![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 330 to 354 of 536. Go back in thread:
Posted by Jai Narayan on February 11, 2005, at 16:09:40
In reply to Re: eep! Can we avoid that subject header??? :-) (nm) » Jai Narayan, posted by alexandra_k on February 10, 2005, at 22:45:10
sorry about that other subject line....
is there anything I can so to stop it?At PC you can delete anything....I think.
there was a poster on PC who first deleted her poem, then she deleted her name and became anonymous then all of it just disappeared.
haunting.
Ja*
Posted by alexandra_k on February 11, 2005, at 16:18:52
In reply to Alex is the most wonderful person....:), posted by Jai Narayan on February 11, 2005, at 16:09:40
> sorry about that other subject line....
> is there anything I can so to stop it?Thats okay. I just didn't want it continued indefinately...
> At PC you can delete anything....I think.Within a certain amount of time.
> there was a poster on PC who first deleted her poem, then she deleted her name and became anonymous then all of it just disappeared.Yes. That would be a downside.
> haunting.
:-)
Have a wonderful day
> Ja*
:-)
ps - lets keep it admin in here ;-)
Posted by Dr. Bob on February 12, 2005, at 1:33:59
In reply to Re: back to the boards » Dr. Bob, posted by AuntieMel on February 10, 2005, at 13:34:16
> > > An out-of-town opening would only be temporary, right?
>
> > We could have it be permanent...
>
> Hmmmmm.. and if another went oug of town, and the new permanent person went out of town, and so on and so on.
>
> An end run around the finite size???If they all came back, yes, no system is perfect...
> ++++
>
> In some houses you would have the Cleavers. In others you'd end up with the Osbornes. What if poor June ends up sharing a house with the Osbornes?She could move?
> Or if you know you're a Cleaver but the only house with space is the Osbornes?
You could start a new house of Cleavers?
> ++++
>
> > 1. Was it cozy?
>
> It was very cozy.OK. :-)
> > 2. What if it had been 200-300?
>
> First I'd make sure all the neighbors knew they could come over, too (so they wouldn't complain.) Then I'd have gone out for another keg or two - and ordered pizza if I ran out of food. But I wouldn't have turned them away, if that's what you're asking. I was taught that it would be rude. "Southern hospitality" you know.OK. I guess that would've been even cozier. :-)
++++
> There is only one way to find out how it will go, right? So, how 'bout you just go ahead - and we'll see how it works out?
I think I probably will. When I have some time to set it up. Thanks,
Bob
Posted by Mark H. on February 16, 2005, at 22:17:45
In reply to Re: blocked for week ALEX....please read., posted by Jai Narayan on February 10, 2005, at 21:20:19
Dear Jai,
I almost missed your message!
Yes, I'm mostly reading these days, weighing in once in awhile when I have a question or concern.
I always enjoy your posts and the gentle support you offer to everyone here -- you fill me with light!
With kind regards,
Mark H.
Posted by Jai Narayan on February 17, 2005, at 7:19:27
In reply to Re: The Wonders of Alexandra and Jai » Jai Narayan, posted by Mark H. on February 16, 2005, at 22:17:45
Posted by Dr. Bob on February 17, 2005, at 20:00:26
In reply to Re: The Wonders of Alexandra and Jai » Jai Narayan, posted by Mark H. on February 16, 2005, at 22:17:45
Posted by alesta on April 23, 2005, at 22:28:28
by any chance could anyone paste the thread that thoroughly explains how bob would work this small group thing pretty please? or could someone explain his plan real quick..it can be short and sweet..if no one wants to look it up i understand, lol...
if it involves splitting us up, that will suck hard. i vote nay dr. b. i'm just expressing *my* *personal* feelings on this, not asking for a debate from bob or anyone else as to whether or not i SHOULD feel this way..i don't want any trouble.. just the site please..tankyou.
amy;)
Posted by 10derHeart on April 23, 2005, at 23:36:51
In reply to smaller groups--need thread explaining, posted by alesta on April 23, 2005, at 22:28:28
Hi alesta,
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041218/msgs/441970.html
This is pretty much where it starts back in Jan. Goes on for over three weeks....I couldn't explain it "short and sweet" if my life depended on it... lol. But, I'll bet Alex or Dinah or numerous other posters who are more talented at being concise than I am could do that.
I tend to go round in circles. And the thread eventually got so deep, I just had to stop reading....good luck making your way through it...
Hope this helped :-)
Posted by alexandra_k on April 23, 2005, at 23:46:55
In reply to smaller groups--need thread explaining, posted by alesta on April 23, 2005, at 22:28:28
Oh dear.
The topic is a minefield... An absolute minefield.
The idea is that some people find it hard to feel accepted over on social because there are an awful lot of posters over there.
So Dr Bob had an idea that there could be smaller boards that had a restriction on the number of people who could sign up to the board.
Then the discussion went into gated communities and exclusion etc etc. Some people are vehemently opposed to the notion.
I hope that was a fair explanation.
And that other people will jump on in if they have anything to add or clarify...
Posted by alesta on April 24, 2005, at 0:17:28
In reply to Re: smaller groups--need thread explaining » alesta, posted by alexandra_k on April 23, 2005, at 23:46:55
ohhhh boy. thanks 10derheart and alex very much! i will say no more, lol..amy :)
Posted by alesta on April 24, 2005, at 0:45:31
In reply to Re: smaller groups--need thread explaining, posted by alesta on April 24, 2005, at 0:17:28
>
> ohhhh boy. thanks 10derheart and alex very much! i will say no more, lol..
>
> amy :)
>
>
dam# it, i have to at least say how i feel about it,..hehe..(if only to possibly prevent this from happening.) i hate this idea..many of us have been here for many, many months, and know many ppl here..to just cut us off from each other, no longer seeing various ppl popping in and out and cutting us off from our friends will hurt..a LOT. sorry, but this feels really unfair..so there are a few ppl who feel left out..i'm sorry for them, but this method of dealing with it is way too high a price to pay..besides, i see a lot of support and inclusion of just about everybody on social right now..and if one or two ppl feel left out, oh well. you can't make the boards perfect, ya know..leave the boards be! just my opinion..this will be a sad day for most of us if this happens..i never expected my friendships of this site would just be cut off..that stinks. all right, i'm outta this place..
amy
Posted by alesta on April 24, 2005, at 1:04:40
In reply to my vote, posted by alesta on April 24, 2005, at 0:45:31
< all right, i'm outta this place..
oops. by 'this place' i meant admin, not the whole site..:) bye bye
Posted by alexandra_k on April 24, 2005, at 4:02:52
In reply to my vote, posted by alesta on April 24, 2005, at 0:45:31
> dam# it, i have to at least say how i feel about it,..hehe..
:-)
I hope you don't mind my responding...> i hate this idea..many of us have been here for many, many months, and know many ppl here..to just cut us off from each other, no longer seeing various ppl popping in and out and cutting us off from our friends will hurt..a LOT.
But all the boards that are currently running will keep running just as they are. They won't change. The idea is that some people don't participate on social because they feel overwhelmed by the number of posters / posts there and they might feel more at home on a board where there is a limit on the number of posters who can participate on that board only.
>i never expected my friendships of this site would just be cut off..that stinks. all right, i'm outta this place..
But they wouldn't be cut off. They could continue as usual. But the people who do feel overwhelmed on social would have a place for them as well.
Posted by Dinah on April 24, 2005, at 9:57:50
In reply to Re: my vote » alesta, posted by alexandra_k on April 24, 2005, at 4:02:52
That's one way to look at it.
Of course, the other way to look at it can no longer be expressed under the civility guidelines, can it?
Posted by alexandra_k on April 24, 2005, at 16:19:12
In reply to Re: my vote » alexandra_k, posted by Dinah on April 24, 2005, at 9:57:50
> That's one way to look at it.
>
> Of course, the other way to look at it can no longer be expressed under the civility guidelines, can it?
Hmm. I think it can.
How about babblemailing your civility buddy???
Oh, Dinah I don't really want to start this up again...
Sigh.
Hug?
Posted by Dinah on April 24, 2005, at 16:35:52
In reply to Re: my vote » Dinah, posted by alexandra_k on April 24, 2005, at 16:19:12
Neither do I.
I have no need to talk to a civility buddy about it. I'm in no risk of saying something that will get me in trouble. I know a lost cause when I see it and see no point in expending energy on what is done. I did a cost benefit analysis, that came down on the side of staying on Babble, for the moment at least.
I just find it a bit unfair that free discussion is limited to one side.
Posted by Dinah on April 24, 2005, at 16:39:28
In reply to Re: my vote » alexandra_k, posted by Dinah on April 24, 2005, at 16:35:52
And I did clarify that at one point. I outlined the chain of events, and my conclusion that opposing viewpoints that gave any detail whatsoever were now considered uncivil, and Dr. Bob agreed.
It's in the archives somewhere.
Posted by alexandra_k on April 24, 2005, at 18:45:13
In reply to Re: my vote, posted by Dinah on April 24, 2005, at 16:39:28
I'm sorry. That stuff about the civility buddy was a joke. You do better at being civil than I do.
I'm sorry.
(((Dinah)))
Posted by alesta on April 24, 2005, at 23:50:46
In reply to Re: my vote, posted by Dinah on April 24, 2005, at 16:39:28
> And I did clarify that at one point. I outlined the chain of events, and my conclusion that opposing viewpoints that gave any detail whatsoever were now considered uncivil, and Dr. Bob agreed.
>
> It's in the archives somewhere.hi dinah,:)
how are you, girl..i wasn't gonna come back over here, but someone emailed me and told me to read your post..thanks for that piece of info..:-)holy #$#$, i can't believe it is considered uncivil to discuss an opposing viewpoint on this on the motherf$%$$% admin board..what kind of weird, wacked stipulation is that? i knew i should've stayed away from here, but this issue directly involves me, and all of us..
amy
Posted by alesta on April 24, 2005, at 23:55:28
In reply to Re: my vote » alesta, posted by alexandra_k on April 24, 2005, at 4:02:52
hi alex,
ok, so are you saying that these private rooms will be in *addition* to the main social board? because that is the only way things are going to carry on as normal..i could handle that, no problem..could you go in a little more detail please? your post leaves me with a lot of questions..and i don't mind that you replied at all.:) hope i'm not starting anything here, but i really do not want to be separated from 75% (ballpark guess) of my babble friends.amy
Posted by alesta on April 25, 2005, at 0:05:34
In reply to Re: my vote » Dinah, posted by alesta on April 24, 2005, at 23:50:46
hi doctor, please don't block me without PBCing me first..:) i will try to be civil, but want to be able to discuss the issue if need be without walking on eggshells. thank you dr. bob.
Posted by alesta on April 25, 2005, at 0:28:01
In reply to sorry dr b, i lost my cool, posted by alesta on April 25, 2005, at 0:05:34
i might've offended..i mean i'm *really* sorry..i think just being over here on this board triggers anger in me, as i've had such bad experiences over on this board in the past, and i just can't believe all of this is happening and i had no idea, and now it may be too late. i feel terrible for losing my temper.
amy
Posted by alexandra_k on April 25, 2005, at 0:50:07
In reply to Re: my vote » alexandra_k, posted by alesta on April 24, 2005, at 23:55:28
> ok, so are you saying that these private rooms will be in *addition* to the main social board?
Yup. That is indeed my understanding. The rest of the boards would continue as normal.
>could you go in a little more detail please? your post leaves me with a lot of questions..
Hmm. I'm not too sure what your questions are. I guess nobody really knows how they are going to work exactly except Dr Bob and maybe he hasn't even worked out all the details yet. I think the idea may be first come first served or something like that. And the number of posters to the board will be restricted to a certain number (not sure how many). If people don't post for a couple of weeks or whatever then they lose their place and someone else can join up. I'm not too sure but I think the idea is to have as many of them as there are people who want them so if one is full then another may be set up. I think the idea is that some people would feel more comfortable in a smaller group.
IMO I don't think it would change the current boards much. But some people have been worried that it would change things because some of the people off social might prefer their smaller board. I don't know. I just know that in my case I would probably like to be a member of a smaller board - but I'd also keep posting to social as usual because I wouldn't want to miss out on my friends there and also all the new people who come along and all the old people who I don't know very well yet.With respect to civility...
There was some concern about people saying that small boards were exclusive and stuff like that. The concern was that posters might not feel comfortable joining up to the small boards (if they ever get underway) because posters might think that other posters think they are being exclusionary in joining.That was what that was about.
You can say you don't like them etc.
But I think you aren't really supposed to call them 'names'.
Posted by alesta on April 25, 2005, at 1:23:16
In reply to Re: my vote » alesta, posted by alexandra_k on April 25, 2005, at 0:50:07
> > ok, so are you saying that these private rooms will be in *addition* to the main social board?
> Yup. That is indeed my understanding. The rest of the boards would continue as normal.
thanks, alex. well, great. i don't have a problem with the private rooms then. wish i'd known this from the beginning, lol..that's a real load off....phew! now that idea actually sounds like a win-win to me. i want everybody to be comfortable here, and happy. i think it's great to be able to choose.
amy:)
Posted by alexandra_k on April 25, 2005, at 1:38:58
In reply to Re: my vote » alexandra_k, posted by alesta on April 25, 2005, at 1:23:16
> thanks, alex. well, great. i don't have a problem with the private rooms then. wish i'd known this from the beginning, lol..that's a real load off....phew! now that idea actually sounds like a win-win to me. i want everybody to be comfortable here, and happy. i think it's great to be able to choose.
I agree...
Though I should probably point out that me and you and Dr Bob might be the only three people who are willing to admit that 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.