![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 119 to 143 of 157. Go back in thread:
Posted by laima on December 28, 2006, at 19:20:17
In reply to Re: Good Bye Posts » laima, posted by wishingstar on December 28, 2006, at 18:16:45
Wishingstar, I hope I didn't sound as if I was accusing anyone of anything! That would be ME with the wrong tone or words... Not sure how to explain. I think what I was expressing concern about hasn't exactly manifested on babble, (as far as I can tell), but it is quite common out and about.> I absolutely agree with you laima. 100%. After I posted my last message I thought more and realized I'd probably worded my thoughts incorrectly. It may have sounded like I meant that people with depression/bipolar dont (in my opinion) suffer from 'severe' mental illness, and are therefore better/more "sane"/more important/etc etc etc or somehow in a different category than those with more severe diagnoses or no diagnoses at all. I absolutely do not believe that. I just wanted to make that clear. We all have our problems, and whether or not a person has a diagnosis does not change their worth or importance.
Posted by laima on December 28, 2006, at 19:32:45
In reply to Re: Lou's request for clarification to fayeroe » Lou Pilder, posted by fayeroe on December 28, 2006, at 19:13:03
I think Lou was just trying to explain that a website which welcomes and attracts suicidal posters will have a higher mortality rate than one which bans suicidal posters...BECAUSE it attracts more of them in the first place. And if that doesn't make sense, an anology might be that a website for amateur skydivers will have a higher mortality rate than one for quilting bee enthusiasts. (Or watchers of adventure tv shows.) Whether or not the anology is a good one is uncertain, but that's the gist of it.
(Please do correct me if I'm wrong, Lou. But I think this is what you're saying, because I read and understood Dr. Bob's statement the same way you did.)
Posted by wishingstar on December 28, 2006, at 19:47:50
In reply to Re: Good Bye Posts » wishingstar, posted by laima on December 28, 2006, at 19:20:17
Oh dont worry, your post did not seem accusatory or anything else negative. I had just thought about what I'd posted before reading your post, and wanted to make you it was clear to you and to everyone else that we were in agreement. I didnt want to come off in any way other than what I intended.
Posted by Fallen4MyT on December 28, 2006, at 20:32:39
In reply to Please don't pressure others » Deneb, posted by Dinah on December 26, 2006, at 16:29:13
Isn't it against the **civility** rules to harrass another member? Would pressure to some not feel like harassment? Don't you still PBC and THEN block people when they do not follow DNP's and other board policies??? If I recall correctly if one had a few PBC's then a block would be in order when they failed to obey the rules as Dinah understands them below. I have never heard of a do not pressure. I would ask you to take stronger action then DN=PRESSURE in this case.
Thank you for even considering my post.
> It's against Babble policy to pressure others, or to post to those who have requested that you not post to them.
>
> It is *not* against the rules, as I understand them, for either party to mention the other party, or to discuss the contents of their posts.
>
> I'm going to have to ask you to please not pressure Happyflower to respond to you, per the civility guidelines as I understand them. If I am misapplying them, I'm sure Dr. Bob will feel free to correct me.
>
> Follow-ups regarding these issues, as well as replies to the above posts, should of course themselves be civil.
>
> Dr. Bob is always free to override deputy decisions. His email is on the bottom of each page. Please feel free to email him if you believe this decision was made in error.
>
> Dinah, acting as deputy to Dr. Bob
Posted by Fallen4MyT on December 28, 2006, at 20:36:42
In reply to Re: Do I have to take y'all outside?, posted by fayeroe on December 27, 2006, at 15:41:28
> > I will calm down when this matter is taken seriously and not made light of by asking us if you should take us all outside. Geeze my mother did do that, and beat the sh*t out of me until I couldn't stand anymore or sit for that matter for days.
> > Rules have been broken, and nothing is done except threatening to take us outside. If that abusive comment was meant to be funny, well it isn't to anyone who has been "taken outside" and was abused afterwards.
> >
> > I guess I expected more from a deputy.
>
>
> it's too bad when something like this is said, even if the deputy thought she was making a joke. as much hurt as there was in the thread, i don't see how making a joke would have helped anything anyway.
>
> there are numerous abuse victims here and everyone has heard that one many more times that they should have had to hear it.
>
> Happyflower, i am appalled, but not surprised, that you got blocked. it is the one size fits all remedy.
>
> i am proud of you for taking the stand that you took and support you, as i've said before, and will see you if you come back......xoxoxo pat
>((HF)) I am with Pat on this one. I would feel PUT DOWN by that ....ahem...joke post above apology or not. I am sorry for you hurt.
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2006, at 20:51:40
In reply to Re: Lou's request for clarification to fayeroe » fayeroe, posted by laima on December 28, 2006, at 19:32:45
>
> I think Lou was just trying to explain that a website which welcomes and attracts suicidal posters will have a higher mortality rate than one which bans suicidal posters...BECAUSE it attracts more of them in the first place. And if that doesn't make sense, an anology might be that a website for amateur skydivers will have a higher mortality rate than one for quilting bee enthusiasts. (Or watchers of adventure tv shows.) Whether or not the anology is a good one is uncertain, but that's the gist of it.
>
>
> (Please do correct me if I'm wrong, Lou. But I think this is what you're saying, because I read and understood Dr. Bob's statement the same way you did.)laima,
You wrote,[...because it attracts {>more< of them } in the first place...and if that doesn't make sense, an analogy..skydivers vs quilting bee enthusiasts...I..understand (Dr. Hsiung's)statement >the same way you did<,Lou...].
Thank you for letting me know that you see Dr. Hsiung's statement the same way that I do. And you are correct in thinking that that is what I meant, that if there is a forum that attracts those of that nature,then...
Another way of looking at he grammatical structure of Dr. Hsiung's statement could be in relation to any accusation made to the forum that it causes in any way suicides, and then the maker of the argument points to the fact that there have been members here that have committed suicide.
But looking again at the grammatical structure of Dr. Hsiung's statement;
[..attract suicidal posters(and thereby increase the incidence of suicide {in the group}...].
>First< there is an increase in the {number} of posters of that nature because the word {attract} is there. The grammatical meaning of {attract} is that others come to {the attraction},which {increases the number of , in this case, suicidal posters. Because there is an increase in the {number} of posters of that nature, then it could follow statistically, that the number of actual suicides could increase here, which is written in Dr. Hsiung's statement,{increase the number of suicides >{in the group}<.
My analogy, you saw, was one of IMO simplicity. I could give a much more comprehensive statistical analogy with correlation coefficiants and such. But is this the place for advanced statisitcs or epidemiology?
Then again, if bottomfeeder's interpretation is validated by Dr. Hsiung, that could reverse this entire matter.
Lou's twelth smilely>>[:-)
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2006, at 21:19:57
In reply to Re: Lou's request for clarification to fayeroe » Lou Pilder, posted by fayeroe on December 28, 2006, at 19:13:03
> this is a mental health forum. i'm not very interested in nascar forums/sky diving forums/deep sea fishing forums and i doubt that very many others are..........that's what i meant when i said there are too many "what ifs"........we could "what if" it til the cows come home. ......it's counterproductive to go off in seventy different directions.........
>
> i merely pointed out that we we discussing a very specific issue.
>
> and the explanation for "til the cows come home" is that it could be very late.........fayeroe,
You wrote,[...I'm not..interested..and I doubt that very many others are...it's counterproductive to go off in seventy different directions...cows...]
Well, one cannot always have interest in things that others do, but there could be the potential IMO for some others here to have an interest in NASCAR racing,skydiving,deep sea fishing,in as much that they could have some knowlege as to the hazardous nature of such, rather than to be an actual participant in those hobbies.
In my analogy here, the direction that I was intending to go was to answer the question directed to me concerning the possible interpretations to Dr. Hsiung's statement in question here. I directed my understanding of his statement in one direction. Bottomfeeder gave another direction. Liama agreed with the direction that I pointed to. Could you elaborate as to what you mean by 70 directions?
Lou
Posted by SLS on December 28, 2006, at 21:59:16
In reply to Re: Lou aspects of El's post, and others, etc, posted by madeline on December 28, 2006, at 12:13:46
Hi.
> It is THAT issue that on which I would like to see some clarification and accountability.
I am unclear as to what you mean here. Could you elaborate?
Thanks.
- Scott
Posted by madeline on December 29, 2006, at 10:01:40
In reply to Re: Lou aspects of El's post, and others, etc » madeline, posted by SLS on December 28, 2006, at 21:59:16
I think that the ability of posters to discuss suicide ideation and seek support to fight that ideation is a valuable component of babble. A lot of posters, including me, have received this support and it has really helped to move them toward a more hopeful place.
However, when you allow this kind of discussion you also open the door for all kinds of abuse of that support.
I think this kind of abuse is most acute when it is reference to the behavior of other posters or even the routine administration of the board.
For instance, I think it is appropriate for a poster to say that "you know, I feel very triggered when people don't do/say/act in the way that I want and I need some help working through this"
You see, that post elicits support and help from the other posters. No one feels put down or responsible for the way the poster is reacting. In fact, the door is opened for them to help the other poster.
What I think is not okay is when a poster says "What you said/did made me feel like committing suicide"
This is not a post asking for help, it makes people feel accused and directly responsible for the way that person feels. I don't think anyone could argue it is a not so subtle form of manipulation.
To me, it makes the other posters feel very hurt, unsafe, taken advantage of and coerced.
Also a characteristic of this form of communication is that it tends to escalate and repeat until the desired behaviour from people is achieved.
To me, threatening suicide in order to elicit a behaviour from someone clearly falls well below the civility requirements of babble and yet, to me, I haven't seen it addressed by the the powers that be (although it may have been).
If the powers agree with me, I would like to see a policy explicitly stated (restated) that covers suicide threats in reponse to other posters. I would also like to see the specific adminstrative action that could result from this kind of "offense".
Now, having said all this, I will add a caveat. It may allow people to completely write off my concerns as specific to me, or just as a function of some deficit on my part. My mother was the queen of this kind of coercion. Everything I said or did would lead to a suicide threat on her part - leading me to suspect that one day I would just finally kill my mother by simply being around.
That kind of responsiblity is simply too much for anyone to bear.
It may not be possible, but I would simply like to be free from this on babble.
Maddie
Posted by SLS on December 29, 2006, at 11:40:24
In reply to Re: clarification for SLS - trigger I think., posted by madeline on December 29, 2006, at 10:01:40
Hi Maddie.
Thanks for clarifying.
I'll have to think about that for awhile.
- Scott
> I think that the ability of posters to discuss suicide ideation and seek support to fight that ideation is a valuable component of babble. A lot of posters, including me, have received this support and it has really helped to move them toward a more hopeful place.
>
> However, when you allow this kind of discussion you also open the door for all kinds of abuse of that support.
>
> I think this kind of abuse is most acute when it is reference to the behavior of other posters or even the routine administration of the board.
>
> For instance, I think it is appropriate for a poster to say that "you know, I feel very triggered when people don't do/say/act in the way that I want and I need some help working through this"
>
> You see, that post elicits support and help from the other posters. No one feels put down or responsible for the way the poster is reacting. In fact, the door is opened for them to help the other poster.
>
> What I think is not okay is when a poster says "What you said/did made me feel like committing suicide"
>
> This is not a post asking for help, it makes people feel accused and directly responsible for the way that person feels. I don't think anyone could argue it is a not so subtle form of manipulation.
>
> To me, it makes the other posters feel very hurt, unsafe, taken advantage of and coerced.
>
> Also a characteristic of this form of communication is that it tends to escalate and repeat until the desired behaviour from people is achieved.
>
> To me, threatening suicide in order to elicit a behaviour from someone clearly falls well below the civility requirements of babble and yet, to me, I haven't seen it addressed by the the powers that be (although it may have been).
>
> If the powers agree with me, I would like to see a policy explicitly stated (restated) that covers suicide threats in reponse to other posters. I would also like to see the specific adminstrative action that could result from this kind of "offense".
>
> Now, having said all this, I will add a caveat. It may allow people to completely write off my concerns as specific to me, or just as a function of some deficit on my part. My mother was the queen of this kind of coercion. Everything I said or did would lead to a suicide threat on her part - leading me to suspect that one day I would just finally kill my mother by simply being around.
>
> That kind of responsiblity is simply too much for anyone to bear.
>
> It may not be possible, but I would simply like to be free from this on babble.
>
> Maddie
Posted by AuntieMel on December 29, 2006, at 15:47:07
In reply to (((((auntie mel))))) » AuntieMel, posted by karen_kay on December 28, 2006, at 14:07:59
Over your knee? Could be fun.
Thanks for understanding. And I'm doing fine, considering.
Posted by karen_kay on December 29, 2006, at 16:05:21
In reply to Re: Ooohhhhh » karen_kay, posted by AuntieMel on December 29, 2006, at 15:47:07
you reminded me a little of me when you posted that. and i understood it completely. geez, you try to liven a situation up a bit (and that can be very helpful btw. my husband and i fight all the time and sometimes in the middle of a fight i'll say something stupid and it helps. not that you said anything stupid. geez, i give up.
but, i felt bad for you anyway. doesn't seem fair that someone tries to help and it gets taken the wrong way completely. see, you may feel a bit better now, because everyone'll say i'm being insensitive. (grunt)
back to that spanking.....
kk
Posted by Declan on December 29, 2006, at 16:35:34
In reply to Re: Ooohhhhh » AuntieMel, posted by karen_kay on December 29, 2006, at 16:05:21
We couldn't have, like, a Spanking Board, could we?
How would it work?
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 29, 2006, at 16:47:34
In reply to Re: Ooohhhhh » AuntieMel, posted by karen_kay on December 29, 2006, at 16:05:21
> you reminded me a little of me when you posted that. and i understood it completely. geez, you try to liven a situation up a bit (and that can be very helpful btw. my husband and i fight all the time and sometimes in the middle of a fight i'll say something stupid and it helps. not that you said anything stupid. geez, i give up.
>
> but, i felt bad for you anyway. doesn't seem fair that someone tries to help and it gets taken the wrong way completely. see, you may feel a bit better now, because everyone'll say i'm being insensitive. (grunt)
>
> back to that spanking.....
>
> kkFriends,
It is written here,[...g*ez, you try to liven up a situation...it gets >taken the wrong way {completly}<...back to that...].
I have a different point of view to the aspects of this and could email with anyone if they like to see my perspective.
Lou
lpilder_1188@fuse.net
Posted by karen_kay on December 29, 2006, at 20:37:21
In reply to Re: Ooohhhhh » karen_kay, posted by Declan on December 29, 2006, at 16:35:34
in my closet (some call it a paddle) and i could only imagine how that would work on the internet. who'd have thought that thinking cap could be so fun (and dirty :)
Posted by Declan on December 29, 2006, at 21:58:39
In reply to i've got a spanking board.. » Declan, posted by karen_kay on December 29, 2006, at 20:37:21
Hmmmmmm
Posted by muffled on December 29, 2006, at 23:33:47
In reply to Paddle hey? » karen_kay, posted by Declan on December 29, 2006, at 21:58:39
Not to offend anyone, but, HF is blocked, but she CAN still read, and no doubt does.
I think many of us have a hard time dragging ourselves away, even if we know its triggering us.
In this very thread HF states that abuse, or anything that links to 'that' type of abuse(beating) is terribly triggering to her at this time.
I would just respectfully ask that mebbe we can stop talking bout that kinda stuff, when a poster we care about is obviosly struggling hard, and as I said, has already specifically and clearly stated that its triggering to her.
So I don't know how else to phrase this?
I am trying to be polite.
If I get blocked for this, well, then I just DON'T understand. And thats why I have fear on this site, and why I come to admin too, cuz I want to understand, and recently I can't understand some of these blocks :(
And noone will explain.
Muffled
Posted by Fallen4MyT on December 30, 2006, at 0:18:41
In reply to Re: clarification for SLS - trigger I think., posted by madeline on December 29, 2006, at 10:01:40
Beautifully written. I FEEL I can totally agree with you. Well said
> I think that the ability of posters to discuss suicide ideation and seek support to fight that ideation is a valuable component of babble. A lot of posters, including me, have received this support and it has really helped to move them toward a more hopeful place.
>
> However, when you allow this kind of discussion you also open the door for all kinds of abuse of that support.
>
> I think this kind of abuse is most acute when it is reference to the behavior of other posters or even the routine administration of the board.
>
> For instance, I think it is appropriate for a poster to say that "you know, I feel very triggered when people don't do/say/act in the way that I want and I need some help working through this"
>
> You see, that post elicits support and help from the other posters. No one feels put down or responsible for the way the poster is reacting. In fact, the door is opened for them to help the other poster.
>
> What I think is not okay is when a poster says "What you said/did made me feel like committing suicide"
>
> This is not a post asking for help, it makes people feel accused and directly responsible for the way that person feels. I don't think anyone could argue it is a not so subtle form of manipulation.
>
> To me, it makes the other posters feel very hurt, unsafe, taken advantage of and coerced.
>
> Also a characteristic of this form of communication is that it tends to escalate and repeat until the desired behaviour from people is achieved.
>
> To me, threatening suicide in order to elicit a behaviour from someone clearly falls well below the civility requirements of babble and yet, to me, I haven't seen it addressed by the the powers that be (although it may have been).
>
> If the powers agree with me, I would like to see a policy explicitly stated (restated) that covers suicide threats in reponse to other posters. I would also like to see the specific adminstrative action that could result from this kind of "offense".
>
> Now, having said all this, I will add a caveat. It may allow people to completely write off my concerns as specific to me, or just as a function of some deficit on my part. My mother was the queen of this kind of coercion. Everything I said or did would lead to a suicide threat on her part - leading me to suspect that one day I would just finally kill my mother by simply being around.
>
> That kind of responsiblity is simply too much for anyone to bear.
>
> It may not be possible, but I would simply like to be free from this on babble.
>
> Maddie
Posted by Fallen4MyT on December 30, 2006, at 0:21:12
In reply to i've got a spanking board.. » Declan, posted by karen_kay on December 29, 2006, at 20:37:21
???? How is this supportive ? Is it a joke? Maybe a trigger on it in social would be best for others who have had to deal with cs?
> in my closet (some call it a paddle) and i could only imagine how that would work on the internet. who'd have thought that thinking cap could be so fun (and dirty :)
Posted by karen_kay on December 30, 2006, at 9:15:26
In reply to GUYS?, posted by muffled on December 29, 2006, at 23:33:47
sorry.
Posted by 10derHeart on December 30, 2006, at 12:22:45
In reply to GUYS?, posted by muffled on December 29, 2006, at 23:33:47
Posted by Declan on December 30, 2006, at 19:48:12
In reply to right » muffled, posted by karen_kay on December 30, 2006, at 9:15:26
So you took the rap?
That's good.
Posted by madeline on December 31, 2006, at 7:56:54
In reply to Blocked » Happyflower, posted by gardenergirl on December 27, 2006, at 12:50:37
How long will happyflower's block be?
Posted by karen_kay on December 31, 2006, at 9:55:42
In reply to Re: right » karen_kay, posted by Declan on December 30, 2006, at 19:48:12
sometimes i don't think before i type. my problem. nothing a good, long block won't cure.
sorry happyflower, i wasn't trying to be disrespectful, even though i was. sorry again.
Posted by Dr. Bob on December 31, 2006, at 15:25:06
In reply to Please do not post to me Notfred » notfred, posted by Deneb on December 26, 2006, at 20:21:07
> I'm not reading this thread. It upsets me too much. I saw you posted something above. I just realized I rescinded my DNP when I replied to you. I'm reinstating my DNP.
I've been thinking:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061018/msgs/696737.html
and I'd like to try something new. You can request that notfred not post to you, but I'd rather lines of communication stayed open, so I think I'd prefer not to enforce this unless you feel harassed and it's necessary as a last resort. If you do feel harassed and see this a last resort, could you let me know, by babblemail or email, what it is that makes you feel that way and what steps you've already taken to address this? Then I'll post something if I'm going to enforce this.
Since this is a new procedure, I'm also interested in questions, comments, and suggestions regarding it.
Thanks,
Bob
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.