![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 7 to 31 of 73. Go back in thread:
Posted by Fallen4MyT on April 26, 2004, at 19:09:22
In reply to Re: invisibility » underthecs, posted by spoc on April 26, 2004, at 18:11:59
to an extent i have to agree on all points spoc....often times people miss the new or ignored looking for their established friend's posts i really dont think they see that in themselves...so my thought is i tend to post more to the newer and or quieter or unestablished people....I HOPE YOURE OK UNDERETHICS
> Underthecs, I'm not sure what your situation is, but in general just wanted to say I know what you mean. I think people who have been here a long time or are "established" are just content and satisfied with what they have, and don't think about what may be happening to some of the other people. Also ironic is that people spent so much time discussing the impending "Newbie" board and how to make them feel welcome and get them to post everywhere often, but then pay little attention to what happens right under their noses. To leave it at that is to greatly minimize how it feels, but I will do so.
>
> Anyway, I hope you feel better! : )
Posted by Dinah on April 26, 2004, at 19:27:30
In reply to Re: invisibility » underthecs, posted by spoc on April 26, 2004, at 18:11:59
I remember feeling this way when I started here. I would start a thread and no one would answer. And it always seemed like my post was the last one on a thread.
I still remember with immense fondness those people that responded to me at first when I felt so out of place.
But to my knowledge, no one here is so rich in friends that they don't wish to have more. So I don't think lack of caring is the root cause. Or cliquishness. Some of the people who appear so much at ease here really haven't been here that long.
I have some general thoughts. Threads have a limited lifespan - most of them anyway. When I first came to the board I would think a long time about my response. So long that the thread had lost momentum by the time I posted. So my posts really did end threads sometimes, but more because of the life cycle of threads than for any other reason.
The board has cycles. There are times when things seem pretty jumping, then there are dry periods. Weekends tend to be quiet. Mondays appear lively. When there isn't a lot of traffic, you don't get a lot of responses.
With very few exceptions, topic is important. Most people have topics that interest them, and others not so much. I rarely contribute on relationship threads. I've been married for eons, and haven't been out looking for close to twentyfive years. I don't know much about friendship or relationships either. Sexual attraction isn't something I feel I have any expertise on, so I rarely have much to say about those topics. I'm sure pretty much everyone is the same about feeling more able to contribute in some topics than others. In other cases, there are topics some people might be sensitive about and skip for that reason. Or sometimes, people have just thoroughly discussed a topic recently and don't feel they have any more to say. So the topic, to some extent, determines response.
And then there is the individual mood and other variables. There are days when I'm "on" and I might post a ton. Other days I can barely drag my brain through reading posts. I might flag in my mind posts to come back to, but I might forget to do that. There are days when my individual mood means which posts I relate best to, based on the mood of the post. Then there are days when I either have something offline to do, or I've decided I'm online too much. I think that happens a lot. So if you're having a nice conversation with someone and it suddenly halts, chances are that something happened in that other person's life and mood. Check out the board. Did something happen to upset them IRL? Have they suddenly stopped posting in general? Do their posts have a different tone?
I doubt that I'm unique in my posting habits. And I'm mostly mentioning the reasons I may or may not post. There may be a ton more that don't even occur to me.
What it amounts to is that there are tons and tons of reasons why posts may or may not be responded to. Only a few has to do with people responding negatively to a poster, and only a few have to do with posters being purposely impolite.
So with that in mind, isn't it best to give everyone involved the benefit of the doubt? If I see a post that is on a topic that I know nothing about, I don't write off the poster. If posters don't respond to my post, even posters I've known for a long time, I don't assume that they are being stand offish. Not even if they've responded to every single other post on the board.
I'm not great at interpersonal relationships, but I do suspect that the best way to foster them is to make the most positive assumptions about people's motives and people's reactions to myself. Easier said than done, I know. Boy, do I know.
So everyone, keep posting and if for some reason, you don't get responses, just post again. Chances are excellent that it's nothing personal.
Posted by spoc on April 26, 2004, at 20:33:48
In reply to Re: invisibility, posted by Dinah on April 26, 2004, at 19:27:30
Thanks so much for providing so many comforting possible explanations Dinah! All parts of it are applicable at plenty of times, but I do think much more of it has to do with "unintentional contentedness." I'm mainly referring to the cases where people keep talking *around* someone on a thread (often when what they said was something you can be sure would've been responded to if another name accompanied it; and not infrequently when it was even >> directed to someone specific).
Within days may be too quick for someone to jump to conclusions, but not weeks and months of the same pattern. Benefit of the doubt can be given that people don't *realize* they do it, but not about *whether* they do it. It's an easy thing to fall into I'm sure, it doesn't have to be a matter of meanness, but it can't get better if it is instead buried under unrealistic "best case scenario" explanations.
As a matter of fact, even if this is "just" a message board and many of the people here are far from social butterflies in real life, it wouldn't be human nature if nothing akin to cliques ever formed. And in most of life as well as at most message boards, it's rightly a matter of things being what you make of them, even if it's hard. But this place is supposed to be a little different, and not require people (who may not be up to it) to struggle as hard to be heard and known as they may have to elsewhere.
Maybe in some other cases, people understandably prefer the reliably soothing or gentle or even idealistic voices, but that's just not how all people with problems manage to express themselves. As long as a person isn't mean or antogonistic, support and acceptance are supposed to be readily available to all here; and an occasional "I hear you : )-(nm)" wouldn't be too much. Maybe the board cycles and turns over and then more people who remain get noticed.
But thanks again for comforting anyone here who feels this way, and your points are good, and true in many cases! :- )
Posted by Dinah on April 26, 2004, at 20:57:24
In reply to Re: invisibility » Dinah, posted by spoc on April 26, 2004, at 20:33:48
Well, I do think it's natural for people to be drawn to certain people more than others. People who see the world in the same way, people who are sharing similar experiences, people who remind you of you either now or at some point in the past, or just people that catch your fancy. I don't know that it's a matter of longevity on the board. (You might recall that I told you that you reminded me a bit of myself.)
But I do know that there are some topics I rarely pass up. (Therapy being the biggie.) And there are other topics like relationships or literature or fine movies that I don't touch if my best friend started the thread. I just have nothing at all worthwhile to say on those topics.
It is true that if someone I have known for a long time, and that has been consistent in their support of me, is having a rough time, I'll rouse myself out of a depressive torpor to say something at least vaguely supportive if perhaps not too coherent. At least I will if I'm reading the board, which I don't always do.
But the thing is that everyone has the opportunity to be that person that someone else pulls themselves from a stupor to answer. It does take time though. Relationships do take time to form. Shared histories form. Short hand communication. So I might talk to Noa about flaming amygdalas, or Judy about SPOW, and that might seem a bit exclusive to others. But that doesn't mean I won't be talking to Underthecs about XXX or Spoc about YYY in a month or two. And that's where bulletin boards come in really handy. If you want to know what on earth flaming amygdalas or SPOW is, the search engine is a click away. And presto, you are "in" on the shared language and history.
So there are, perhaps, two levels. You may be right about that. And the second level may develop at different rates of time with different people. Some people you might fall instantly in love with. Some people you might grow to appreciate over time.
But at the first level, I think the reasons people do or don't respond are rarely personal and have more to do with external factors.
Posted by Dinah on April 26, 2004, at 20:58:07
In reply to Re: invisibility » Dinah, posted by spoc on April 26, 2004, at 20:33:48
Posted by spoc on April 26, 2004, at 21:55:35
In reply to Re: invisibility, posted by Dinah on April 26, 2004, at 20:57:24
> And that's where bulletin boards come in really handy. If you want to know what on earth flaming amygdalas or SPOW is, the search engine is a click away. And presto, you are "in" on the shared language and history. >
---
I've used that concept, and tried to join in speaking about the thing or giggling about it (whatever it is in a particular case), and people will still go around a person, clinking their glasses over their head.---
> Some people you might fall instantly in love with. Some people you might grow to appreciate over time.>---
That is of course true and natural and no disgrace. But this also may just not be a good medium for all, for reasons attributable only to themselves of course (like I go on too long in many cases as part of my issues; but I have posted much more brief stuff and things intended to benefit someone else). Because *if* it's harder here than it has been in someone's real life -- including in writing -- it might not be a good message for them to start getting about themself now. And some may do better if they fixed their problems first, but then they probably wouldn't need to be here period, so it's another paradox. Of course nothing can work for everyone, that's just the way it is. However, I am confident in saying that this could work for *more,* if people would be a bit more cognizant of some patterns that are easy to fall into.Please note that I definitely don't mean that people who click shouldn't flock together and enjoy it. I'm just saying, it is not unusual for people to talk around someone on a thread, even if that person speaks of the thing at hand, in context; and sometimes even if they try >> to get someone's attention. Just the facts ma'am! I know you are sincere and sincerely don't see the forest of which I speak through the trees. And I like and respect you, and don't want this all to bring you down! :- )
Posted by Dinah on April 26, 2004, at 22:17:57
In reply to Re: invisibility » Dinah, posted by spoc on April 26, 2004, at 21:55:35
You are right, of course. I don't really see it. And I suppose it wouldn't be considered civil to give concrete examples. But my email is in the FAQ's. If you'd like to email me with URL's and explanations, maybe I'd see the forest amongst the trees.
I care a lot about Babble, and if I'm missing something that I can help make better, I'd like to understand.
Posted by Dinah on April 26, 2004, at 22:21:55
In reply to Re: invisibility » Dinah, posted by spoc on April 26, 2004, at 21:55:35
While I truly meant what I said, I should warn that I am awful at email sometimes. The email screen isn't as user friendly to me as a posting screen and it takes more effort and concentration for some reason and is more daunting to me. So it takes me a bit longer to reply sometimes.
Posted by spoc on April 26, 2004, at 22:41:54
In reply to Re: invisibility » spoc, posted by Dinah on April 26, 2004, at 22:17:57
Posted by Fallen4MyT on April 27, 2004, at 0:16:48
In reply to Re: Ok, I will email you this week : ) : ) (nm) » Dinah, posted by spoc on April 26, 2004, at 22:41:54
Spoc we TOTALLY agree...Dinah you know I adore you but we disagree here...yes I agree there are many reasons posters dont post to some posters or all posts..that applies to me too as summer comes I am seldom on and miss much BUT I do see cliques and have from the start...thats ok really but I feel bad for the ones who arent IN the crowd and seem to want to be. Me I love ya all :)
Posted by gardenergirl on April 27, 2004, at 1:11:37
In reply to I see it too spoc and dinah, posted by Fallen4MyT on April 27, 2004, at 0:16:48
I'm jumping i a bit late here (actually really late as it is 2:00 a.m., sigh).
I have to admit, I don't really see it as Fallen4myT and spoc are describing. Perhaps this means that I am one of the offenders. I just know that, like Dinah, I don't always resond on every thread for a variety of reasons. Sometimes I don't have time. Sometimes I don't feel like I have anything to add. Sometimes, it's just not grabbing me, for whatever reason.
There are also times when I just don't understand a post, so I might not respond to it directly. I admit I don't always take the time to post questions to try to understand, as I already feel like my time online is rationed, and I hope that I will eventually figure it out or that it will get clarified by other posters. I guess that is a bit selfish of me.
I really wish that I could respond more to everything I read that is at all interesting. Sometimes I feel the need to "catch up" on responses, but then I am on for hours, and I really can't afford that right now, or I'll never graduate.
So, if I have inadvertently failed to respond to someone who posted to me or on a thread I started, I apologize. It's likely an oversight rather than an intentional slight. I seem to be developing that absent-minded professor shtick, :( If I tend to stick to only a few threads, unfortunately, that's all I can manage right now.
That all being said, I had the same feelings at the beginnning. I thought I was a thread killer and an outsider. But it changed the more I posted. It took a few months, I believe.
Glad all babblers are here. It's really a cool place filled with warm and wonderful, unique people.
gg
Posted by All Done on April 27, 2004, at 1:54:50
In reply to Invisibility, posted by gardenergirl on April 27, 2004, at 1:11:37
To all,
I'm kind of at a loss here. It makes me sad to know that you feel this way and I want to post to try to make you all feel less invisible, but I'm not exactly sure how to go about it. Part of me feels like I should apologize if I was one of the offenders (if so, I am truly sorry). The other part of me wants to give reasons why I don't always post (time is my major issue and when I do have time, I will admit, sometimes I post to those I've had previous interactions with first).
I realize there are plenty of reasons you feel this way but I also realize there are plenty of reasons you shouldn't feel this way (Dinah did a pretty good job with the latter). So, the best advice I can give is probably the hardest. Just keep jumping in where you can and eventually, I bet it won't feel the same anymore. I have found Babble to be a wonderful place to interact and make friends. Ironically, though, sometimes it is necessary to have thick skin while waiting for replies.
I hope you all know we all appreciate your presence here and no one wants you to feel like an outsider.
Take care,
All Done
Posted by rainyday on April 27, 2004, at 7:10:06
In reply to Re: underthecs, Fallen4MyT, lonelygirl, and spoc, posted by All Done on April 27, 2004, at 1:54:50
And I don't even know you!
I definitely look at the thread subjects and read based on that. Some boards I don't even check due to my inability to contribute anything meangingful. I have to say that all the boards are interesting, but I can't relate to them all the time.
I figure when my thread is the last post, that the subject has been exhausted , or I jumped in too late (like here, perhaps??). I guess I wouldn't take it personally because PB is only a part of what makes me, me. We DON'T really know each other that well. I would be uncomfortable to think that someone had based an opinion of my values and judgement just on my posts here.
Also, when thread subjects are directed at a particular individual, I try to respect that.
:)
Posted by Dinah on April 27, 2004, at 7:55:18
In reply to Where is underthecs in all of this?, posted by rainyday on April 27, 2004, at 7:10:06
> Also, when thread subjects are directed at a particular individual, I try to respect that.
Now, *that* I would tend to disagree with. I figure all threads are on an open board, and anyone can jump in anywhere. People can always make space for more input. I know sometimes I direct a post at a particular poster for a particular reason (See my post to Racer below), but that doesn't mean I don't welcome other input. I just want someone to see something, that's all.
Posted by spoc on April 27, 2004, at 8:08:15
In reply to Where is underthecs in all of this?, posted by rainyday on April 27, 2004, at 7:10:06
Posted by rainyday on April 27, 2004, at 9:03:55
In reply to Re: Where is underthecs in all of this?, posted by Dinah on April 27, 2004, at 7:55:18
Dinah, I'm just saying that is what I *personally* do. Don't mean to take a stance or anything.
Have you noticed that I am extremely non-confrontational? AKA a wimp?
rainyday
Posted by spoc on April 27, 2004, at 10:11:41
In reply to Invisibility, posted by gardenergirl on April 27, 2004, at 1:11:37
... when I have already spent too much time in one thread or archive, and want to skim all the current boards too before I attempt to shut the door, I will unconciously scroll down them and often not "see" a new thread that has no posts to it yet. That isn't even the scenario I have been referring to, but just realized that this is a way I too probably miss a lot of people (who may be newer than me). I do know there really are many unconscious elements to it all. : )
Posted by Fallen4MyT on April 27, 2004, at 10:35:39
In reply to Invisibility, posted by gardenergirl on April 27, 2004, at 1:11:37
My opinion on this is the cycle will continue sadly because people do not want to or are unable to see who they flock to. I do not think so many over the course of the time I have been on this site would have posted feeling shunned or invisable...AFTER posting if there wasnt SOME validity to this. I just think people need to look at themself and if they have a habit of posting to say 6 or 10 posters only all the time and toss a free on in to someone else once in a while
Posted by rainyday on April 27, 2004, at 10:58:32
In reply to Re: Invisibility, posted by Fallen4MyT on April 27, 2004, at 10:35:39
I think there is validity to this too.
Maybe some people are just chattier than others? I know I can't stop my fingers sometimes. I think I am looking at who's "talking" to each other. If there's a lot going back and forth and I don't have anything different to say, I stay quiet instead of posting a "me too"!
Posted by spoc on April 27, 2004, at 11:19:37
In reply to Re: Invisibility » Fallen4MyT, posted by rainyday on April 27, 2004, at 10:58:32
See how easy this stuff happens -- for instance, Rainyday, I just posted >> to you above and I'm the only one you didn't answer, ha ha! BUT although I assume that was a fluke, I would also never mean to say that everyone is obligated to answer someone who directs a post to them.
FYI, the (nm) to you above was just this:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20040307/msgs/339246.html
Posted by Dinah on April 27, 2004, at 11:54:32
In reply to Re: Invisibility about invisibility » rainyday, posted by spoc on April 27, 2004, at 11:19:37
Now, for instance, in that example, I might well have assumed that it was a no response needed sort of post. Which leads to a new suggestion for those who might feel that way. Some posts sound as if they have a final ring to them, and don't require a response. Others seem like a comment that also aren't inviting further comment. So if you want to increase the chance of getting a reply maybe it's a good idea to include a question in your post. Either a question to the individual you are responding to or a general question.
I've found that in general, I have a hard time finding the end of a conversation. But a question is a clear indication that this is not meant to be an ending sort of statement.
Wow, it feels weird to microanalyze things. But interesting.
Another suggestion. I think that to each of us, our posts are our babies. We put a piece of ourselves in them and send them off into cyberspace, hoping for the best. Hoping they'll find acceptance. While none of us consider *anyone* else's posts in the same fashion.
So my solution has been to just send so many of the little dickens out there so that I know some will fall flat and some will find a comfortable welcome. And enough that I rarely even remember the individual posts, so I'm not overly concerned about their futures. Every once in a while, I post something and then follow its progress with fear and anticipation. But that hurts a bit and is very anxiety provoking. I try not to get too attached to my posts.
Posted by rainyday on April 27, 2004, at 12:11:06
In reply to Re: Invisibility about invisibility » rainyday, posted by spoc on April 27, 2004, at 11:19:37
I got it (finally)! A bit thick in the head today.
Posted by karen_kay on April 27, 2004, at 13:18:05
In reply to Re: Invisibility about invisibility » spoc, posted by rainyday on April 27, 2004, at 12:11:06
if you notice from the post i start below to kid that says, "hey kid" i started a post to him, yet didn't respond as of yet. however, i responded to ivan micheal. in a day or so, i'll respond to kid. yet, in my response to ivan michael, i made reference to kid's post. (and everyone here knows how much i adore kid, so there's my point precisely).. sheesh, now i really feel bad, so i have to think of something to say to kid... good grief! how can i even top being put in jail on a monday? anyway....
i jump around often. i don't mean to. i'm easily distracted. i can't help that. and i pick and choose the posts i respond to. and i read most posts. but, i don't respond to every post. if i did, i would spend even more time than i do at babble (if that's even possible). it doesn't mean that i don't care any less for the particular poster. i just means that i jump around often. and i don't expect each and every person to respond to me. i often feel bad when people do respond to me, as i can't always get back to them. which is why i try not to start too many threads any more. because i know i can't get back to each individual person.
when i first started posting, i was concerned with the same thing. however, you soon realize you shouldn't be. it's not a matter of people not liking eachother. i like everyone here. i don't purposely not post to anyone. EVER! i just spend way too much time here. and i feel especially rude answering some people and not others. so, i hope that if i answer some, and casually ignore others (much like my problems, hmmm funny how babble mimics real life in that way, isn't it??) somehow i won't feel bad...and it's not that i ignore really, i just write in such a way that i don't really answer or ask questons really. and so when i respond to one person, it actually responds to everyone..
anyway, i always feel bad. always. so, i could devote all of my time to babble. or i could not post at all. or, i could answer some and then make a blanket thank you (which still to me seems rude). or, i can just do what i do, which is to jump around, get to what i have time for and hope no one feels hurt. i try to talk to everyone. i don't ever neglect anyone, i think. if you honestly feel i do, please bring it to my attention, so i can feel bad, even moreso than i already do at this point. i honestlyl feel everyone plays by the same rules i do. i don't think anyone else ignores any other poster on purpose. sometimes i just don't have anything to say about something. i wish sometimes i could pull something insightful out of my butt, however it doesn't always come to me. and again, if it did, i'd be here all the time. and i've never posted anything where i've felt people never posted back recently. maybe it's because people do post back, or perhaps because i just don't have anything important to say. and i kill threads all the time. but, i'd rather kill threads than have someone else kill them.
Posted by rainyday on April 27, 2004, at 13:52:33
In reply to note to all!! i'm rude!, posted by karen_kay on April 27, 2004, at 13:18:05
You have struck a nerve there! But you're not in the least bit rude. I lose track of threads and I'm not certain there is a protocol - or should be - about responding to all who respond to a post. That might be a question for Emily Post!
If anything, you are exceptionally compassionate. Rude is not a word I would EVER use to describe you. Adorable, definitely: but you already know that!
Just think of the few truly offensive posts that crop up now and then - they are caught swiftly and it's obvious to me that we are all looking out for each other.
rainyday
Posted by gardenergirl on April 27, 2004, at 14:26:01
In reply to Re: Invisibility, posted by Fallen4MyT on April 27, 2004, at 10:35:39
Fallen4myT,
I'm wondering, since my post was pretty much describing my own habits, if your reply is directed to me?gg
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Social | 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.