![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 8 to 32 of 257. Go back in thread:
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 6, 2010, at 3:23:08
In reply to Bless you guys...., posted by muffled on October 5, 2010, at 18:53:35
> I'd like to think of PB as a family because we share things here we can't anywhere else. The only people I know who understand what mental illness is like and what taking psychiatric medication is like are here. Therefore it saddens me greatly when people leave this site for one reason or another. Where will they go? Who will they turn to for answers and advice and empathy?
>
> I've been lurking on-and-off here since 1999 and it seems to me that 'administrative' issue are starting to consume the boards much more than they used to. I don't really know why this is - maybe it's just the natural evolution of an organic community.It saddens me, too. But you got me thinking, maybe part of it is that we have in fact become like a family, and like in a family, both love and hurt can have deep roots.
> I think resetting the blocks for everyone would have a massively positive effect on the community, for a number of reasons. Every legislative system, even the town library, recognizes the need for however rare amnesty as a way of putting the 'family' back together, opening the gate and asking all the poor stray sheep to please come back in...
>
> Also I'd like propose that all Babblers who have grievances against Dr.Bob and other posters just forgive each other and move on.
>
> Could we all just reset our relationships with each other? Just put away the knives and forget about who's right and who's wrong and just go back to what PB used to be about?It might be nice to be able to "reboot" one's family. :-)
I'd rather the sheep didn't stray in the first place, but how about this: If all of Babble can stay civil for a month, then I'll cut all blocks in half.
> Maybe it's a sign that we need some new legislative action and structures.
>
> Maybe we need some kind of Elders Council which would be posters recognized by Dr. Bob as having the best interests of the community at heart and would have more oomph, so to speak, when making recommendations and rendering judgments on policy issues. ... The necessity of a group of representatives for the citizenry irregardless of the type of governmental system involved has been recognized for ages.
>
> hyperfocusI've actually been thinking about something like that myself. How exactly would you see it working?
--
> he has his own personal ever changing agenda, and that what is important and real to him. What people here want doesn't seem to matter.
That's kind of black-and-white. But maybe that shouldn't be surprising, lots of politics is black-and-white these days.
> Many wonderful, coherant, caring, intelligent people were once here, and they warned Bob they would leave, they begged him to change some things, or not do some things, but he didn't listen and showed no remorse at the loss of these many posters who had once made Babble the special place it was.
>
> muffledBegging doesn't always get people what they want. I regret losing posters. I'm not perfect, but I've done my best to consider all sides and viewpoints and do the best thing for everybody involved.
I think the current posters make this a special place, too. :-)
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on November 6, 2010, at 7:36:19
In reply to Re: Amnesty, posted by Dr. Bob on November 6, 2010, at 3:23:08
+2
> how about this: If all of Babble can stay civil for a month, then I'll cut all blocks in half.
You mean if you don't manage to find something to interpret as uncivil in one month then you will cut all blocks in half?
I'd be fairly confident I could extract an un PBC'd portion of at least one post per week that an independent jury wouldn't be able to reliably differentiate from portions of posts that you PBC'd or blocked over the years. Even factoring in 'context'.
I do understand that you think this is a way of making people more civil (according to you).
But I'm not sure it helps make your decisions more understandable, predictable, or justifiable. And for some... It is that that is the problem.
Posted by muffled on November 6, 2010, at 11:49:31
In reply to Re: Amnesty, posted by Dr. Bob on November 6, 2010, at 3:23:08
"If all of Babble can stay civil for a month, then I'll cut all blocks in half."
Ummm. Bob, your dealing with adults here.... :-/
A lollipop doesn't make it all better. Just quiets the kid down so you can hurt them again :("Begging doesn't always get people what they want. I regret losing posters. I'm not perfect, but I've done my best to consider all sides and viewpoints and do the best thing for everybody involved."
Begging????? WTF?????
If people are debasing themselves to the point of begging, then that just shows how important they feel about something, and it would seem that doesn't mean that much to you....they merely.......begged....:( (have YOU ever begged? You wouldn't use the term loosely if so. Begging is under extreme duress. Begging is a last resort :( Begging is demeaning and make you feel like a piece of sh*t under someones boot :( OR maybe you have....and thats why you are the way you are.... )
*YOU* regret losing posters. How about how the *posters* FELT????
You consider perhaps, but then you just do what you think is best in YOUR opinion, never mind that the majority others do not agree with you..."I think the current posters make this a special place, too."
Of course they do.
So did the old ones....
:(
Posted by alexandra_k on November 7, 2010, at 20:17:21
In reply to Re: Amnesty » Dr. Bob, posted by muffled on November 6, 2010, at 11:49:31
And you found incivility already. Is anybody surprised??? I'm most definately not.
Posted by hyperfocus on November 8, 2010, at 16:03:33
In reply to Re: Amnesty, posted by Dr. Bob on November 6, 2010, at 3:23:08
>It saddens me, too. But you got me thinking, maybe part of it is that we have in fact become like a family, and like in a family, both love and hurt can have deep roots.
Yes when posters debate blocks and civility and privacy here they're bringing in old unresolved feelings from the past. To me this is the primary reason why blocks and uncivility are becoming more and more frequent. If there was a away to free posters from these past feeling then I think blocks would decrease drastically.>It might be nice to be able to "reboot" one's family. :-)
Well maybe we can't with our own family in real life but in an online community and family there exist opportunities for rebooting. It's sort of a crude metaphor but even the best-maintained computer systems need a reboot from time to time to clear all the bad stuff that's accumulated from continuous use. Everything in human affairs is cyclical and is constantly renewing.>I'd rather the sheep didn't stray in the first place, but how about this: If all of Babble can stay civil for a month, then I'll cut all blocks in half
Cutting blocks in half would be a good start but I think it has to be unconditional - a show of good faith. Maybe you could try it as an experiment and see if it has a positive effect - i.e return of estranged posters and increased posting and decreased uncivility.>I've actually been thinking about something like that myself. How exactly would you see it working?
This is just my opinion but I think that everybody here recognizes people like 10der heart and Dinah and SLS as people who through their words and actions have always nurtured the community here. So maybe before announcing a policy decision or handing down a contentious block you could ask them what they think of the situation before doing something. The power to make decisions resides in you solely but posters could appeal to them to hear their case and make recommendations. At least as a first step posters could feel that other voices besides Dr. Bob alone can influence things here - that knowledge alone can do a huge amount of good.
Posted by Free on November 8, 2010, at 17:39:25
In reply to Re: Amnesty » Dr. Bob, posted by hyperfocus on November 8, 2010, at 16:03:33
I agree with a lot of your insights and ideas, Hyperfocus. But I disagree with this:
>
> >I've actually been thinking about something like that myself. How exactly would you see it working?
> This is just my opinion but I think that everybody here recognizes people like 10der heart and Dinah and SLS as people who through their words and actions have always nurtured the community here. So maybe before announcing a policy decision or handing down a contentious block you could ask them what they think of the situation before doing something. The power to make decisions resides in you solely but posters could appeal to them to hear their case and make recommendations. At least as a first step posters could feel that other voices besides Dr. Bob alone can influence things here - that knowledge alone can do a huge amount of good.
>I think if Bob were to actually set up a "council" of some sort to consult and discuss his admin policies with, it should be balanced with different points of view.
I don't know exactly where SLS(whom I appreciate) stands anymore but he was pro-block if I remember correctly. So the council would be made up of three pro-block members, of which two were ex-Deputies? Deputies who were part of the system that handed out PCBs and Blocks? I would like to suggest including members like Twinleaf, Sigismund (sorry Sig), and others(too many great people to name) with different ideas to really move away from the status quo and "reboot" the "family".
I appreciate your post though...I think some of your insights are spot-on.
Posted by Dinah on November 8, 2010, at 18:37:40
In reply to Re: Amnesty » hyperfocus, posted by Free on November 8, 2010, at 17:39:25
I would prefer that the term "pro-block" not be applied to me. I don't think anyone is in favor of people being blocked. I think the difference of opinion lies more in the locus of control.
I rather wish all posters would post in accordance with site guidelines and therefore not be blocked.
Posted by Dinah on November 8, 2010, at 18:39:35
In reply to Re: Amnesty » Dr. Bob, posted by hyperfocus on November 8, 2010, at 16:03:33
Thanks, hyperfocus. I appreciate your confidence.
I am somewhat skeptical about the amount of influence any group would have on Dr. Bob's decisions when he believes himself to be correct.
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 8, 2010, at 23:51:37
In reply to Re: Amnesty » Dr. Bob, posted by hyperfocus on November 8, 2010, at 16:03:33
> > how about this: If all of Babble can stay civil for a month, then I'll cut all blocks in half.
>
> You mean if you don't manage to find something to interpret as uncivil in one month then you will cut all blocks in half?
>
> alexandra_kI mean that if posters don't choose to post anything I choose to consider uncivil, then I'll cut all blocks in half.
> Ummm. Bob, your dealing with adults here.... :-/
> A lollipop doesn't make it all better. Just quiets the kid down so you can hurt them again :(If shortening blocks is just a giving people a lollipop, then does that mean lengthening blocks is just taking away a lollipop?
> > Begging doesn't always get people what they want.
>
> If people are debasing themselves to the point of begging, then that just shows how important they feel about something
>
> muffledFeeling it's important doesn't always get people what they want, either.
> Yes when posters debate blocks and civility and privacy here they're bringing in old unresolved feelings from the past. To me this is the primary reason why blocks and uncivility are becoming more and more frequent. If there was a away to free posters from these past feeling then I think blocks would decrease drastically.
I think so, too. But freeing people from past feelings is easier said than done!
> Cutting blocks in half would be a good start but I think it has to be unconditional - a show of good faith. Maybe you could try it as an experiment and see if it has a positive effect - i.e return of estranged posters and increased posting and decreased uncivility.
>
> hyperfocusWhy does it have to be unconditional? What if posters were civil as a show of good faith and saw if that had a positive effect? :-)
Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 8, 2010, at 23:51:46
In reply to Re: Amnesty » hyperfocus, posted by Free on November 8, 2010, at 17:39:25
> maybe before announcing a policy decision or handing down a contentious block you could ask them what they think of the situation before doing something. The power to make decisions resides in you solely but posters could appeal to them to hear their case and make recommendations.
>
> hyperfocusHmm, I'd ask them before blocking someone, or after someone's blocked they could appeal to them?
> I think if Bob were to actually set up a "council" of some sort to consult and discuss his admin policies with, it should be balanced with different points of view.
>
> FreeWould you want to elect them?
Bob
Posted by Solstice on November 9, 2010, at 0:23:30
In reply to Re: some kind of Elders Council, posted by Dr. Bob on November 8, 2010, at 23:51:46
> Hmm, I'd ask them before blocking someone, or after someone's blocked they could appeal to them?Before blocking. Maybe it would be a joint decision by you and the 'Council,' with majority rule? Council Members/Bob vote?
> Would you want to elect them?
Nominations and elections?
Solstice
Posted by muffled on November 9, 2010, at 0:30:41
In reply to Re: some kind of Elders Council, posted by Dr. Bob on November 8, 2010, at 23:51:46
So....remembering the deps....
Is Bob going to give a council some tools?
Is he going to give them as a council some of his power?
Remembering the deps...
Bob UTTERLY bailed on them...
Posted by muffled on November 9, 2010, at 0:49:16
In reply to Re: Amnesty, posted by Dr. Bob on November 8, 2010, at 23:51:37
> I mean that if posters don't choose to post anything I choose to consider uncivil, then I'll cut all blocks in half.
*wwaaaagggghh???? But HOW can posters choose something they don't know??? I don't UNDERSTAND some of the things you consider uncivil.
What if I just have a bad frikken day full of triggers and screw up? Bob, you sure love to keep slapping the block responsibility onto others...
Besides, this comes across as a crap bandaid fix to try and make yourself look good or something. What will this actually PROVE??? You are just making yet another random unpreditable confusing out of the blue change here.
> If shortening blocks is just a giving people a lollipop, then does that mean lengthening blocks is just taking away a lollipop?*No, its slapping them upside the head and ostracizing them for longer. You just don't get it Bob...
> Feeling it's important doesn't always get people what they want, either.*OMG Bob, you are making me (more) insane?!
You missed the point again. I was trying to get you to see that if people feel THAT strongly about something, then maybe you ought to consider there is a valid reason they feel that way. You didn't consider it over the tweet thing, you just barged ahead.
You can't always get what you want, but it might be nice if we here could get more what we need, and thats more predictability and safety.> Why does it have to be unconditional? What if posters were civil as a show of good faith and saw if that had a positive effect? :-)
*Cuz maybe it would show some friggin respect for the posters if it was unconditional. Maybe you could say, ya, I've screwed up some and I am making a one time concession here while I think bout things.
Do you not see that you are putting MORE pressure on posters with the ultimatum??????
Now its not just, if you screw up, your banished, now its if you screw up your banished and you've screwed your friends over too....
Nice one Bob.....
:(
Posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 7:51:25
In reply to Re: some kind of Elders Council, posted by Dr. Bob on November 8, 2010, at 23:51:46
I think it would be a good idea to have a review board. As it stands now, blocks have no real relation to a poster's willingness to return and abide by site rules. I'd rather see blocks be lifted if a poster agrees to abide by site guidelines. The first time, it could be based solely on their word that they are ready. After that, they could propose concrete ways that could help them stay within site guidelines. For example, choosing a civility buddy, choosing not to post on topics that have proved troublesome, etc.
An "ignore button" might help as well, since some repeat blocks seem to come about as a result of feelings about a particular poster. A mandatory ignore might help.
My warning would be that those who participate have to be willing to have some of the anger turned on Dr. Bob turned on them. Even if the elder decided to always rule in favor of leniency, a fair amount of anger comes from leniency as well.
I do not think Dr. Bob should turn over his decisions to majority rule. Why should I trust a group more than I trust Dr. Bob?
Posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 8:58:48
In reply to Re: some kind of Elders Council, posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 7:51:25
Those who believe they have a decent understanding of the civility guidelines could volunteer to make themselves available to those who feel they don't.
There are (at least) two functions of a civility buddy.
A civility buddy can be someone you use to review your posts if you're unsure of your civility, or if you think maybe you're too angry to judge, or if you feel your posts are being scrutinized by Dr. Bob.
A civility buddy can also be the recipient of the things you really oughtn't post. A person of like enough mind that you're able to vent your feelings to without fear of repercussions. Sometimes I preview my post to my civility buddy, then after I feel better, I say "Ok, now what can I actually write?" And believe it or not, the venting has helped my feelings reflect a more thoughtful and sensitive post than I might have previously made. Of course, I tend not to get worked up by discussing things that anger me. It's more likely that I see the absurdity of my anger, and recognize that perhaps I'm not entirely being generous in spirit. I nearly always talk myself down with my civility buddy. It might not be as useful if talking to a civility buddy just stirs up feelings of outrage.
I greatly urge that everyone who feels the need, and who would benefit, make use of a civility buddy.
I think the second function is best served by choosing a friend of like mind and might not be the sort of thing where volunteers are useful. But I am more than willing to volunteer for the first function. As long as I am treated politely.
Would anyone else be willing to volunteer to be available to those who are uncertain how the civility guidelines might apply to their post? Perhaps Dr. Bob could include in the FAQ or provide a link in his pbc's to a list of posters who can be babblemailed in those circumstances? If the post still gets flagged, the civility buddy could explain their role, and ask for further clarification. If Dr. Bob finds a civility buddy is consistently missing the mark, he could request that they get further training before being listed as a resource.
It would be a pragmatic way of reducing blocks.
Posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 9:02:01
In reply to And how about volunteer civility buddies?, posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 8:58:48
Of course, I totally credit my civility buddy for helping me see how my feelings might be a bit... extreme without ever making me feel bad about it.
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 9, 2010, at 9:52:42
In reply to Re: Amnesty, posted by muffled on November 9, 2010, at 0:49:16
> What if I just have a bad frikken day full of triggers and screw up?
If you screw up, and no one helps you backpedal, then unfortunately there may be consequences.
> Besides, this comes across as a crap bandaid fix to try and make yourself look good or something. What will this actually PROVE???
The main idea would be to get all blocks cut in half, not to prove anything, but it would also prove that posters have the power to be civil. And IMO they would look good, too.
> You are just making yet another random unpreditable confusing out of the blue change here.
See:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20090302/msgs/893534.html
> > Why does it have to be unconditional? What if posters were civil as a show of good faith and saw if that had a positive effect? :-)
>
> Cuz maybe it would show some friggin respect for the posters if it was unconditional.Maybe it would show more respect for me if posters were civil. :-)
> Do you not see that you are putting MORE pressure on posters with the ultimatum??????
> Now its not just, if you screw up, your banished, now its if you screw up your banished and you've screwed your friends over too....It could feel like more pressure. But they wouldn't have to deal with it alone, they could work together.
Bob
Posted by floatingbridge on November 9, 2010, at 10:46:42
In reply to And how about volunteer civility buddies?, posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 8:58:48
This sounds good, Dinah.
Posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 13:10:54
In reply to Re: And how about volunteer civility buddies? » Dinah, posted by floatingbridge on November 9, 2010, at 10:46:42
Would it be something you'd be willing to do?
I think there would be less chance of being on the receiving end of anger if the poster had chosen to seek out help. Certainly, I've experienced that unasked for assistance isn't always well received.
Posted by floatingbridge on November 9, 2010, at 13:37:25
In reply to Re: And how about volunteer civility buddies? » floatingbridge, posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 13:10:54
Dinah,
I'd be willing to consider it. I have much to learn about civility myself.
I do think your suggestion is pragmatic and could be implemented fairly easily.
It may not solve all that everyone would like; then what would? That said, I can see how having civility buddies could encourage a healthier, more supportive community. While it may not be possible for everyone to feel heard by Dr. Bob, babble members would have a greater
chance of feeling heard by someone.I think it is a constructive suggestion. Thank you for it.
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 9, 2010, at 17:57:31
In reply to And how about volunteer civility buddies?, posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 8:58:48
> Would anyone else be willing to volunteer to be available to those who are uncertain how the civility guidelines might apply to their post? Perhaps Dr. Bob could include in the FAQ or provide a link in his pbc's to a list of posters who can be babblemailed in those circumstances? If the post still gets flagged, the civility buddy could explain their role, and ask for further clarification. If Dr. Bob finds a civility buddy is consistently missing the mark, he could request that they get further training before being listed as a resource.
I think that's a great idea. Could I delegate it to you? Which I guess would mean soliciting volunteers, doing any training that's necessary, and maintaining the list? I'd be happy to include a link in the FAQ and PBCs.
Bob
Posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 18:12:17
In reply to Re: And how about volunteer civility buddies?, posted by Dr. Bob on November 9, 2010, at 17:57:31
I suppose so, although since you make the civility calls, you'd have to let me know when more training is needed.
Posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 18:19:59
In reply to Re: And how about volunteer civility buddies? » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 18:12:17
Don't worry if you don't feel your understanding of the civility guidelines is perfect. No one's understanding is perfect. You can always ask for guidance and training as you think it necessary.
It's not even necessary that you agree with the civility guidelines so long as you're willing to help people avoid blocks by staying within them.
You can contact me here or by babblemail.
Posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 18:22:41
In reply to Re: And how about volunteer civility buddies? » Dinah, posted by floatingbridge on November 9, 2010, at 13:37:25
You are welcome, and I hope you consider it. If you have any questions about Dr. Bob's civility decisions, you could always ask me, or anyone else you think may understand.
It would be interesting to see what could come of it. There might even be some side benefits of increased feelings of community.
Posted by 10derheart on November 9, 2010, at 21:19:33
In reply to All righty then. Who would be interested?, posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 18:19:59
I don't think I need any training just at the moment ;-)
Only caveat is time. If a poster feels they need to post quickly...I am not always available. I can generally read Babble/email once or twice a day. i can't promise super-quick responses, but I would do my best.
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.