![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 239 to 263 of 272. Go back in thread:
Posted by Sobriquet Style on April 2, 2006, at 18:22:03
In reply to Re: openings for deputy administrators, posted by gardenergirl on April 2, 2006, at 8:59:09
>I have to admit, given that there is no pay involved, I do wonder why five is better than six deputies at this time.
Thats a good point, many hands make light work :-)
(I'm just waiting now for someone to mention cooks and a broth...;)~
Posted by Sobriquet Style on April 2, 2006, at 18:23:06
In reply to Re: openings for deputy administrators » Sobriquet Style, posted by 10derHeart on April 2, 2006, at 14:37:49
Posted by AuntieMel on April 3, 2006, at 9:20:18
In reply to Re: thanks, gg, right back atcha :-), posted by Phillipa on April 2, 2006, at 14:48:49
Actually, it might be better if people 'monitor' the boards they *don't* normally post on. No conflict of interest there.
Posted by 10derHeart on April 3, 2006, at 17:13:21
In reply to Re: actually » Phillipa, posted by AuntieMel on April 3, 2006, at 9:20:18
Posted by Phillipa on April 3, 2006, at 20:50:44
In reply to Re: actually » Phillipa, posted by AuntieMel on April 3, 2006, at 9:20:18
That makes sense to me too. Boy I'm learning a lot on this thread. Love phillipa
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 8, 2006, at 7:01:12
In reply to Re: openings for deputy administrators, posted by Sobriquet Style on April 2, 2006, at 8:23:40
> he couldn't even tell the prospectives of how he was planning on running this BEFORE posting it to the boards.
>
> special_kI'm sorry if anyone felt hurt, but I did try. Even if there were only 2 volunteers:
> > Volunteers should *not* assume that satisfying the above requirements means they'd automatically be selected.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20060111/msgs/606866.html
--
> IMHO, all three should get the job.
>
> Sobriquet StyleI suppose that could be an option, too, but then what if next time the number of positions isn't expanded to include everyone?
Bob
Posted by Sobriquet Style on April 8, 2006, at 17:36:09
In reply to Re: openings for deputy administrators, posted by Dr. Bob on April 8, 2006, at 7:01:12
>I suppose that could be an option, too, but then what if next time the number of positions isn't expanded to include everyone?
First-come, first-served? Thinking about it, that may have flaws..
Like a job offer, i'm not sure if this happened this time around, but maybe when the openings come up again there might be a rough figure you're willing to take on. Eg openings for X amount of deputies etc.
~
Posted by Sobriquet Style on April 8, 2006, at 17:43:30
In reply to Re: openings for deputy administrators » Dr. Bob, posted by Sobriquet Style on April 8, 2006, at 17:36:09
>Like a job offer, i'm not sure if this happened this time around, but maybe when the openings come up again there might be a rough figure you're willing to take on. Eg openings for X amount of deputies etc.
Forget that ^ I just read the thread LOL
~
Posted by special_k on April 8, 2006, at 19:56:24
In reply to Re: openings for deputy administrators, posted by Dr. Bob on April 8, 2006, at 7:01:12
> I did try... Volunteers should *not* assume that satisfying the above requirements means they'd automatically be selected.
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20060111/msgs/606866.html
OMG you did too
<blush>
Sorry bout that.
Er...
Maybe with something like that it still wouldn't have hurt to check with them before posting to the boards. I mean... Yeah, you did try... I think everybody missed it. It can be hard to interpret meanings sometimes and only too easy to put a slant on it that you are expecting. I think maybe people figured that you would tell them when they volounteered if you didn't think they would get to do it. They probably figured that if you weren't trying to put them off the idea then you were probably thinking they were going to get to do it. But yeah... Maybe we interpret what we want to hear...But yeah you did try. Sorry about that.
Posted by special_k on April 9, 2006, at 4:49:44
In reply to Re: openings for deputy administrators, posted by Dr. Bob on April 8, 2006, at 7:01:12
> > > Volunteers should *not* assume that satisfying the above requirements means they'd automatically be selected.
Right. Maybe people thought that the extra ingredient was... Your approval. And maybe they thought they had got that.
> > IMHO, all three should get the job.
> I suppose that could be an option, too, but then what if next time the number of positions isn't expanded to include everyone?
Well then maybe next time once all the volounteers are in you could email them all:
'there have been n volounteers and I'm only going to take on y new deputies. do you still want to be considered for the position?'
and then if people agree to post something to the boards.
Posted by zazenducky on September 12, 2006, at 10:23:46
In reply to Re: openings for deputy administrators, posted by Dr. Bob on March 28, 2006, at 9:35:01
It's been 6 months now.........
> > I think we could accommodate 2 additional
deputies now. Let say the deadline for volunteering is in 2 weeks = through Feb. 20.
>
> I'm delighted to report that we have 3 volunteers: ClearSkies, Racer, and 10derHeart. Thanks for stepping forward! FYI, next is an orientation, and then there are practice scenarios and a final exam...
>
> Bob
Posted by 10derHeart on September 12, 2006, at 11:12:26
In reply to New Deputy recruits are yall ok out there??????, posted by zazenducky on September 12, 2006, at 10:23:46
I'm fine, and thanks for asking :-)
Posted by ClearSkies on September 12, 2006, at 11:41:52
In reply to New Deputy recruits are yall ok out there??????, posted by zazenducky on September 12, 2006, at 10:23:46
Yup, I'm here too.
Posted by Racer on September 12, 2006, at 14:06:30
In reply to Re: New Deputy recruits are yall ok out there?????? » zazenducky, posted by ClearSkies on September 12, 2006, at 11:41:52
Posted by zazenducky on September 13, 2006, at 12:23:41
In reply to All present and accounted for... (nm), posted by Racer on September 12, 2006, at 14:06:30
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 10, 2006, at 14:24:06
In reply to Re: openings for deputy administrators, posted by Sobriquet Style on April 2, 2006, at 8:23:40
> > I'm delighted to report that we have 3 volunteers
>
> All three are great people and can each bring excellent individual qualities. IMHO, all three should get the job.I agree, and they've all stuck with the orientation process and passed the final exam, so let's give a hearty welcome to our new deputies, ClearSkies, Racer, and 10derHeart! :-)
Bob
Posted by Phillipa on November 10, 2006, at 14:41:13
In reply to Re: new deputy administrators, posted by Dr. Bob on November 10, 2006, at 14:24:06
Wise choice Dr. Bob. Congratulations to you all!!!!!Love Phillipa
Posted by zenhussy on November 10, 2006, at 14:50:52
In reply to Re: new deputy administrators, posted by Dr. Bob on November 10, 2006, at 14:24:06
the site continues to be blessed with your choice of this new batch of deputies.
Hail new deputies!
How interesting it will be to watch the next few years of Dr. Bob's definition of civility as interpreted by himself and his all female deputy crew.
good job on clearing Bob's hurdles and passing your trial periods ladies! Congrats to our new models of civility: Racer, ClearSkies and 10derHeart!!!
Posted by muffled on November 10, 2006, at 15:01:48
In reply to Re: new deputy administrators, posted by Dr. Bob on November 10, 2006, at 14:24:06
Posted by muffled on November 10, 2006, at 15:02:38
In reply to Re: new deputy administrators, posted by Dr. Bob on November 10, 2006, at 14:24:06
Posted by Dinah on November 10, 2006, at 17:36:03
In reply to Re: new deputy administrators, posted by Dr. Bob on November 10, 2006, at 14:24:06
Posted by Dinah on November 10, 2006, at 17:37:14
In reply to Welcome! It's great to have you! (nm) » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on November 10, 2006, at 17:36:03
Well, you know what I mean.
Welcome Clear Skies, Racer, and 10derheart.
It's great to have you.
Posted by ClearSkies on November 10, 2006, at 18:41:44
In reply to Oh dang. Obviously not addressed to Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on November 10, 2006, at 17:37:14
Thanks, Dinah.
Thanks, everyone!
CS
Posted by Phillipa on November 10, 2006, at 19:20:14
In reply to Re: Oh dang. Obviously not addressed to Dr. Bob » Dinah, posted by ClearSkies on November 10, 2006, at 18:41:44
So now there are five? GG,Dinah, Clear Skies, Racer, 10derHeart? What ever happened to Auntie Mel? Did she resign? I again offer my congratulations. Love Phillipa
Posted by Dinah on November 10, 2006, at 19:38:53
In reply to Re: Oh dang. Obviously not addressed to Dr. Bob, posted by Phillipa on November 10, 2006, at 19:20:14
There are six. :)
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.