full of political threads, week after week.....particularly when there didn't seem to be room for certain points of view, and when posters even mildly suggested they might hold those views, ....well, let's just say outright rejection of a poster as a person, due to their possible holding an unpopular political view *can* be clearly expressed even while staying within the civility rules.
A significant amount of stress and hurt was building up over this, IMO. Thus, the creation of the separate board, where at least posters who wish to avoid things can do so by not visiting the board at all, yet not having to stay away from Social, where many have many friends.
I have no good solution and doubt there is one that will make it any better or easier to post about politics on Babble. I don't think I've said this the way I wanted, actually. Dinah explains the problem we had back then far better than I do.
Posted by greywolf on March 27, 2007, at 21:06:06
In reply to Re: Declan's block » greywolf, posted by 10derHeart on March 27, 2007, at 20:51:30
That makes sense, 10derHeart.
But it brings to mind the quandary of trying to be all things to all people. Maybe this just isn't the place for politics at all. Lord knows, there are plenty of opportunities for political partisanship elsewhere on the net.
Posted by 10derHeart on March 27, 2007, at 21:39:16
In reply to Re: Declan's block » 10derHeart, posted by greywolf on March 27, 2007, at 21:06:06
Posted by caraher on March 27, 2007, at 22:46:13
In reply to Re: blocked for week » Declan, posted by Dr. Bob on March 25, 2007, at 7:40:30
>> Maybe the problem is ... the mindset that made
>> [Bush] possible.> Please be sensitive to the feelings of others
> (such as supporters of Bush).Please be sensitive to the feelings of others (such as those appalled by apparently endless war and the threat of climate change).
The text in the original post was
>>Maybe the problem is not Bush so much as the
>>mindset that made him possible.Please do not conflate statements about political thought with statements about individuals or groups. This may cause those who are trying to observe civility guidelines by not singling out political leaders to feel hurt or put down.
But please don't take this personally, this doesn't mean I don't like you or think you're a bad person.
If you have questions about my blocks and warnings, please first make sense of the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#enforceFollow-ups regarding these issues should not be redirected to Psycho-Babble Administration. They, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
Thanks,
John.
P.S. According to the current system:
previous block: none
period of time since previous block: not applicable
uncivil toward a particular individual or group: yes
particularly uncivil: no
different type of incivility: no
provoked: no
block/warning issued more than one week after original post: yesIf we take 0 weeks, divide by 10, and round, that's a reduction of 1 week. If we apply that to your previous block, that takes you back to 0. And if we go from there, that's 1 week.
Posted by Declan on April 2, 2007, at 2:01:44
In reply to Re: blocked for week » Dr. Bob, posted by caraher on March 27, 2007, at 18:29:08
You are all very kind. Like someone else here once, I too feel like 'a clueless unnacomplished nuisance'.
Chris Smither in his excellent "Leave the Light On" (a plea, I'm sure) does a version of Dylan's "Visions of Johanna" which is fully equal to the original. Done as a resigned, reflective, melancholy walz, the new version has its own truth, which for me is that it is impossible to listen to it and not weep for what has happened to our world in the intervening 40 years.
I'm sorry that my difficulties with all this interfere with my sociability.
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.