![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 2 to 26 of 52. Go back in thread:
Posted by SLS on November 3, 2014, at 6:49:02
In reply to I'm confused about the posts here, posted by oceansun on November 2, 2014, at 11:26:13
> Hi. I'm a new member and just started reading this Admin section. I haven't gotten through all the posts, but could someone summarize the issues?
Devolution?
> This board is very different from the board I remember from years and years ago, but I've found a lot of help recently on the Medication board, and am very grateful for that. I just wonder, why isn't Lou blocked?
> His first post to me scared me, and I can see how a new member might not post again with his responses.
Thanks for affirming the concerns that many of us have had and expressed to Dr. Bob for quite a few years.
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 3, 2014, at 16:20:37
In reply to I'm confused about the posts here, posted by oceansun on November 2, 2014, at 11:26:13
> Hi. I'm a new member and just started reading this Admin section. I haven't gotten through all the posts, but could someone summarize the issues?
>
> This board is very different from the board I remember from years and years ago, but I've found a lot of help recently on the Medication board, and am very grateful for that. I just wonder, why isn't Lou blocked? This is probably an old story, but he went away briefly but now is back. His first post to me scared me, and I can see how a new member might not post again with his responses.Friends,
It is written here,[...I can see how someone might not post after reading (Lou's responses)...could someone summarize the issues?...].
I do not think that there is an issue. This is all because the forum is for support and the Golden Rule is to be taken into consideration when posting.
Now some may think support is to post only to advocate glorifying taking mind-altering drugs in collaboration with a psychiatrist/doctor. But would that then be {reinforcement} and not support? The mission of the forum is for support remembering the Golden Rule while posting, not {reinforcement} although reinforcement could happen.
Now there are children looking into this site and parents wanting to know if they should drug their child in collaboration with a psychiatrist. If they only received reinforcement to drug their child, would that be supportive? If they were to be told that the drugs could cause their child to have suicidal and homicidal thoughts from taking the drugs, would that be supportive? And what about addiction and Tardive Dyskinesia as a result of taking these drugs? Is it to be barred here to tell readers that these drugs could do that? Ad what about that combining these drugs can increase the aspect of death exponentially? Are posters here to be barred from posting those facts? And if those facts frighten readers to reconsider taking these drugs and to seek another way that will not kill them or give them an addiction or cause diabetes or liver failure or kidney failure or blood disease or Tardive Dyskinesia or serotonin syndrome or many of the other life-ruining conditions that their child could get from these drugs, would that not be supportive? You see, my friends, I am not against psychiatry, I am against death. And I have come here to free the captives to be delivered out of bondage and be led to a new life. Those that hear my voice and know that they are lost, have that opportunity. And those that want to still my voice take away that opportunity that I could show to them.
Let those that only want to read from those that advocate the taking of these drugs read from those names that are well-known here to advocate these drugs. And here are some ways that those readers can use.
A. When they see my name, do not click on the post.
B. When they do read my post, send it to your psychiatrist/doctor and discuss it with them.
C. Send my post to the FDA and ask them if what is in the post accurate.
D. Send my post to the drug manufacturer and ask if it is true.
E. Ask your self if you would give the drugs t your children, if any.
F. Find out the historical relationship between psychiatry and mass-murder
G. Ask your psychiatrist if they know if the drugs shorten your life-span.
H. redacted by respondent
Lou
Posted by oceansun on November 3, 2014, at 23:08:35
In reply to Re: I'm confused about the posts here » oceansun, posted by SLS on November 3, 2014, at 6:49:02
Oh dear.
And Lou's been on this site for years??? Do you know why he isn't blocked?
Posted by SLS on November 4, 2014, at 7:46:31
In reply to Re: I'm confused about the posts here » SLS, posted by oceansun on November 3, 2014, at 23:08:35
> Oh dear.
>
> And Lou's been on this site for years??? Do you know why he isn't blocked?No.
Dr. Bob has elected to allow Mr. Pilder to post in ways that I feel are in confict with the FAQ posting guidelines.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
"Please don't...
harass or pressure others...
exaggerate or overgeneralize -- etc. Even if you're quoting someone else."
- Scott
Posted by oceansun on November 4, 2014, at 22:37:45
In reply to Re: I'm confused about the posts here » oceansun, posted by SLS on November 4, 2014, at 7:46:31
This explains a lot. I'm greatly saddened by it.
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 6, 2014, at 6:14:09
In reply to Re: I'm confused about the posts here » SLS, posted by oceansun on November 4, 2014, at 22:37:45
> This explains a lot. I'm greatly saddened by it.
o_s,
I am unsure as to what Scott's post explains to you and why that saddens you. If you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly
A. In that you say that what Scott wrote about me here explains a lot, what does it explain to you?
B. Why does that sadden you?
C. How could you determine if it is true as to what Scott posted about me here?
D. If what Scott posted about me here could decrease the respect, regard and confidence in which I am held and induce hostile and disagreeable feelings and opinions about me, would you want to be in concert with him to further those opinions and feelings about me here? If so, why?
Lou
Posted by Phillipa on November 6, 2014, at 8:53:25
In reply to Lou's request-ihnconcrt » oceansun, posted by Lou Pilder on November 6, 2014, at 6:14:09
I am neither but the message to me is obvious & very clear. Could you re read the message? I think you will understand it then. Phillipa
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 6, 2014, at 15:44:49
In reply to Re: Lou's request-ihnconcrt » Lou Pilder, posted by Phillipa on November 6, 2014, at 8:53:25
> I am neither but the message to me is obvious & very clear. Could you re read the message? I think you will understand it then. Phillipa
Ph,
What is the message that is obvious and very clear to you?
Lou
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 11, 2014, at 14:53:59
In reply to Re: I'm confused about the posts here » SLS, posted by oceansun on November 4, 2014, at 22:37:45
> I just wonder, why isn't Lou blocked? ... His first post to me scared me, and I can see how a new member might not post again with his responses.
> I'm greatly saddened by it.
Sorry about not replying more promptly.
I'd feel sad, too, if feeling scared kept people from posting. In this case, yes, I could block one trigger. (And I plan to add a Refuge board that would be more safe/less tolerant.) In general, however, it's impossible just to do away with triggers. My idea is that support and encouragement might help counteract fear. How were you able to overcome feeling scared and post again?
Bob
Posted by SLS on November 11, 2014, at 19:16:00
In reply to Re: why Lou isn't blocked, posted by Dr. Bob on November 11, 2014, at 14:53:59
> > I just wonder, why isn't Lou blocked? ... His first post to me scared me, and I can see how a new member might not post again with his responses.
> >
> > I'm greatly saddened by it.> Sorry about not replying more promptly.
>
> I'd feel sad, too, if feeling scared kept people from posting. In this case, yes, I could block one trigger. (And I plan to add a Refuge board that would be more safe/less tolerant.) In general, however, it's impossible just to do away with triggers. My idea is that support and encouragement might help counteract fear. How were you able to overcome feeling scared and post again?
>
> Bob
"Why Lou isn't blocked"Why is Twinleaf blocked?
If personal attacks are to be sanctioned, why, then, did you not block Lou Pilder when he attacked me personally?
Allow all triggers because it is impossible to sanction all triggers?
It seems to me that the only person who might have been triggered by Twinleaf is you.
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 11, 2014, at 21:47:42
In reply to Re: why Lou isn't blocked » Dr. Bob, posted by SLS on November 11, 2014, at 19:16:00
> > > I just wonder, why isn't Lou blocked? ... His first post to me scared me, and I can see how a new member might not post again with his responses.
> > >
> > > I'm greatly saddened by it.
>
> > Sorry about not replying more promptly.
> >
> > I'd feel sad, too, if feeling scared kept people from posting. In this case, yes, I could block one trigger. (And I plan to add a Refuge board that would be more safe/less tolerant.) In general, however, it's impossible just to do away with triggers. My idea is that support and encouragement might help counteract fear. How were you able to overcome feeling scared and post again?
> >
> > Bob
>
>
> "Why Lou isn't blocked"
>
> Why is Twinleaf blocked?
>
> If personal attacks are to be sanctioned, why, then, did you not block Lou Pilder when he attacked me personally?
>
> Allow all triggers because it is impossible to sanction all triggers?
>
> It seems to me that the only person who might have been triggered by Twinleaf is you.
>
>
> - ScottFriends,
It is written here,[...he attacked me personally...].
Now I am the subject person, again, here. And the subject is an attack against the poster that has used me as his subject person claiming some sort of attack against him.
Now the attack is not specified here so readers could think anything that I have written could constitute this personal attack. It could be that I am different from him but my different point of view is not an attck on him. Or it could be that I do not think that it is supportive to advise readers to take a combination of drugs that could kill them or addict them or give them a life-ruining condition. That is not an attack on Scott. Or it could be my stance that children reading here could think that it is supportive to take drugs that could cause them to kill themselves and/or others and I am trying to show them facts so that them and their parents could make a more-informed decision as to take these drugs or not. That is not an attack on Scott. Or it could be that I am tring to stop Mr. Hsiung and any deputy doing his wishes to let antisemitic propaganda remain to be seen here as supportive where it is originally posted. That is not an attack on Scott. Or it could be that I am also trying to stop Mr. Hsiung from allowing defamation toward me to be seen as supportive. That is not an attack on Scott.
What I am askiing readers here to do is to understand that there are prohibitions posted to me here by Mr. Hsiung that prevent me from posting my own repudiations to antisemitic statements and defamation against me here where those statements are originally posted. And for you to understand that there are years of outstanding notifications from me that if they were acted on , posters IMHO, would not ask why I am not blocked here and I do not know where any attack by me is toward the poster here.
Lou
Posted by SLS on November 11, 2014, at 22:10:35
In reply to Lou's respone-wairizdahattak?, posted by Lou Pilder on November 11, 2014, at 21:47:42
If I can find examples of your attacking me and other posters personally, will you agree to be blocked for them?
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 12, 2014, at 7:28:33
In reply to Will you? » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on November 11, 2014, at 22:10:35
> If I can find examples of your attacking me and other posters personally, will you agree to be blocked for them?
>
>
> - ScottFriends,
Sometimes I come to the aid of someone that I see being abused and post what I think could alleviate the harm that someone could have from being abused here. I do not consider that a personal attack on the one that I am responding to, for I am trying to help the one being seen by a subset of readers as a target for abuse to see that they are a victum and that they have done no wrong to have what is written about them.
Here is one such post.
Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20140304/msgs/1063064.html
Posted by oceansun on November 12, 2014, at 20:49:48
In reply to Re: why Lou isn't blocked, posted by Dr. Bob on November 11, 2014, at 14:53:59
I was scared because his post to me was one of the first ones I read. My first response was actually shock. I've only recently resurfaced, and I remember the board 10+ years ago when it was a big source of support and knowledge to me. From what I understand from The New York Times article, it was still flourishing in 2010.
What I've seen on this board lately still retains that care and compassion and curiosity, but the sheer number of people posting has dropped dramatically. Shockingly. I certainly can't speak for any member, past or present, but I myself wish more people were able to gain the sort of support and information offered here.
So, I wonder, although I don't know how long Lou has been posting, has he, or similar people, been a factor in the decrease in posters? Has he been turning off new people who could contribute to the site? He's clearly more scary, and prolific, than other unpleasant posters I remember. Unfortunately, because of the small size of the board, his voice is pretty loud. And I honestly think he would have been blocked in the past.
I don't think it's a matter of triggers -- many people seem to ignore him, though I'm guessing pretty annoyed that he's still around -- but of maintaining the health and wellness of the board as a whole, and encouraging growth, if that is wanted, of course.
I continue to post, and am posting this post, simply because I remember the board of the past and thus was able to look past his post to the wonderful other posters here. I don't read his posts. It's the new and potential posters I am worried about, who don't have prior knowledge of the board and might just be turned off immediately, and the current members who might get discouraged and leave.
Of course, there could be many other reasons for the downturn in posters in the past few years. I'm really curious about this, and concerned -- if anyone has any thoughts about this, I would appreciate any input.
> > I just wonder, why isn't Lou blocked? ... His first post to me scared me, and I can see how a new member might not post again with his responses.
>
> > I'm greatly saddened by it.
>
> Sorry about not replying more promptly.
>
> I'd feel sad, too, if feeling scared kept people from posting. In this case, yes, I could block one trigger. (And I plan to add a Refuge board that would be more safe/less tolerant.) In general, however, it's impossible just to do away with triggers. My idea is that support and encouragement might help counteract fear. How were you able to overcome feeling scared and post again?
>
> Bob
Posted by Twinleaf on November 12, 2014, at 23:41:58
In reply to Re: why Lou isn't blocked » Dr. Bob, posted by oceansun on November 12, 2014, at 20:49:48
I, for one, appreciate your concerns about the negative effect these posts might be having on newcomers. A number of us have expressed this concern for several years now, but have eventually accepted, however reluctantly, that this does not appear to be a concern shared with Bob.
While the medication board has continued to be a great source of informstion for new treatments, it does seem that the sense of warmth and community which once characterized Babble has largely disappeared. The number of active posters appears to be decreasing. I don't really understand the reasons for this, although I do feel it would have been helpful to both Lou and the community to impose moderate checks on some of his more frightening statements. I don't read them, but I can see that they could be quite alarming to new posters who are just trying to find out if this site is helpful for them. We will never know how many potential posters have decided to reject this site because of this. It is very sad to see how lifeless Babble is now, compared to how it once was.
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 13, 2014, at 9:55:08
In reply to Re: why Lou isn't blocked » Dr. Bob, posted by oceansun on November 12, 2014, at 20:49:48
> I was scared because his post to me was one of the first ones I read. My first response was actually shock. I've only recently resurfaced, and I remember the board 10+ years ago when it was a big source of support and knowledge to me. From what I understand from The New York Times article, it was still flourishing in 2010.
>
> What I've seen on this board lately still retains that care and compassion and curiosity, but the sheer number of people posting has dropped dramatically. Shockingly. I certainly can't speak for any member, past or present, but I myself wish more people were able to gain the sort of support and information offered here.
>
> So, I wonder, although I don't know how long Lou has been posting, has he, or similar people, been a factor in the decrease in posters? Has he been turning off new people who could contribute to the site? He's clearly more scary, and prolific, than other unpleasant posters I remember. Unfortunately, because of the small size of the board, his voice is pretty loud. And I honestly think he would have been blocked in the past.
>
> I don't think it's a matter of triggers -- many people seem to ignore him, though I'm guessing pretty annoyed that he's still around -- but of maintaining the health and wellness of the board as a whole, and encouraging growth, if that is wanted, of course.
>
> I continue to post, and am posting this post, simply because I remember the board of the past and thus was able to look past his post to the wonderful other posters here. I don't read his posts. It's the new and potential posters I am worried about, who don't have prior knowledge of the board and might just be turned off immediately, and the current members who might get discouraged and leave.
>
> Of course, there could be many other reasons for the downturn in posters in the past few years. I'm really curious about this, and concerned -- if anyone has any thoughts about this, I would appreciate any input.
>
>
>
> > > I just wonder, why isn't Lou blocked? ... His first post to me scared me, and I can see how a new member might not post again with his responses.
> >
> > > I'm greatly saddened by it.
> >
> > Sorry about not replying more promptly.
> >
> > I'd feel sad, too, if feeling scared kept people from posting. In this case, yes, I could block one trigger. (And I plan to add a Refuge board that would be more safe/less tolerant.) In general, however, it's impossible just to do away with triggers. My idea is that support and encouragement might help counteract fear. How were you able to overcome feeling scared and post again?
> >
> > Bob
>
> Friends,
If you are considering being a discussant here, I am requesting for you to read the following.
To see this post go to the search box at the end of this page and type in:
[ admin, 428781 ]
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 14, 2014, at 5:27:52
In reply to Lou's response-, posted by Lou Pilder on November 13, 2014, at 9:55:08
> > I was scared because his post to me was one of the first ones I read. My first response was actually shock. I've only recently resurfaced, and I remember the board 10+ years ago when it was a big source of support and knowledge to me. From what I understand from The New York Times article, it was still flourishing in 2010.
> >
> > What I've seen on this board lately still retains that care and compassion and curiosity, but the sheer number of people posting has dropped dramatically. Shockingly. I certainly can't speak for any member, past or present, but I myself wish more people were able to gain the sort of support and information offered here.
> >
> > So, I wonder, although I don't know how long Lou has been posting, has he, or similar people, been a factor in the decrease in posters? Has he been turning off new people who could contribute to the site? He's clearly more scary, and prolific, than other unpleasant posters I remember. Unfortunately, because of the small size of the board, his voice is pretty loud. And I honestly think he would have been blocked in the past.
> >
> > I don't think it's a matter of triggers -- many people seem to ignore him, though I'm guessing pretty annoyed that he's still around -- but of maintaining the health and wellness of the board as a whole, and encouraging growth, if that is wanted, of course.
> >
> > I continue to post, and am posting this post, simply because I remember the board of the past and thus was able to look past his post to the wonderful other posters here. I don't read his posts. It's the new and potential posters I am worried about, who don't have prior knowledge of the board and might just be turned off immediately, and the current members who might get discouraged and leave.
> >
> > Of course, there could be many other reasons for the downturn in posters in the past few years. I'm really curious about this, and concerned -- if anyone has any thoughts about this, I would appreciate any input.
> >
> >
> >
> > > > I just wonder, why isn't Lou blocked? ... His first post to me scared me, and I can see how a new member might not post again with his responses.
> > >
> > > > I'm greatly saddened by it.
> > >
> > > Sorry about not replying more promptly.
> > >
> > > I'd feel sad, too, if feeling scared kept people from posting. In this case, yes, I could block one trigger. (And I plan to add a Refuge board that would be more safe/less tolerant.) In general, however, it's impossible just to do away with triggers. My idea is that support and encouragement might help counteract fear. How were you able to overcome feeling scared and post again?
> > >
> > > Bob
> >
> > Friends,
> If you are considering being a discussant here, I am requesting for you to read the following.
> To see this post go to the search box at the end of this page and type in:
> [ admin, 428781 ]
> Lou
>
> Friends,
Where does this (expletive) come from about me?
I would like for interested readers to bring up the following post and in the post is a video that I would like for you to view.
The members here bringing me up in the light that could induce hostile and disagreeable feelings and opinions about me and decrease the respect and regard and confidence in which I am held is nothing new. It is an old tactic that history records. but whose loss could it be if my voice is stilled here? Who would benifit? And what woulod be the result?
Let us look at this post and the video offered to see where this (expletive) comes from.
Lou
To see the post go to the search box at the bottom of this page and type in:
[ babble, 1046247 ]
then follow the directions to see the video
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 14, 2014, at 7:17:25
In reply to Re: why Lou isn't blocked » oceansun, posted by Twinleaf on November 12, 2014, at 23:41:58
> I, for one, appreciate your concerns about the negative effect these posts might be having on newcomers. A number of us have expressed this concern for several years now, but have eventually accepted, however reluctantly, that this does not appear to be a concern shared with Bob.
>
> While the medication board has continued to be a great source of informstion for new treatments, it does seem that the sense of warmth and community which once characterized Babble has largely disappeared. The number of active posters appears to be decreasing. I don't really understand the reasons for this, although I do feel it would have been helpful to both Lou and the community to impose moderate checks on some of his more frightening statements. I don't read them, but I can see that they could be quite alarming to new posters who are just trying to find out if this site is helpful for them. We will never know how many potential posters have decided to reject this site because of this. It is very sad to see how lifeless Babble is now, compared to how it once was.T_l,
You wrote,[...the negative effect...the sense of warmth..has largly disappeared..active posters..decreasing...both Lou and the community to impose moderate checks on some of his more frightening statements. I don't read them, but I can see that they could be quite alarming to new posters...We will never know how many potential posters have decided to reject this site because of this. It is very sad to see how lifeless Babble is now...].
What you have written could lead a subset of readers to think that I am your subject person here to be considered to be the cause of a real or imagined ill of the community. Note my objection to you posting such, for I think that what you have posted here could induce hostil and disagreeable feeliings toward me and decrease the respect, regard and confidence in which I am held.
I am asking for you to post here:
A. What kind of statement has a negative effect?
B. Why could that type of statement not be positive?
C. What would be a moderate check consist of?
D. What constitutes a frightening statement?
E. What could you do here to bring back to life this forum as you say it is lifeless
F. Do you know how many people that are not seen here that have died?
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 14, 2014, at 16:06:04
In reply to Re: why Lou isn't blocked » Dr. Bob, posted by oceansun on November 12, 2014, at 20:49:48
> I was scared because his post to me was one of the first ones I read. My first response was actually shock. I've only recently resurfaced, and I remember the board 10+ years ago when it was a big source of support and knowledge to me. From what I understand from The New York Times article, it was still flourishing in 2010.
>
> What I've seen on this board lately still retains that care and compassion and curiosity, but the sheer number of people posting has dropped dramatically. Shockingly. I certainly can't speak for any member, past or present, but I myself wish more people were able to gain the sort of support and information offered here.
>
> So, I wonder, although I don't know how long Lou has been posting, has he, or similar people, been a factor in the decrease in posters? Has he been turning off new people who could contribute to the site? He's clearly more scary, and prolific, than other unpleasant posters I remember. Unfortunately, because of the small size of the board, his voice is pretty loud. And I honestly think he would have been blocked in the past.
>
> I don't think it's a matter of triggers -- many people seem to ignore him, though I'm guessing pretty annoyed that he's still around -- but of maintaining the health and wellness of the board as a whole, and encouraging growth, if that is wanted, of course.
>
> I continue to post, and am posting this post, simply because I remember the board of the past and thus was able to look past his post to the wonderful other posters here. I don't read his posts. It's the new and potential posters I am worried about, who don't have prior knowledge of the board and might just be turned off immediately, and the current members who might get discouraged and leave.
>
> Of course, there could be many other reasons for the downturn in posters in the past few years. I'm really curious about this, and concerned -- if anyone has any thoughts about this, I would appreciate any input.
>
>
>
> > > I just wonder, why isn't Lou blocked? ... His first post to me scared me, and I can see how a new member might not post again with his responses.
> >
> > > I'm greatly saddened by it.
> >
> > Sorry about not replying more promptly.
> >
> > I'd feel sad, too, if feeling scared kept people from posting. In this case, yes, I could block one trigger. (And I plan to add a Refuge board that would be more safe/less tolerant.) In general, however, it's impossible just to do away with triggers. My idea is that support and encouragement might help counteract fear. How were you able to overcome feeling scared and post again?
> >
> > Bob
>
> o_s,
You wrote,[...the sort of information and support offered here...or similar people...he is clearly more scary...other unpleasant posters...I'm ge(t)(t)ing pretty annoyed that he's still around...was able to look past his post to the wonderful other posters here...I don't read his posts...].
As I am your subject person named, there could be a subset of readers influenced by what you wrote to have induced into them hostile and disagreeable feelings and opinions about me and decrease the respect, regard and confidence in which I am held. I base this on the fact that the grammatical structure of your post leaves one open to think different things about me , so if you could answer the following, then I could respond accordingly and it could be known what you want readers to think about me.
A. If you are getting annoyed that you see me around here, what is it about me that makes you annoyed?
B. If you post a reason here, is it in your opinion a rational reason, and if so, why?
C. What is the information that you want people to gain here?
D. Does my posting keep others from obtaining that information? If so, why?
E. What is it that you see that I write, if you do see something of mine, that is more scary?
F. If there are wonderful posters here, am I included in that subset of posters, and if not, why not?
G. If I am not included by you in that subset, (redacted by respondent)
H. If you do not read my post, how do you know that I am clearly more scary?
I. Are you familiar with the criteria used to determine if when one uses a person as a subject person, if the criteria to determine if the post is an anti-Semitic post such as using a person that is Jewish as a scapegoat for the real or imagined ills of a community?
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 14, 2014, at 16:50:08
In reply to Lou's request-skehypgaux? » oceansun, posted by Lou Pilder on November 14, 2014, at 16:06:04
> > I was scared because his post to me was one of the first ones I read. My first response was actually shock. I've only recently resurfaced, and I remember the board 10+ years ago when it was a big source of support and knowledge to me. From what I understand from The New York Times article, it was still flourishing in 2010.
> >
> > What I've seen on this board lately still retains that care and compassion and curiosity, but the sheer number of people posting has dropped dramatically. Shockingly. I certainly can't speak for any member, past or present, but I myself wish more people were able to gain the sort of support and information offered here.
> >
> > So, I wonder, although I don't know how long Lou has been posting, has he, or similar people, been a factor in the decrease in posters? Has he been turning off new people who could contribute to the site? He's clearly more scary, and prolific, than other unpleasant posters I remember. Unfortunately, because of the small size of the board, his voice is pretty loud. And I honestly think he would have been blocked in the past.
> >
> > I don't think it's a matter of triggers -- many people seem to ignore him, though I'm guessing pretty annoyed that he's still around -- but of maintaining the health and wellness of the board as a whole, and encouraging growth, if that is wanted, of course.
> >
> > I continue to post, and am posting this post, simply because I remember the board of the past and thus was able to look past his post to the wonderful other posters here. I don't read his posts. It's the new and potential posters I am worried about, who don't have prior knowledge of the board and might just be turned off immediately, and the current members who might get discouraged and leave.
> >
> > Of course, there could be many other reasons for the downturn in posters in the past few years. I'm really curious about this, and concerned -- if anyone has any thoughts about this, I would appreciate any input.
> >
> >
> >
> > > > I just wonder, why isn't Lou blocked? ... His first post to me scared me, and I can see how a new member might not post again with his responses.
> > >
> > > > I'm greatly saddened by it.
> > >
> > > Sorry about not replying more promptly.
> > >
> > > I'd feel sad, too, if feeling scared kept people from posting. In this case, yes, I could block one trigger. (And I plan to add a Refuge board that would be more safe/less tolerant.) In general, however, it's impossible just to do away with triggers. My idea is that support and encouragement might help counteract fear. How were you able to overcome feeling scared and post again?
> > >
> > > Bob
> >
> > o_s,
> You wrote,[...the sort of information and support offered here...or similar people...he is clearly more scary...other unpleasant posters...I'm ge(t)(t)ing pretty annoyed that he's still around...was able to look past his post to the wonderful other posters here...I don't read his posts...].
> As I am your subject person named, there could be a subset of readers influenced by what you wrote to have induced into them hostile and disagreeable feelings and opinions about me and decrease the respect, regard and confidence in which I am held. I base this on the fact that the grammatical structure of your post leaves one open to think different things about me , so if you could answer the following, then I could respond accordingly and it could be known what you want readers to think about me.
> A. If you are getting annoyed that you see me around here, what is it about me that makes you annoyed?
> B. If you post a reason here, is it in your opinion a rational reason, and if so, why?
> C. What is the information that you want people to gain here?
> D. Does my posting keep others from obtaining that information? If so, why?
> E. What is it that you see that I write, if you do see something of mine, that is more scary?
> F. If there are wonderful posters here, am I included in that subset of posters, and if not, why not?
> G. If I am not included by you in that subset, (redacted by respondent)
> H. If you do not read my post, how do you know that I am clearly more scary?
> I. Are you familiar with the criteria used to determine if when one uses a person as a subject person, if the criteria to determine if the post is an anti-Semitic post such as using a person that is Jewish as a scapegoat for the real or imagined ills of a community?
> Lou
Friends,
Here is a post and look at what Jane said that is plainly visible.
Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20130702/msgs/1047738.html
Posted by oceansun on November 14, 2014, at 22:19:14
In reply to Re: why Lou isn't blocked » oceansun, posted by Twinleaf on November 12, 2014, at 23:41:58
Thanks for writing back Twinleaf. I didn't really know the history of it. Sigh.
And I guess I'm placing my memories of the old board onto this new one, which I really shouldn't be doing. I'm just a newbie. But I agree it was more supportive in the past. Sigh again.
Posted by SLS on November 17, 2014, at 12:32:44
In reply to Lou's response-brngumbkehylyve » Twinleaf, posted by Lou Pilder on November 14, 2014, at 7:17:25
> > I, for one, appreciate your concerns about the negative effect these posts might be having on newcomers. A number of us have expressed this concern for several years now, but have eventually accepted, however reluctantly, that this does not appear to be a concern shared with Bob.
> >
> > While the medication board has continued to be a great source of informstion for new treatments, it does seem that the sense of warmth and community which once characterized Babble has largely disappeared. The number of active posters appears to be decreasing. I don't really understand the reasons for this, although I do feel it would have been helpful to both Lou and the community to impose moderate checks on some of his more frightening statements. I don't read them, but I can see that they could be quite alarming to new posters who are just trying to find out if this site is helpful for them. We will never know how many potential posters have decided to reject this site because of this. It is very sad to see how lifeless Babble is now, compared to how it once was.
>
> T_l,
> You wrote,[...the negative effect...the sense of warmth..has largly disappeared..active posters..decreasing...both Lou and the community to impose moderate checks on some of his more frightening statements. I don't read them, but I can see that they could be quite alarming to new posters...We will never know how many potential posters have decided to reject this site because of this. It is very sad to see how lifeless Babble is now...].> I am asking for you to post here:
> A. What kind of statement has a negative effect?
> B. Why could that type of statement not be positive?
> C. What would be a moderate check consist of?
> D. What constitutes a frightening statement?
> E. What could you do here to bring back to life this forum as you say it is lifeless
>
> LouMr. Pilder,
That you even have to ask these questions could lead a subset of people to conclude that you should be able to answer the questions for yourself before continuing to post on a mental health website. I have found that interpersonal therapy is helpful for being able to develop one's ability to understand others through the construction of "theory of mind".
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 17, 2014, at 17:59:21
In reply to Posing questions. » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on November 17, 2014, at 12:32:44
> > > I, for one, appreciate your concerns about the negative effect these posts might be having on newcomers. A number of us have expressed this concern for several years now, but have eventually accepted, however reluctantly, that this does not appear to be a concern shared with Bob.
> > >
> > > While the medication board has continued to be a great source of informstion for new treatments, it does seem that the sense of warmth and community which once characterized Babble has largely disappeared. The number of active posters appears to be decreasing. I don't really understand the reasons for this, although I do feel it would have been helpful to both Lou and the community to impose moderate checks on some of his more frightening statements. I don't read them, but I can see that they could be quite alarming to new posters who are just trying to find out if this site is helpful for them. We will never know how many potential posters have decided to reject this site because of this. It is very sad to see how lifeless Babble is now, compared to how it once was.
> >
> > T_l,
> > You wrote,[...the negative effect...the sense of warmth..has largly disappeared..active posters..decreasing...both Lou and the community to impose moderate checks on some of his more frightening statements. I don't read them, but I can see that they could be quite alarming to new posters...We will never know how many potential posters have decided to reject this site because of this. It is very sad to see how lifeless Babble is now...].
>
> > I am asking for you to post here:
> > A. What kind of statement has a negative effect?
> > B. Why could that type of statement not be positive?
> > C. What would be a moderate check consist of?
> > D. What constitutes a frightening statement?
> > E. What could you do here to bring back to life this forum as you say it is lifeless
> >
> > Lou
>
> Mr. Pilder,
>
> That you even have to ask these questions could lead a subset of people to conclude that you should be able to answer the questions for yourself before continuing to post on a mental health website. I have found that interpersonal therapy is helpful for being able to develop one's ability to understand others through the construction of "theory of mind".
>
>
> - Scott
> S,
You wrote,[...you (Lou) be able to answer these questions yourself...].
I have asked the poster those questions because I do not know the answers from the poster as to what the poster wants people to think so that I can continue dialog with that poster. If I was to know what the poster wanted readers to think, then I could have a better idea of what the intent of the poster here is and respond accordingly.
In my want for information, if I was to know what the poster meant by a "negative effect" as to what constitutes such, then I could have a better understanding of the mind-set of that poster. And if I was to know what was in the mind of the poster by the poster answering my questions, then I could have a better way to understand the poster and have interpersonal dialog with the poster and be better able to develop my ability to know what motivates the poster to write what the poster has about me as a subject person.
As a subject person, I do not want to jump to a conclusion about the intent of the poster which I, and readers, could avoid if I was to know the answers to my questions from that poster. If I was to know the answers from that poster, which I am offereing the opportunity to reply to them, then I could possibly rule out what is written about my character here that IMHO a subset of readers could think could decrease the respect regard and confidence in which I am held and rule out what the poster wrote about me as the possibility to cause hostile and disagreeable feelings and opinions about me. If the poster rejects the opportunity to answer the questions, that , in and of itself, could allow readers to think about me in the terms that I do not want for people to think about me here. And as long as that opportunity exists for readers to think of me in the terms that I do not want to jump to a conclusion about, then there could be a false conclusion about my character made in the minds of a subset of readers which I am giving the poster an opportunity to rule out.
Without the poster accepting the opportunity to answer my questions, IMHHHO, I could be portrayed here in a {false light} and suffer the effects of readers seeing those statements that could be about me as supportive here and will be good for this community as a whole in Mr. Hsiungs thinking.
Lou
Posted by Elanor Roosevelt on January 22, 2015, at 18:50:07
In reply to Posing questions. » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on November 17, 2014, at 12:32:44
I had to stop reading Lou completely in order to continue to visit this site.
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 22, 2015, at 19:30:11
In reply to why read Lou?, posted by Elanor Roosevelt on January 22, 2015, at 18:50:07
> I had to stop reading Lou completely in order to continue to visit this site.
ER,
You wrote the above. I am unsure as to what you want readers to think by what you wrote. If you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
A. What could you see in what I wrote that could cause you to not visit this site?
B. Why would if you saw that cause you not to visit this site?
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.