![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 8 to 32 of 57. Go back in thread:
Posted by Racer on July 14, 2005, at 22:19:27
In reply to Re: No, I'm afraid you can't » Dinah, posted by pinkeye on July 14, 2005, at 20:28:22
Much as it pains me to say -- especially since I lost my cool earlier -- I think those guidelines are good, both for the community as a whole, because if we all abided by those rules all the time, this would be a very gentle, peaceful place; and for the individuals here, because it gives us a fairly safe place to practice patience and tolerance and self-control.
By the way, I felt better when I read your first post in this thread -- I don't want you to feel as though your intentions were lost, just because I agree with the civility guidelines that say you shouldn't have posted it.
{sigh}
Life can be complicated, can't it?
Peace.
Posted by Nikkit2 on July 15, 2005, at 5:47:36
In reply to Apology to the board, posted by Racer on July 14, 2005, at 17:39:39
Please don't apologise.
You are speaking for more than youself here. You are certainly speaking for me.
I felt SO hurt and sick when I posted my pain about last Thursdays bombings, and it got compared to *that*..
THAT is why I posted that I didn't mean to post it.
I don't want to come to this board any more, and its all because of the accusations and comparisons being thrown around by one single poster.
Nikki
Posted by Nikkit2 on July 15, 2005, at 5:52:12
In reply to Re: Apology to the board » Racer, posted by pinkeye on July 14, 2005, at 18:04:25
remember, its OK to accuse someone of being an AntiSemite, but its NOT Ok to say you're offended and hurt to be called that.
I, seriously and honestly believe that Lou Pilder has some kind of hold over Dr Bob.. his previous threats of legal action must have worked it seems.
I'm fed up, utterly and totally with this. Something needs to be done once and for all.
Lou doesn't believe he does anyone harm - maybe I should get a copy of my medical notes for him.
Nikki
Posted by SLS on July 15, 2005, at 6:29:11
In reply to Re: Apology to the board » pinkeye, posted by Nikkit2 on July 15, 2005, at 5:52:12
> remember, its OK to accuse someone of being an AntiSemite, but its NOT Ok to say you're offended and hurt to be called that.
>
> I, seriously and honestly believe that Lou Pilder has some kind of hold over Dr Bob.. his previous threats of legal action must have worked it seems.
>
> I'm fed up, utterly and totally with this. Something needs to be done once and for all.
>
> Lou doesn't believe he does anyone harm - maybe I should get a copy of my medical notes for him.
>
> Nikki
Can someone please post the links that you find upsetting. I don't have the energy to read the entire board looking for them, and I would like to see them in order to form an opinion.Thanks.
- Scott
Posted by Nikkit2 on July 15, 2005, at 7:36:10
In reply to Re: Apology to the board, posted by SLS on July 15, 2005, at 6:29:11
Scott,
Personally, I am talking of a number of posts over a number of years.
But there has been one quite recently.. I'll try and grab the time to find it, but work is hectic as a very hectic thing and I'm just grabbing two minutes here and there between jobs..
Nikki x
Posted by Nikkit2 on July 15, 2005, at 7:38:48
In reply to Re: Apology to the board, posted by SLS on July 15, 2005, at 6:29:11
I *think* this is the thread..
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050530/msgs/511513.html
Posted by so on July 15, 2005, at 13:34:54
In reply to Re: Apology to the board » Racer, posted by pinkeye on July 14, 2005, at 18:04:25
dinah,
you previously wrote, in response to a request that you intervene in a matter the administrator later deemed uncivil but did not address for several days, that your involvement as a deputy here is reserved for occassions when discussion labeled uncivil is escalating.
Please explain how, in your perspective, this one response to another person's apology comprises an escalation.
Posted by gardenergirl on July 15, 2005, at 13:42:43
In reply to Please cite escalating circumstance » pinkeye, posted by so on July 15, 2005, at 13:34:54
Dinah did not intervene, as far as giving out a PBC or block in this thread. So the rule for escalation does not apply. She is able to give out information about Babble rules as either a poster or a deputy whenever the situation calls for it, as far as I understand.
gg
Posted by gardenergirl on July 15, 2005, at 13:44:01
In reply to Re: Please cite escalating circumstance » so, posted by gardenergirl on July 15, 2005, at 13:42:43
disregard above please...careless skimming involved.
gg
Posted by so on July 15, 2005, at 14:04:23
In reply to Please cite escalating circumstance » pinkeye, posted by so on July 15, 2005, at 13:34:54
This was written to dinah, but was incorrectly addressed to the person she acted against.
> dinah,
>
> you previously wrote, in response to a request that you intervene in a matter the administrator later deemed uncivil but did not address for several days, that your involvement as a deputy here is reserved for occassions when discussion labeled uncivil is escalating.
>
> Please explain how, in your perspective, this one response to another person's apology comprises an escalation.
Posted by Dinah on July 15, 2005, at 16:15:28
In reply to Re: Please cite escalating circumstance dinah, posted by so on July 15, 2005, at 14:04:23
I gave out two PBC's on the same subject, on two related threads. There were at least three posts involved.
That meets the escalation clause.
So if you ever see me give *two* PBC's at any one time, you know it's been met in my estimation.
I then emailed Dr. Bob to tell him what I'd done and to request a review by him, as is my custom.
Posted by so on July 15, 2005, at 18:52:07
In reply to Re: Please cite escalating circumstance dinah » so, posted by Dinah on July 15, 2005, at 16:15:28
Then your own actions comprise the circumstances you cite as "escalating"? How was it escalating when you first acted? What circumstances beside your own actions differentiate this circumstance from any other on the board about which you do not intervene?
> I gave out two PBC's on the same subject, on two related threads. There were at least three posts involved.
>
> That meets the escalation clause.
>
> So if you ever see me give *two* PBC's at any one time, you know it's been met in my estimation.
>
> I then emailed Dr. Bob to tell him what I'd done and to request a review by him, as is my custom.
Posted by Dinah on July 15, 2005, at 19:38:30
In reply to Re: Please cite escalating circumstance dinah, posted by so on July 15, 2005, at 18:52:07
No. What I mean is that if I think it is necessary to give two PBC's then I must have seen two posts which violate the civility guidelines (two related posts, I should add. While these two posts were on two different threads, the second thread was closely related to the first). Two posts which violate the civility guidelines constitute an escalating situation.
Therefore, what I was saying was, that it is not necessary to ask me why I intervened if you see two PBC's. Two PBC's means I saw two posts in violation of the civility guidelines. And that constitutes an escalating situation by definition.
If Dr. Bob disagrees, he'll tell me so. And his judgement of course prevails.
Posted by so on July 15, 2005, at 20:43:45
In reply to Re: Please cite escalating circumstance dinah » so, posted by Dinah on July 15, 2005, at 19:38:30
>Two posts which violate the civility guidelines constitute an escalating situation.
Did the first of those posts constitute an escalating situation? When you admonished that first poster, how did that situation differ from any another situation in which one person posted an isolated post you thought contravened site guidelines?
Posted by Dinah on July 15, 2005, at 23:20:40
In reply to Re: Please cite escalating circumstance dinah, posted by so on July 15, 2005, at 20:43:45
Please check the times. They are approximately three minutes apart.
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 16, 2005, at 1:11:32
In reply to Re: Apology to the board » Racer, posted by Nikkit2 on July 15, 2005, at 5:47:36
> the accusations and comparisons being thrown around by one single poster.
Sorry, but 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 NikkiT2 on July 16, 2005, at 7:20:59
In reply to Re: please be civil » Nikkit2, posted by Dr. Bob on July 16, 2005, at 1:11:32
Dr Bob,
Could you explain why, in your opinion, its not uncivil to suggest someone may be an anti-semetic, or defaming people?
Nikki
Posted by Dinah on July 16, 2005, at 8:01:11
In reply to Re: please be civil » Dr. Bob, posted by NikkiT2 on July 16, 2005, at 7:20:59
> Dr Bob,
>
> Could you explain why, in your opinion, its not uncivil to suggest someone may be an anti-semetic, or defaming people?
>
> NikkiI'd like to know that myself.
Posted by so on July 16, 2005, at 12:34:00
In reply to Re: please be civil » Dr. Bob, posted by NikkiT2 on July 16, 2005, at 7:20:59
> Dr Bob,
>
> Could you explain why, in your opinion, its not uncivil to suggest someone may be an anti-semetic, or defaming people?
>
> NikkiA person cannot be an adjective. Otherwise, I understand the present claim to refer not to occassions where someone has suggested another is antisemetic, but instead, occassions when a person has compared rhetorical methods, including those used by a political affiliation widely known to have latter committed genocide.
Posted by so on July 16, 2005, at 13:17:35
In reply to Re » NikkiT2, posted by so on July 16, 2005, at 12:34:00
i attempted to address this post specifically to Dinah, who wrote "I'd like to know that myself." but for some reason, another's name appears in the subject line -- most likely because Dinah's post and the other appeared similar.
> > Dr Bob,
> >
> > Could you explain why, in your opinion, its not uncivil to suggest someone may be an anti-semetic, or defaming people?
> >
> > Nikki
>
> A person cannot be an adjective. Otherwise, I understand the present claim to refer not to occassions where someone has suggested another is antisemetic, but instead, occassions when a person has compared rhetorical methods, including those used by a political affiliation widely known to have latter committed genocide.
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 17, 2005, at 1:37:55
In reply to Re: please be civil » Dr. Bob, posted by NikkiT2 on July 16, 2005, at 7:20:59
> Could you explain why, in your opinion, its not uncivil to suggest someone may be an anti-semetic, or defaming people?
Well, I can try... Can you give me an example of a suggestion like that?
Bob
Posted by NikkiT2 on July 17, 2005, at 5:43:02
In reply to Re: suggestions, posted by Dr. Bob on July 17, 2005, at 1:37:55
*blinks*
You've, um, not seen any??
Nikki
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 17, 2005, at 7:52:48
In reply to Re: suggestions, posted by Dr. Bob on July 17, 2005, at 1:37:55
DR. Hsiung,
I am requesting that you declare what constraints that I may have here to me if I wish to be a participant in this discussion that NikkiT2 is innitiating here.
A. Could I cite previous posts here?
B. Are there any posts in the archives that I can not cite here? If so, which ones, and why csn I not use them in this discussion?
C. Can another here use a post in this discussion that could have the potential, IMO, to arrouse ill-will toward me and be acceptable here? If so, could you list any reasons for such?
D. Could I post links here showing how historically the use of accusations toward jews like those that have the potential IMO to have the potential for some to think that the accusation could be saying that [...the jews killed Christ...], or,[...the religious leaders of Israel are hypocrites..]? or, [...the jews are filthy...]or,[...the jews are viruses or rats, or cancers, that will infect the community...], or posts what IMO have the potential to have me have a [...badge of shame...] put on me?, or other posts that have the potential, IMO to arrouse anti-Semitic feelings here?
I would like to know these restraints upon me, if there are any, so that I could be an equal participant here in this discussion, for I am not sure how your rule of 3's in relation to posting links to previous posts of poster that I have posted 3 of here could play a part in restricting my participation in this discussion and would like this to be declared ahead of time.
Also, I am requesting that you consider the following link in relation to this discussion because it may be relevant here.
Lou Pilder
http://xxxxxxx
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 17, 2005, at 8:55:46
In reply to Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-lvlplygfild? » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on July 17, 2005, at 7:52:48
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 17, 2005, at 9:03:01
In reply to I hav requested t th admin th the above be deleted (nm), posted by Lou Pilder on July 17, 2005, at 8:55:46
Friends,
I am having some difficulty with my system. What I wanted deleted was not the post by me but something else that is now under exploration as to the correction. The link is difficult for me to post because of my system. I still would like to offer the link and if another posts here, then I will make another attempt to post the link.
Lou
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.