![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 304. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by verne on April 3, 2009, at 3:13:38
I guess I'm repeating the obvious. I don't think any block should be longer than a week, frankly. I spent 2 years on mental wards, with graduated reward systems with a week or two of restricted freedom, but this site is medevial with year long blocks.
Where's the compassion, the forgiveness? Where's the love?
I don't post much here any more because this site puts the letter above the spirit of civility.
I guess I'm through here but still might post in the alternative medicine section if I think I can contribute.
If I said what I really thought, I'd be blocked for another year - not that I care.
Verne
Posted by fayeroe on April 3, 2009, at 10:08:42
In reply to Blocks, posted by verne on April 3, 2009, at 3:13:38
Verne, I agree 100% with you on the block system. I have given up on hoping that Bob will see the light and make the changes that I see necessary to empower people to grow and heal.
I miss you. I wish that we could talk. Pat
Posted by myco on April 3, 2009, at 13:57:35
In reply to Re: Blocks » verne, posted by fayeroe on April 3, 2009, at 10:08:42
This starts from within here, this board. it's the "aura" of this board that creates an environment in which some people cant be themselves without offending others...even though you direct nothing at anyone. Some tend to allow their negative perceptions and interpretations, spawned from their own inner issues, to make attempts to censure others and take offence where none is meant. But I guess it takes all kinds of personalities.
If this kind of thing loosened up within the boards members...bob wouldnt feel compelled to do this as much...he has to play the role of monitor for school children it seems...babysitting and this is one way to make an attempt to enforce a "no fighting" policy...to protect those who are insecure.
Not much you can do really...just abide. EVeryone of all personalities will use this board regardless so it's futile to fight administration here. In their defense, they do spend alot of time babysitting here thats for sure. I'm guessing bob has to be called in on occasion to make a decision based on something theyve noticed...and im guessing he has minimal time for this so...enforcing rule of law is probably the best way even though many may not agree. I'm learning this...touchy touchy...lots of us here.
> Verne, I agree 100% with you on the block system. I have given up on hoping that Bob will see the light and make the changes that I see necessary to empower people to grow and heal.
>
> I miss you. I wish that we could talk. Pat
Posted by Deputy 10derHeart on April 3, 2009, at 20:20:22
In reply to Re: Blocks » fayeroe, posted by myco on April 3, 2009, at 13:57:35
>their negative perceptions and interpretations, spawned from their own inner issues, to make attempts to censure others
>he has to play the role of monitor for school children it seems...babysittingPlease don't post post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down.
It's fine to discuss administrative policy here, as long as you do that without posting negative characterizations of other Babblers. Being yourself is important and encouraged - but with limits as explained in the FAQ. Your freedom of speech *is* limited here and Babble is not necessarily the place to express *everything" you'd like to express in the manner you'd like to express it. Also, as you have correctly noticed, it isn't necessary to direct negative comments specifically at someone for those comments to be uncivil. In fact, it is often the case that the more vague and general you are, the more posters you may offend, or potentially offend, as more may read your words and think, "When he says posters are XXX and YYY, does he mean me?"
If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternate ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil. It *does* take a while to 'get the hang' of posting in accordance with the civility rules here. Dr. Bob chooses to enforce civil language, respect and sensitivity more stringently than what is allowed on other similar internet sites, at least in my experience. I would strongly encourage you to take a look at this section of the FAQ, in order to avoid any further administrative actions.
Follow ups regarding these issues should of course, be civil. Dr. Bob has oversight over deputy decisions, and he may choose a different action.
-- 10derHeart, posting as deputy to Dr. Bob
Posted by Sigismund on April 3, 2009, at 23:26:55
In reply to Blocks, posted by verne on April 3, 2009, at 3:13:38
There should be a board somewhere in cyberspace for all the interesting people who have been booted off babble.
I miss them.
Posted by myco on April 3, 2009, at 23:28:46
In reply to Re: Blocks, posted by Sigismund on April 3, 2009, at 23:26:55
I'll save you a seat LOL on my way shortly as this rate.
> There should be a board somewhere in cyberspace for all the interesting people who have been booted off babble.
>
> I miss them.
Posted by Phillipa on April 4, 2009, at 0:53:38
In reply to Re: Blocks » Sigismund, posted by myco on April 3, 2009, at 23:28:46
Myco see what you mean Love Phillipa
Posted by myco on April 4, 2009, at 14:38:04
In reply to Re: Blocks » myco, posted by Phillipa on April 4, 2009, at 0:53:38
lol slammed for defending the administration. nice lol
> Myco see what you mean Love Phillipa
Posted by desolationrower on April 4, 2009, at 19:41:37
In reply to Blocks, posted by verne on April 3, 2009, at 3:13:38
I understand the idea of making an environment that is comfortable for people with more fragile than average egos. But the current rule system i don't think is optimal for working with how people actually interact, espcially since PB also has people who exists in perpetual unpleasant mood states, are especially impulsive, paranoid, used to not being heard or interpreted charitably, etc., and banning them sucks for the person banned.
-PRINCIPLE: less 'civility warning' for honest disagreement, keep it focused to personal disagreements. in policing online fora, CLEAR rules are bad. they need to be enforced with judgement.
-PRINCIPLE: punishment needs to be swift and certain for it to be useful. being blocked 20hours later is a long time off, and harsh and not particularly productive since during 100% of the ban time, the person has cooled off, and can't post about things unrelated.
-NEW RULE: duputy can tell people who specifically do not get along well to not address each other (but not a ban on posting in teh same threads, especially if the are talking about something pharmaceutical and not jsut each other)
-NEW RULE: better than 'banning' (the goal is to protect vulnerable, not punish the wicked or 'fix' their cruel natures, right?): let deputy 'edit' the offending post to remove personal hostility, and replace with extra politeness. save the bans for bigger cases.
-NEW: perhaps it would help if there were more jr. deputies, would could edit posts to ensure hostile posts are quickly edited, even if they weren't able to ban?
-GOAL: since what the person wants is to express themself, ban doesn't really work well. knowing their communication will have hostility removed, people might self-censor a bit more when they see something that makes them angry.
-also, more focus on keeping posters who don't get on well with each other from posting hostilities to each other, not on hostilities in general. focus on the relationhips, not the posts themselves. I think people are more likely to take seriously if they are told they are being a jerk to someone, than if they are told they are are breaking 'politeness etiquette.' but that requires change in emphasis.
-d/r
Posted by JadeKelly on April 4, 2009, at 22:44:22
In reply to Blocks, posted by verne on April 3, 2009, at 3:13:38
Dr. Bob,
as i'm not feeling so angry right now, I'd like to try once more for you to hear me, I am really not trying to be rude Dr Bob, but either you are too busy to remember what has been previously said, posted,etc. or I think you really don't want to hear your posters. I hope its the former, and that you will consider adding to your staff.
Apr 4, 2009 12:04:44 PM, bob@dr-bob.org wrote:> It is, from what I've seen, very unusual for someone to get a block
> w/o a PBC, unless they have been warned with in a day or two
> regarding their behavior. The blocks are given very inconsistently
> with your policies and rules. Some can say whatever they want, and
> others well, not. In addition, you say that this is not meant to be
> hurtful. I feel in my case it was. No babblmail gets to me, I
> received NO notitification that I was blocked, as it was done at
> night I geuss. I went to post the next day, was blocked for 2 weeks
> and didn't even know why. This is a shock, its hurtful, and they had
> HOURS to at least email me that I'd been blocked. *Do you really feel
> this is okay Dr, Bob?* Is this not punative? Did they really "hate"
> blocking me? My therapist and psychiatrist are in the same office,
> and feel this behavior towards posters who come here for help is an
> abuse of power, as I do feel abused, among other things. Luckily, I'm
> smart enough to leave when I'm being treated that way.It may be unusual, but it happens. You had already been blocked 2 months before and warned twice 1 month before. We could be seen as inconsistent or as using our judgment. I know that we sometimes cause hurt even though we don't mean to, and I'm sorry about that. Blocked posters are notified the next time they try to post, we don't email them. I realize that can be a shock. To find out why, it's up to them to find the post from us. Yes, we really do hate to block people. It's using our power, but I don't see it as abusing it. If you feel abused somewhere, I agree, it might be smart to leave.
I geuss for the sake of Babble, I was hoping you would say that this block was handled poorly. Instead, you are defending it which tells me this kind of "rule" on the site is not only acceptable to you but expected. I'm wondering if you think its having a positive impact on the boards. If you truly mean not to cause hurt, may I offer a few suggestions?
Email the blocked party immediately. Why would you want to "shock them"? You've said on Admin that something kind should always follow a PBC. My second suggestion is to have the deputy that issued the block and sends the email, tell the poster why they are being blocked. To make them find it *I feel* is childish on the part of admin, and hurtful to the poster. I think a kind word would go a long way here as well. Maybe even an offer of a discussion afterward. Example: Jade, you have been blocked for two weeks as a result of your post " name of post" I wanted to let you know so that you would not be surprised. Please understand that this has nothing to do with how I feel about you personally, but is a direct result of your post and our guidlines. If you would like to talk about how to avoid this in the future, please contact me when your block is up and I will be happy to have a private conversation with you about it. Deputy ABC.
Next, a blocked poster has a very difficult time appealing the block. Have you seen your deputies email addresses? They obviously are not meant to be used. THE ONLY way to contact anyone (unless you want to spend an hour trying to figure out missing email parts) is to email you. Which I did. I cc'd all of my emails to you, with in 1-3 days I'd say of my block. It was repeated over and over that I had emailed Jan immediately with a sincere apology, which I did, and we are trying to repair our friendship now. Yet, you offered to reconsider my block if I were to send you a copy of the apology, a day before it was over. I'm not sure how to take that other than you weren't hearing me. Would you intentionally offer to reconsider, finally, my 2 week block, the day before its over? Can you maybe see where I don't feel heard?> *You'll let it stand? Its over in a day or two Dr. Bob. As I said in
> a earlier email, I will not be back, what difference does any of this
> make now, lol? *I'm feeling angry right now, and as much as I
> intended to try to offer some insight here, you telling me that
> "your going to let it stand", when my block is essentially over, is
> insulting, tells me that I'm not being heard , and frankly, just as I
> could not get the smallest courtesies when I was blocked, I no longer
> have time or interest in offering well thought out, researched
> material that may have been helpful. At this point, I think my time
> is better spent somewhere that I can make a difference.I understand that you feel angry. But I did hear you, I just didn't change my mind as a result.
This is hurtful communication as well. I just hear defensiveness. You feel angry *But* Where in this statement can you explain receiving at least three emails that mentioned the apology, and that I would be open to some kind of open dialogue with Jan to stop the bickering on the board. And your offer to reconsider the day before my block is up should I provide you with the apology? Can you see here where maybe I felt unheard? If you had acted on my apology to Jan one of the many times I emailed that to you (makes me feel I'm being heard) "But I did hear you, I just didn't change my mind as a result" again, if I was truly heard, you would not have waited until the day before my block is up to reconsider based on my immediate apology to Jan, you said if you received that, you may reconsider the block. You say you did hear me, I don't believe you would intentionally be that hurtful as to offer reconsideration the day before the block is up. In addition, Jan said if anyone had contacted her she would have confirmed it. We talk every day.
I sincerely hope that somewhere in our conversations, Dr. Bob, you really did hear something that will benefit the posters at Babble. As I am leaving, I have no other agenda here other than I care about them.PosterJadeKelly
PS- Einstien I believe: Definition of insanity: "Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
You are losing a lot of really cool posters at an alarming rate.
Posted by JadeKelly on April 4, 2009, at 23:20:46
In reply to Blocks, posted by verne on April 3, 2009, at 3:13:38
Posted by JadeKelly on April 4, 2009, at 23:24:40
In reply to Re: ****Crickets Chirping******* (nm), posted by JadeKelly on April 4, 2009, at 23:20:46
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 5, 2009, at 16:58:59
In reply to DR.BOB pls change/clarify rules SUGGESTIONS, posted by desolationrower on April 4, 2009, at 19:41:37
> lol slammed for defending the administration. nice lol
>
> mycoI trust the lols mean you realize it wasn't defending us that was considered uncivil. :-)
--
> the current rule system i don't think is optimal for working with how people actually interact, espcially since PB also has people who exists in perpetual unpleasant mood states, are especially impulsive, paranoid, used to not being heard or interpreted charitably, etc., and banning them sucks for the person banned.
>
> -PRINCIPLE: less 'civility warning' for honest disagreement, keep it focused to personal disagreements. in policing online fora, CLEAR rules are bad. they need to be enforced with judgement.
>
> -PRINCIPLE: punishment needs to be swift and certain for it to be useful. being blocked 20hours later is a long time off, and harsh and not particularly productive since during 100% of the ban time, the person has cooled off, and can't post about things unrelated.
>
> -NEW RULE: duputy can tell people who specifically do not get along well to not address each other
>
> -NEW RULE: better than 'banning' (the goal is to protect vulnerable, not punish the wicked or 'fix' their cruel natures, right?): let deputy 'edit' the offending post to remove personal hostility, and replace with extra politeness. save the bans for bigger cases.
>
> -GOAL: since what the person wants is to express themself, ban doesn't really work well. knowing their communication will have hostility removed, people might self-censor a bit more when they see something that makes them angry.
>
> -d/rThanks for giving this some thought and suggesting some alternatives. I do realize that it can be a challenge to be civil when in perpetually unpleasant mood states, etc. And that it can suck to be blocked.
Disagreeing in and of itself isn't considered uncivil. It can be hard to balance being predictable and using judgment. Blocked posters don't necessarily stay cool 100% of the time they're blocked.
Swifter might be better in some ways, but deputies can't be here all the time. And it would give posters less time to apologize or otherwise work things out on their own, which I'd much prefer.
Under certain conditions, posters can already be asked not to post to certain other posters:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#harassed
I think it's nice when posters themselves replace hostility with politeness. Sometimes friendly input from other posters is more effective than input, no matter how friendly, from the administration.
Again, be the change you wish to see. Show other posters how they might interpret things more charitably. Encourage them to apologize. Suggest they not address those they can't get along with. Help them avoid being blocked. A post in time saves nine.
Bob
Posted by myco on April 5, 2009, at 17:44:33
In reply to Re: SUGGESTIONS, posted by Dr. Bob on April 5, 2009, at 16:58:59
So you don't ever feel that you are "babysitting" Bob? Don't slam me for asking Bob a question please...that's uncalled for. I agree it's good practice for people to readjust their communication skills to be polite and compassionate for others but also the others need to add to their own skills by learning to reinterpret or perceiving things said or done in a different light. My limited experience with therapy thus far includes this as a way of reducing added stress on oneself. Try to put yourself in others shoes if you know what I mean...giving that same compassion back to those you are listening to. I don't want to argue with you here Bob...i'm just trying to justify this in my head. I don't go out of my way to hurt anyone but seriously some people take me, and others, so serious in what we say, so misinterpreted that I wonder how effective their own therapy is for them...again please don't slam me. Just trying to understand from your point of view Bob...perception plays a large role in therapy. Does it not?
I'm also trying to bring a community spirit together here...one where the board is able to accept others differences. This is difficult as this board contains many little cliques or groups who don't associate with others or avoid certain boards because they contain certain types of people etc...Bob it can be a somewhat unhealthy environment. Please offer a response and I will let the issue go...I just wanted it off my chest is all. I'm an adult...I can agree to disagree if I have to. "Thanks for listening" (Dr Fraser Crane - hey...at least a smile come on, something? a chuckle? eh? lol )
myco
---------------------> > lol slammed for defending the administration. nice lol
> >
> > myco
>
> I trust the lols mean you realize it wasn't defending us that was considered uncivil. :-)
>
> --
>
> > the current rule system i don't think is optimal for working with how people actually interact, espcially since PB also has people who exists in perpetual unpleasant mood states, are especially impulsive, paranoid, used to not being heard or interpreted charitably, etc., and banning them sucks for the person banned.
> >
> > -PRINCIPLE: less 'civility warning' for honest disagreement, keep it focused to personal disagreements. in policing online fora, CLEAR rules are bad. they need to be enforced with judgement.
> >
> > -PRINCIPLE: punishment needs to be swift and certain for it to be useful. being blocked 20hours later is a long time off, and harsh and not particularly productive since during 100% of the ban time, the person has cooled off, and can't post about things unrelated.
> >
> > -NEW RULE: duputy can tell people who specifically do not get along well to not address each other
> >
> > -NEW RULE: better than 'banning' (the goal is to protect vulnerable, not punish the wicked or 'fix' their cruel natures, right?): let deputy 'edit' the offending post to remove personal hostility, and replace with extra politeness. save the bans for bigger cases.
> >
> > -GOAL: since what the person wants is to express themself, ban doesn't really work well. knowing their communication will have hostility removed, people might self-censor a bit more when they see something that makes them angry.
> >
> > -d/r
>
> Thanks for giving this some thought and suggesting some alternatives. I do realize that it can be a challenge to be civil when in perpetually unpleasant mood states, etc. And that it can suck to be blocked.
>
> Disagreeing in and of itself isn't considered uncivil. It can be hard to balance being predictable and using judgment. Blocked posters don't necessarily stay cool 100% of the time they're blocked.
>
> Swifter might be better in some ways, but deputies can't be here all the time. And it would give posters less time to apologize or otherwise work things out on their own, which I'd much prefer.
>
> Under certain conditions, posters can already be asked not to post to certain other posters:
>
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#harassed
>
> I think it's nice when posters themselves replace hostility with politeness. Sometimes friendly input from other posters is more effective than input, no matter how friendly, from the administration.
>
> Again, be the change you wish to see. Show other posters how they might interpret things more charitably. Encourage them to apologize. Suggest they not address those they can't get along with. Help them avoid being blocked. A post in time saves nine.
>
> Bob
Posted by JadeKelly on April 5, 2009, at 21:35:53
In reply to Re: SUGGESTIONS, posted by Dr. Bob on April 5, 2009, at 16:58:59
--
> D/R
> > the current rule system i don't think is optimal for working with how people actually interact, espcially since PB also has people who exists in perpetual unpleasant mood states, are especially impulsive, paranoid, used to not being heard or interpreted charitably, etc., and banning them sucks for the person banned.
> >
> > -PRINCIPLE: less 'civility warning' for honest disagreement, keep it focused to personal disagreements. in policing online fora, CLEAR rules are bad. they need to be enforced with judgement.
> >
> > -PRINCIPLE: punishment needs to be swift and certain for it to be useful. being blocked 20hours later is a long time off, and harsh and not particularly productive since during 100% of the ban time, the person has cooled off, and can't post about things unrelated.
> >
> > -NEW RULE: duputy can tell people who specifically do not get along well to not address each other
> >
> > -NEW RULE: better than 'banning' (the goal is to protect vulnerable, not punish the wicked or 'fix' their cruel natures, right?): let deputy 'edit' the offending post to remove personal hostility, and replace with extra politeness. save the bans for bigger cases.
> >
> > -GOAL: since what the person wants is to express themself, ban doesn't really work well. knowing their communication will have hostility removed, people might self-censor a bit more when they see something that makes them angry.
> >
> > -d/r
>
>BOB
Thanks for giving this some thought and suggesting some alternatives. I do realize that it can be a challenge to be civil when in perpetually unpleasant mood states, etc. And that it can suck to be blocked. REPEAT=NO CHANGE
>
> Disagreeing in and of itself isn't considered uncivil. It can be hard to balance being predictable and using judgment. Blocked posters don't necessarily stay cool 100% of the time they're blocked. =NO CHANGE
>
> Swifter might be better in some ways, but deputies can't be here all the time. And it would give posters less time to apologize or otherwise work things out on their own, which I'd much prefer. REALLY, BOB, CAUSE THATS EXACTLY WHAT JUST HAPPENED TO ME AND I STILL HAD A 2WK BLOCKSORRY, AGAIN=NO CHANGE
>
> Under certain conditions, posters can already be asked not to post to certain other posters:
>
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#harassed
>
> I think it's nice when posters themselves replace hostility with politeness. Sometimes friendly input from other posters is more effective than input, no matter how friendly, from the administration.NO=CHANGE
>
> Again, be the change you wish to see. Show other posters how they might interpret things more charitably. Encourage them to apologize. Suggest they not address those they can't get along with. Help them avoid being blocked. A post in time saves nine.=NO CHANGE
>
> Bob"It takes two to tango"...(Fayeroe, out of context)
Bob:
"Hmm, and maybe in addition to hurt and anger, my unavailability also triggers longing?"
You did NOT just say that to Fayeroe. I think I just threw up in my mouth. Dude, you got issues.
-You implied that maybe greenleaf was looking to you to fulfil some kind of "Daddy Issues"?
Are you insane? No really. You are creeping me out. Does it trigger us when you aren't here? He*l no, don't you get it? It triggers us when EACH OTHER arent here.Go far far away Bob please. Just stop the blocks before you go. Bye Bye!
Jade***Jade***Jade***Jade***Jade***Jade***Jade****
Posted by Phillipa on April 5, 2009, at 21:45:59
In reply to Re: SUGGESTIONS-ANOTHER FALSE ALARM » Dr. Bob, posted by JadeKelly on April 5, 2009, at 21:35:53
Jade we straightened out our differences amongst ourselves so there is much merit to this. People get upset and get trigger fingers so give us time to work things out Dr. Bob please. Would hate to lose you Jade. Love Phillipa
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 5, 2009, at 22:48:08
In reply to Re: SUGGESTIONS » Dr. Bob, posted by myco on April 5, 2009, at 17:44:33
> So you don't ever feel that you are "babysitting" Bob?
No, I don't ever feel posters are babies.
> I agree it's good practice for people to readjust their communication skills to be polite and compassionate for others but also the others need to add to their own skills by learning to reinterpret or perceiving things said or done in a different light. My limited experience with therapy thus far includes this as a way of reducing added stress on oneself.
I agree, which is why one of my suggestions was to show other posters how they might interpret things more charitably.
Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 6, 2009, at 17:01:33
In reply to Re: SUGGESTIONS-ANOTHER FALSE ALARM » Dr. Bob, posted by JadeKelly on April 5, 2009, at 21:35:53
Hi, everyone,
Would any of you be willing to try this out?
Show Jade how she might interpret things more charitably. Encourage her to apologize. Help her avoid being blocked.
> Bob:
>
> "Hmm, and maybe in addition to hurt and anger, my unavailability also triggers longing?"
>
> You did NOT just say that to Fayeroe. I think I just threw up in my mouth. Dude, you got issues.
>
> Are you insane? No really. You are creeping me out.
>
> JadeKellyBob
PS: From that other thread:
> > I really would like to talk to zazenducke
> >
> > Sigismund
>
> It takes two to tango...
>
> Hmm, and maybe in addition to hurt and anger, my unavailability also triggers longing?
>
> Bobhttp://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20081228/msgs/883196.html
> It takes two to tango.
>
> fayeroehttp://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20081228/msgs/883223.html
Posted by Garnet71 on April 6, 2009, at 17:38:32
In reply to Blocks, posted by verne on April 3, 2009, at 3:13:38
We could avoid a lot of blocks here if people would quit 'telling on' one another; in other words, if you feel hurt or slighted - maybe just let the perceived insulter know right away rather than hitting that notify adminstrator button. That creates a lot less friction than being told on like back in elementary school. I've done it myself when I thought someone was rude to me when I first came here - and vice versa when someone thought I was rude or inconsiderate to them - problems resolved; no blocking.
**How about make that a rule - let the posters resolve the problem on thier own, and if that doesn't work - then do your administrative stuff. That type of communication fosters relationships and is a lot healthier than having some "authority" intervene. It is a little strange since we are all adults here. In real life, we don't have some authority swoop down and make it all go away when their are frictions with work, family, friends - we must work things out on our own.*** See-that would be good thereuputic practice for us; problem resolution experience.
Jade, I had wondered why I haven't seen you around - you had a lot of good advice and support to offer, I hope you stick around.
Posted by Garnet71 on April 6, 2009, at 17:48:16
In reply to Blocks, posted by verne on April 3, 2009, at 3:13:38
"This is a message board for mutual support and education."
So it seems, Dr. Bob, this forum is more for members that it is for you. Lightening up a bit on the rules, such as letting people resolve their own problems (like apologizing to another, etc.) before doing administrative blocks, would be beneficial to the community because it would foster personal growth and social skills that are helpful in maintaining a supportive evironment.
This technique is more in line with your mission statements and forum purpose. The environment of 'walking on eggshells' that some have inadvertently described through many posts on this particular board is counterproductive to a supportive atmosphere.
Think about it.
Posted by garnet71 on April 6, 2009, at 18:08:17
In reply to Blocks, posted by verne on April 3, 2009, at 3:13:38
Okay-one more thing Dr. Bob - if you believe in utilizing the internet to solve problems - you would know current societal trends that are escalating and increasingly eminant, brought upon by technological communications, and you could either harness the trends or fall behind:
Heirarchy of organizations:
- moving from top down to bottom upOnline collaboration - the future in problem solving:
- moving from CONsumers to PROsumers (that would be us members)
If you recognize that - i'd say you're pretty up on your research in using technology in the realm of problem solving/support groups. You don't want to be outdated, do you? If you don't recognize those changes that are being facilitated via communication technologies at this very moment, then I might just have to compare you with a recent Dean of a local university who I met not too long ago who did not even know what the term "social entrepreneurship" meant and had to be taught about it by some sophomore undegrad student (me). Nothing personal!
Hope that's a convincing argument Z:)
Posted by myco on April 6, 2009, at 18:13:19
In reply to behind the times.?, posted by garnet71 on April 6, 2009, at 18:08:17
ooo Garnet71 youre just so sssthhexxayyyy when you talk logic. :o)
*hugs*
> Okay-one more thing Dr. Bob - if you believe in utilizing the internet to solve problems - you would know current societal trends that are escalating and increasingly eminant, brought upon by technological communications, and you could either harness the trends or fall behind:
>
> Heirarchy of organizations:
>
> - moving from top down to bottom up
>
> Online collaboration - the future in problem solving:
>
> - moving from CONsumers to PROsumers (that would be us members)
>
> If you recognize that - i'd say you're pretty up on your research in using technology in the realm of problem solving/support groups. You don't want to be outdated, do you? If you don't recognize those changes that are being facilitated via communication technologies at this very moment, then I might just have to compare you with a recent Dean of a local university who I met not too long ago who did not even know what the term "social entrepreneurship" meant and had to be taught about it by some sophomore undegrad student (me). Nothing personal!
>
> Hope that's a convincing argument Z:)
>
Posted by JadeKelly on April 6, 2009, at 18:51:01
In reply to Re: an opportunity, posted by Dr. Bob on April 6, 2009, at 17:01:33
I love you guys, but if ANYONE does this I swear I will find you!!!!! LOL!! Really, please don't.
Do not show me a dam* thing please. How dare him.
I have finally learned how to interpret exactly whats going on here.*****Please hear me****I am NOT coming back. He knows this. He is trying to control you and weild (in his own mind) power to punish me, by encouraging you to get me to apologize. For what? I meant EVERY word. Again, I meant every word. He can block me till the cows come home. I will not be back EVER. I will not ever apologize. I feel no "charity" towards bob.
I'm posting one last time because I will not stand back and watch him turn you into his puppets to punish me. Wish me luck if you want to, Phillipa has my email if you want it. I would love to hear from posters (only).
I am begging you do not respond to that garbage below. Bob is small and insecure. Let him get his jollies elsewhere. Maybe HE could be thinking about charity. How many weeks of blocking in the last few months? TwinLeaf?
Bob, immediately remove everyones blocks. YOU show some charity, bob. If I had my way everyone would stop posting until all blocked posters were pardoned. Charity? Lets see some Bob. And maybe a few apologies to them as well.
Love to posters, Jade
BLOCK AWAY BOB Its what you do best. In fact, just make it permanent please. Then I don't have to go to the trouble of unregistering.
****GARBAGE******GARBAGE****GARBAGE****GARBAGE****"Show Jade how she might interpret things more charitably. Encourage her to apologize. Help her avoid being blocked.-Bob
******GARBAGE****GARBAGE****GARBAGE******GARBAGE
Posted by myco on April 6, 2009, at 19:00:10
In reply to Re:********READ BEFORE POSTING**** PLEASE, posted by JadeKelly on April 6, 2009, at 18:51:01
lol Jade, we really must get you a date babe :oP
kiss it missy hehe
> I love you guys, but if ANYONE does this I swear I will find you!!!!! LOL!! Really, please don't.
>
> Do not show me a dam* thing please. How dare him.
> I have finally learned how to interpret exactly whats going on here.*****Please hear me****
>
> I am NOT coming back. He knows this. He is trying to control you and weild (in his own mind) power to punish me, by encouraging you to get me to apologize. For what? I meant EVERY word. Again, I meant every word. He can block me till the cows come home. I will not be back EVER. I will not ever apologize. I feel no "charity" towards bob.
>
> I'm posting one last time because I will not stand back and watch him turn you into his puppets to punish me. Wish me luck if you want to, Phillipa has my email if you want it. I would love to hear from posters (only).
>
> I am begging you do not respond to that garbage below. Bob is small and insecure. Let him get his jollies elsewhere. Maybe HE could be thinking about charity. How many weeks of blocking in the last few months? TwinLeaf?
>
> Bob, immediately remove everyones blocks. YOU show some charity, bob. If I had my way everyone would stop posting until all blocked posters were pardoned. Charity? Lets see some Bob. And maybe a few apologies to them as well.
>
> Love to posters, Jade
>
> BLOCK AWAY BOB Its what you do best. In fact, just make it permanent please. Then I don't have to go to the trouble of unregistering.
>
>
> ****GARBAGE******GARBAGE****GARBAGE****GARBAGE****
>
> "Show Jade how she might interpret things more charitably. Encourage her to apologize. Help her avoid being blocked.-Bob
>
> ******GARBAGE****GARBAGE****GARBAGE******GARBAGE
>
Posted by garnet71 on April 6, 2009, at 19:00:26
In reply to Re: behind the times.? » garnet71, posted by myco on April 6, 2009, at 18:13:19
Well, Myco, maybe everyone could use some
**sex and chocolate***
lol
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.