![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 106 to 130 of 161. Go back in thread:
Posted by Lini on April 25, 2002, at 13:14:59
In reply to Re: so much energy » Lini, posted by Shar on April 25, 2002, at 12:10:25
>L-
I think people would not be any happier if the door was unlocked but still closed.Using your analogy--If the boards are rooms we can run in and out of, the 2000 board is IMO not really one with a closed and locked door. It is one that has an open door and a doorway at which you can stand and hear/read all the conversation and see who is in there. You just can't go inside and converse. Which ought to be ok if you meant it when you said "We don't particualry want to go in your room..."
Shar
I must have been unclear, cause you're missing my point . . . standing at the door and looking in, however not being able to converse, is pretty much equivalent to the door being locked, closed, an invisible force field, a junk yard dog or anything else that basically says NO TRESSPASSING. (ie. no posting)The issue is that the boundary exists, not what's on the other side. Get it? I have no interest in a reunion board, but I am interested in the concept of exclusiveness, or separateness or no tresspassing and how it relates to a support group. I think that this is a pretty simple concept to get.
You don't need to feel like you have to justify the reunion boards existence - you didn't create it. If Dr. Bob created a "Lini and Friends" board, you'd bet I'd be on there, enjoying it, and feeling pretty supported, but it wouldn't be a mystery to me why others might be offended...
Posted by Lini on April 25, 2002, at 13:16:48
In reply to Re: so much energy » Lini, posted by Anyuser on April 25, 2002, at 12:52:19
Posted by Krazy Kat on April 25, 2002, at 13:43:27
In reply to Re: so much energy » Lini, posted by Shar on April 25, 2002, at 12:10:25
i really admire your posts and would love to converse with you further here or There. :)
but there is a difference - when one Can access something and chooses not to, it's their choice. when one Cannot access something, it places them in an inferior position.
why do i seem to be the only "old timer" who sees this?
just confused.
- kk
Posted by DinahM on April 25, 2002, at 14:17:07
In reply to oh, shar, it's so different..., posted by Krazy Kat on April 25, 2002, at 13:43:27
> i really admire your posts and would love to converse with you further here or There. :)
>
> but there is a difference - when one Can access something and chooses not to, it's their choice. when one Cannot access something, it places them in an inferior position.
>
> why do i seem to be the only "old timer" who sees this?
>
> just confused.
>
> - kkKrazy Kat, I just love you. And I don't say that often. :)
Dinah
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 25, 2002, at 14:35:31
In reply to Re: so much energy, posted by Lini on April 25, 2002, at 13:14:59
> Basically these boards are like rooms. Usually we get to run around, in and out or whichever room we want. Now you guys have gone and locked the door to one and we're all standing outside banging our heads up against it. We don't particualry want to go in your room, we just want the door to be unlocked.
If you don't want to go in, does it matter if the door is locked?
> Just providing a room that we can lock ourselves in doesn't really solve it.
Why not?
> If you guys don't mind all of us on the other side of the door, we'll probably get tired and go to our own room to bitch. :)
I guess that would be one way of supporting each other, but I'd rather have these new boards come together in a more positive way. I guess that's civility again...
> The issue is that the boundary exists, not what's on the other side. Get it? I have no interest in a reunion board, but I am interested in the concept of exclusiveness, or separateness or no tresspassing and how it relates to a support group.
Think about the people inside the boundary, not the people outside. Sometimes it's nice to be with those you've shared experiences with. But including just them means excluding others.
Bob
Posted by DinahM on April 25, 2002, at 15:06:21
In reply to Re: rooms and doors, posted by Dr. Bob on April 25, 2002, at 14:35:31
> > Just providing a room that we can lock ourselves in doesn't really solve it.
>
> Why not?
>
Because, Dr. Bob, if we are opposed to exclusion, providing us with our own exclusive domain will not solve our moral objections. As I said before, I will not post in the 2001 room because the dear friends I met in 2002 are not welcome there, the dear friends I have yet to meet in 2002 and 2003 are not welcome there, and my dear friends who began posting in 2000 or before are not welcome there. That's why. Sigh.> > If you guys don't mind all of us on the other side of the door, we'll probably get tired and go to our own room to bitch. :)
>
> I guess that would be one way of supporting each other, but I'd rather have these new boards come together in a more positive way. I guess that's civility again...
>
I'd like to have the whole site come together in a more positive way. That's civility too.
>
> Think about the people inside the boundary, not the people outside. Sometimes it's nice to be with those you've shared experiences with. But including just them means excluding others.
>
It's all too obvious that you are thinking of the people inside the boundary, not the people outside. Including just them DOES mean excluding others.But I'm going to quit wasting my breath, or fingers. And one day, Dr. Bob, I am going to have my mother come give you that little talk.
Posted by Lini on April 25, 2002, at 15:10:43
In reply to Re: rooms and doors, posted by Dr. Bob on April 25, 2002, at 14:35:31
>Think about the people inside the boundary, not >the people outside. Sometimes it's nice to be >with those you've shared experiences with. But >including just them means excluding others.
>Bob
Hhhm, I think you're finally getting through to me here. So, *the* most supportive thing for OTs could be a reunion board? I think that that could be valid. The only thing that remains however is how "unsupported" those outside the boundary feel, and if one group's "support" should usurp anothers.I don't envy your position, the scales you have to use, but I guess we're going to have to rely on your judgement. Besides the obvious fact that you can do whatever you want with YOUR board, you are also (i hope!) a little more plugged into "health" in the mental sense.
Best wishes
Posted by DinahM on April 25, 2002, at 15:23:18
In reply to Re: rooms and doors » Dr. Bob, posted by Lini on April 25, 2002, at 15:10:43
Because I sure don't. And I don't like how it makes me feel about Babble. And I don't like how it changes my view of Dr. Bob.
I too appreciate the time he gives to running this site.
But I don't appreciate that he doesn't seem to be listening. He doesn't have to end up agreeing. But it would be nice if he was listening. Perhaps that's just my perception. I suppose if I could hear him repeat back the objections in a way that gave me a sense he understood them....
Oh well.
Posted by Lini on April 25, 2002, at 16:02:37
In reply to Re: I'm glad you understand. » Lini, posted by DinahM on April 25, 2002, at 15:23:18
Dinah,
Yeah, I was pretty bothered about it when I first read about and OT Board, but I do appreciate the discussion around it, and I think that I do *understand* the sentiments on both sides finally. Though my vote would of course be to forgo additional boards, I think what Dr. Bob is trying to ride out whether the support an OT board affords those that have felt disconnected is worth the annoyance/hurt that others will feel by its creation.
I basically think that there are alot of things that could be done to help people feel more supported (things I have alluded to in humor and seriously in other posts) but I really think that people should try and find a way to connect/be supportive on PSB, not create more boards. I think its a can of worms to start creating special "rooms" to help people out cause it will get endless. (and by this I mean exclusive rooms, not the PSB/PB split)
Adapting is a fact of life, and I am not sure that creating a special board for people to catch up on is better than encouraging OT/Newbies to try to figure out a way to catch up/connect/be supportive with what currently exists. I do think that PSB can get a little rowdy, but I would rather see people figure out how to navigate and be supportive/connected there, than for people to retreat to their own corners.
SO, I am sorry that it bothers you, and if it was my board, it would be different, but there would probably just be something else that upset people, because it really is hard to please everyone. That's why it's best to stay out of the pleasing business. :)All the best to you Dinah, glad you're here.
Posted by Phil on April 25, 2002, at 18:22:11
In reply to Re: I'm glad you understand. » DinahM, posted by Lini on April 25, 2002, at 16:02:37
Even if people were successful in 'closing' the OT board, you would piss the OT's off and then you would probably lose a lot of people.
There's really no turning back unless the board doesn't attract enough people.
We can debate this till the cows come home but it's a done deal.
If we get a lot of the OT's back and you find that you relate to what they're saying; post on PSB that you want to talk to geezer boBB. Everytime I come to PB, I visit PSB, geezer board, and lately, this board. If the person you want to talk to missed you post, we could relay the message. Meanwhile more new people are arriving, etc. It could ACTUALLY be a positive move for everyone. Especially if we get boBB back.
Posted by Anyuser on April 25, 2002, at 19:05:10
In reply to Can we end this???????, posted by Phil on April 25, 2002, at 18:22:11
> Even if people were successful in 'closing' the OT board, you would piss the OT's off and then you would probably lose a lot of people.
>
> There's really no turning back unless the board doesn't attract enough people.
>
> We can debate this till the cows come home but it's a done deal.
>
> If we get a lot of the OT's back and you find that you relate to what they're saying; post on PSB that you want to talk to geezer boBB. Everytime I come to PB, I visit PSB, geezer board, and lately, this board. If the person you want to talk to missed you post, we could relay the message. Meanwhile more new people are arriving, etc. It could ACTUALLY be a positive move for everyone. Especially if we get boBB back.I, for one, think it's an interesting topic. If others think it's interesting and want to talk about it, what's the harm?
Posted by Shar on April 26, 2002, at 0:55:22
In reply to Re: Can we end this??????? » Phil, posted by Anyuser on April 25, 2002, at 19:05:10
> I, for one, think it's an interesting topic. If others think it's interesting and want to talk about it, what's the harm?
......I guess your definition of talking about an interesting topic is pretty different from mine:
>When we catch one of the Kool Kids wandering outside their private room, complaining about how we outsiders just don't get it, we should give them a wedgie. :)
.......or, maybe the message above is exactly the type of thing you like to contribute to group discussions.
Shar
> > Even if people were successful in 'closing' the OT board, you would piss the OT's off and then you would probably lose a lot of people.
> >
> > There's really no turning back unless the board doesn't attract enough people.
> >
> > We can debate this till the cows come home but it's a done deal.
> >
> > If we get a lot of the OT's back and you find that you relate to what they're saying; post on PSB that you want to talk to geezer boBB. Everytime I come to PB, I visit PSB, geezer board, and lately, this board. If the person you want to talk to missed you post, we could relay the message. Meanwhile more new people are arriving, etc. It could ACTUALLY be a positive move for everyone. Especially if we get boBB back.
>
Posted by Shar on April 26, 2002, at 0:58:53
In reply to Can we end this???????, posted by Phil on April 25, 2002, at 18:22:11
Posted by Anyuser on April 26, 2002, at 1:41:10
In reply to Re: Can we end this??????? » Anyuser, posted by Shar on April 26, 2002, at 0:55:22
We disagree about what's interesting. But why not ignore the thread if you're not interested? What's your purpose in trying to stop others from discussing it?
Posted by Janelle on April 26, 2002, at 2:01:04
In reply to Re: Can we end this??????? » Shar, posted by Anyuser on April 26, 2002, at 1:41:10
To quote Dr. Bob from a thread above:
"Think about the people inside the boundary, not the people outside. Sometimes it's nice to be with those you've shared experiences with. But including just them means excluding others."
There -- he has SAID IT POINT BLANK - the new boards are indeed EXCLUDING others, which imho is the issue/problem with them.
Posted by kiddo on April 26, 2002, at 2:07:49
In reply to Dr. Bob used the *word* himself !!, posted by Janelle on April 26, 2002, at 2:01:04
Posted by Janelle on April 26, 2002, at 2:09:59
In reply to Re: Can we end this??????? » Shar, posted by Anyuser on April 26, 2002, at 1:41:10
> We disagree about what's interesting. But why not ignore the thread if you're not interested? What's your purpose in trying to stop others from discussing it?
Absolutely ... those who are no longer interested or are burned out by this discussion can chose simply to ignore the thread. There are still some of us who are bothered and feel the need to continue the discussion.
Posted by Janelle on April 26, 2002, at 2:12:11
In reply to Should we PBC Dr. Bob? :-) (nm) » Janelle, posted by kiddo on April 26, 2002, at 2:07:49
Dr. Bob himself admitted that the new boards *exclude* people, which has been a bone of contention with them.
Posted by Phil on April 26, 2002, at 7:27:46
In reply to LOL, but I was trying to make a point..! » kiddo, posted by Janelle on April 26, 2002, at 2:12:11
Old-Timers, including me, have a new board. We post on it, you don't.
Y'all have no middle ground and seemingly ignore or still make sarcastic remarks when someone makes a suggestion.
I'm leaving this discussion because I feel like I'm wasting time.
Yes. The board excludes new people. Either you like the idea or not. Don't like it, sorry.
I'll let you guys figure out the magic words to make the 2000 board disappear.
WE HAVE AN OLD TIMERS BOARD FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE SUPPORTED THIS SITE LONGER. WE POST ON IT, YOU DON'T. WE LIKE THE BOARD dR bOB SUPPORTS IT.
LET IT GO......
YOU ARE NOT AN OT, IT'S AN OT BOARD. WE POST, YOU CAN READ. OKAY??BYE
Posted by Krazy Kat on April 26, 2002, at 10:14:49
In reply to Re: How about this? Then I'll go, posted by Phil on April 26, 2002, at 7:27:46
i really find most of your posts supportive and certainly understand that bad feelings have arisen because of this discussion, but what did you expect?
and how can you use terms like "sarcastic" and capital letters (a big no, no in the cyber world, you know) and not consider that you've lowered yourself to whatever level you think the non-old- timers are sitting on?
frankly, i don't think it is going to end until the board is opened up. perhaps you should stop posting to this thread, stop reading it, and stick to the new board.
i may see you over there - i hope, if so, we can converse like we have before and leave this here. it is an administrative issue.
- :( kk
Posted by Krazy Kat on April 26, 2002, at 10:18:51
In reply to Re: How about this? Then I'll go, posted by Phil on April 26, 2002, at 7:27:46
again, i prefer as open a forum as possible, and i feel this thread should continue as long as it has life.
but it's getting pretty raunchy based on pbc rules. i can't even point them all out here w/o a great effort - and it's new And old timers.
can you step Dr. B and try to bring it back to topic? or maybe it Does need to end...
some of the insults directed At specific people - my, my.
- kk
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 26, 2002, at 10:37:56
In reply to Re: I'm glad you understand. » DinahM, posted by Lini on April 25, 2002, at 16:02:37
> > > Just providing a room that we can lock ourselves in doesn't really solve it.
> >
> > Why not?
> >
> Because, Dr. Bob, if we are opposed to exclusion, providing us with our own exclusive domain will not solve our moral objections.OK, I think I see now, if you're opposed to exclusion as a matter of principle, then it doesn't have to do with whether you yourself are excluded or not.
But aren't these other rooms also exclusive to some extent? Since I block people?
> As I said before, I will not post in the 2001 room because the dear friends I met in 2002 are not welcome there, the dear friends I have yet to meet in 2002 and 2003 are not welcome there, and my dear friends who began posting in 2000 or before are not welcome there.
>
> DinahMThose who feel no special affinity for others from their year won't be interested in these rooms. That's OK. Not everyone goes to their class reunions, either. Speaking of which, are you morally opposed to them, too?
--------
> I think you're finally getting through to me here.
Finally! :-)
> So, *the* most supportive thing for OTs could be a reunion board? I think that that could be valid.
> I think what Dr. Bob is trying to ride out whether the support an OT board affords those that have felt disconnected is worth the annoyance/hurt that others will feel by its creation.Right. And also it's not like the class of 2000 has the only special room, the class of 2001 has one, too. Which they could do something nice with instead of boycotting...
> I think its a can of worms to start creating special "rooms" to help people out cause it will get endless.
OK, but we're a long way from endless, and isn't some degree of diversity usually a good thing?
> Adapting is a fact of life, and I am not sure that creating a special board for people to catch up on is better than encouraging OT/Newbies to try to figure out a way to catch up/connect/be supportive with what currently exists. I do think that PSB can get a little rowdy, but I would rather see people figure out how to navigate and be supportive/connected there, than for people to retreat to their own corners.
>
> LiniI don't think it's either-or. Encouragement like that would be great! But, you know, I might rather have people do one thing, and still they might do something else...
Bob
Posted by Shar on April 26, 2002, at 13:15:45
In reply to Re: Can we end this??????? » Shar, posted by Anyuser on April 26, 2002, at 1:41:10
>What's your purpose in trying to stop others from discussing it?
Far be it from me to stop others from doing anything on these boards. Expressing my opinion that this is getting nowhere fast (if people are interested in resolving a situation they see as problematic) and believing that getting nasty to or about others serves a purpose antithetical to problem resolution, doesn't mean I want to stop others from "discussing" anything. No matter how "discussion" is defined.
So, let the posting continue...or not! I have no power or say so at all over who does what. And, don't think I should. I have an affinity for the truth, and when "discussions" begin to consist of name-calling and sarcasm, the truth is they are no longer about resolving a problem, or voicing an opinion on an administrative issue. So, IMO, we should not pretend that those posts contribute anything positive to the discussion of the situation at hand, or resolving the problem at hand.
Shar
Posted by Lini on April 26, 2002, at 13:27:11
In reply to Re: I'm glad you understand., posted by Dr. Bob on April 26, 2002, at 10:37:56
Maybe it would have made more sense to create a reunion board and not block people, unless it became necessary? The people that have an affinity for special topics (books, OTs, tele-whatever it is) can then have their room, newbies/older OTs can jump in every now and then, but it would still be that particular year's "special" room, just without the door being locked. If someone steps all over things and makes a mess, then boot them out. (No initial PBC, just stright to the Please get the hell off this particular board, also known as PGTHOTPB)
I just think maybe you could solve both problems by having these reunion "rooms" or special focus "rooms" and also having them be open. Just like I don't post in the book club cause it just ain't my thing, i wouldn't post in 2000, cause it ain't my thing either. BUT should a book, or a topic come up that I have something to add to, I might. I haven't seen people being unsupportive in tele-psycho babble or the book club, so i would have to assume that the reunion board could continue to be supportive and still be open. . .
and by the way, if someone goes to their class reunion, they can usually bring whoever they want as their guest, so your reunion board is actually *more* exclusive than an actual class reunion. AND, (while I am splitting hairs) I am not actually boycotting the 2001 room, I am just not interested in it. Okay? :)
Cool.
(Sorry Phil. This thread just won't die).
Posted by Shar on April 26, 2002, at 13:36:28
In reply to phil - -, posted by Krazy Kat on April 26, 2002, at 10:14:49
> frankly, i don't think it is going to end until the board is opened up.
I think, unless pressure is applied to posters, that the 2001 board will slowly begin to be used, and after a couple of weeks or so, this will all be a moot point.
I don't think the boards will be opened up, and IMO they should not be. Now, whether people will continue to post to admin and lobby for the boards to be opened up, I don't know...I do know that if they do, they have a lot more energy than I.
Only a handful of us are still "discussing" the issue...relative to all posters at this site. That doesn't mean we should stop, just an observation that it doesn't seem to be a major problem for most people. Or, if it is, they aren't expressing it.
Shar
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.