![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 198 to 222 of 308. Go back in thread:
Posted by Dinah on July 23, 2010, at 13:28:32
In reply to Re: Point system, posted by PartlyCloudy on July 23, 2010, at 13:23:12
Was my post in reply to Faye's still obscure?
I was basically saying that I am totally against the idea, and in fact it's had me so riled that I'm sick to my stomach at the thought. But if he's going to do it, I'm going to figure out a way to not participate in it.
My only other choice is to leave Babble, and I've tried doing that too many times to think I'd succeed short of being blocked out of Babble by Dr. Bob.
Posted by Dinah on July 23, 2010, at 13:36:16
In reply to Re: Ratings » Dinah, posted by PartlyCloudy on July 23, 2010, at 13:24:13
That was a suggestion I later *dropped*.
It had nothing to do with rating or judging other posters. It only had to do with counting posts, which could be done by computer.
I have no huge objection to counting posts, if the number is low enough. Twenty posts a month is hardly an insurmountable hurdle. And I don't think it's an entirely bad thing to encourage posters to interact with other posters on nonadministrative matters. It's not, to my mind, exclusionary.
What I object to is not recognizing that anyone who cares enough to post *is* helpful by virtue of caring enough about another poster to post. In a community, I think everyone should be considered valuable. Dr. Bob claims that this wouldn't be doing that. But he also says that other posters could see how "helpful" you've been to other posters. I suppose Dr. Bob thinks it's ok to think that degrees of value are ok here. I think it's a recipe for disaster.
Posted by PartlyCloudy on July 23, 2010, at 14:00:25
In reply to Re: Ratings » PartlyCloudy, posted by Dinah on July 23, 2010, at 13:36:16
> That was a suggestion I later *dropped*.
>
OK, I missed that. I'm sorry.> I think it's a recipe for disaster.
Agreed!!
Posted by BayLeaf on July 23, 2010, at 19:06:19
In reply to Re: Point system, posted by Dr. Bob on July 23, 2010, at 2:58:17
I don't want the creater of this or any thread to rate my post as helpful or not helpful. I do my best when I post. I may not always succeed. I don't need my misses/failures pointed out. I do my best to communicate my ideas and feelings.
A poster may not be ready to hear something which is SUPER helpful, crafted by a PhD, etc., but we may simply not know the poster all that well. Could be a quiet one, or a newbie. So we try our best. Poster may not be ready to hear this great, supportive idea. So poster could rate the post NOT helpful.
WTH? Who the BLEEP does that help?? What am I missing here Bob?
Posted by BayLeaf on July 23, 2010, at 19:11:29
In reply to Re: blocked for week » ron1953 » Toph, posted by Dr. Bob on July 23, 2010, at 0:43:14
It's a volatile time here Bob....cut folks some slack, wouldcha? Just post a general - "please be nicer so I don't have to block a bunch of yous knuckleheads", might be useful.
Posted by fayeroe on July 23, 2010, at 21:17:24
In reply to Re: blocked for week » Dr. Bob, posted by BayLeaf on July 23, 2010, at 19:11:29
> It's a volatile time here Bob....cut folks some slack, wouldcha? Just post a general - "please be nicer so I don't have to block a bunch of yous knuckleheads", might be useful.
Ditto, Bayleaf.
Recently Bob said that "the posters can't manage the group alone" yet when he is here people are much more likely to be upset and say things that they probably wouldn't say under ordinary circumstances.
Posted by chujoe on July 24, 2010, at 8:06:33
In reply to Re: blocked for week » BayLeaf, posted by fayeroe on July 23, 2010, at 21:17:24
>>Recently Bob said that "the posters can't manage the group alone" yet when he is here people are much more likely to be upset and say things that they probably wouldn't say under ordinary circumstances.<<
Ditto, indeed. I actually thought that remark about posters not being able to manage the group by themselves to be, well, uncivil.
Posted by fayeroe on July 24, 2010, at 10:12:01
In reply to Re: blocked for week » fayeroe, posted by chujoe on July 24, 2010, at 8:06:33
> >>Recently Bob said that "the posters can't manage the group alone" yet when he is here people are much more likely to be upset and say things that they probably wouldn't say under ordinary circumstances.<<
>
> Ditto, indeed. I actually thought that remark about posters not being able to manage the group by themselves to be, well, uncivil.Yes, I thought at the time that it fell into the uncivil category.
Personally, I would like to see Bob let the members know that he is going to be spending less time here. Letting the posters know what he is doing is key.
Previously, he has disappeared and some posters had problems because no one knew how long he was going to be gone and if something "happened" people were likely to become very upset. Fear of the unknown.
It would be nice if members felt like we have a partnership with Bob. I ain't feeling it.
Posted by sigismund on July 24, 2010, at 17:05:52
In reply to Re: blocked for week » chujoe, posted by fayeroe on July 24, 2010, at 10:12:01
>It would be nice if members felt like we have a partnership with Bob.
It doesn't feel like a very happy relationship, does it?
If I owned a website and had a relationship with posters like Bob does, I'd feel awful about it.
Posted by fayeroe on July 24, 2010, at 17:50:28
In reply to Re: blocked for week, posted by sigismund on July 24, 2010, at 17:05:52
> >It would be nice if members felt like we have a partnership with Bob.
>
> It doesn't feel like a very happy relationship, does it?
>
> If I owned a website and had a relationship with posters like Bob does, I'd feel awful about it.The main reason that I enjoyed teaching in a prison is that I established a good relationship with each offender. We all worked well together and frequently the offenders would tell me that they were less likely to cause problems in their pod after one of my classes. One day a younger offender started crying and said that the classroom was the only place he felt equal to everyone else. I cried and I saw several of the "rough and tough" guys wiping their eyes.
A good relationship in all aspect of our lives makes everything brighter and easier. My 11 year old granddaughter told me "my other nana treats me like I am a dumb little kid and you treat me like I am your partner". That is one of the nicest compliments I have ever had.
Another good example would be our partnership when we were commenting in the Politics forum. That was so much fun and I looked forward to it each day.
Posted by gardenergirl on July 24, 2010, at 18:19:43
In reply to Re: blocked for week » sigismund, posted by fayeroe on July 24, 2010, at 17:50:28
That's quite a gift you give your students and loved ones.
Way to go!gg
Posted by sigismund on July 24, 2010, at 22:10:38
In reply to feeling equal » fayeroe, posted by gardenergirl on July 24, 2010, at 18:19:43
In some volunteer organisations people get on very well because, not being paid, they really have to be nice to each other for the organisation to work well.
It seems to me that the application of the civility rules has alienated a significant number of people and now Bob is reaching for a technical fix.
Some of those people would have gone anyway, and some would not.
It was something I really enjoyed on Politics, working out how to say what I wanted within the framework of the civility rules. Still, when there are blocks like Lil jimmy's for linking to a site critical of the torture policy of the previous Administration....and not everyone wants to spend hours figuring out how to say stuff. People just leave instead. For the record, I'm in favour of some kind of moderation and rules.
Posted by fayeroe on July 24, 2010, at 22:26:02
In reply to Re: feeling equal )fayeroe, posted by sigismund on July 24, 2010, at 22:10:38
Did you know that Lil' Jimmy lives in Austin? I am 35 miles southwest in a small town. I lost his email address so I don't know how to get in touch with him. I liked him a lot.
No doubt we need rules and moderation. We just don't need to be "tweaked" to death.
I am beginning to care less and less again. I know Bob will do whatever he pleases whether it will work for the posters or not.
Babble posts will be on every website that will take them.
Yeah, I really miss talking about politics. I talk to the dogs and cats now. :-) We've been discussing the new law that Arizona just passed that pertains to illegal immigration. Check it out. While you are at it, look at what is happening to a sheriff who dislikes the law. He is under the microscope of those who want everyone to enforce it. I believe his last name is Dobson. I'll check and email it to you. It is very interesting.
Pat
Posted by fayeroe on July 25, 2010, at 15:08:03
In reply to feeling equal » fayeroe, posted by gardenergirl on July 24, 2010, at 18:19:43
> That's quite a gift you give your students and loved ones.
> Way to go!
>
> ggThanks, I've found that working out in the real world certainly helps one see the big picture.
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 26, 2010, at 2:53:10
In reply to Re: feeling equal )fayeroe » sigismund, posted by fayeroe on July 24, 2010, at 22:26:02
> Yeah, I really miss talking about politics.
Sorry to interrupt, but I'd like to redirect more social posts to Psycho-Babble Social. Here's a link:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20100716/msgs/955946.html
If it keeps being about politics, I might redirect it again. :-)
That'll be considered a different thread, so if you'd like to be notified by email of follow-ups to it, you'll need to request that there. Thanks,
Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 26, 2010, at 3:57:28
In reply to Re: blocked for week » chujoe, posted by fayeroe on July 24, 2010, at 10:12:01
> So the poster originating the thread awards the helpfulness points?
>
> So that we can de facto opt out by choosing not to reply to anyone who decides to use the system?Yes, or you could just opt out:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20100714/msgs/955117.html
> I don't think I'd particularly want to converse with people who only thank some of the people who care enough to take the trouble to respond to their threads.
Do you only converse now with people who thank everyone who responds to their threads?
> he also says that other posters could see how "helpful" you've been to other posters. I suppose Dr. Bob thinks it's ok to think that degrees of value are ok here. I think it's a recipe for disaster.
>
> DinahI think it's clear that some people are considered helpful by more posters and some by fewer. Differences between members of a community are a fact of life. Why would acknowledging that be a disaster?
--
> A poster may not be ready to hear something which is SUPER helpful, crafted by a PhD, etc., but we may simply not know the poster all that well. Could be a quiet one, or a newbie. So we try our best. Poster may not be ready to hear this great, supportive idea. So poster could rate the post NOT helpful.
>
> WTH? Who the BLEEP does that help?? What am I missing here Bob?1. There wouldn't be a "not helpful" button:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20100714/msgs/955563.html
2. The poster would consider other posts helpful.
3. Those people would feel good for having been considered helpful.
4. The original poster would feel good for having thanked them.
5. The PhD would learn what kind of posts that poster feels helped by.
6. Other posters might consider the PhD's posts helpful.
> It's a volatile time here Bob....cut folks some slack, wouldcha? Just post a general - "please be nicer so I don't have to block a bunch of yous knuckleheads", might be useful.
>
> BayLeafI tried something like that:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20100714/msgs/955115.html
Other posters might be useful, too. :-)
--
> I've never posted to anyone expecting a score/rating/reward.
Have you ever appreciated being thanked?
> It would be nice if members felt like we have a partnership with Bob. I ain't feeling it.
>
> fayeroeI sense a lot of anxiety, but I think posters still have some misunderstandings, and are continuing to clarify their concerns, and I'm trying to address those. A partnership can be hard work.
Bob
Posted by vwoolf on July 26, 2010, at 6:38:10
In reply to Re: Rewards, posted by Dr. Bob on July 26, 2010, at 3:57:28
I've been thinking more about the point system, and although I still feel very uncomfortable about it, I am beginning to see that there might be some value in it.
If a board like this can have an educational and socialising (i.e. therapeutic)effect on its members through a system like this, perhaps it would not be a bad idea and we as users should be more open to exploring the possibilities. In other words, if it could be carrying out a kind of low-grade behavioral therapy at no cost to anyone, should we fight it so hard?
There are problems though.
It seems to me that there are at least two different kinds of communication that happen on this board.
The first is the kind of post that is typical of the medication board, where the focus is mostly on an exchange of information. The questions are purposeful and have to do with objects (meds).
I think it would be very easy to implement a points system here, e.g. Is the reply helpful, yes/no? Did I get the right information, yes/no?No one would be hurt at being rated for their ability to convey knowledge - at least, I don't think so.The kind of post that is typical of the psychology board is very different. It is usually about feelings, often quite extreme feelings, where the poster is looking for understanding, empathy and support. To rate this is, to my mind, not possible through the fixed, yes/no questions that would be required for a points system. The psychology board deals much more with the symbolic, which cannot be reduced to simple black and white reasoning. That's one of the wonderful things about the symbolic.
It seems to me that most of the people who are objecting to the points system are people who are normally very active on the psychology board. I don't think that this is because they are any more stubborn than the people on the meds board, but that they feel that they have much more to lose. A points system would flatten the nature of the interactions that take place here.
I would like to suggest that the points system, if it is to be implemented, should be tried out first on the medication board, and only at a later stage, with much consultation with the users, on the psychology board.
Posted by Dinah on July 26, 2010, at 8:12:30
In reply to Re: Rewards, posted by Dr. Bob on July 26, 2010, at 3:57:28
> > I don't think I'd particularly want to converse with people who only thank some of the people who care enough to take the trouble to respond to their threads.
>
> Do you only converse now with people who thank everyone who responds to their threads?It's not something that often comes up. Most people either thank generally or thank everyone. Thanking taking the form of responding and acknowledging. If someone "thanks" some posters but not others on occasion, I do them the courtesy of assuming it was accidental. Certainly it's all too possible to start answering your thread and get distracted, only to forget to return until you've forgotten what you meant to do. If someone routinely forgets to "thank" my posts while "thanking" others, I certainly note it and recognize I am unhelpful to that poster and think twice about responding to them. If someone routinely does it to others, I note it and consider what it might mean. What I conclude will influence my future posting decisions, yes.
> > he also says that other posters could see how "helpful" you've been to other posters. I suppose Dr. Bob thinks it's ok to think that degrees of value are ok here. I think it's a recipe for disaster.
> >
> > Dinah
>
> I think it's clear that some people are considered helpful by more posters and some by fewer. Differences between members of a community are a fact of life. Why would acknowledging that be a disaster?Lots of things are a fact of life. Lots of things are true. I thought it had long since been decided on Babble that just because something was true, pointing it out was not necessarily either civil or kind.
I am absurdly disappointed that you have changed your mind about that.
And yes, I think changing the civility standards in a community of this size, with a group of regular posters who have to live with each other later would be a disaster to said community.
You aren't easily hurt Dr. Bob. Or at least you don't seem to be. But I think you need to consider that this is not necessarily true of others.
Also, you've been relentlessly positive in your description of this process. Could you tell me how you'd feel if a poster rated everyone else on a thread helpful except you? If your ranking was lower than that of the average poster? Pretend you're one of the less confident and assured people when answering.
Posted by Dinah on July 26, 2010, at 8:27:01
In reply to Re: Rewards, posted by vwoolf on July 26, 2010, at 6:38:10
I agree. I've long said that this would be most appropriate when the answers are clearcut and either right or wrong. If you're looking for information only, it might be appropriate.
Particularly on some large (non-mental health) boards I've seen where there was a large amount of answering that was neither to the point nor particularly caring. If you're looking for a response to a particular question, it helps to know who is willing to actually answer.
Babble is neither large, nor are some boards fact oriented. It consists of a relatively small but fluid and shifting community of posters who remain together in that community for a period of time.
And as you say, some boards are just not oriented to topics that fall into a helpful/unhelpful category. People on Social aren't usually looking for a factual response. Psychology also is not really a place where that would be useful. At least not on Babble unless it grows way way way bigger. I can only imagine what it would look like on Politics or Faith.
I've been suggesting that Dr. Bob designate a board for this type of information exchange. An "answers" board perhaps. Where people who don't wish to be part of an ongoing community, who only want an answer to their questions, can post. They would get whatever benefits Dr. Bob would wish them to get from rating. And it would affect the community at Babble less because while it would do the weeding out of less "helpful" responders that Dr. Bob seems to desire, it wouldn't weed them out of the community. Just that board.
Posted by fayeroe on July 26, 2010, at 11:23:02
In reply to Re: Rewards, posted by Dr. Bob on July 26, 2010, at 3:57:28
"I sense a lot of anxiety, but I think posters still have some misunderstandings, and are continuing to clarify their concerns, and I'm trying to address those. A partnership can be hard work."
BobI don't sense any anxiety in our posts. I think that frustration is a more accurate description. Why would we feel anxious when we are talking about not feeling that there is a partnership here between administration and the members? It isn't as if something is being taken away from us.
I feel that a partnership can be hard work if there is no opportunity for it.I feel it is virtually impossible to attain a partnership when the members are given nothing to work with.
Posted by fayeroe on July 26, 2010, at 11:32:44
In reply to Re: Rewards, posted by vwoolf on July 26, 2010, at 6:38:10
"If a board like this can have an educational and socialising (i.e. therapeutic)effect on its members through a system like this, perhaps it would not be a bad idea and we as users should be more open to exploring the possibilities. In other words, if it could be carrying out a kind of low-grade behavioral therapy at no cost to anyone, should we fight it so hard?"
I feel that there would be a cost to posters and it could be in an emotional sense. I feel that hurting someone with a "reward/points" system would be awful. There are posters here who lived through something like that when they were in their parent's home and this could produce feelings that they have worked hard to overcome.
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 27, 2010, at 1:42:37
In reply to Re: Rewards » vwoolf, posted by fayeroe on July 26, 2010, at 11:32:44
> I've been thinking more about the point system, and although I still feel very uncomfortable about it, I am beginning to see that there might be some value in it.
>
> The kind of post that is typical of the psychology board ... is usually about feelings, often quite extreme feelings, where the poster is looking for understanding, empathy and support. To rate this is, to my mind, not possible through the fixed, yes/no questions that would be required for a points system.
>
> I would like to suggest that the points system, if it is to be implemented, should be tried out first on the medication board, and only at a later stage, with much consultation with the users, on the psychology board.
>
> vwoolfThanks for being willing to consider the potential benefits.
If a poster is looking for understanding, empathy, and support, they could simply reward those who respond with understanding, empathy, and support:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20100714/msgs/955117.html
That's a good point, thanks, lots of times it's better to roll out changes in stages.
--
> If someone routinely forgets to "thank" my posts while "thanking" others, I certainly note it and recognize I am unhelpful to that poster and think twice about responding to them.
May I ask if you feel hurt by that?
> Lots of things are a fact of life. Lots of things are true. I thought it had long since been decided on Babble that just because something was true, pointing it out was not necessarily either civil or kind.
I agree, pointing out that someone hasn't been thanked many times might be considered uncivil.
> Could you tell me how you'd feel if a poster rated everyone else on a thread helpful except you? If your ranking was lower than that of the average poster? Pretend you're one of the less confident and assured people when answering.
>
> DinahI might post that I feel unappreciated and unhelpful. Someone else might post what they like about me. I might feel appreciated and reward them for being helpful to me. And then I might feel helpful to them.
--
> it would do the weeding out of less "helpful" responders that Dr. Bob seems to desire
>
> Dinah> > I sense a lot of anxiety
>
> I don't sense any anxiety in our posts. I think that frustration is a more accurate description.For example, I sense anxiety about being hurt and being weeded out. I certainly do sense frustration, too!
> I feel that hurting someone with a "reward/points" system would be awful. There are posters here who lived through something like that when they were in their parent's home and this could produce feelings that they have worked hard to overcome.
>
> fayeroeHow might parents hurt a child with a reward system?
Bob
Posted by chujoe on July 27, 2010, at 6:31:10
In reply to Re: Rewards, posted by Dr. Bob on July 27, 2010, at 1:42:37
I am very skeptical regarding any points or reward system at Babble. I used to hang around a couple of sites that allowed ratings & it became clear pretty quickly that the system is easy to abuse in several different ways. Even someone as "wise and compassionate" as me* was often tempted to rate down people I disagreed with politically, for example. Sometimes, the rating system itself becomes a kind of meta-subject in a thread, to the detriment of the actual subject. But my main concern would be that some people would be better at working the system than others, resulting in an in group & an out group & surely that would be a major problem for a community like Psychobabble, which presents itself as inclusive and supportive. There are lots of examples around the internet of sites dominated by fanboys and fangirls, who create a kind of echo chamber effect that merely amplifies the prevailing belief system of the site, while excluding (either subtly or overtly) other points of view. That is one reason I have been so insistent on finding ways to allow for argument within a community of support -- argument keeps us honest.
____
*I'm being ironic, of course, but someone did actually use those words to describe me recently.
Posted by Dinah on July 27, 2010, at 8:07:06
In reply to Re: Rewards, posted by Dr. Bob on July 27, 2010, at 1:42:37
> > If someone routinely forgets to "thank" my posts while "thanking" others, I certainly note it and recognize I am unhelpful to that poster and think twice about responding to them.
>
> May I ask if you feel hurt by that?You may ask anything. And sometimes I'll answer. :)
I suppose I do feel hurt. How hurt might depend on context. Or maybe I always feel hurt, and just deny feelings of hurt and defend against them sometimes more than others. May I ask why you ask?
> > Lots of things are a fact of life. Lots of things are true. I thought it had long since been decided on Babble that just because something was true, pointing it out was not necessarily either civil or kind.
>
> I agree, pointing out that someone hasn't been thanked many times might be considered uncivil.Isn't reporting their rankings of "helpfulness" pointing it out? I consider it to be pointing it out. And by the administration of the site at that. If you were to point that out to me by publishing my poor rankings, it would feel to me that you were pointing out that you would prefer more helpful people to post here and I ought to leave.
> How might parents hurt a child with a reward system?
Are you a huge fan of behavior modification? Hmmmm.... Of course parents can hurt a child with a reward system. We aren't dogs to respond to a clicker system.
"You aren't on your way to winning a gold star today" can be hurtful. "Johnny has ten gold stars this month and you only have one" can be hurtful. The latter is what you are proposing, in effect.
Gold stars can be withheld or granted based more on the feelings of the granter than the behavior of the grantee. The withholding of gold stars can be used as coercion to a sensitive child. Some children might grow to believe that they just aren't capable of gold stars. That starless row on the class chart can become an indicator of the future, causing the child to give up or even to make d*mn sure they in no way qualify for a star so that they won't be disappointed. A child can believe they are being helpful, and be simply devastated at the end of they day when they didn't receive a gold star. Standards by other posters are unlikely to be as clearly outlined as a proper behavior modification program should be (even if I were a firm believer in behavior modification programs). Peers might be more likely to reward those whom they like, those who are popular, those they perceive as powerful (if they wish to curry favor or appease, for example). Being popular and being helpful are not synonymous. I'm not even suggesting any maliciousness of motive. It's a fairly normal thing to reward our friends or people who agree with us.
It depends on the child, I suppose. But I would never have used a rigid reward system like this for my child. I'm not a behaviorist. I don't believe humans are so simple. Rewards flow naturally from the choices you make. Natural consequences. Not gold stars. And of course, the major way I taught my son to understand what he ought and oughtn't do in life is by explaining what the rules are why the rules are in place. The behavior comes from him, and has to be motivated by his own beliefs, not by an arbitrary reward system that will end at some point. Should he only be helpful to win gold stars? Or should he realize what being helpful can mean to others and be motivated by his compassion for others? I think it would have harmed him a bit to teach him to be good for rewards.
Of course, this begs the real question. You have always maintained that answering itself is helpful. You have encouraged people to answer posts by newcomers, or posts that have not received responses. Are you now saying that you don't consider the act of caring enough to answer supportively helpful enough for this site?
Posted by violette on July 27, 2010, at 10:27:18
In reply to Re: Rewards » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on July 27, 2010, at 8:07:06
Behavioral modification is manipulative.
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.