![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 23 to 47 of 64. Go back in thread:
Posted by confuzyq on June 22, 2007, at 23:08:18
In reply to Re: separate deputy posting names » Dr. Bob, posted by confuzyq on June 22, 2007, at 22:52:21
But yes there would be potential up-sides for all parties too... I've let some things get to me lately so I guess I'm not sure where I stand, and don't mean to focus on potential down-sides. I hope you understand.
Posted by zenhussy on June 23, 2007, at 21:10:30
In reply to Re: separate deputy posting names, posted by Dr. Bob on June 21, 2007, at 22:23:00
>>>I do think it's important to be able to keep everyone straight...
Bob<<<
agreed! yesterday over on social the newly created Deputy sign in was used---(field tested?): General reminder about sensitivity and content Deputy Racer 6/22/07 [new member]
then today in post on admin this was written "That's just one deputy, talking about the experience of that one deputy." [msg #765264 admin] but not signed in as deputy.
when applying deputy interpretation of babble law will they sign in as deps? but when talking about dep. 'experience' no sign in as dep? is that how it will go?
hard to keep straight already!
Posted by Meri-Tuuli on June 24, 2007, at 20:40:31
In reply to Re: separate deputy posting names, posted by Dr. Bob on June 21, 2007, at 22:23:00
Hello
Well I think that it'd be a good idea, I think it might help remove any deputy bias against or for particular posters, particulary if we didn't know what their deputy and other posting names were (and the deputies didn't tell us either). So I'm in favour, but then again, I'm not a deputy, so I don't know how it would feel for them. But I think it'd be good - they could do a bunch of checks in 'deputy mode' and then switch and be in 'not deputy mode'. It would be good as long as the deputies didn't reveal their other posting identities. It might even be worth a shot of just having, say 'deputy1, deputy2' etc. So no-one except the deputies and you would know who the real deputy was. I think that might help to make deputies more impartial and reduce any bias they might have..... hhmmmmm?
Posted by Honore on June 24, 2007, at 23:26:10
In reply to Re: separate deputy posting names » Dr. Bob, posted by zenhussy on June 23, 2007, at 21:10:30
I personally prefer the system we already have, where deputies use their own names, but put "acting as deputy"-- or whatever the phrase is.
I prefer to know who did what, not only because it helps me understand my world-- which is of paramount importance--and trust the actions of people. I may disagree, but I can come to see the inner logic of a real person, to understand, and accept the point of view as a responsible, reliable part of how that person sees the world.
I believe that individuals see things differently, and that it's important to acknowledge that reality-- and the reality that Dinah or GG or Racer did x, y, or z. We know these are individual judgments, not the impersonal weighing of facts by unknown Decider(s) imposing absolute or impartial judgments- from the stars-- We know they aren't distanced and detached. I couldn't pretend to believe or feel comfortable with such disjunctive roles for people here.
In the world of Deputies #1,2,3, etc, that knowledge (that they are actual posters with whom I have online relationships) would leave me very unsure, and suspicious, about what they've done, and how to relate to them as posters-- My feeling is that there's a lot of honesty and reliability in a system of real relationships, even with different roles-- and all that becomes unclear and somewhat dishonest to me in the proposed way of doing things.
I'm sure everyone will have guesses, possibly incorrect ones, about which deputy did anything-- and it's freeing and lighter to know who's done what, when, why, to whom. I don't like the prospect of suspecting that someone I like or trust has done something I deeply disagree with. Most importantly, I'm left without any way of resolving that with the person-- short of asking what seems to become an invasive and unfair question-- ie was it you who did such and such.
I mention that, because the problems arise when a particular person-- poster, or deputy, feels blamed or put in the wrong. I know that's an aspect of any system of rules, and enforcements. But knowing who it is gives us a way of making sense, of coming to a better place, of working through, rather than being left with confusion and uncertainty in our minds.
Honore
Posted by confuzyq on June 24, 2007, at 23:41:47
In reply to Re: separate deputy posting names, posted by Honore on June 24, 2007, at 23:26:10
> I'm sure everyone will have guesses, possibly incorrect ones, about which deputy did anything-- and it's freeing and lighter to know who's done what, when, why, to whom. I don't like the prospect of suspecting that someone I like or trust has done something I deeply disagree with. Most importantly, I'm left without any way of resolving that with the person-- short of asking what seems to become an invasive and unfair question-- ie was it you who did such and such.
>
> I mention that, because the problems arise when a particular person-- poster, or deputy, feels blamed or put in the wrong. I know that's an aspect of any system of rules, and enforcements. But knowing who it is gives us a way of making sense, of coming to a better place, of working through, rather than being left with confusion and uncertainty in our minds.
>... has it accomplished that lately...
Posted by Honore on June 25, 2007, at 4:56:48
In reply to Re: separate deputy posting names » Honore, posted by confuzyq on June 24, 2007, at 23:41:47
It has for me, many times.
I think we see instances where there's a breakdown-- but aren't as aware of times when things do get worked out in a helpful way, or, more, how the overall sense of reliability works effectively to give deputy decisions respect.
There a lot of respect and support for deputies, even if it isn't universal.
Honore
Posted by scratchpad on June 25, 2007, at 6:49:34
In reply to Re: separate deputy posting names, posted by Honore on June 24, 2007, at 23:26:10
> I personally prefer the system we already have, where deputies use their own names, but put "acting as deputy"-- or whatever the phrase is.
>
> I prefer to know who did what, not only because it helps me understand my world-- which is of paramount importance--and trust the actions of people. I may disagree, but I can come to see the inner logic of a real person, to understand, and accept the point of view as a responsible, reliable part of how that person sees the world.
>
> I believe that individuals see things differently, and that it's important to acknowledge that reality-- and the reality that Dinah or GG or Racer did x, y, or z. We know these are individual judgments, not the impersonal weighing of facts by unknown Decider(s) imposing absolute or impartial judgments- from the stars-- We know they aren't distanced and detached. I couldn't pretend to believe or feel comfortable with such disjunctive roles for people here.
>More often than not, deputies consult amongst each other regarding civility questions; but just one deputy will make the response.
If another deputy has already been a participant in the thread in question, they keep out of it. (This is practice and not a rule.)There is consensus, even if doesn't look that way because of how the individual deputies post.
Scratchpad, formerly deputy ClearSkies
for information purpoises only!
Posted by Dinah on June 25, 2007, at 8:07:00
In reply to Re: separate deputy posting names, posted by Honore on June 24, 2007, at 23:26:10
That's how I tend to feel about it too.
It's astonished me that people appear to be against personal accountability as deputies. Do we really want deputies in masks? While I fought the concept for a long time, I've grown to see that whether I'm posting as poster or as deputy that the fact that I'm a deputy can't be overlooked either by other posters or by myself, and that I feel a certain responsibility to Dr. Bob to post in such a way that won't cause him trouble. It's almost like being a minister or public official more than having a job where you can take off the badge. I'm not sure if I like that, in fact considering that I was dragged to this point kicking and screaming I am reasonably sure I don't. But I've conceded that it's true, will I or nill I.
I must confess that I fail to see how posting as Deputy #_ would make me more impartial or accountable for my actions as deputy. It certainly wouldn't affect any feelings I might have. It's the job of a deputy not to act on any personal feelings, and if people had ever seen the agonizing going on backstage about whether something meets the technical standards of incivility I don't think anyone could think that doing so was standard operating procedure at all. Maybe I'm missing something, or don't understand.
I would not wish to post as Deputy#_. I take responsibility for my actions both as deputy and poster. And I know what's in my heart and mind and if I ever post anything as either that I feel does not do my good (to me) name justice, I feel the responsibility to apologize and repair.
I just don't understand this at all. Any of it.
Posted by muffled on June 25, 2007, at 9:49:12
In reply to Re: separate deputy posting names » Honore, posted by Dinah on June 25, 2007, at 8:07:00
((((Dinah)))
I have afeeling the thot was just to try and offer deps some protection from harassement and negative scruntiny.
As you said, when in a higher profile position, your more on the firing line as it were :-(
Goes with the territory I guess.
Just wish it weren't so hard being a deputy :-(
Like a cop friend of mine said, you just goto have thick skin and try and let stuff roll off...
Not so easy I understand.
Just no easy answers I guess.
I guess one thing I would like to say is i think its important for Bob to be clearly backing up and supporting his deputies....but he here more now, so mebbe he will.
I say again, that I think deps been doing a GOOD job. I think deps show more restraint than Bob!!!(sorry Bob ;-} )
So I guess and hope mebbe this is just Bob trying to help out his deps is all?
Hope so.
M
Posted by Honore on June 25, 2007, at 10:12:49
In reply to Re: separate deputy posting names » Honore, posted by scratchpad on June 25, 2007, at 6:49:34
Thanks for that clarification, Scratchpad. The consultation is important, and I'm glad to be reminded of it. It certainly adds a dimension to the issue. But I still feel that anonymity is uncertain and disturbing, as opposed to knowing who wrote the particular post. It helps to be reminded of the consultative nature of the process, though.
By the way, your having been a deputy in training for two years and a deputy for however long you were only is a plus-- in my mind.
I thought you were a deputy for years and years, but however long it was-- it's a sign of dedication and caring-- and I hope at some point you feel that it's worth it to continue. You are always warmly thought of by me, in that regard and others.
Honore
Posted by confuzyq on June 25, 2007, at 10:46:05
In reply to Re: separate deputy posting names » confuzyq, posted by Honore on June 25, 2007, at 4:56:48
> There a lot of respect and support for deputies, even if it isn't universal.
>
> HonoreThat may just be a general statement, but just in case... If I've seemed to fall into the second half of that sentence (not supporting or respecting deputies period), that hasn't been my intention or how I feel. I think I'm too cryptic and vague sometimes, because I feel like it's "safer." But in being that way I'm sure I often just obliterate whatever my actual point was, or worse.
Posted by Meri-Tuuli on June 29, 2007, at 15:22:43
In reply to Re: separate deputy posting names » Honore, posted by confuzyq on June 25, 2007, at 10:46:05
The thing is, perhaps deputies like to be known as deputies on this board....simply because it gives them more power and status somehow? I mean, I was quite surprised that, for example, Dinah didn't like the idea that deputies become 'nameless'.
I personally feel it would enable them to do their job better -- I mean, for example, if you're a close babble buddy with a poster, I can't help but feel that somehow you might be either more lenient or more harsh if you then have to give them an uncivil warning or something. Surely, then, it would be better that you were anon, so that these posting decisions didn't affect any relationships with posters you might have? At any rate, wouldn't it make life easier?
So I have come to the conclusion (rightly or wrongly) that deputies like to be known, simply because they enjoy more status and power that way.
If I were a deputy, I would want to be anonymous, so that my deputy decisions would not interfere with my personal posts etc. I think it would also help people who are blocked etc not take it so peronally or hurtfully -- its less hurtful when you don't know or have personal ties with the punisher. Its easier to take the punishment, somehow.
Anyway I know that I would much prefer babble to be run that way!
Its like the teacher who tries to be cool and be friends with his/her students - it just never works, simply because one has much more power over the other. Perhaps.
Posted by Deputy Dinah on June 29, 2007, at 15:31:14
In reply to Power and status and deputies, posted by Meri-Tuuli on June 29, 2007, at 15:22:43
> So I have come to the conclusion (rightly or wrongly) that deputies like to be known, simply because they enjoy more status and power that way.People are free to come to any conclusion they wish. But the ability to express negative conclusions is limited by the civility guidelines, as it is with any poster.
If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
Follow-ups regarding these issues, as well as replies to the above posts, should of course themselves be civil.
Dr. Bob is always free to override deputy decisions. His email is on the bottom of each page. Please feel free to email him if you believe this decision was made in error.
Dinah, acting as deputy to Dr. Bob
Posted by muffled on June 29, 2007, at 16:08:59
In reply to Power and status and deputies, posted by Meri-Tuuli on June 29, 2007, at 15:22:43
the thing is though...
the deps DON'T have much power.
Not really.
And they are WAY more approachable and lenient than Bob.
I think its been VERY hard for them lately :-(
And taken time.
I really dunno WTF Bob is up to.
But I think the deps goto be doing it out of kindness for babble, cuz its an utterly and completely thankless job these days....
I think the deputies WANT to be held accountable. Thats why names. From what has been said, they worry a great deal bout fairness.
Just no easy answers I am afraid.
Pretty soon there will be no deputies.....
then what?
Posted by Sigismund on June 29, 2007, at 22:44:41
In reply to Power and status and deputies, posted by Meri-Tuuli on June 29, 2007, at 15:22:43
>If I were a deputy, I would want to be anonymous, so that my deputy decisions would not interfere with my personal posts etc. I think it would also help people who are blocked etc not take it so peronally or hurtfully -- its less hurtful when you don't know or have personal ties with the punisher. Its easier to take the punishment, somehow.
I think that's right.
Posted by Meri-Tuuli on June 30, 2007, at 1:58:14
In reply to Please be civil » Meri-Tuuli, posted by Deputy Dinah on June 29, 2007, at 15:31:14
I don't really think I deserved that uncivil warning.
Whats wrong with saying that someone has power and status?
Gordon Brown, the new PM for the UK, enjoys power and status now. Thats surely not uncivil, is it?
Perhaps my comments where abit too close to the bone?
Posted by Meri-Tuuli on June 30, 2007, at 2:10:14
In reply to Re: Power and status and deputies, posted by Sigismund on June 29, 2007, at 22:44:41
Thanks for agreeing with me.
Perhaps this is a perspective we need to examine - how does it impact on posters that we don't have anonymous deputies?
I, for one, avoid posting personal posts to deputies, simply because they are deputies. Not that I have ever had a block (not that I can remember anyway), but if I had received a block from a particular deputy, I think afterward I would hold a slight grudge against that deputy, and perhaps avoid them altogether.
I actually feel quite strongly that deputies should become anonymous and be bound by rules not to tell anyone on babble that they are a deputy, and what their deputy posting name was. I can't help but feel it would be of benefit to everyone in this community. If deputies were anonymous, I for one, would think about offering to become a deputy.
But, all this said, I'm not saying that I'm not grateful for deputies giving up their time etc. Clearly, babble could not function as it does now without their input. I'm just thinking of ways of making it better and more just.
Posted by Meri-Tuuli on June 30, 2007, at 2:20:18
In reply to Re: Power and status and deputies » Meri-Tuuli, posted by muffled on June 29, 2007, at 16:08:59
> the deps DON'T have much power.
> Not really.Yes they do. They can give us uncivil warnings, they can block us, what more power (on babble anyway) do you want?
> And they are WAY more approachable and lenient than Bob.
No they aren't. And they really really shouldn't be more lenient. Dr Bob and the Deputies should have the very same criteria for blocking as each other. Deputies should have exactly the same lenienancy as Dr Bob. The very fact that you think that they are more lenient just goes to show that they show bias. In all honestly, I find Dr Bob the most fair and lenient.
> I think its been VERY hard for them lately :-(
I'm not saying it hasn't been hard for them. Perhaps this could have been avoided if they were anonymous? Perhaps it would help them take things less personally when they get critized in their deputy roles?
> I really dunno WTF Bob is up to.
Finding balance in his life?
> But I think the deps goto be doing it out of kindness for babble, cuz its an utterly and completely thankless job these days....
No-one has forced them to become deputies.
> I think the deputies WANT to be held accountable. Thats why names. From what has been said, they worry a great deal bout fairness.
I'm not saying that deputies should not be held accountable for their decisions. Of course they should. Simply that the deputies become anonymous and that personal posting names and deputy names become completely separate. We can still hold accountable 'deputy_2' for example.
> Just no easy answers I am afraid.
> Pretty soon there will be no deputies.....
> then what?Yes there will. I can imagine that all sorts of people will volunteer to become deputies if we had the cover of anonymity.
Posted by muffled on June 30, 2007, at 9:43:55
In reply to Re: Power and status and deputies, posted by Meri-Tuuli on June 30, 2007, at 2:20:18
> > the deps DON'T have much power.
> > Not really.
>
> Yes they do. They can give us uncivil warnings, they can block us, what more power (on babble anyway) do you want?**Yes they have the power minimally, but do they *abuse* it? they also always say that Bob can override their descicions, so ultimately, they have small power, cuz a person can complain to Bob(whom you stated is fair)and he can override their descions. Bob is FAR more difficult to deal with than our deputies IMHO. And I say OUR deputies, they are a part of our community.
>
> > And they are WAY more approachable and lenient than Bob.
>
> No they aren't. And they really really shouldn't be more lenient. Dr Bob and the Deputies should have the very same criteria for blocking as each other. Deputies should have exactly the same lenienancy as Dr Bob. The very fact that you think that they are more lenient just goes to show that they show bias. In all honestly, I find Dr Bob the most fair and lenient.**They are human, the *art* of dealing with people will never be perfect or exact. I wish Bob would lean toward the deputies ways, not the other way around. Bob is rigid and inflexible, I think he is honestly trying, but perhaps its hard for him. The deputies show a GENERAL level of lenience, and they try hard not to show bias, they fully admit themselves that they are human. You WILL notice I magically escaped a block on a thread above where EVERYone else appears to have been blocked.....that was Bob...
Hmmmmm.
>
> > I think its been VERY hard for them lately :-(
>
> I'm not saying it hasn't been hard for them. Perhaps this could have been avoided if they were anonymous? Perhaps it would help them take things less personally when they get critized in their deputy roles?**Its not so much personal attacks that I am worried about. Its the fact they they *do* worry about their actions. Bob is supposed to back them up, cuz there's times when they feel they are struggling with trying to step in on more difficult threads, cuz they do not have the power Bob does, and because they would like to be able to babble too, and not be ostracised for trying to help. Yeah, I dunno bout the anonymity, to me it seems it might make it easier, but the deps seem to think its not such a great idea, and I *do* trust the deps...like I say, I think its more lack of an overseer than the personal attacks thats been hard for them methinks.
>
> > I really dunno WTF Bob is up to.
>
> Finding balance in his life?**thats what he says, and good for him. he *does* seem to be communicating ever so slightly better...
He still does not tell us much however :-(
I think the deps are struggling too...
>
> > But I think the deps goto be doing it out of kindness for babble, cuz its an utterly and completely thankless job these days....
>
> No-one has forced them to become deputies.**Noone *forces* ANYone to do volunteer work, they do it to make a contribution to society.....you think I find it fun washing God knows what off the walls in a drop on center? Seeing fights there? Seeing people slowly go down over time, and die? Yet there I go.....I *want* to help. I beleive the deputies do it for the very same reason. I *don't* think its fun for them. The training process takes a long time. I want to help too, but I just couldn't take the worry and the flack, I am not stable enough. I am thankful for the deputies.
>
> > I think the deputies WANT to be held accountable. Thats why names. From what has been said, they worry a great deal bout fairness.
>
> I'm not saying that deputies should not be held accountable for their decisions. Of course they should. Simply that the deputies become anonymous and that personal posting names and deputy names become completely separate. We can still hold accountable 'deputy_2' for example.**well, like I said, I *thot* it a good thot, the anonymity. If for no other reason than, as you say, maybe there could be more deputies. I have some doubt though, for how long they would remain anon.... and speculation would run rampant, if they were babblers AND deputies....I think the level of distrust on babble would increase exponentially, for some don't wish to post to deps....
>
> > Just no easy answers I am afraid.
> > Pretty soon there will be no deputies.....
> > then what?
>
> Yes there will. I can imagine that all sorts of people will volunteer to become deputies if we had the cover of anonymity.
>
**I honestly am not sure there will be :-(
And what would their motivations be, under cover of anonymity...
At least our deps are out front and honest.
People didn't exactly flock to the call last time....
And its a long training process...
And how would it *feel* to be posting AND an anonymous deputy???? I would feel like I was living a lie in front of my babble friends. I couldn't do that....
So, its just not that easy Meri.
We may just have to agree to disaggree....
But I did post this post, for you, and others, so that you could understand *my* POV. Cuz this is what *I* have seen here. And I beleive theres truth in what I say.
Posted by Dinah on June 30, 2007, at 10:30:11
In reply to Re: Power and status and deputies, posted by muffled on June 30, 2007, at 9:43:55
Thank you muffled, and not just for this, but in general for you contributions around Babble lately.
Perhaps it's just that it was pretty strongly stressed in our history classes that having neighbors hiding their faces behind hoods to enforce the law was not actually the best way to achieve fairness and lack of bias. :(
Anonymity on the internet seems to increase disinhibition. Knowing that my reputation in this community is on the line with each of my actions (along with OCD scrupulosity I suppose) is part of what keeps me scrutinizing myself closely to make sure my actions are unbiased and that my reasoning could be published on the nightly news without any cause for shame.
Maybe it's just me. But I, Dinah, feel part of this community as Dinah, and I would not feel comfortable wearing a mask to do anything here.
Posted by Meri-Tuuli on June 30, 2007, at 11:17:51
In reply to Re: Power and status and deputies » muffled, posted by Dinah on June 30, 2007, at 10:30:11
> Perhaps it's just that it was pretty strongly stressed in our history classes that having neighbors hiding their faces behind hoods to enforce the law was not actually the best way to achieve fairness and lack of bias. :(
I don't really know what that is supposed to mean, or what it is referring to, as we don't get taught American history in school.
> Anonymity on the internet seems to increase disinhibition.Yes, in those that are trying to provoke. Not in those that are trying to protect.
>Knowing that my reputation in this community is on the line with each of my actions (along with OCD scrupulosity I suppose) is part of what keeps me scrutinizing myself closely to make sure my actions are unbiased and that my reasoning could be published on the nightly news without any cause for shame.
But you can still worry about your reputation if you were anonymous -- it would simply be your reputation as a fair and just deputy! You would still have a reputation to protect if you were 'deputy_2' for example.
> Maybe it's just me. But I, Dinah, feel part of this community as Dinah, and I would not feel comfortable wearing a mask to do anything here.So exactly. My point which got me an uncivil warning remains, which obviously I am not going to re-iterate. Anything else which I might add to that comment you just made, will probably end up with a block or something. But, let me ask you a question instead. If, for the good of the community, it was decided that deputies were to become anonymous, would you therefore resign? Because you just stated you 'would not feel comfortable wearing a mask around here'?
Posted by Dinah on June 30, 2007, at 11:34:22
In reply to Re: Power and status and deputies » Dinah, posted by Meri-Tuuli on June 30, 2007, at 11:17:51
Yes, I would. But that wouldn't be a very hard thing to get me to do right now in any case so I don't know how much that means.
I have said what I thought on the matter. I do not wish to say any more. Either people understand my position or they don't. I'm not going to try to convince anyone. It rarely seems to be helpful.
I was merely explaining to muffled why this deputy opposed anonymous deputy names.
Posted by muffled on June 30, 2007, at 11:34:31
In reply to Re: Power and status and deputies » muffled, posted by Dinah on June 30, 2007, at 10:30:11
>Maybe it's just me. But I, Dinah, feel part of this community as Dinah, and I would not feel comfortable wearing a mask to do anything here.
**Ahhhh ((Dinah))
I feel you are a part too. A contributing part. A wonderful part.
Makes me sad when I thot of this....
WHY am I working to defend deputies particularly????
Many reasons:
we need them
I value them
but the sad one is.....
Cuz I am one to defend the underdog :-(
and really, sadly
in my mind :-(
which is partly why I would not want to be a deputy,
is that you guys apparently *are* perceived by some others differently....you actually are :-(
Guess I'd not consciously realized that before, not really...
and so,
to me,
it kinda puts you not in a status of power,
but a status of limitation here on babble.
So you pay personally for your volunteer work :-(
Sorta like I do for mine.
And it HURTS doesn't it sometimes?
People not wanting to touch you...
We get hurt for what we do.
But we do it anyways.
And we feel good inside,
THATS the payoff for us.
It feels good to help others.
And so we go on.
THANKS DEPUTIES!
M
Posted by Dinah on June 30, 2007, at 11:42:51
In reply to The cost of volunteering » Dinah, posted by muffled on June 30, 2007, at 11:34:31
I needed that. Thanks.
Posted by Meri-Tuuli on June 30, 2007, at 11:53:34
In reply to Re: Power and status and deputies, posted by muffled on June 30, 2007, at 9:43:55
> **Yes they have the power minimally, but do they *abuse* it? they also always say that Bob can override their descicions, so ultimately, they have small power, cuz a person can complain to Bob(whom you stated is fair)and he can override their descions.
Well I don't think the details matter so much - the fact is that they do have more power than the non-deputy poster, and when there is an inbalance of power between two people, the relationship can never really be equal. It can try to be, but there is always the power inbalance in the background. So no matter how little power you might think the deputies have, they still have more power than the non-deputy.
And yes, I do think Dr Bob is fair.
>Bob is FAR more difficult to deal with than our deputies IMHO.
In what way?
>And I say OUR deputies, they are a part of our community.
I never said that they weren't part of our community.
> **They are human, the *art* of dealing with people will never be perfect or exact.
I never said they couldn't make mistakes or whatever.
>I wish Bob would lean toward the deputies ways, not the other way around. Bob is rigid and inflexible, I think he is honestly trying, but perhaps its hard for him.
Law enforcement is supposed to be rigid and inflexible, and fair to all. You still get arrested for shop lifting if did it because you were starving, than if you were just a bored teenager. Police, the law, law enforcement is supposed not to be lenient or to favour any particular party.
>The deputies show a GENERAL level of lenience, and they try hard not to show bias, they fully admit themselves that they are human. You WILL notice I magically escaped a block on a thread above where EVERYone else appears to have been blocked.....that was Bob...
Well Bob is clearly human too. I never said that deputies weren't human, or couldn't make mistakes. They try hard to minimize bias, but why are they then so against going anonymous?
> Yeah, I dunno bout the anonymity, to me it seems it might make it easier, but the deps seem to think its not such a great idea,Thanks for agreeing with me. I don't know why the deputies don't like it.
> He still does not tell us much however :-(What is he supposed to tell us?
> **Noone *forces* ANYone to do volunteer work, they do it to make a contribution to society.....you think I find it fun washing God knows what off the walls in a drop on center? Seeing fights there? Seeing people slowly go down over time, and die? Yet there I go.....I *want* to help. I beleive the deputies do it for the very same reason. I *don't* think its fun for them. The training process takes a long time. I want to help too,Good for you that you are doing volunteer work. I'm sure the deputies want to help - I never said they didn't want to help, did I?
>....but I just couldn't take the worry and the flack, I am not stable enough.
But do you think you might if you were anonymous? Any flank for acting as a deputy might be easier to take if it weren't directed at 'muffled' but rather at 'deputy_2' instead? Don't you think that it might be better to have flack caused by a deputies actions, aimed at a poster called 'deputy_2'? Rather than your personal posting name?
>well, like I said, I *thot* it a good thot, the anonymity. If for no other reason than, as you say, maybe there could be more deputies. I have some doubt though, for how long they would remain anon.... and speculation would run rampant, if they were babblers AND deputies....I think the level of distrust on babble would increase exponentially, for some don't wish to post to deps....Whats 'thot' mean? Why would distrust increase? And why would it do it expotentially? I don't think speculation matters. I think it would help everyone be more civil - you have no idea who the deputies are, so everything must be super civil because you don't know where they're lurking....and posters wouldn't be able to 'know' the deputies and therefore try to play up any advantages they might have over deputies.
> And its a long training process...
> And how would it *feel* to be posting AND an anonymous deputy???? I would feel like I was living a lie in front of my babble friends. I couldn't do that....Thats you, might not be the same for others. And why would it be a lie? Surely your conduct as a babble community regular poster should be no different than that of a deputy, ie civil at all times etc...
> So, its just not that easy Meri.I never said it was easy!
> We may just have to agree to disaggree....
> But I did post this post, for you, and others, so that you could understand *my* POV. Cuz this is what *I* have seen here. And I beleive theres truth in what I say.Well yes, point taken.
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.