![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 59 to 83 of 193. Go back in thread:
Posted by mair on January 7, 2004, at 16:03:49
In reply to Re: Dr bob is a pedophile - What's this about?, posted by stjames on January 7, 2004, at 15:11:04
I don't necessarily endorse this little experiment, but I would like to point out that if someone made a similar statement about one of us - reflected in the subject line of the post, Bob would not necessarily delete it. He has said several times that he doesn't like deleting things.
Mair
Posted by mair on January 7, 2004, at 17:06:42
In reply to you're absolutely right » SLS, posted by judy1 on January 7, 2004, at 11:05:23
Judy - you'll get no argument from me concerning the need for Dr. Bob to administer this site in a way which makes it as safe as possible. By the same token, I think we frequently use the word "safe" all too casually as if there was a bright line between what is "safe" and what is not.
I try to be a responsible poster, but I can't help but cringe when I see someone being sanctioned for making statements which I know could easily have been made by me with no concern that I might be violating one of Bob's rules. This is particularly so when it's so obvious that the offending poster is not just spouting off thoughtlessly, but is making a genuine attempt to be civil.
I know that I would feel pretty awful if I was blocked or warned for making what I considered to be responsible statements. I'm sure I would be hurt by the inference I would make that my contributions to the site were not valued. Under some circumstances I'm sure I'd be pretty horrified that others might think I was trying to put someone else down, and I seriously doubt I could look at my block in any objective way. Your assertion that blocks happen all the time and that posters who have been blocked frequently return is absolutely correct. The fact that blocks may be pretty standard stuff around here, however, doesn't mean that the people who have been blocked can simply view them as casually. Getting blocked would certainly be a big deal to me, and I'm sure I'd have a tough time returning to this site afterwards.
This is too long-winded. The point I'm so ineptly trying to make is that I'm sure that those who feel they have been blocked unfairly or for reasons which they cannot really understand do not at all feel safe when they return, and ironically, it seems that many of those who have registered objections to Larry's block have done so because they respect the efforts he made to make the site a safe place for others.
Mair
Posted by Karen_kay on January 7, 2004, at 17:13:53
In reply to Dr bob is a pedophile, posted by stjames on January 7, 2004, at 13:12:36
Even if you are trying to make a point, I believe this statement is uncalled for. Don't you think that there could be a more appropriate way to get your point across, without resulting to name calling and libel? Just my personal opinion....
Karen
Posted by tabitha on January 7, 2004, at 18:33:28
In reply to Re: IMO, posted by Dr. Bob on January 7, 2004, at 4:15:28
> It's fine to refute what someone says, but that should be able to be done without being accusatory. For example, instead of:
>
> "Those claims are more than just simple opinion. They are provocative and threatening."
>
> one could say:
>
> "I can find no justification for your claims, and others may be alarmed by them."OK, when you put it that way I can see that Larry's statement was more accusatory than it needed to be. He put negative labels on the claim (provocative and threatening) rather than stating his underlying concern that people might be scared by it.
My concern is that people don't understand the concepts of making things non-accusatory and using I-statements and so forth. It's such a different standard than other boards, and from normal social discourse. I really think it takes some special training to get your rules. Did you ever think of putting together a bunch of examples like this, of blockable offenses, and the acceptable alternatives? Put it into the FAQ somewhere. Otherwise we keep having these cases of valuable, intelligent, well-spoken posters stepping over the lines without realizing it.
Posted by judy1 on January 7, 2004, at 18:54:01
In reply to Re: IMO, posted by stjames on January 7, 2004, at 11:30:38
please notice my previous post was not directed towards you, if I had meant to I would have checked the box.
Posted by judy1 on January 7, 2004, at 19:01:52
In reply to Re: you're absolutely right » judy1, posted by mair on January 7, 2004, at 17:06:42
I understand what you're saying, there is a great deal of gray here and nobody can be right 100% of the time. I honestly can't remember you ever being blocked?, your posts are always considerate and I guess I think everyone should be capable of the same. I think Tabitha made a good point about some kind of FAQ to help people with "I" statements, etc.
take care, judy
Posted by shar on January 7, 2004, at 19:05:28
In reply to Re: more tips, please. » Dr. Bob, posted by tabitha on January 7, 2004, at 18:33:28
Posted by Dinah on January 7, 2004, at 19:41:11
In reply to Re: IMO, posted by Dr. Bob on January 7, 2004, at 4:15:28
I would say the same thing for this situation as I did for Dena's. When someone is obviously attempting to be civil, and yet you feel they haven't quite made it, couldn't you give alternative ways of stating first along with a please rephrase before you block?
Surely a well intentioned post that falls short doesn't come up so often that it would be *that* much extra work for you.
Posted by psychlover on January 7, 2004, at 19:57:51
In reply to Re: And » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on January 7, 2004, at 19:41:11
Posted by SLS on January 7, 2004, at 20:20:11
In reply to Re: more tips, please. » Dr. Bob, posted by tabitha on January 7, 2004, at 18:33:28
> My concern is that people don't understand the concepts of making things non-accusatory and using I-statements and so forth. It's such a different standard than other boards, and from normal social discourse. I really think it takes some special training to get your rules. Did you ever think of putting together a bunch of examples like this, of blockable offenses, and the acceptable alternatives? Put it into the FAQ somewhere. Otherwise we keep having these cases of valuable, intelligent, well-spoken posters stepping over the lines without realizing it.
Guidelines for civility? That is a wonderful idea.
- Scott
Posted by Jai Narayan on January 7, 2004, at 22:38:05
In reply to Re: blocked for 2 weeks » Larry Hoover, posted by Dr. Bob on January 5, 2004, at 23:41:35
I have to say Larry Hoover is not as he seems, I too thought he was a wonderful and thoughtful person till I came up against *his* strict rules. I have been hurt and assaulted by his attitudes and the people who think Larry " can do no wrong". I am not suprised at all that he has overstepped his bounds. Sometimes I thought he could have been sued for the claims he made about products he uses. He sometimes behaves like a pdoc....telling all what they should take and not take. I was repeatedly surprised that this was *okay*. If he decided what someone should take then he would give a dose level....well that sure looked like perscribing to me. I am amazed how he got as far as he got. I have seen people sued for less. I guess I have wondered how this site was exempt from the legal rules. It sure looked risky.
IMHO
Posted by gabbix2 on January 7, 2004, at 23:06:46
In reply to Re: blocked for 2 weeks, posted by Jai Narayan on January 7, 2004, at 22:38:05
> I am not suprised at all that he has overstepped his boundsDo you feel you stayed within the bounds of the civility guidelines?
Posted by Karen_kay on January 7, 2004, at 23:28:37
In reply to Re: Dr bob is a pedophile - What's this about?, posted by mair on January 7, 2004, at 16:03:49
I don't necessarily endorse this little experiment, but I would like to point out that if someone made a similar statement about one of us - reflected in the subject line of the post, Bob would not necessarily delete it. He has said several times that he doesn't like deleting things.
Mair
**Correct, and I see the point of the "experiment." But, couldn't it be put in a less offensive way, such as the context that the last offense was? I'm aware of the last subject header and wouldn't it be more appropriate and less offensive to conduct the "experiment" in that fashion? I'm sorry, but at this point I'm highly offended. I really appreciate the fact that people are upset. I honestly do. But is it necessary to upset and offend others in the process as well? HONESTLY!
Posted by Dinah on January 7, 2004, at 23:29:17
In reply to Re: blocked for 2 weeks, posted by Jai Narayan on January 7, 2004, at 22:38:05
> I have to say Larry Hoover is not as he seems, I too thought he was a wonderful and thoughtful person till I came up against *his* strict rules. I have been hurt and assaulted by his attitudes and the people who think Larry " can do no wrong". I am not suprised at all that he has overstepped his bounds. Sometimes I thought he could have been sued for the claims he made about products he uses.
Dinah here, acting as deputy for Dr. Bob.
Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down.
Posted by Jai Narayan on January 7, 2004, at 23:31:03
In reply to Re: blocked for 2 weeks » Jai Narayan, posted by gabbix2 on January 7, 2004, at 23:06:46
> Do you feel you stayed within the bounds of the civility guidelines?
<Dear poster, I have stated what I thought was going on for a while. I was worried about the legal ramifications about Larry's postings.Is that so bad to question?
I think it is not.
To question is not that same as to make statements. Do you not agree?
Posted by dragonfly25 on January 7, 2004, at 23:31:25
In reply to Dr bob is a pedophile, posted by stjames on January 7, 2004, at 13:12:36
that is not funny, there are other ways to get your point accross,
Posted by Jai Narayan on January 7, 2004, at 23:36:58
In reply to Re: Please be civil » Jai Narayan, posted by Dinah on January 7, 2004, at 23:29:17
> Dinah here, acting as deputy for Dr. Bob.
> Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down.
<so sorry, I was out of line. I guess I was concerned. but I can back down. thanks for the warning. peace?
Posted by Karen_kay on January 7, 2004, at 23:42:31
In reply to Re: Please be civil, posted by Jai Narayan on January 7, 2004, at 23:36:58
I feel that if you think this place is unsafe, maybe you should follow your own advice and "Vote with your feet and leave."
Posted by sb417 on January 8, 2004, at 0:11:19
In reply to Re: blocked for 2 weeks, posted by Jai Narayan on January 7, 2004, at 22:38:05
> He sometimes behaves like a pdoc....telling all what they should take and not take. I was repeatedly surprised that this was *okay*. If he decided what someone should take then he would give a dose level....well that sure looked like perscribing to me. I am amazed how he got as far as he got. I have seen people sued for less. I guess I have wondered how this site was exempt from the legal rules. It sure looked risky.
> IMHOHello Jai. I have often wondered about that, too. I think it is much better to say something like, "I took that medicine, and I took x number of milligrams," or "I've read that product xyz is excellent for this condition. It has helped me (or it hasn't helped me)." I think it would be better to put things in terms of one's own experience or to post literature references rather than to pose as a physician. Most REAL physicians probably know better than to prescribe over the Internet to strangers! They WOULD be sued!
Posted by Elle2021 on January 8, 2004, at 2:17:33
In reply to Dr bob is a pedophile, posted by stjames on January 7, 2004, at 13:12:36
I stayed out of this thread for a long time. I would just like to say that making false or uninformed claims about a medication is a lot different than personally assaulting someone by calling them a pedophile.
Elle
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 8, 2004, at 3:05:04
In reply to Dr bob is a pedophile, posted by stjames on January 7, 2004, at 13:12:36
> Dr bob is a pedophile
Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused, thanks.
> > People have never been under any obligation here to back up what they say. So sometimes they don't. That should be taken into account when deciding what information to trust
There's a difference between whether something is accusatory and whether it's backed up by evidence...
Bob
PS: Thanks for your support, everyone. :-)
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 8, 2004, at 3:05:12
In reply to Re: And » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on January 7, 2004, at 19:41:11
> My concern is that people don't understand the concepts of making things non-accusatory and using I-statements and so forth. It's such a different standard than other boards, and from normal social discourse. I really think it takes some special training to get your rules. Did you ever think of putting together a bunch of examples like this, of blockable offenses, and the acceptable alternatives? Put it into the FAQ somewhere. Otherwise we keep having these cases of valuable, intelligent, well-spoken posters stepping over the lines without realizing it.
>
> tabithaThere have always been a couple examples in the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
and not too long ago I added a link there to more information on I-statements:
http://www.crnhq.org/windskill4.html
> I would say the same thing for this situation as I did for Dena's. When someone is obviously attempting to be civil, and yet you feel they haven't quite made it, couldn't you give alternative ways of stating first along with a please rephrase before you block?
>
> DinahNew posters, sure, they may step over a line without realizing it. But after they do it a half dozen times...
Hmm, I suppose I could suggest each time that they consider discussing alternative wordings here... To be more prepared the next time...
Bob
Posted by mair on January 8, 2004, at 7:54:47
In reply to Vote with your feet and leave stjames, posted by Karen_kay on January 7, 2004, at 23:42:31
I'm sure stjames knows he can leave any time. If my memory serves correctly, I'd guess that among active posters, he's been here as long as almost anyone else. Obviously in spite of frustrations with this site, he's chosen to stay and I hope he continues to stay for a very long time.
I'm sure Bob would be among the first to admit that this site isn't perfect and his administration of it isn't flawless. Everyone has to continually balance the benefits they get from participation against the toll of emotional upheaval that we all feel when things happen here that upset us. Its an everchanging balance as most things are. Maybe he could have made his point in a better way, but I don't think he should ever be faulted for pointing out what he feels are some of the deficiencies in the way the site is being administered.
Mair
Posted by zenhussy on January 8, 2004, at 8:08:27
In reply to you're absolutely right » SLS, posted by judy1 on January 7, 2004, at 11:05:23
> ...I think on the whole they are enforced equally (meaning the good people who occasionally screw up get hit with blocks along with those who consistently mess up), and more importantly I feel safer now then I did for the period when the board was growing w/o rules in place...
> take care, judyJudy1,
What do you think of this kind of selective enforcement with the recent blocks and bans of late?
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20031120/msgs/297991.html
Re: Before this gets deleted.... » Dr. Bob
Posted by zenhussy on January 8, 2004, at 7:58:17In reply to Re: sorry, sometimes things slip through, posted by Dr. Bob on January 8, 2004, at 3:07:35
>>Meaning? You will be dealing with the offensive language from the three posts by the methods you spell out in the FAQ?
>>Or are you saying that if it slips through then 'oh well' and you're going to let it be?
>In cases like this, I think it's usually better overall just to let it be...
Bob
That's the biggest load of bs to ever come out of your mouth Dr. Bob. I cannot believe you enforce your rules so willy nilly.I think everyone needs to see that you CHOOSE not to enforce the rule where others have been banned for alternate words for DONKEY.
Posters...what do you think of the doctor's enforcement???? Especially those of you dinged for lesser words?
zh
Here's how the doctor treats Zenhussy:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20031217/msgs/291964.html
Re: please be civil » zenhussy
Posted by Dr. Bob on December 20, 2003, at 16:59:38In reply to Re: Hold on to these feelings while they pass.... » 8 Miles, posted by zenhussy on December 20, 2003, at 4:41:53
> Who will come take care of everything I've let fall to sh*t because of my depression?
Please don't use language that could offend others, thanks.
Bob
Here is how NikkiT2 is treated:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/2000/20031122/msgs/297278.html I'm sorry about all of that shit..Here is st@cy's special treatment:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20031229/msgs/295751.html and if i ever disagree with what
you do i can beat the shit out of you and not get into troubleAnd fluffy too gets a pass:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20031231/msgs/296349.html I've been pretty shitty myself. I was laying
on the couch crying,
Posted by Dinah on January 8, 2004, at 9:14:53
In reply to Re: please be civil » stjames, posted by Dr. Bob on January 8, 2004, at 3:05:04
Wow, Dr. Bob. If I had a bunch of PBC's on my record, and made that statement, I'd pretty much expect a block. I kind of think I'd get one too....
I certainly am impressed with your patience and forbearance. I wish you had shared some with Lar and Dena.
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.