![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 33. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Lou Pilder on June 20, 2012, at 20:55:24
Mr. Hsiung and hie deputy,
In accordance with your reminder provision, there are three additional outstanding notifications from me.
Lou Pilder
Posted by Phillipa on June 24, 2012, at 9:52:12
In reply to Lou's reminder to the administration-3mhoar, posted by Lou Pilder on June 20, 2012, at 20:55:24
And you feel that to leave them outstanding could cause anti-semetic feelings? Scare some away? I'd like to hear from another Jewish poster their feelings on this issue. I haven't seen posts that seem to attack or add religion to them. Are there examples of someone who has left after a certain post on the meds board for example? Phillipa
Posted by Lou Pilder on June 24, 2012, at 11:09:12
In reply to Re: Lou's reminder to the administration-3mhoar » Lou Pilder, posted by Phillipa on June 24, 2012, at 9:52:12
> And you feel that to leave them outstanding could cause anti-semetic feelings? Scare some away? I'd like to hear from another Jewish poster their feelings on this issue. I haven't seen posts that seem to attack or add religion to them. Are there examples of someone who has left after a certain post on the meds board for example? Phillipa
Phillipa,
There are numerous outstanding requests/notifications from me to Mr. Hsiung and his deputy that go back days, weeks, months and years. What that could cause is that since there could be statements that could lead a Jew to feel put down as part of those outstanding requests from me, then it is my great conviction that the historical record that shows that Jews could be targets of antisemitic violence when a community allows antiemitic statements to be considered to be supportive by the leader, could have the potential to be promunlgated here also.
Now by the nature of those requests from me being outstanding, then I do not have the opportunity to post a response unless my requessts are first addresssed by Mr. Hsiung or his deputy or I could be jumping to a conclusion for the requests generally contain a request for verification/clarification or for the rationales involved if there are those. Also, there are prohibitions to me here by Mr. Hsiung that prevent me from showing some of the historical paralles so that if the prohibition to mme was not made, I could post my response.
Now here is a post that I am requesting members to read, and then I will post further concerning the aspects involved as being outstanding that IMHHHHO could arouse antisemitic feelings and put Jews in danger of being victims of antisemitic violence .
Lou
To see this post:
A.Go to the search box aat the bottom of this page
B. Type in:
[events, faith, 1002966]
It is usually the second or third. The colord strip has {1002966} to differentate from the others.
Posted by SLS on June 24, 2012, at 15:50:57
In reply to Lou's reminder to the administration-3mhoar, posted by Lou Pilder on June 20, 2012, at 20:55:24
> Mr. Hsiung and hie deputy,
> In accordance with your reminder provision, there are three additional outstanding notifications from me.
> Lou PilderWhat would be the status of your notifications if they have already been read?
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on June 24, 2012, at 20:35:21
In reply to Re: Lou's reminder to the administration-3mhoar » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on June 24, 2012, at 15:50:57
> > Mr. Hsiung and hie deputy,
> > In accordance with your reminder provision, there are three additional outstanding notifications from me.
> > Lou Pilder
>
> What would be the status of your notifications if they have already been read?
>
>
> - ScottScott,
You wrote the above. I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean.
Lou
Posted by SLS on June 25, 2012, at 6:07:49
In reply to Lou's reply-rhedbyhu? » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on June 24, 2012, at 20:35:21
> > > Mr. Hsiung and hie deputy,
> > > In accordance with your reminder provision, there are three additional outstanding notifications from me.
> > > Lou Pilder
> >
> > What would be the status of your notifications if they have already been read?
> >
> >
> > - Scott
>
> Scott,
> You wrote the above. I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean.
> Lou
Do you feel that your notifications remain outstanding for as long as Dr. Bob does not respond to them writing?
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on June 25, 2012, at 7:04:06
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-rhedbyhu?, posted by SLS on June 25, 2012, at 6:07:49
> > > > Mr. Hsiung and hie deputy,
> > > > In accordance with your reminder provision, there are three additional outstanding notifications from me.
> > > > Lou Pilder
> > >
> > > What would be the status of your notifications if they have already been read?
> > >
> > >
> > > - Scott
> >
> > Scott,
> > You wrote the above. I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean.
> > Lou
>
>
> Do you feel that your notifications remain outstanding for as long as Dr. Bob does not respond to them writing?
>
>
> - ScottScott,
The TOS states that a notification to the administration will be either addressed in the thread in question or the administration will respond to the notifier by email or b-mail directly.
If niether of those are done by the administration, I consider the notification to be outstanding.
A reminder provision to the administration is also given by Mr. Hsiung and also a provision to keep reminding Mr. Hsiung as a procedure to follow here for a requester of a notification and such to receive an answer. These are the {internal} procedures of the administartion that I know of to have a notification/request acted upon by Mr. Hsiung or his deputy.
Now if there is a way for the administraion here to act upon them other than what is given in the TOS here, I am not aware of any. As far as what it means if the notification/request remains outstanding in that there is not a written reply either on the board or to the requester directly, I think that there is the potential for some others to think that what is in question is {supportive} by the nature of Mr. Hsiung stateing that he does what in his thinking will be good for this community as a whole, and that since he also states that support takes precedence, and that he does not wait to sanction a statement here because he also states that in his thinking one match could start a forest fire, and he also staes not to post anything that could lead a person to feel put down or accused, and that antisemitic statements are those that when a Jew reads it they could feel put down/accused, then as long as the notifications remain outstanding, then I think that there is the potentiall for there to be danger to Jews as a result of the notifications/requests being outstanding because Mr. Hsiiung also staes that he wants people to {try} to trust him in what he is doing here.
The aspect that Mr. Hsiung is requesting the members to {try} to trust his thinking could lead IMHHHO to an indoctrination here that could lead to Jews being subjected to antisemitic violence. I base this on the past practice throughout history as when the leader of a community allows antisemitic statements to stand,for any reason or raionale, then there could be the aspect of {state-sponsord} antisemitism, which is when the people in the community think that it is {supportive} as to what is allowed to stand. As long as my requests remain outstanding,for any reason, it is my conviction that the statements can be considerd by some to be supportive, which could be dangerous to Jews in schools, in communities, and in other places. You may have the ability to understand what is supportive or not, but a middle school student may not, and instead rely on the fact that Mr. Hsiung asks people to {try }to trust him in his thinking that he is doing what in his thinking will be good for this community as a whole. Well, could not a 14 year old that reads this site see what is plainly visible and think about Jews in the way that they are described in the posts that I have outstanding requests to Mr. Hsiung about and think that what is in question is supportive? Then those that think that could have the potential IMHO to target a Jewish student to bully, or a Jewish child in the neighborhood, or vandalize a home of a Jewisgh family, or desecrate a Jewish cemetary or spray paint swatiskas on the walls of synagogs or schools.
Here is a post where Mr.Hsiung states that he is going to allow it to stand. You could go through the thread to find the post in question. And could you look at his rationale for allowing it to stand? I do not accept Mr. Hsiung's rationale, for as long as the statement can be seen by some as supportive, IMHHHHO there is a danger to Jews being victims of antisemitic violence, for in this case, Jews (redacted by respondent) as the historicl record shows when that kind of statement is allowed to stand, for any reason.
Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041012/msgs/402039.html
Posted by SLS on June 25, 2012, at 13:03:39
In reply to Lou's reply-thekdiscytanscviht » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on June 25, 2012, at 7:04:06
> > > > > Mr. Hsiung and hie deputy,
> > > > > In accordance with your reminder provision, there are three additional outstanding notifications from me.
> > > > > Lou Pilder
> > > >
> > > > What would be the status of your notifications if they have already been read?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > - Scott
> > >
> > > Scott,
> > > You wrote the above. I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean.
> > > Lou
> >
> >
> > Do you feel that your notifications remain outstanding for as long as Dr. Bob does not respond to them writing?
> >
> >
> > - Scott
>
> Scott,
> The TOS states that a notification to the administration will be either addressed in the thread in question or the administration will respond to the notifier by email or b-mail directly.Would I find this in the FAQ? If not, then where?
> If niether of those are done by the administration, I consider the notification to be outstanding.
So, then, the definition of "outstanding" with regard to notifications is yours alone?
> A reminder provision to the administration is also given by Mr. Hsiung and also a provision to keep reminding Mr. Hsiung as a procedure to follow here for a requester of a notification and such to receive an answer.
Where do you find this stuff? I did not see this in the FAQ. Perhaps I didn't look closely enough.
> These are the {internal} procedures of the administartion that I know of to have a notification/request acted upon by Mr. Hsiung or his deputy.
I don't understand what you mean here. Do you know of administrative procedures that the rest of the community does not know of because the procedures are not specified in writing?
> Now if there is a way for the administraion here to act upon them other than what is given in the TOS here, I am not aware of any.
Can you please provide me with a link to the TOS? Thanks.
I don't have any suggestions as to how you should address your concerns regarding antisemitism. It seems clear to me that Dr. Bob has already acted upon your petition by allowing the verbiage that you found disagreeable to remain in place.
If Dr. Bob does read your notifications and decides not to post replies to them, is that a tacit denial of your petitions? I vaguely recall that this was the way things were to proceed, but I am not sure. I would like to review the TOS in order to see if this policy is described there.
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on June 25, 2012, at 13:26:04
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-thekdiscytanscviht » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on June 25, 2012, at 13:03:39
> > > > > > Mr. Hsiung and hie deputy,
> > > > > > In accordance with your reminder provision, there are three additional outstanding notifications from me.
> > > > > > Lou Pilder
> > > > >
> > > > > What would be the status of your notifications if they have already been read?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > - Scott
> > > >
> > > > Scott,
> > > > You wrote the above. I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean.
> > > > Lou
> > >
> > >
> > > Do you feel that your notifications remain outstanding for as long as Dr. Bob does not respond to them writing?
> > >
> > >
> > > - Scott
> >
> > Scott,
> > The TOS states that a notification to the administration will be either addressed in the thread in question or the administration will respond to the notifier by email or b-mail directly.
>
> Would I find this in the FAQ? If not, then where?
>
> > If niether of those are done by the administration, I consider the notification to be outstanding.
>
> So, then, the definition of "outstanding" with regard to notifications is yours alone?
>
> > A reminder provision to the administration is also given by Mr. Hsiung and also a provision to keep reminding Mr. Hsiung as a procedure to follow here for a requester of a notification and such to receive an answer.
>
> Where do you find this stuff? I did not see this in the FAQ. Perhaps I didn't look closely enough.
>
> > These are the {internal} procedures of the administartion that I know of to have a notification/request acted upon by Mr. Hsiung or his deputy.
>
> I don't understand what you mean here. Do you know of administrative procedures that the rest of the community does not know of because the procedures are not specified in writing?
>
> > Now if there is a way for the administraion here to act upon them other than what is given in the TOS here, I am not aware of any.
>
> Can you please provide me with a link to the TOS? Thanks.
>
> I don't have any suggestions as to how you should address your concerns regarding antisemitism. It seems clear to me that Dr. Bob has already acted upon your petition by allowing the verbiage that you found disagreeable to remain in place.
>
> If Dr. Bob does read your notifications and decides not to post replies to them, is that a tacit denial of your petitions? I vaguely recall that this was the way things were to proceed, but I am not sure. I would like to review the TOS in order to see if this policy is described there.
>
>
> - ScottScott,
You wrote the above.
Now there is much more to this here , but for now:Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061018/msgs/699224.html
Posted by Lou Pilder on June 25, 2012, at 15:40:35
In reply to Lou's reply-gudphoardhakhamewnitty » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on June 25, 2012, at 13:26:04
> > > > > > > Mr. Hsiung and hie deputy,
> > > > > > > In accordance with your reminder provision, there are three additional outstanding notifications from me.
> > > > > > > Lou Pilder
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What would be the status of your notifications if they have already been read?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - Scott
> > > > >
> > > > > Scott,
> > > > > You wrote the above. I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean.
> > > > > Lou
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Do you feel that your notifications remain outstanding for as long as Dr. Bob does not respond to them writing?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > - Scott
> > >
> > > Scott,
> > > The TOS states that a notification to the administration will be either addressed in the thread in question or the administration will respond to the notifier by email or b-mail directly.
> >
> > Would I find this in the FAQ? If not, then where?
> >
> > > If niether of those are done by the administration, I consider the notification to be outstanding.
> >
> > So, then, the definition of "outstanding" with regard to notifications is yours alone?
> >
> > > A reminder provision to the administration is also given by Mr. Hsiung and also a provision to keep reminding Mr. Hsiung as a procedure to follow here for a requester of a notification and such to receive an answer.
> >
> > Where do you find this stuff? I did not see this in the FAQ. Perhaps I didn't look closely enough.
> >
> > > These are the {internal} procedures of the administartion that I know of to have a notification/request acted upon by Mr. Hsiung or his deputy.
> >
> > I don't understand what you mean here. Do you know of administrative procedures that the rest of the community does not know of because the procedures are not specified in writing?
> >
> > > Now if there is a way for the administraion here to act upon them other than what is given in the TOS here, I am not aware of any.
> >
> > Can you please provide me with a link to the TOS? Thanks.
> >
> > I don't have any suggestions as to how you should address your concerns regarding antisemitism. It seems clear to me that Dr. Bob has already acted upon your petition by allowing the verbiage that you found disagreeable to remain in place.
> >
> > If Dr. Bob does read your notifications and decides not to post replies to them, is that a tacit denial of your petitions? I vaguely recall that this was the way things were to proceed, but I am not sure. I would like to review the TOS in order to see if this policy is described there.
> >
> >
> > - Scott
>
> Scott,
> You wrote the above.
> Now there is much more to this here , but for now:Lou
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061018/msgs/699224.htmlScott,
You wrote something about if Mr. Hsiung was to read my peititions and they are outstanding, could I consider it to be a tacit denial of my petitions.
The purpose of mine for using the notification policy here and to post requests to Mr. Hsiung for his rationale and such, is because if I was to know what is requested from him, {then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly}.
And my requests give Mr. Hsiung and his deputy the opportunity to know my requests. If the opportunity to post a response is not acted upon by them, there could be IMHHHHO deaths result to readers, children to be maimed, mass-murder to be comitted, people to get life-ruining conditions/addictions. You see, if you look at just the requests from me to Mr. Hsiunng posted here, could there be (redacted by respondent) to the Jews and others so that they could not be concerned that this site fosters what is in question as being supportive??
Now here is a link to a post that I would like interested readers to examine. If anyone could examine such, I think that they could have a better understanding to make their own determination as to {what's goin' on}
Lou
Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20110117/msgs/1005256.html
Posted by SLS on June 25, 2012, at 16:03:53
In reply to Lou's reply-gudphoardhakhamewnitty » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on June 25, 2012, at 13:26:04
Could you please post a link to this website's TOS?
Thanks.
- Scott
Posted by Phillipa on June 25, 2012, at 19:21:05
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-gudphoardhakhamewnitty » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on June 25, 2012, at 16:03:53
It's always been my understanding that to contact Dr Bob the correct proceedure was to post first on admin. Also to write to him directly. Since that one link from 2006 does state that unless rule of three applies that a reponse should be received to the request. To my way of thinking this would be a private babblemail from Bob. I have no way of knowing if any was ever received by Lou. I personally in the past did receive babblemails to answer a question. But if the post in question didn't get some diciplinary action. Personally I'd agree that the post was okay with Dr. Bob. As for antisemetic. Sorry I just don't buy into this. My personal feelings. Phillipa
Posted by Lou Pilder on June 25, 2012, at 19:29:55
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-gudphoardhakhamewnitty, posted by Phillipa on June 25, 2012, at 19:21:05
> It's always been my understanding that to contact Dr Bob the correct proceedure was to post first on admin. Also to write to him directly. Since that one link from 2006 does state that unless rule of three applies that a reponse should be received to the request. To my way of thinking this would be a private babblemail from Bob. I have no way of knowing if any was ever received by Lou. I personally in the past did receive babblemails to answer a question. But if the post in question didn't get some diciplinary action. Personally I'd agree that the post was okay with Dr. Bob. As for antisemetic. Sorry I just don't buy into this. My personal feelings. Phillipa
Phillipa,
You wtote,[...unless (the) rule of three applies that a response should be received to the request...].
Thanks, I think that's good
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on June 25, 2012, at 19:40:52
In reply to Lou's reply-dahtzgud » Phillipa, posted by Lou Pilder on June 25, 2012, at 19:29:55
> > It's always been my understanding that to contact Dr Bob the correct proceedure was to post first on admin. Also to write to him directly. Since that one link from 2006 does state that unless rule of three applies that a reponse should be received to the request. To my way of thinking this would be a private babblemail from Bob. I have no way of knowing if any was ever received by Lou. I personally in the past did receive babblemails to answer a question. But if the post in question didn't get some diciplinary action. Personally I'd agree that the post was okay with Dr. Bob. As for antisemetic. Sorry I just don't buy into this. My personal feelings. Phillipa
>
> Phillipa,
> You wtote,[...unless (the) rule of three applies that a response should be received to the request...].
> Thanks, I think that's good
> LouPhillipa,
I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean in the grammatical structure that can be seen. Here is what I do not understand and if you could post more to clarify, that could give me the opportunity to post a response.
Lou
[...I agree that the post was OK with (Mr Hsiung). As for antisemitic. Sorry, I just don't buy into this.]
Posted by Lou Pilder on June 25, 2012, at 20:15:44
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-gudphoardhakhamewnitty » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on June 25, 2012, at 16:03:53
> Could you please post a link to this website's TOS?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> - ScottScott,
You wrote the above.
Now one way to think of the terms of service in an internet forum ,in part, those things that are duties.
One of these duties is here
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faith
You see, one of the duties of ciitizenship here is to be civil.
Then the terms of service can be {policies}. These policies are throughout the forum which in some cases are just further clarification of a broad rule, like [..do not post anything that could lead one to feel...].
The administration states their policy in many ways. The FAQ is just one part of where they are.
One can find policy in {prohibitions} posted to a member by Mr Hsiung or a deputy.
Phillipa has posted that she thinks that what is stated as policy in the link that I posted here from 06, has the potential to lead one to think that it is a term of service as that the administration has some type of duty, in her opinion, to act on the request.
Now the aspect of that if the administration does not have to act on the request, there is case law concerning this ongoing in the sixth district. The key in this case is if the owner/operator could be thought that there is an {encouragement} by the owner for others to defame another or defame a group of people that can be identified. This is just one test, there are 3 more. And how can the encouragement happen, if there is defamation toward Jews, or anyone else, allowed to stand? My friends, if you look at the adminisstrative board, one of the tests is if it is {reasonable}. There are outstanding notifications from one person that go back days, weeks, months and years. Reasonable, my friends, reasonable.
Lou
Posted by sigismund on June 26, 2012, at 2:25:34
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-gudphoardhakhamewnitty, posted by Phillipa on June 25, 2012, at 19:21:05
Lou
Have you ever had a response from Dr Bob about notifications outstanding?
Posted by Lou Pilder on June 26, 2012, at 4:01:19
In reply to Lou's reply-whtzgoinohn, posted by Lou Pilder on June 25, 2012, at 15:40:35
> > > > > > > > Mr. Hsiung and hie deputy,
> > > > > > > > In accordance with your reminder provision, there are three additional outstanding notifications from me.
> > > > > > > > Lou Pilder
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What would be the status of your notifications if they have already been read?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - Scott
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Scott,
> > > > > > You wrote the above. I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean.
> > > > > > Lou
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Do you feel that your notifications remain outstanding for as long as Dr. Bob does not respond to them writing?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > - Scott
> > > >
> > > > Scott,
> > > > The TOS states that a notification to the administration will be either addressed in the thread in question or the administration will respond to the notifier by email or b-mail directly.
> > >
> > > Would I find this in the FAQ? If not, then where?
> > >
> > > > If niether of those are done by the administration, I consider the notification to be outstanding.
> > >
> > > So, then, the definition of "outstanding" with regard to notifications is yours alone?
> > >
> > > > A reminder provision to the administration is also given by Mr. Hsiung and also a provision to keep reminding Mr. Hsiung as a procedure to follow here for a requester of a notification and such to receive an answer.
> > >
> > > Where do you find this stuff? I did not see this in the FAQ. Perhaps I didn't look closely enough.
> > >
> > > > These are the {internal} procedures of the administartion that I know of to have a notification/request acted upon by Mr. Hsiung or his deputy.
> > >
> > > I don't understand what you mean here. Do you know of administrative procedures that the rest of the community does not know of because the procedures are not specified in writing?
> > >
> > > > Now if there is a way for the administraion here to act upon them other than what is given in the TOS here, I am not aware of any.
> > >
> > > Can you please provide me with a link to the TOS? Thanks.
> > >
> > > I don't have any suggestions as to how you should address your concerns regarding antisemitism. It seems clear to me that Dr. Bob has already acted upon your petition by allowing the verbiage that you found disagreeable to remain in place.
> > >
> > > If Dr. Bob does read your notifications and decides not to post replies to them, is that a tacit denial of your petitions? I vaguely recall that this was the way things were to proceed, but I am not sure. I would like to review the TOS in order to see if this policy is described there.
> > >
> > >
> > > - Scott
> >
> > Scott,
> > You wrote the above.
> > Now there is much more to this here , but for now:Lou
> > http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061018/msgs/699224.html
>
> Scott,
> You wrote something about if Mr. Hsiung was to read my peititions and they are outstanding, could I consider it to be a tacit denial of my petitions.
> The purpose of mine for using the notification policy here and to post requests to Mr. Hsiung for his rationale and such, is because if I was to know what is requested from him, {then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly}.
> And my requests give Mr. Hsiung and his deputy the opportunity to know my requests. If the opportunity to post a response is not acted upon by them, there could be IMHHHHO deaths result to readers, children to be maimed, mass-murder to be comitted, people to get life-ruining conditions/addictions. You see, if you look at just the requests from me to Mr. Hsiunng posted here, could there be (redacted by respondent) to the Jews and others so that they could not be concerned that this site fosters what is in question as being supportive??
> Now here is a link to a post that I would like interested readers to examine. If anyone could examine such, I think that they could have a better understanding to make their own determination as to {what's goin' on}
> Lou
> Lou
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20110117/msgs/1005256.htmlFriends,
Now we have posts that have my outstanding requests. Here are some posts with statements that I think could arouse antisemitic feelings and/or present the aspect of a Jew being a victim of antisemitic violence as long as the requests from me contained in the post remain outstanding.
I am asking interested readers to examine these two here and email me if you would like to have more information.
Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20110117/msgs/999438.html
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20110117/msgs/1005051.html
Posted by Lou Pilder on June 26, 2012, at 5:04:50
In reply to Lou's reply-hlpthechldrn, posted by Lou Pilder on June 26, 2012, at 4:01:19
> > > > > > > > > Mr. Hsiung and hie deputy,
> > > > > > > > > In accordance with your reminder provision, there are three additional outstanding notifications from me.
> > > > > > > > > Lou Pilder
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > What would be the status of your notifications if they have already been read?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > - Scott
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Scott,
> > > > > > > You wrote the above. I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean.
> > > > > > > Lou
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Do you feel that your notifications remain outstanding for as long as Dr. Bob does not respond to them writing?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - Scott
> > > > >
> > > > > Scott,
> > > > > The TOS states that a notification to the administration will be either addressed in the thread in question or the administration will respond to the notifier by email or b-mail directly.
> > > >
> > > > Would I find this in the FAQ? If not, then where?
> > > >
> > > > > If niether of those are done by the administration, I consider the notification to be outstanding.
> > > >
> > > > So, then, the definition of "outstanding" with regard to notifications is yours alone?
> > > >
> > > > > A reminder provision to the administration is also given by Mr. Hsiung and also a provision to keep reminding Mr. Hsiung as a procedure to follow here for a requester of a notification and such to receive an answer.
> > > >
> > > > Where do you find this stuff? I did not see this in the FAQ. Perhaps I didn't look closely enough.
> > > >
> > > > > These are the {internal} procedures of the administartion that I know of to have a notification/request acted upon by Mr. Hsiung or his deputy.
> > > >
> > > > I don't understand what you mean here. Do you know of administrative procedures that the rest of the community does not know of because the procedures are not specified in writing?
> > > >
> > > > > Now if there is a way for the administraion here to act upon them other than what is given in the TOS here, I am not aware of any.
> > > >
> > > > Can you please provide me with a link to the TOS? Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > I don't have any suggestions as to how you should address your concerns regarding antisemitism. It seems clear to me that Dr. Bob has already acted upon your petition by allowing the verbiage that you found disagreeable to remain in place.
> > > >
> > > > If Dr. Bob does read your notifications and decides not to post replies to them, is that a tacit denial of your petitions? I vaguely recall that this was the way things were to proceed, but I am not sure. I would like to review the TOS in order to see if this policy is described there.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > - Scott
> > >
> > > Scott,
> > > You wrote the above.
> > > Now there is much more to this here , but for now:Lou
> > > http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061018/msgs/699224.html
> >
> > Scott,
> > You wrote something about if Mr. Hsiung was to read my peititions and they are outstanding, could I consider it to be a tacit denial of my petitions.
> > The purpose of mine for using the notification policy here and to post requests to Mr. Hsiung for his rationale and such, is because if I was to know what is requested from him, {then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly}.
> > And my requests give Mr. Hsiung and his deputy the opportunity to know my requests. If the opportunity to post a response is not acted upon by them, there could be IMHHHHO deaths result to readers, children to be maimed, mass-murder to be comitted, people to get life-ruining conditions/addictions. You see, if you look at just the requests from me to Mr. Hsiunng posted here, could there be (redacted by respondent) to the Jews and others so that they could not be concerned that this site fosters what is in question as being supportive??
> > Now here is a link to a post that I would like interested readers to examine. If anyone could examine such, I think that they could have a better understanding to make their own determination as to {what's goin' on}
> > Lou
> > Lou
> > http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20110117/msgs/1005256.html
>
> Friends,
> Now we have posts that have my outstanding requests. Here are some posts with statements that I think could arouse antisemitic feelings and/or present the aspect of a Jew being a victim of antisemitic violence as long as the requests from me contained in the post remain outstanding.
> I am asking interested readers to examine these two here and email me if you would like to have more information.
> Lou
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20110117/msgs/999438.html
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20110117/msgs/1005051.htmlFriends,
In regards to outstanding requests from me to Mr. Hsiung, I am requesting that interested memers read the following.
Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20110117/msgs/999436.html
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20120228/msgs/1013908.html
Posted by Dinah on June 27, 2012, at 9:23:05
In reply to Lou's reply-hlpthechldrn, posted by Lou Pilder on June 26, 2012, at 4:01:19
> Friends,
> Now we have posts that have my outstanding requests. Here are some posts with statements that I think could arouse antisemitic feelings and/or present the aspect of a Jew being a victim of antisemitic violence as long as the requests from me contained in the post remain outstanding.
> I am asking interested readers to examine these two here and email me if you would like to have more information.
> LouLou, surely you must have seen that things have changed at Babble. There does not appear to be any active oversight. A lack of communication from Bob at this point is pretty much the norm. If your request isn't acted on, it probably has been tacitly allowed to stand.
I do remember that if a poster makes more than three complaints about a member that were not considered uncivil by administration, then written explanations need no longer be given. The action or lack of action would be considered an answer. Perhaps this also applies to multiple complaints by a poster about the posts of more than one member. If this is so, then even if Dr. Bob were consistently answering, which he's not, he would not consider it necessary to reply.
I am curious. Have you been elsewhere on the internet? I can't read a major news site comments without being sickened at the hatred and vicious rants. I've never seen on Babble the sort of antisemitic rants that go on elsewhere without apparent response from the moderators. I can't see antisemitic violence coming from anything I've seen on Babble. I doubt it's likely on the other sites either. But it does seem as if your concerns are needed more elsewhere.
Also, I wonder if you see any uncivil remarks towards a person who happens to be a Jew to be the same as anti-semetism? Isn't it possible for someone to be uncivil to another person without regard to their religion or ethnicity? If someone is rude to me, I don't consider it a sign of a tendency towards violence directed at all Americans of European descent. How do you even know the religion or ethnicity of a person who is rude to another person on the internet? Isn't it possible that they too are Jewish?
Posted by ron1953 on June 27, 2012, at 9:30:38
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-hlpthechldrn, posted by Dinah on June 27, 2012, at 9:23:05
As for me, I thinks it's really nice to NOT see blocks and PBCs as was the norm before. Even the "F*CK YOU" thread was left alone, and the world as we know it didn't come to an end. Maybe this site can be a peer support forum where the posters are responsible and don't require a kindergarten teacher to interfere every time someone's feelings are hurt.
Posted by ron1953 on June 27, 2012, at 9:39:24
In reply to Re: Lou's reminder to the administration-3mhoar » Lou Pilder, posted by Phillipa on June 24, 2012, at 9:52:12
>I'd like to hear from another Jewish poster their feelings on this issue.
I'm a Jewish poster, and I have never had a clue as to what Lou is complaining about. As far as I can see, it's all utter nonsense, and his myriad posts amount to nothing more than SPAM. The attention-seeking aspects are obvious.
Posted by Toph on June 27, 2012, at 17:53:38
In reply to Lou's reminder to the administration-3mhoar, posted by Lou Pilder on June 20, 2012, at 20:55:24
I recently returned from Mexico with inflamed ears from repeated equilization of pressure while scuba diving. I had to try very hard not to rub my ears as this worstened the condition. Avoiding this irritation led to its going away.
Posted by ron1953 on June 28, 2012, at 10:30:30
In reply to Re: Lou's reminder to the administration-3mhoar, posted by Toph on June 27, 2012, at 17:53:38
> I recently returned from Mexico with inflamed ears from repeated equilization of pressure while scuba diving. I had to try very hard not to rub my ears as this worstened the condition. Avoiding this irritation led to its going away.
WTF?
Posted by sleepygirl2 on June 28, 2012, at 16:44:04
In reply to Re: Lou's reminder to the administration-3mhoar, posted by ron1953 on June 28, 2012, at 10:30:30
I think toph might be saying that if you make an effort to avoid that which bothers you, then eventually it truly doesn't bother you. Maybe?
Posted by Lou Pilder on June 28, 2012, at 16:48:59
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-hlpthechldrn, posted by Dinah on June 27, 2012, at 9:23:05
> > Friends,
> > Now we have posts that have my outstanding requests. Here are some posts with statements that I think could arouse antisemitic feelings and/or present the aspect of a Jew being a victim of antisemitic violence as long as the requests from me contained in the post remain outstanding.
> > I am asking interested readers to examine these two here and email me if you would like to have more information.
> > Lou
>
> Lou, surely you must have seen that things have changed at Babble. There does not appear to be any active oversight. A lack of communication from Bob at this point is pretty much the norm. If your request isn't acted on, it probably has been tacitly allowed to stand.
>
> I do remember that if a poster makes more than three complaints about a member that were not considered uncivil by administration, then written explanations need no longer be given. The action or lack of action would be considered an answer. Perhaps this also applies to multiple complaints by a poster about the posts of more than one member. If this is so, then even if Dr. Bob were consistently answering, which he's not, he would not consider it necessary to reply.
>
> I am curious. Have you been elsewhere on the internet? I can't read a major news site comments without being sickened at the hatred and vicious rants. I've never seen on Babble the sort of antisemitic rants that go on elsewhere without apparent response from the moderators. I can't see antisemitic violence coming from anything I've seen on Babble. I doubt it's likely on the other sites either. But it does seem as if your concerns are needed more elsewhere.
>
> Also, I wonder if you see any uncivil remarks towards a person who happens to be a Jew to be the same as anti-semetism? Isn't it possible for someone to be uncivil to another person without regard to their religion or ethnicity? If someone is rude to me, I don't consider it a sign of a tendency towards violence directed at all Americans of European descent. How do you even know the religion or ethnicity of a person who is rude to another person on the internet? Isn't it possible that they too are Jewish?
>Dinah,
You wrote,[...I am curious...I can't see antisemitic violence coming from anything I've seen on babble...].
I am unnsure as to what you are wanting to mean here and have concerns. If you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
A. Have you read all posts here on this site?
B. By what criteria do you use, if any, to determine if or if not a statement here could or could not arouse antisemitic feelings that could lead to violene toward a Jew?
C. Are you aware of the propagaanda used to foster violence toward Jews that is in the historical record, before 1933?
D. Are you aware of the propaganda used to excite a community to do violence toward Jews after 1945?
E. Would you be willing to examine the posts in the offered links by me in this thread and apply whatever criteria that you use, if any, to determine if or if not there is the potential for some readers of those statements to comitt violence toward a Jew?
F. redacted by respondent
Lou
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.