![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 65 to 89 of 348. Go back in thread:
Posted by Deneb on October 28, 2010, at 20:57:20
In reply to Re: Reduced rate of posting, posted by Deneb on October 28, 2010, at 20:50:34
I'm not crying wolf. I'm not even making threats. I don't know why you think I'm crying wolf.
Posted by Dr. Bob on October 29, 2010, at 0:25:33
In reply to Re: Reduced rate of posting » ron1953, posted by twinleaf on October 15, 2010, at 12:57:24
> the capriciousness of all of it.
>
> ron1953> That was so outlandish as to be funny
>
> twinleafI'd like to ask those who care about ron or twinleaf -- or object to blocks in general -- to do what they can to try to prevent more blocks.
Protests haven't proved all that effective at preventing blocks and may even encourage behaviors that lead to them. You have the right to protest (as long as you're civil), but if your goal is to prevent more blocks, please consider a different strategy.
Bob
--
> You all seen my 6 week ban ... i recieved e mails from babbler,s saying sorry for the ban.But only a couple spoke on babble. That speak,s to me as you wanted me banned, or you didnt give a sh*t. I think thats what bob means about helping each other. The Block didnt hit me hard but the lack of support did.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20100716/msgs/956872.html
> You have the power to pick your battles.
>
> Battling Dr. Bob on PB Admin? Generally results in frustration and effects on policy ranging from
> - none
> - the exact opposite of what you intended to accomplish
> - some other seemingly random policy change that isn't what you wanted.
>
> Choose wisely!http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20090302/msgs/893534.html
Posted by twinleaf on October 29, 2010, at 6:26:12
In reply to Re: more blocks, posted by Dr. Bob on October 29, 2010, at 0:25:33
I didn't write that with the intention of being critical. I was just expressing my personal reaction to what seemed to me to be an unusual reason for a block.. It did not cross my mind that my post would result in a block. I certainly do not want to be blocked for a year for a statement which was innocent in its intentions, so I would like to withdraw that statement.
Posted by twinleaf on October 29, 2010, at 6:37:43
In reply to Re: more blocks, posted by twinleaf on October 29, 2010, at 6:26:12
"Protests are not all that effective...." Those of us who do protest do so because we believe, deeply, in the values we are expressing. How these values are received cannot change that.
Posted by ron1953 on October 29, 2010, at 12:14:28
In reply to Re: more blocks, posted by Dr. Bob on October 29, 2010, at 0:25:33
One of the Merriam-Webster definitions for capricious is unpredictable, and that's how I meant it. That's how I see blocks, etc. - unpredictable. Is my seeing it as unpredictable somehow uncivil? I honestly and sincerely don't think so.
Posted by maxime on October 29, 2010, at 17:21:08
In reply to Re: Reduced rate of posting, posted by Deneb on October 28, 2010, at 20:57:20
> I'm not crying wolf. I'm not even making threats. I don't know why you think I'm crying wolf.
>
>Because you said you like people's initial response to the thread/post. But then you don't really post again or respond to what people have posted to you. So naturally, people are going to think about posting to the threads you start.
Then one day you are really going to need to post and have a quick response. No one will respond because of your past behaviour. That is what I meant my crying wolf. I know that you have never made threats to hurt yourself.
Posted by sigismund on October 29, 2010, at 20:14:59
In reply to Re: more blocks, posted by twinleaf on October 29, 2010, at 6:26:12
You two have to be very careful, don't you?
Posted by twinleaf on October 29, 2010, at 20:31:40
In reply to Re: more blocks, posted by sigismund on October 29, 2010, at 20:14:59
Yes, it would seem so. It means a lot that you noticed.
Posted by sigismund on October 29, 2010, at 20:50:51
In reply to Re: more blocks » sigismund, posted by twinleaf on October 29, 2010, at 20:31:40
Far be it from me to suggest that people are singled out and picked on.
Posted by twinleaf on October 29, 2010, at 21:11:16
In reply to Re: more blocks » twinleaf, posted by sigismund on October 29, 2010, at 20:50:51
Some people get preferential treatment. They go straight to "more blocks" without having to waste precious time on PBC's.
Posted by Phillipa on October 29, 2010, at 22:44:11
In reply to Re: more blocks » sigismund, posted by twinleaf on October 29, 2010, at 21:11:16
Twinleaf I think I agree with you. Now don't get blocked again okay? Phillipa
Posted by sigismund on October 30, 2010, at 0:30:04
In reply to Re: more blocks » sigismund, posted by twinleaf on October 29, 2010, at 21:11:16
It's like Monopoly then?
Go to jail, go directly to jail, do not pass go, do not collect $200.
Posted by Zeba on October 30, 2010, at 1:19:58
In reply to Re: more blocks, posted by twinleaf on October 29, 2010, at 6:26:12
> I didn't write that with the intention of being critical. I was just expressing my personal reaction to what seemed to me to be an unusual reason for a block.. It did not cross my mind that my post would result in a block. I certainly do not want to be blocked for a year for a statement which was innocent in its intentions, so I would like to withdraw that statement.
Twinleaf - no matter what you say, you are likely to be blocked soon. Best to just drop it. Some folks are definitely in the headlights, and well, I think you understand what I mean. From what I can see, it appears you are definitely one of those people.
Posted by twinleaf on October 30, 2010, at 9:08:22
In reply to Re: more blocks » twinleaf, posted by Zeba on October 30, 2010, at 1:19:58
All of the blocks I have received have been, at their core, either because I have objected to long blocks themselves, or because I was critical about how the Facebook/Twitter issue was handled.. These were not issues involving a lack of civility to anyone, Bob included. I am apparently considered dangerous, not because I am uncivil, but because I continue to express views opposite to Bob's. They are my own beliefs and principles about Psychobabble; I would not be maintaining my integrity if I changed them. I really did not intend or want to become the poster whose every sentence is scanned for incivilities which are never there except in the mind of the moderator. I have been a caring and civil poster and do not at all deserve to be treated this way. I also did not want or intend to become the poster singled out in advance for "more blocks", which in my case would be a year long.
Babble would not have lost so much of its vitality and strong sense of community if the members' moderate, flexible views about civility, blocks and social networking had been taken into consideration. Instead, it has been shaped progressively into an overly-managed, non-democratic forum. In the process, it has lost much of its social relevance and personal impact.
I'm personally very sorry to see that happen, I feel that I did my small part as best I could to help prevent that outcome. But now, it's time to leave. I am going to miss many, many posters, so I won't name them in case I leave out someone important to me. Many of them aren't actively posting any longer, but perhaps they are still reading. I have much to thank people for here, including learning about the physiological basis of depression, as well as about TMS and tianeptine, which were clinically very helpful to me. Even more, I am grateful for the support and mutual sharing which took place on Psychology. In any event, I wish everyone the very best, now and in the future. I'll plan to drop by from time to time.
'Bye all.
Posted by Dinah on October 30, 2010, at 11:01:23
In reply to time to say goodbye..., posted by twinleaf on October 30, 2010, at 9:08:22
Even if Dr. Bob's interpretation of your Admin posts may be a bit sensitive at the moment, Psychology board posters have greeted your return with delight.
Maybe you could just avoid admin? Dr. Bob may run Babble, but Dr. Bob isn't the real incentive for posting at Babble. As long as he doesn't do anything like adding the buttons again, I see no reason that what happens on Admin needs to effect Psychology.
Besides, I've rarely found engaging with Dr. Bob, particularly about topics that aren't new, to be all that effective to change things in the direction I'd like. The only appeals I've found useful at all are ones that help him gain a new point of view about something. An ah-hah moment, so to speak. I'm a pragmatist at heart. There are things I cannot change, and Dr. Bob's heart and mind on the topic of longstanding issues is one of those things.
Posted by Free on October 30, 2010, at 12:10:25
In reply to Please don't go » twinleaf, posted by Dinah on October 30, 2010, at 11:01:23
> Even if Dr. Bob's interpretation of your Admin posts may be a bit sensitive at the moment, Psychology board posters have greeted your return with delight.
>
> Maybe you could just avoid admin? Dr. Bob may run Babble, but Dr. Bob isn't the real incentive for posting at Babble. As long as he doesn't do anything like adding the buttons again, I see no reason that what happens on Admin needs to effect Psychology.
...
>
>The Psychology board used to be one of the hotbeds for PBCs and blocks before everyone either left or got blocked or both. That's where I saw Twinleaf get PBC'd left and right for trying to help other babblers in trouble. At times, it appeared as though she couldn't speak without getting handed a citation. And from there on, Twinleaf's blocks seemed to multiply exponentially to lengthy one year blocks.
As much as I'm going to miss reading posts from someone of her caliber, frankly, I worry for her. I feel very badly for what she's gone through.
Hey Twinleaf, I don't post much, but it was obvious to me how hard you tried this time around. I'm glad you're doing well. I can only imagine all the conversations you must have had with your T about your interactions at babble. Your analyst must be amazing. :)
Posted by SLS on October 30, 2010, at 18:40:27
In reply to time to say goodbye..., posted by twinleaf on October 30, 2010, at 9:08:22
> 'Bye all.
Damn.
:-(
- Scott
Posted by Justherself54 on October 30, 2010, at 18:45:59
In reply to Re: time to say goodbye... » twinleaf, posted by SLS on October 30, 2010, at 18:40:27
Posted by rskontos on October 31, 2010, at 1:21:25
In reply to Re: Please don't go, posted by Free on October 30, 2010, at 12:10:25
> > Even if Dr. Bob's interpretation of your Admin posts may be a bit sensitive at the moment, Psychology board posters have greeted your return with delight.
> >
> > Maybe you could just avoid admin? Dr. Bob may run Babble, but Dr. Bob isn't the real incentive for posting at Babble. As long as he doesn't do anything like adding the buttons again, I see no reason that what happens on Admin needs to effect Psychology.
> ...
> >
> >
>
> The Psychology board used to be one of the hotbeds for PBCs and blocks before everyone either left or got blocked or both. That's where I saw Twinleaf get PBC'd left and right for trying to help other babblers in trouble. At times, it appeared as though she couldn't speak without getting handed a citation. And from there on, Twinleaf's blocks seemed to multiply exponentially to lengthy one year blocks.
>
> As much as I'm going to miss reading posts from someone of her caliber, frankly, I worry for her. I feel very badly for what she's gone through.
>
> Hey Twinleaf, I don't post much, but it was obvious to me how hard you tried this time around. I'm glad you're doing well. I can only imagine all the conversations you must have had with your T about your interactions at babble. Your analyst must be amazing. :)Free, I agree with you. I feel that Twinleaf is a special person and we all miss her tremendously. I personally feel that rarely do we as fellow babblers ever know when someone we care about is either in trouble or in danger of getting blocks. I personally think blocks are punative to the community of babblers and to those being blocked I have been here off and on for awhile and I have seen many blocks for things I felt were not uncivil but I know it is not my site, but I can disagree. Unfortunately all these blocks and all the rules changing so fast it is hard to keep up with makes me feel like that is the reason babble seems dried up. So many great people are blocked right now and it hurts all of us when they are blocked. I love psychology but the things here on admin just simply hurtful because I miss so many wonderful people that are no longer here. It is a shame. It also makes me feel like I can't post because I can tell you right now a block would send me in a tailspin. Downward tailspin.
But that is my humble lowly opinion and I am sure I am not allowed to have it.
rsk
Posted by sigismund on October 31, 2010, at 2:46:04
In reply to Re: Please don't go Twinleaf » Free, posted by rskontos on October 31, 2010, at 1:21:25
It says a lot (about the application of the civility rules?) that someone like Twinleaf should have fallen foul of them by pursuing issues of principle.
Posted by ron1953 on October 31, 2010, at 8:28:39
In reply to Re: Please don't go Twinleaf, posted by sigismund on October 31, 2010, at 2:46:04
Posted by Willful on October 31, 2010, at 11:49:00
In reply to (sigh) (nm), posted by ron1953 on October 31, 2010, at 8:28:39
yeah. The application of blocks is becoming seemingly even more arbitrary and capricious than ever. But as Dinah says that there's no arguing with Bob on settled points of long-standing, especially unless you've got some new idea about it-- and if there's one thing we've contested with Bob, it's his policy on blocking-- I think it's really something that we should simply accept and try to accommodate.
I personally find his blocks unfair-- and often out of kilter and not balanced-- but I just don't think that getting upset about it to the point of arguing with Bob will do anything other than further agitate and anger me.
I would hate to see twinleaf get blocked. Which she won't since she retracted her comment. Should she or ron have had to retrace or apologize? IMO no -- but it's not my board.
I hope twinleaf stays because her presence here means a lot to other people on pbabble, and I hope we are the ones she's here for. It would be great if she would reconsider and not leave-- and work on keeping away from admin-- or being very circumspect here.
I feel the same way about ron. I 've liked his contributions a lot and hate to see him blocked or gone.
So all I can say too is "sigh"--
Willful
Posted by Dinah on October 31, 2010, at 13:33:45
In reply to Re: (sigh), posted by Willful on October 31, 2010, at 11:49:00
I think Twinleaf very graciously did withdraw her statement, so I'd be very surprised if Dr. Bob blocked her for it.
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 1, 2010, at 0:37:07
In reply to Re: Please don't go Twinleaf, posted by sigismund on October 31, 2010, at 2:46:04
> I would like to withdraw that statement.
>
> twinleaf> One of the Merriam-Webster definitions for capricious is unpredictable, and that's how I meant it. That's how I see blocks, etc. - unpredictable. Is my seeing it as unpredictable somehow uncivil? I honestly and sincerely don't think so.
>
> ron1953It would be more of an I-statement to say that you're unable to predict blocks, but thanks for withdrawing and rephrasing. I'm glad we avoided more blocks this time.
--
> I personally feel that rarely do we as fellow babblers ever know when someone we care about is either in trouble or in danger of getting blocks.
Then I'm glad I said they were in danger. But were you really surprised I considered their posts uncivil?
> So many great people are blocked right now
It may be tempting to see me as responsible for reduced posting. Who do you think is blocked right now?
> It also makes me feel like I can't post because I can tell you right now a block would send me in a tailspin. Downward tailspin.
>
> rskThat's one reason I like to see posters help each other avoid blocks.
--
> It says a lot (about the application of the civility rules?) that someone like Twinleaf should have fallen foul of them by pursuing issues of principle.
>
> sigismundWhat do you think that might say about the application of the civility rules?
Bob
Posted by sigismund on November 1, 2010, at 2:01:38
In reply to Re: avoiding more blocks, posted by Dr. Bob on November 1, 2010, at 0:37:07
>What do you think that might say about the application of the civility rules?
That some people are singled out.
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.