![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 74 to 98 of 123. Go back in thread:
Posted by Dinah on January 5, 2011, at 14:12:08
In reply to Re: Dr Bob, I'm sorry » Dinah, posted by SLS on January 5, 2011, at 13:33:14
I could possibly work for years to come to the point where I don't expect myself to have the power to achieve anything. I don't think I will ever get to the point where I don't say anything. Avoidance is easier.
(I had to skip Sunday School for a few months while they were doing a book I found rather anti-Semitic. I probably should have gone every week to point out the errors. But it was easier not to be there. What I am constitutionally unable to do was go and say nothing.)
Posted by Solstice on January 5, 2011, at 14:33:55
In reply to Re: What can I do? » twinleaf, posted by Dinah on January 5, 2011, at 13:11:36
> I was saying that Phillipa also deserves respect.
>
> As do you.I don't think that holding people accountable is necessarily disrespectful.
> People don't deserve these very long threads about their alleged wrongdoings.If the result of an isolated incident, I might feel the same way. However, I think that communities respond to their members in self-governing ways sort of naturally. Even animals do that. I think there would be something kind of abnormal going on if a community member was engaging in harmful behaviors to others, repeatedly over a long period of time and to multiple members - and the group of members didn't somehow react in a way that was driven by a need to extinguish the harmful behavior. That's the only way a society of any kind can cohesively exist for a long period of time. Cohesive doesn't mean in 'total harmony.' That's a ridiculously impossible utopia. It more means that it's about the whole group self-adjusting. I don't hear anyone calling for Phillipa to be banished or abandoned. But perhaps social pressure will succeed in causing Phillipa and everyone else to really 'get it' that this community is not tolerant of using babblemail to gossip and spread private information about other members whether accurate or not. And even though Bob is not able to monitor regular email, if community members use regular email to spread gossip or say mean things about others - although they may not get blocked - their behavior is likely to come back and bite them. I can't help but think of Ceasar (Dog Whisperer) and his technique of how dogs handle unruly members of the pack. The dog isn't banished - but the rest of the pack will make it unbearable enough for the unruly dog that he/she eventually learns to manage their behavior in order to co-exist within the pack. The social pressure (and disruption) goes away when the objectionable behavior goes away.
One thing I'm pretty sure of, is that it would be highly unusual for a community like this to without cause, have an assortment of members over a long period of time make random and unfounded complaints of the same nature about a single member.
As for as trying to handle it off-board, I think the multiplicity of the history of complaints means that it's not a problem for a single member to work out on their own off board. I think it really might be a Community problem. Reporting facts about things that have taken place is not uncivil or unkind. Reactions to factual events might become uncivil or unkind. That of course brings us back to the question of whether Maxime's report is factual - which again raises the issue of Maxime's report being the most recent of a long history of similar reports by various people. That alone lends credibility, even without Maxime attempting to get copies of communication (reportedly) sent to others about her.
With respect to Maxime - I think it's a mistake to 'kill the messenger.' I also think she has put a lot of effort into ensuring that the harm she has experienced doesn't drive uncivil postings about the matter. She needs to be heard. Both Maxime and Phillipa need to feel supported, but the support Maxime needs is different than the support Phillipa needs.
I am no expert - and perhaps there are things I don't yet see that may affect my view. These are just my thoughts at this time on the matter.
Solstice
Posted by Dinah on January 5, 2011, at 14:37:53
In reply to Re: What can I do?, posted by Solstice on January 5, 2011, at 14:33:55
As I said to Phillipa, my intervention just brings along more of the same sort of post. I find that very frustrating, since I am responsible for causing Phillipa additional pain.
I'm sure you'll understand why I don't reply any further to posts that contain negative comments about Phillipa or any other individual babbler.
Posted by Dinah on January 5, 2011, at 14:41:31
In reply to Re: What can I do?, posted by Solstice on January 5, 2011, at 14:33:55
However, I don't hold you responsible for my decision.
What you do is what you do. What I do in response in my own responsibility.
Posted by Dinah on January 5, 2011, at 15:08:36
In reply to Re: What can I do?, posted by Solstice on January 5, 2011, at 14:33:55
> I can't help but think of Ceasar (Dog Whisperer) and his technique of how dogs handle unruly members of the pack. The dog isn't banished - but the rest of the pack will make it unbearable enough for the unruly dog that he/she eventually learns to manage their behavior in order to co-exist within the pack. The social pressure (and disruption) goes away when the objectionable behavior goes away.
Of course, it not infrequently happens that a dog is driven away from a pack without fences. That may be seen as a very good thing by the pack. Occasionally a dog will even be seriously injured before it limps, bleeding, away. Or worse.
Funny thing is that the kids from middle school would have said the same thing. I exhibited behavior that was objectionable to them. They savaged me right out of their pack to another school.
You think of this as a *good* thing? We truly see things from different points of view. It's hard for me to believe that this is Bob's new vision of Babble.
Posted by Dinah on January 5, 2011, at 15:17:35
In reply to Re: What can I do?, posted by Dinah on January 5, 2011, at 15:08:36
to one of my posts....
It better as h*ll be negative about ME.
You got something to say, you say it about ME.
Posted by gardenergirl on January 5, 2011, at 15:49:42
In reply to Re: public forum )) gardenergirl, posted by Maxime on January 4, 2011, at 22:52:44
> HA! I found something even better that I can examine in a petri dish. Mario!! I found this on a site http://kotaku.com/5429450/mario-recreated-in-petri-dish
>
> Beat that GG! :pThat's awesome!!!!!
Posted by gardenergirl on January 5, 2011, at 15:52:22
In reply to If anyone has anything negative to say in response, posted by Dinah on January 5, 2011, at 15:17:35
Dinah,
I'm sorry you're hurting so much. And I'm just in awe of your fierce support. You matter, my friend.gg
Posted by Solstice on January 5, 2011, at 16:05:33
In reply to Re: What can I do?, posted by Dinah on January 5, 2011, at 15:08:36
> > I can't help but think of Ceasar (Dog Whisperer) and his technique of how dogs handle unruly members of the pack. The dog isn't banished - but the rest of the pack will make it unbearable enough for the unruly dog that he/she eventually learns to manage their behavior in order to co-exist within the pack. The social pressure (and disruption) goes away when the objectionable behavior goes away.
>
> Of course, it not infrequently happens that a dog is driven away from a pack without fences. That may be seen as a very good thing by the pack. Occasionally a dog will even be seriously injured before it limps, bleeding, away. Or worse.You're right - that aspect can certainly exist - but that's not what I was thinking of. Of course with Cesar, he's always there to prevent that kind of thing from developing. Maybe that's why closer moderation here is important.
> Funny thing is that the kids from middle school would have said the same thing. I exhibited behavior that was objectionable to them. They savaged me right out of their pack to another school.And that's horrible. I did not mean to imply that ANYone should be treated that way. Legitimately objectionable behavior can be rejected, without rejecting the person. When I say 'objectionable behavior,' I'm talking about behavior that is causing harm to others.
> You think of this as a *good* thing?Absolutely not.. and I'm sad that it has sounded like that to you.
> We truly see things from different points of view.Not necessarily.. because I don't think my point of view is accurately understood. I regret that.
> It's hard for me to believe that this is Bob's new vision of Babble.It might not be fair to yourself to draw conclusions right now about Bob's vision for Babble.
Solstice
Posted by SLS on January 5, 2011, at 17:47:31
In reply to Re: Dr Bob, I'm sorry » SLS, posted by Dinah on January 5, 2011, at 14:12:08
> I could possibly work for years to come to the point where I don't expect myself to have the power to achieve anything.
Isn't this black-or-white, all-or-nothing thinking?
I probably didn't word my post properly. I wasn't suggesting that you have no power. I was just suggesting that you don't have power over everything. It is also abundantly clear to me that you don't appreciate the power that you do have. You have influenced my thinking on more than one occasion. That's true power. Perhaps there is a control thing going on. Perhaps it is perfectionism. Whatever it is, it is not fair to you that you should assume so much responsibility over the workings of the entire Universe. It really is self-defeating. To raise your expectations of yourself to accomplish things that are beyond your potential (to control) is to become (feel) powerless.
The measure of achievement lies not in how high the mountain, but in how hard the climb.The measure of success lies only in how high one feels he must climb to get there.
- Scott
Posted by ou812 on January 5, 2011, at 19:20:30
In reply to Re: Dr Bob, I'm sorry » SLS, posted by Dinah on January 5, 2011, at 14:12:08
Dinah, I think you have properly addressed the thread with your rules of internet etiquette. I feel you are fair, compassionate and have heart bigger than your body can hold. You are a stable force here and I, as well as the majority of the members here, would feel a great loss if we didn't see your insightful and supportive posts. I don't feel you have done anything that should bring doubt to your mind as your motives are pure and honest. :)
Posted by ou812 on January 5, 2011, at 19:29:09
In reply to Re: What can I do?, posted by Solstice on January 5, 2011, at 14:33:55
> > I can't help but think of Ceasar (Dog Whisperer) and his technique of how dogs handle unruly members of the pack. The dog isn't banished - but the rest of the pack will make it unbearable enough for the unruly dog that he/she eventually learns to manage their behavior in order to co-exist within the pack. The social pressure (and disruption) goes away when the objectionable behavior goes away.
I am not trying to defend or accuse anyone; just making an observation. Interesting analogy with dogs. I have seen many documentaries on pack behavior where they hunt together and single out the weak or sick to attack. The eating of newborns is also a common occurrence. There are no morals or conscience; only survival of the fittest in the pack or in another pack. I am not sure this primal training method is applicable in a civilized world. I thought this was a board geared for support of MI and folks with problems??
Posted by ou812 on January 5, 2011, at 19:36:36
In reply to Re: Phillipa - Say it ain't so. » violette, posted by Maxime on January 4, 2011, at 23:38:03
> Again, I would like echo what Violette wrote. I have no desire to bully you Phillipa, or anyone else on PB. My only concern is the storing and dissemination of personal information.
> Yes, but you don't share the information with others. I don't find it creepy at all.You don't start gossip in Babblemail. You don't have someone approaching new members telling them to careful of you because go after men on the board. You don't have someone saying that you are lesbian to other members, even if it's not true.
If what you said is accurate, then the first sentence is adequate. The remainder has no factual evidence that I am aware of and has NOTHING to do with your original post. I see that by following the guidelines the INTENT is harmful and made to provide fuel for another lively discussion at Phillipa's expense. This IMO could be an example of passive-aggressive behavior.As violette said," I think bullying is singling out a person for just being themselves, someone who just going about their business, not harming others. People are just trying to prevent harm to themselves here, is all"
I think there is more than just self-preservation in the accusations.
Posted by Maxime on January 5, 2011, at 19:42:59
In reply to Re: to Phillipa - personal information, posted by Dinah on January 5, 2011, at 10:22:28
> But I'd advise you to be wise. I wouldn't tell you to trust no one. There are a handful of people I trust, and one or two I trust completely. But for the most part, remember that any information you send to others can and possibly will be sent by them to others. If they send you information, don't pass it on. If you send them information, assume it will be passed on and interpreted in whatever ways the sender wishes. It will probably not be sent on in context. It's ok to engage in the activity of talking about others. You'd be a singular person if your discussions were never about acquaintances. But try not to say anything that you wouldn't want plastered on Babble or on the front page of the NY Times. Be kind. Be discreet.
>
> That's advice I'd give to EVERYONE.That is very good advice. I would like to add that if you are using Babblemail to gossip about others, chances are that the content of the Babble Mail will be forwarded to person in question. I have received many a Babble Mail where gossip about me, was sent to me by the person who received it. It hurts.
Posted by Maxime on January 5, 2011, at 19:48:11
In reply to True meaning, posted by ou812 on January 5, 2011, at 19:36:36
> > Yes, but you don't share the information with others. I don't find it creepy at all.You don't start gossip in Babblemail. You don't have someone approaching new members telling them to careful of you because go after men on the board. You don't have someone saying that you are lesbian to other members, even if it's not true.
>
>
> If what you said is accurate, then the first sentence is adequate. The remainder has no factual evidence that I am aware of and has NOTHING to do with your original post. I see that by following the guidelines the INTENT is harmful and made to provide fuel for another lively discussion at Phillipa's expense. This IMO could be an example of passive-aggressive behavior.
>
I still have the Babblemails in question ...that's a fact.
Posted by Maxime on January 5, 2011, at 19:54:24
In reply to True meaning, posted by ou812 on January 5, 2011, at 19:36:36
I will no longer be posting in this thread. I think that everything that had to be said was said. I don't want to continue harming anyone.
I don't know if you noticed my post to Phillipa
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20101201/msgs/975905.html
Posted by Solstice on January 5, 2011, at 23:07:40
In reply to Re: Dr Bob, I'm sorry » Dinah, posted by SLS on January 5, 2011, at 17:47:31
Amen!
Solstice
> > I could possibly work for years to come to the point where I don't expect myself to have the power to achieve anything.
>
> Isn't this black-or-white, all-or-nothing thinking?
>
> I probably didn't word my post properly. I wasn't suggesting that you have no power. I was just suggesting that you don't have power over everything. It is also abundantly clear to me that you don't appreciate the power that you do have. You have influenced my thinking on more than one occasion. That's true power. Perhaps there is a control thing going on. Perhaps it is perfectionism. Whatever it is, it is not fair to you that you should assume so much responsibility over the workings of the entire Universe. It really is self-defeating. To raise your expectations of yourself to accomplish things that are beyond your potential (to control) is to become (feel) powerless.
>
>
> The measure of achievement lies not in how high the mountain, but in how hard the climb.
>
> The measure of success lies only in how high one feels he must climb to get there.
>
>
> - Scott
Posted by Solstice on January 5, 2011, at 23:18:55
In reply to Dogs? » Solstice, posted by ou812 on January 5, 2011, at 19:29:09
> > > I can't help but think of Ceasar (Dog Whisperer) and his technique of how dogs handle unruly members of the pack. The dog isn't banished - but the rest of the pack will make it unbearable enough for the unruly dog that he/she eventually learns to manage their behavior in order to co-exist within the pack. The social pressure (and disruption) goes away when the objectionable behavior goes away.
>
> I am not trying to defend or accuse anyone; just making an observation. Interesting analogy with dogs. I have seen many documentaries on pack behavior where they hunt together and single out the weak or sick to attack. The eating of newborns is also a common occurrence. There are no morals or conscience; only survival of the fittest in the pack or in another pack. I am not sure this primal training method is applicable in a civilized world. I thought this was a board geared for support of MI and folks with problems??ou812 - Don't you think you might be taking the analogy far outside of what my intent was? I was using it in a very limited and specific way. I used it because in another thread, Muffled used it to describe the correlation between how a new dog coming to the dog park behaves, and how someone new to the Babble community should behave. Do you honestly believe, based on what I wrote, that I think that human communites and packs of animals are exactly alike, across-the-board? That's silly. I can't imagine how on earth you would draw that kind of a conclusion.
Solstice.
Posted by Solstice on January 5, 2011, at 23:26:56
In reply to True meaning, posted by ou812 on January 5, 2011, at 19:36:36
> If what you said is accurate, then the first sentence is adequate. The remainder has no factual evidence that I am aware of and has NOTHING to do with your original post. I see that by following the guidelines the INTENT is harmful and made to provide fuel for another lively discussion at Phillipa's expense. This IMO could be an example of passive-aggressive behavior.Are you calling Maxime, who you are responding to here, passive-aggressive?
> As violette said," I think bullying is singling out a person for just being themselves, someone who just going about their business, not harming others. People are just trying to prevent harm to themselves here, is all"
>
> I think there is more than just self-preservation in the accusations.And in your accusations?
Solstice
Posted by Solstice on January 5, 2011, at 23:30:50
In reply to Re: to Phillipa - personal information » Dinah, posted by Maxime on January 5, 2011, at 19:42:59
> That is very good advice. I would like to add that if you are using Babblemail to gossip about others, chances are that the content of the Babble Mail will be forwarded to person in question. I have received many a Babble Mail where gossip about me, was sent to me by the person who received it. It hurts.Maxime - I hope you have saved that stuff and will use it to make your case with Bob. There's nothing that speaks louder than factual evidence.
Solstice
Posted by Willful on January 6, 2011, at 0:01:02
In reply to True meaning, posted by ou812 on January 5, 2011, at 19:36:36
To ou812: I've having trouble evaluating the basis for your statements about this board, a place where you seem not to have posted before, but where you say you have been "lurking for years" and about which you are now --also after having visited many other forums--thinking of writing an article on cyber-bullying. First of all, you don't give any basis in fact-- which ask for from others--for your claims of lurking, your familiarity with many other boards, or your expertise in cyber-bullying.
Your analysis of this board as having "Borderline/ Paranoid /Passive-Aggressive" qualities isn't very meaningful either as this board is not a person and doesn't have a psychology such as what you could ascribe to individuals. At least you would need some sort of discussion to show that that was a valid type of analysis before trying to offering it as some sort of independent view.
I don't see any evidence for your statements-- yet you seem to know quite a bit about individuals here. Why have you chosen suddenly after presumably noting other incidents of this type for years without being moved to post,, to post in this thread and to make the judgments about us that you've made?
I wanted to point out that Dr. Bob does not have a Phd, but is a medical doctor, a fact which you would know if you were doing careful research of any kind, and which is stated on virtually every main page of this forum.
It has been said in this thread that we shouldn't trust people that we don't know or know well, and I want to reiterate that we should recognize that none of us really do know one another, and we must therefore make our own judgments of what is or is not true or important here.
I also would like to say to everyone that I certainly am thinking of Phillipa as a human being. I'm not suggesting that she's a bad person. I don't consider myself to be bullying her or wish for her to be lynched, stoned, driven from our community or destroyed. I want that to be very very clear. And I don't believe that anyone here feels that way, or is treating her with inhumanity.
Willful
Posted by Solstice on January 6, 2011, at 0:32:54
In reply to Re: True meaning, posted by Willful on January 6, 2011, at 0:01:02
I, for one, appreciate your direct and skillful confrontation of this stuff, Willful. The judgment has bothered me, too. And further, I second your sentiment about Phillipa. She is a long-term valued member of the community that has valuable contributions to make. I think everyone genuinely wants everybody to play in the sandbox nicely - but in order to do that - community accountability is important.
Solstice
> To ou812: I've having trouble evaluating the basis for your statements about this board, a place where you seem not to have posted before, but where you say you have been "lurking for years" and about which you are now --also after having visited many other forums--thinking of writing an article on cyber-bullying. First of all, you don't give any basis in fact-- which ask for from others--for your claims of lurking, your familiarity with many other boards, or your expertise in cyber-bullying.
>
> Your analysis of this board as having "Borderline/ Paranoid /Passive-Aggressive" qualities isn't very meaningful either as this board is not a person and doesn't have a psychology such as what you could ascribe to individuals. At least you would need some sort of discussion to show that that was a valid type of analysis before trying to offering it as some sort of independent view.
>
> I don't see any evidence for your statements-- yet you seem to know quite a bit about individuals here. Why have you chosen suddenly after presumably noting other incidents of this type for years without being moved to post,, to post in this thread and to make the judgments about us that you've made?
>
> I wanted to point out that Dr. Bob does not have a Phd, but is a medical doctor, a fact which you would know if you were doing careful research of any kind, and which is stated on virtually every main page of this forum.
>
> It has been said in this thread that we shouldn't trust people that we don't know or know well, and I want to reiterate that we should recognize that none of us really do know one another, and we must therefore make our own judgments of what is or is not true or important here.
>
> I also would like to say to everyone that I certainly am thinking of Phillipa as a human being. I'm not suggesting that she's a bad person. I don't consider myself to be bullying her or wish for her to be lynched, stoned, driven from our community or destroyed. I want that to be very very clear. And I don't believe that anyone here feels that way, or is treating her with inhumanity.
>
>
> Willful
Posted by Maxime on January 6, 2011, at 12:11:11
In reply to Re: to Phillipa - personal information » Maxime, posted by Solstice on January 5, 2011, at 23:30:50
>
> > That is very good advice. I would like to add that if you are using Babblemail to gossip about others, chances are that the content of the Babble Mail will be forwarded to person in question. I have received many a Babble Mail where gossip about me, was sent to me by the person who received it. It hurts.
>
> Maxime - I hope you have saved that stuff and will use it to make your case with Bob. There's nothing that speaks louder than factual evidence.
>
> SolsticeI still have the Babble Mails. I don't know why I keep them because they are old. At the time I passed on everything to Dr. Bob.
Maxime
Posted by jane d on January 6, 2011, at 23:38:30
In reply to Re: to Phillipa - personal information » Solstice, posted by Maxime on January 6, 2011, at 12:11:11
This was a private dispute. That one party has tried to make a public one by claiming it's about general principles. It wasn't. I really thought that people would see thru that. I'm beyond disillusioned that so few did.
Does anyone else have a cow that's mysteriously sickened? Jump right in.
Posted by SLS on January 7, 2011, at 6:28:37
In reply to Truly disillusioned by this entire thread, posted by jane d on January 6, 2011, at 23:38:30
> This was a private dispute. That one party has tried to make a public one by claiming it's about general principles. It wasn't. I really thought that people would see thru that. I'm beyond disillusioned that so few did.
>
> Does anyone else have a cow that's mysteriously sickened? Jump right in.When one of two parties has made public the alleged behaviors of the other by posting them or referring to them on the Internet, it is no longer a private matter, regardless of how desirable it might have been for the two parties to communicate privately. Here, we have one party accusing another of behavior that is deleterious to one or more people. It is not a matter of principle. It is a matter of hurt or harm.
I would not be so quick to suggest that to blame one party vindicates the other. I think this thread deserves to continue, but should perhaps become more focused on the general and less on the acts of named individuals. I don't usually use this phrase, but "it is what it is." This thread has had legs for specific reasons. I would like to know what they are. I don't believe that this is about pack mentality and bullying. I think it is more about hurt and fear.
Does anyone have the right to collect and publish information about another individual using any material found publicly on the Internet? No. However, this isn't about libel or kiddie porn. There is some serious debate over the Internet and its use as being subject to law. Is anything appearing on the Internet automatically copyrighted? These are interesting and materially important issues.
On Psycho-Babble, issues of privacy and anonymity predominate over those of legalities. For one to feel safe disclosing that they are mentally ill often depends on anonymity. I don't know whether or not there is a legal precedent to proscribe collecting words without publishing them. Let us assume for the moment that doing so is legal. Let us also assume that publishing this information is legal. Would it be desirable to discourage such behaviors when they arise on Psycho-Babble? Are acts of peer pressure desirable? Perhaps a more gentle general reminder of sorts can be issued by moderators from time to time within threads. It might even be included in the FAQs that privacy and anonymity is encouraged. I don't think it is imprudent to emphasize to the posting community the importance of privacy and why.
I have a few questions that I feel are important to answer. I offered suggestions based upon my current judgments. I doubt they are written on stone tablets somewhere.
1. Is it legal to collect and publish words that compromise the privacy and anonymity of an individual aside from libel?
2. Is it desirable to discourage such behavior using the written word as a means aside from libel?
3. Is it desirable to discourage such behavior using peer pressure as a means?
4. Is it desirable that moderators sanction an individual with posting blocks for such behavior?
5. Are posting blocks on a private website legal without sufficient due process?
Libel and due process are genuine concerns when a poster or moderator accuses an individual of a behavior whether it be legal or illegal.
I think the bottom line is that it is desirable to suggest to the community that privacy and anonymity are important to maintain in order to maintain the health and safety of Psycho-Babble. Moderators should not suggest that, or accuse any individual of a particular act, even when the words submitted by the poster are clearly libelous. This isn't a court of law.
The above suppositions indicate that posting blocks are undesirable, if not illegal.
- Scott
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.