![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 40. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 23, 2005, at 19:34:35
Dr. Hsiung,
I am requesting that you examine the following :
The poster writes,[...If it had been that a poster had called me a moron or stupid or some such other word,I could...put it behind me. {But not for this word}...].
I am requesting that you write a determination in regards to if you accept statements like this to be acceptable here. I am questioning this above because of the language in the way it is worded as to its grammatical structure. I am requesting that the part that writes, [...I could...put it behind me. But not for this...word...]be carfully examined and see if you accept that here. Also, is the post, in your opinion, saying that I called this poster something?
Lou Pilder
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20050123/msgs/446378.html
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 23, 2005, at 19:57:01
In reply to Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-, posted by Lou Pilder on January 23, 2005, at 19:34:35
Dr. Hsiung,
The poster wrote,[...put it behind me...(but {not} for this)...]. I do not feel comfortable here with that statement, for if the poster is not going to put it behind her, then I do not know what she is going to further do.
I am wondering if you consider a statement like the one in question to have the potential to be considered to be a threat.
Lou Pilder
Posted by Angel Girl on January 23, 2005, at 22:55:31
In reply to Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-B, posted by Lou Pilder on January 23, 2005, at 19:57:01
> Dr. Hsiung,
> The poster wrote,[...put it behind me...(but {not} for this)...]. I do not feel comfortable here with that statement, for if the poster is not going to put it behind her, then I do not know what she is going to further do.
> I am wondering if you consider a statement like the one in question to have the potential to be considered to be a threat.
> Lou Pilder
I feel extremely hurt, put down and offended and that is an extreme understatement.What would I do? I've already stated the answer to that many times, I will leave PB.
A threat? I feel extremely traumatized by that.
Dr. Bob, forget it. Leave the word. I can no longer stay here. I just can't imagine that anyone would possibly consider me to be threating.
THIS IS MY VERY LAST POST EVER. THERE IS ONLY SO MUCH THAT ANY ONE PERSON CAN HANDLE AND I'VE GONE OVER MY LIMIT NOW.
I'm sorry Lou. I am not meaning to hurt you or offend you but I can not handle this whatsoever.
Thank you everybody for your loving support but it's now all in vain.
An EXTREMELY DISTRAUGHT AG :( :( :(
Posted by justyourlaugh on January 24, 2005, at 0:30:57
In reply to Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-B, posted by Lou Pilder on January 23, 2005, at 19:57:01
lou..
i feel your constant "requests"
are hurting others..
why ?
why are you doing this?
are you trying to undermind dr bob?
are you meaning to hurt other posters..get them banned?
i can not help but "feel"..your posts are nothing but clutter....
email the good doctor about your concerns...
this is getting old..
love jyl!
Posted by alexandra_k on January 24, 2005, at 0:42:48
In reply to Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-B, posted by justyourlaugh on January 24, 2005, at 0:30:57
I am sorry that I started the poll / petition, whatever now.
I didn't mean to make things worse.
But I do think things have escalated rather.I really do not think that Lou intends to hurt anyone. I believe that his requests for determination are done with the intention to clarify the rules. Not only for him but for everyone, so as to benefit the forum as a whole.
I have had my differences with Lou, however. But I don't think he intends to hurt anyone.
But sometimes hurts result despite intentions. And sometimes we need to learn to deal with feeling hurt and traumatised. That can be really hard. It can be really hard when we believe that others could stop the bad feelings. But sometimes there are reasons not to. And if people never did anything we found hurtful we would never learn to be stronger.
Angel Girl, I am sorry for your pain. But I think your pain, or at least the extent of it is more the result of what has happened to you previously than this particular situation.
I can understand how Lou's request was a 'last straw'. But I also think that Lou cannot or does not. Not out of cruelty or malice. We are who we are. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone...
Posted by alexandra_k on January 24, 2005, at 2:28:29
In reply to Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-B, posted by alexandra_k on January 24, 2005, at 0:42:48
Sorry. I retract the last line.
Posted by malthus on January 24, 2005, at 5:33:40
In reply to Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-B, posted by Lou Pilder on January 23, 2005, at 19:57:01
I am sincerely asking why you are uncomfortable and what you think she is going to do to you? Do you truly believe that Angel Girl is a threat to you? I would feel accused, put down and sad if someone intimated that I was a potential threat to them.
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 24, 2005, at 5:58:00
In reply to Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-B, posted by alexandra_k on January 24, 2005, at 0:42:48
It is written here,[...I am sorry that I started the poll...].
Well, this type of situation went to the US Supreme court 30 years ago or so because one thought that taking a public poll was protected by Freedom of Speech. The court rulled ,not, and its resoning could be interesting to read because it writes about a situation similar to the poll here and its effects on the person that the poll could be thought by others as the subject. The court looked at the question of could it not be that a poll could have the potential to defame anyone in the poll? Is a poll a sound mental -health practice? Does the poll have the potential to arrouse ill-will toward another?
It is written here,[...I do think things have escalated...]. hummmmmmm, because of the poll?
It is written here,[...I do not think that Lou intends to hurt anyone...].
This is correct now, was correct in the past and it is my pledge for the future.
Lou
Posted by nikkit2 on January 24, 2005, at 6:42:18
In reply to Lou's response to alexandra's post-regtpol, posted by Lou Pilder on January 24, 2005, at 5:58:00
Lou,
You state the following about the poll..
"Is a poll a sound mental -health practice?"
Do you think that bringing peoples pain to the admin board and asking for "a determination as to the civility" of it is sound mental health practice?
Nikki
Posted by Atticus on January 24, 2005, at 10:55:18
In reply to Lou's response to alexandra's post-regtpol, posted by Lou Pilder on January 24, 2005, at 5:58:00
Lou,
This is the first time that I have requested that a Babbler never post to me again under any circumstances. I am making this request to you, Lou Pilder. I will offer you the same courtesy.I am extremely upset with the fact that Angel Girl will be leaving us, and that the root of her unhappy departure lies with your subject line. She has never shown even the most minimal sign of aggression in any of her posts. So reading your post to Dr. Bob asking for a determination as to whether she was threatening you by remaining so upset infuriated me beyond description.
I wish to have no further interaction of any kind with you. If you post to me, I will never respond. This may not matter to you at all. But seeing as Dr. Bob has not intervened to help, I guess it's up to me, in this small way, to demonstrate to you that sometimes actions have consequences. I can't block you from PB. But I can block you from communication with me on a permanent basis. And I am. Atticus
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 24, 2005, at 13:18:16
In reply to Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-B, posted by alexandra_k on January 24, 2005, at 0:42:48
I agree with everything you've said, completely.
But I wish you wouldn't feel bad for starting the poll, if there is anyone who should have pangs of conscience, it should be Dr. Bob for not intervening. There is no way you could have predicted what happened.
Posted by alexandra_k on January 24, 2005, at 13:29:02
In reply to Alexandra, posted by Gabbix2 on January 24, 2005, at 13:18:16
Hey.
Maybe he is waiting to see how we deal with this ourselves. He already made a decision. Sounds like there has already been a dialogue between himself and Angel Girl. In a very real way it is between them. It is not my business. The particular word in question doesn't affect me at all, believing the antichrist is as much a myth as god and all...
Also I think Lou's point about the question mark was actually even more significant than I thought before. So the casual reader may think that the poster wondered whether Angel Girl was the Antichrist. If they think the worst it will be about Lou's thinking and not about Angel Girl's being. And the non-casual reader (which you would have to be now that it is archived) would follow more of the thread anyway.
I just didn't like to see her hurting.
But then her hurting was resulting in Lou hurting.
Then Lou hurting results in her hurting.
And round and round we go.I am getting off this now.
Sorry this has distracted from the length of Chemists block...
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 24, 2005, at 14:16:31
In reply to Gabbix » Gabbix2, posted by alexandra_k on January 24, 2005, at 13:29:02
> Hey.
>
> Maybe he is waiting to see how we deal with this ourselves. He already made a decision. Sounds like there has already been a dialogue between himself and Angel Girl.You're probably right, I guess whether or not one thinks it's right is the question.
The particular word in question doesn't affect me at all, believing the antichrist is as much a myth as god and all...
Yes, I feel the same way about that too, but like you it was the pain it caused that bothered me.
>
> Also I think Lou's point about the question mark was actually even more significant than I thought before. So the casual reader may think that the poster wondered whether Angel Girl was the Antichrist. If they think the worst it will be about Lou's thinking and not about Angel Girl's being. And the non-casual reader (which you would have to be now that it is archived) would follow more of the thread anyway.
>
> I just didn't like to see her hurting.
> But then her hurting was resulting in Lou hurting.
> Then Lou hurting results in her hurting.
> And round and round we go.Yup..
>
> I am getting off this now.Ya, I think at some point you have too, not *you* personally.
Anyway, I just was wishing you didn't feel bad that's all.
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 24, 2005, at 14:30:25
In reply to Gabbix » Gabbix2, posted by alexandra_k on January 24, 2005, at 13:29:02
> Hey.
>
> Maybe he is waiting to see how we deal with this ourselves. He already made a decision. Sounds like there has already been a dialogue between himself and Angel Girl. In a very real way it is between them. It is not my business. The particular word in question doesn't affect me at all, believing the antichrist is as much a myth as god and all...
>
> Also I think Lou's point about the question mark was actually even more significant than I thought before. So the casual reader may think that the poster wondered whether Angel Girl was the Antichrist. If they think the worst it will be about Lou's thinking and not about Angel Girl's being. And the non-casual reader (which you would have to be now that it is archived) would follow more of the thread anyway.
>
> I just didn't like to see her hurting.
> But then her hurting was resulting in Lou hurting.
> Then Lou hurting results in her hurting.
> And round and round we go.
>
> I am getting off this now.
> Sorry this has distracted from the length of Chemists block...Friends,
It has been written here ,[...Lou's point...question mark..more significant...
casual reader...archived...following thread...about Lou's thinking,not about her being...resulting in hurting Lou...].
I appreciate your consideration of me in the statements that I have indicated here.
Lou
Posted by alexandra_k on January 24, 2005, at 16:39:54
In reply to Lou's response to alexandra_k's post-thnkpstr, posted by Lou Pilder on January 24, 2005, at 14:30:25
Thats ok Lou.
You are welcome :-)
I don't like to see anyone hurting.
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 24, 2005, at 19:32:00
In reply to Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-B, posted by alexandra_k on January 24, 2005, at 0:42:48
> I am requesting that you write a determination in regards to if you accept statements like this to be acceptable here.
>
> Lou PilderI think it's acceptable.
--
> I am sorry that I started the poll / petition, whatever now.
>
> I didn't mean to make things worse.
> But I do think things have escalated rather.
>
> alexandra_kThanks. I think that anything that's polarizing will tend to lead to escalation...
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on January 24, 2005, at 19:45:33
In reply to Re: Lou's request, posted by Dr. Bob on January 24, 2005, at 19:32:00
>I think that anything that's polarizing will tend to lead to escalation...
Sorry. I never thought of polls that way.
And I suppose the intention of a petition is to persuade someone to change their mind.
I guess nobody managed to read your mind to be able to figure out your rationale on this one.
In a way it is none of our business. But it is good to know how and why you are likely to respond a certain way in the future when it really might be our business.
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 24, 2005, at 20:32:35
In reply to Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-B, posted by justyourlaugh on January 24, 2005, at 0:30:57
> i feel your constant "requests"
> are hurting others..
>
> i can not help but "feel"..your posts are nothing but clutter....
>
> this is getting old..Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down.
If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
Follow-ups regarding these issues, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 24, 2005, at 21:03:34
In reply to Re: please be civil » justyourlaugh, posted by Dr. Bob on January 24, 2005, at 20:32:35
I am NOT requesting JYL get a block, I'm wondering why on God's green earth you blocked Angel Girl for calling Lou insensitive, and gave JYL only a P.B.C for this post. I'd like an answer please.
Angel Girl was in pain and she showed terrific restraint, and you added more pain and frustration by blocking her, and now, you cooly hand out a mild p.b.c to a different poster for a post of no less incivility than hers.
sick> > i can not help but "feel"..your posts are nothing but clutter....
> >
> > this is getting old..
>
> Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down.
>
> If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ:
>
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
>
> Follow-ups regarding these issues, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bob
Posted by Fallen4MyT on January 24, 2005, at 21:29:11
In reply to What the DEUCE??? DR. BOB, posted by Gabbix2 on January 24, 2005, at 21:03:34
Gab some posters got please be sensitive to me when saying things to me that if *another* poster said them they would have gotten a PBC or a block. How many posters can say SOME of the things that were said to me and get zero to a sensitivity? Had the same thing been said to someone else say from a gated community they would have gotten a civil notice...NOT THAT I WANT A POSTER TO GET A PBC I DON'T ....I think like with Herman Munster there are different civil rules for different posters..or many Bob's who do not meet eye to eye on what civil is. Because the ONLY thing I see that is consistent in civil in here is who the poster is.....The inconsistency is consistent though :) Like Lab rats we never know. Well I could name some posters who can get away with things but I won't....it would not be civil
> I am NOT requesting JYL get a block, I'm wondering why on God's green earth you blocked Angel Girl for calling Lou insensitive, and gave JYL only a P.B.C for this post. I'd like an answer please.
> Angel Girl was in pain and she showed terrific restraint, and you added more pain and frustration by blocking her, and now, you cooly hand out a mild p.b.c to a different poster for a post of no less incivility than hers.
>
> sick
>
> > > i can not help but "feel"..your posts are nothing but clutter....
> > >
> > > this is getting old..
> >
> > Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down.
> >
> > If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ:
> >
> > http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
> >
> > Follow-ups regarding these issues, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Bob
>
>
Posted by Dinah on January 24, 2005, at 21:35:10
In reply to What the DEUCE??? DR. BOB, posted by Gabbix2 on January 24, 2005, at 21:03:34
Gabbi, you know the drill. Dr. Bob had just given Angel Girl a PBC on the same thread. You know after you've just gotten a PBC you have to be very very careful not to say anything that sounds anything remotely like what you got the PBC for. I'm not saying I agree with Dr. Bob's procedures. But that's a sure fire block. I think posters get caught sometimes more because they don't know how to correctly word something than because they're deliberately defying Dr. Bob. Sometimes it appears they're doing their very best to comply. But it's still a sure fire block.
I sort of wish Dr. Bob would take into account whether or not someone is trying to comply but doesn't fully understand the rules or if they're deliberately not complying.
In the past I've tried to hint, or outright warn, but that seems to cause even more trouble than saying nothing at all.
Posted by Fallen4MyT on January 24, 2005, at 21:37:55
In reply to Re: What the DEUCE??? DR. BOB » Gabbix2, posted by Dinah on January 24, 2005, at 21:35:10
Dinah than what the heck is a be sensitive a I do not want to give YOU a PBC ??? Makes no sense to me if it's not civil its a PBC or reword
> Gabbi, you know the drill. Dr. Bob had just given Angel Girl a PBC on the same thread. You know after you've just gotten a PBC you have to be very very careful not to say anything that sounds anything remotely like what you got the PBC for. I'm not saying I agree with Dr. Bob's procedures. But that's a sure fire block. I think posters get caught sometimes more because they don't know how to correctly word something than because they're deliberately defying Dr. Bob. Sometimes it appears they're doing their very best to comply. But it's still a sure fire block.
>
> I sort of wish Dr. Bob would take into account whether or not someone is trying to comply but doesn't fully understand the rules or if they're deliberately not complying.
>
> In the past I've tried to hint, or outright warn, but that seems to cause even more trouble than saying nothing at all.
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 24, 2005, at 21:39:52
In reply to Re: What the DEUCE??? DR. BOB » Gabbix2, posted by Dinah on January 24, 2005, at 21:35:10
Oh I hadn't seen the P.B.C on the same thread..
oops. Thanks Dinah
Posted by Dinah on January 24, 2005, at 21:44:09
In reply to Re: What the DEUCE??? DR. BOB » Dinah, posted by Fallen4MyT on January 24, 2005, at 21:37:55
Please Be Sensitive is a fairly new wording, that if I remember correctly, came about after Kali Munro was a guest on Admin. The archives from that time period probably give an explanation of Dr. Bob's understanding of the new admin action. But I would imagine that if Dr. Bob thought it was being deliberately ignored, he could still block.
He always has the option of trying to explain further what he's looking for, and sometimes he does. Perhaps that's more a matter of how much time he has than anything else?
If I'm understanding your question correctly? Which I'm not altogether sure I am.
Oh well. I almost always get in more trouble than I save when I try to explain what I'm seeing on Admin.
Posted by Fallen4MyT on January 24, 2005, at 21:52:31
In reply to Re: What the DEUCE??? DR. BOB » Fallen4MyT, posted by Dinah on January 24, 2005, at 21:44:09
Omg lol you mean he is like say assigning it a D value instead of an E Save me the time of looking it up please lol....so it is a lesser evil??? yes ...no...Way I see it it is. How many PBS till a block??? AND thanks as always youre a doll.
> Please Be Sensitive is a fairly new wording, that if I remember correctly, came about after Kali Munro was a guest on Admin. The archives from that time period probably give an explanation of Dr. Bob's understanding of the new admin action. But I would imagine that if Dr. Bob thought it was being deliberately ignored, he could still block.
>
> He always has the option of trying to explain further what he's looking for, and sometimes he does. Perhaps that's more a matter of how much time he has than anything else?
>
> If I'm understanding your question correctly? Which I'm not altogether sure I am.
>
> Oh well. I almost always get in more trouble than I save when I try to explain what I'm seeing on Admin.
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.