Shown: posts 199 to 223 of 257. Go back in thread:
Posted by Solstice on December 12, 2010, at 19:36:37
In reply to Re: a quote which deserves to be quoted correctly....., posted by Willful on December 12, 2010, at 17:34:28
> Unfortunately, on the merits here, and admittedly not having read the ins and outs of every post-- I have to stand with Bob on the issue of elections.
>
> If he appoints the council it will be no different from the deputies.The only way council would be the same as deputies is if:
1. He is the one who chooses who to appoint; and
2. If Council has the power to issue blocksElections that include campaigning and there being winners and losers is devisive here. I've suggested that if the community memebers each send him by private mail their choices for Council - and he starts with the first five who have the most nominations - asks each of them if they are willimng to serve, and then goes down the list until he finds the five with the most nominations who are willing to serve - then he has gotten who the community wants - without subjecting the community to campaigns and elections. Appointment probably isn't the best word for it - - but it's decidedly different than the campaign and election process Bob is focusing on.
> I also notice that we haven't at all articulated the rules that govern actions by the council, Bob's involvement in referring cases to or passing on cases adjudged by the council and many other areas of potential disagreement, cynicism and what I perceive as animadversions on Bob's character, motives, etcMy understanding is that Council would be independent of Bob. Their only power would be to shorten blocks - and they would not be beholden to him to do it. He has outlined it in his post with the proposal. He has added that it would be the responsibility of the blocked poster to contact council and negotiate the terms of a shortened block. It won't be their job to hunt down blocked posters and offer them reprieve.
> Whatever my personal frustrations with the system here, and I have many, I do see over and over again that the community is inflexible, afraid of change, quick to get angry at one another and be cutting, whether overtly or more subtle, entirely willing to stymie change, etc, which lead me to question our motives, goals,and so on.Maybe I'm a little idealistic - but I just don't see the community in those terms - not in an overall way anyway. I just don't see that much of the the negative things you describe. I think that at the times it does happen, though, that may be what sticks with some folks as far as their memory. But I think if we look through the archives - there is much more support than those other things. I do, though, think that change is hard. Many people are afraid of it. Also, a lot of people are busy, and they develop misunderstandings about changes under consideration. I don't think it speaks to their motivations though.
> I see a bit of a power struggle going on here where various people for their own reasons, want to control how this power is allocated.Perhaps.. but I not sure it's really possible for anyone here to control how the power is allocated. King Bob has all the power - and it's not being allocated anywhere except where he is willing to allocate it.
> And to be honest, Bob has every reason to be very careful about how this is done-- so that it doesn't create a ton of headaches, more work, a lot of unhappiness, criticisms and downright insults to him, etcI wholly agree with you on that. Which is why I have trouble understanding why he wouldn't see that campaigns and elections could easily be quite disruptive.
> I don't mean to be uncivil. But we really need to look at our behavior too.
>
> WillfulI sure didn't see anything uncivil in what you shared.. and I agree that it's important that we all look at ourselves in how we respond to the transfer of power that's under consideration.
Solstice
Posted by twinleaf on December 12, 2010, at 21:02:18
In reply to Re: a quote which deserves to be quoted correctly....., posted by alexandra_k on December 12, 2010, at 18:38:00
Alex has identified a really important thing which keeps recurring in our interactions with Bob. We repeatedly identify real problems in how Babble is run, and in how our relationships with Bob play out. We hope for real change. Bob almost invariably responds by either stating directly, or by inferring, that our responses are transference-based. He seems convinced, every time, that we could not possibly be discussing, and offering solutions for, a REAL: problem. Once our ideas have been devalued in this manner, it follows that Bob has no need to do anything. It is obviously very convenient for Bob to consider every critical comment, and every offered solution, to be based, not on the posters' intelligence and creativity, but on some hypothetical transference distortion left over from childhood.
The posters here are highly intelligent and aware. If anything, having an emotional illness requires one to be much more aware and sophisticated about feelings and motives than is average in society. By and large, people here don't miss a thing!. When Bob tries to attribute very sound, intelligent, accurate assessments and suggestion about Babble to childhood distortions or transferences, he risks sounding rather naive. I feel certain that he would not want to appear this way, and we certainly don't want him to.
Ideas about transference have changed a lot since Merton Gill, a psychoanalyst who helped make a major change in modern psychotherapy, suggested that, when things went wrong in the therapeutic relationship, it was usually because of blind spots or mistakes by the therapist. The concept of transference was reserved more for basic unmet needs arising in therapy, such as impaired attachment. When a psychiatrist attributes much that he doesn't like, or that he considers problematic, to others' transference, he runs the risk of being considered rather unsophisticated,
Wouldn't it be great if we could create, or perhaps recreate, a truly happy, mutually respectful community here? I don't think it would be so hard to do - people's ideas and suggestions could be received accurately and respectfully, even when they are not agreed with. Blocks can be reasonably short- perhaps never more than a few weeks. Civility actions could be kept below the level which begins to interfere with natural spontaneity and communicativeness. There would always be problems from time to time, just as there are everywhere else. But there is the strongest possible reason for believing that we can once again have a vital. healthy Babble community: we had one a few years ago.
It's the memory of how important it was to me then that keeps me struggling to get it back!
Posted by Phillipa on December 12, 2010, at 21:12:26
In reply to real relationships vs. transference...., posted by twinleaf on December 12, 2010, at 21:02:18
Twinleaf that is exactly how I also envision babble as it used to be. And can be again. Phillipa
Posted by sigismund on December 12, 2010, at 21:15:45
In reply to Re: a quote which deserves to be quoted correctly....., posted by Willful on December 12, 2010, at 17:34:28
>which lead me to question our motives, goals,
Do we have any?
Posted by alexandra_k on December 12, 2010, at 21:19:59
In reply to real relationships vs. transference...., posted by twinleaf on December 12, 2010, at 21:02:18
I lost you on the last two paragraphs. Just kept thinking 'the wheels on the bus'...
I do think he is naive about this, actually. But unless he gets some help (which he will not do) there isn't much to be done about it.
Posted by alexandra_k on December 12, 2010, at 21:21:12
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference.... » twinleaf, posted by alexandra_k on December 12, 2010, at 21:19:59
Anybody wonder why the clinicians (psychologists and psychiatrists) who used to post to these boards up and left?
Do you think they would put up with the way he treats us?
Why do you think he likes it here (instead of playing with his peers)?
Posted by Solstice on December 12, 2010, at 21:22:41
In reply to real relationships vs. transference...., posted by twinleaf on December 12, 2010, at 21:02:18
> We repeatedly identify real problems in how Babble is run, and in how our relationships with Bob play out. We hope for real change. Bob almost invariably responds by either stating directly, or by inferring, that our responses are transference-based.
Twinleaf - - it would be helpful to me to have a better picture of incidents you're referring to. I'm not suggesting they haven't happened.. I just may not have been attuned to them when they did. Do you have any links or anything where I could see Bob doing this?
Solstice
Posted by alexandra_k on December 12, 2010, at 21:23:28
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference...., posted by alexandra_k on December 12, 2010, at 21:21:12
thats your cue to invite me to consider how much i (pathologically) mistrust because of my past issues, Bob.
I mean seeing the wheels turn here doesn't make me perceptive or insightful or (reasonably and appropriately) cautious.
No. Course not. You are used to having the final say on whether someone is pathological or not, eh? And you get to be healthy for the simple reason that you are a p-doc.
Well done you.
Posted by alexandra_k on December 12, 2010, at 21:33:37
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference...., posted by Solstice on December 12, 2010, at 21:22:41
> Twinleaf - - it would be helpful to me to have a better picture of incidents you're referring to. I'm not suggesting they haven't happened.. I just may not have been attuned to them when they did. Do you have any links or anything where I could see Bob doing this?
fun fun, oh what fun, where do we begin?here's one:
> A lot of the activity here does get focused on my use of power. Maybe it makes some of you feel the way you did when you were a child.
from: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20101014/msgs/971715.html
Posted by alexandra_k on December 12, 2010, at 21:45:55
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference...., posted by alexandra_k on December 12, 2010, at 21:33:37
I was looking for one in particular but decided NOT to get bogged down in an archive search.
Am I the only one who came to view the whole 'small board' discussion as a process group (content irrelevant - changes ain't gonna happen) to process peoples feelings of exclusion in the past?
What gives him the right to do this?
Why do posters give him permission?
Why engage with him at all?
What the f*ck ethics board allows him?
Posted by twinleaf on December 12, 2010, at 21:52:25
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference...., posted by alexandra_k on December 12, 2010, at 21:33:37
Hi Solstice,
I can remember about half a dozen clear examples, similar to the one Alex just gave. To actually find them, though, I would have to search the archives for the last several years. I don't have time to do that right now, but, if it would be helpful, I could do it in January.
While we are on this general topic, there seemed to me to be two responses which occurred with some regularity. The first was the one we have been discussing - having one's thoughts and feelings labelled as transference-based. The second was a pattern of distortion; the response would be to a problem or question which had not being discussed by the poster, or would be to the original problem, but after it had been re-interpreted to mean something entirely different from the poster's original intention. These two ways of responding had the effect of steadily increasing tensions, when they could have been readily defused by genuinely attuned responses.
Posted by Solstice on December 12, 2010, at 22:01:16
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference...., posted by alexandra_k on December 12, 2010, at 21:33:37
>
> > Twinleaf - - it would be helpful to me to have a better picture of incidents you're referring to. I'm not suggesting they haven't happened.. I just may not have been attuned to them when they did. Do you have any links or anything where I could see Bob doing this?
>
>
> fun fun, oh what fun, where do we begin?
>
> here's one:
>
> > A lot of the activity here does get focused on my use of power. Maybe it makes some of you feel the way you did when you were a child.
>
> from: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20101014/msgs/971715.html
eegads.. yeah I have seen that stuff. and it Does feel condescending.but.. maybe it's also a reflection of his training and work becoming embedded in his thinking. I know that my traning and work is embedded in how I relate to people. So maybe he doesn't intended it to feel like it feels? I don't know a whole lot about what he does at the University of Chicago. Is Bob a professor only - or does he also treat patients? That could play a role in how he relates to the community here.
Anyway.. thanks for showing me what Twinleaf was referring to. I do 'get it.'
Solstice.
Posted by Solstice on December 12, 2010, at 22:37:04
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference...., posted by twinleaf on December 12, 2010, at 21:52:25
> While we are on this general topic, there seemed to me to be two responses which occurred with some regularity. The first was the one we have been discussing - having one's thoughts and feelings labelled as transference-based. The second was a pattern of distortion; the response would be to a problem or question which had not being discussed by the poster, or would be to the original problem, but after it had been re-interpreted to mean something entirely different from the poster's original intention. These two ways of responding had the effect of steadily increasing tensions, when they could have been readily defused by genuinely attuned responses.I do understand what you're saying. But I'm going to go out on a limb here and wonder aloud. I do think it's possible that Bob's tendency to refer to things here as being transference-based, as annoying as they might be at times, could have underpinnings that make it a little less offensive. First of all - he Is a psychiatrist, with all the eduxcation, training and experience that goes into that. Anybody spending that many years immersed in the world of psychiatry is going to automatically think in certain ways. My professional background is (among other things) in zoning and governmental compliance of commercial properties, along with condemnations and Departments of Transportation. I know so much about how roadways come to be - all the details - traffic signals, left hand turn lanes, dedicated right-hand turns, continuous left turn lanes.. everything. know all kinds of stuff about parking requirements at commercial properties - signage - setbacks - drainage - utilities - landscaping. I know the 'rules' for distances between commercial property ingress & egress and traffic signals - all kinds of inane stuff that most people don't spend one second of their time considering. I can't drive anywhere without noticing that stuff though. It's ingrained in my thinking. A while back I had gone on a business trip with a marketing genius. He sat in the window, and started his evaluation of the market from the plane! When we got to the town we were evaluating - we went through stores. He could walk thru a grocery store and tell me precisely how much money that store generated and where that store ranked in sales. This guy noticed EVERYthing. I would have never been able to figure out what came second nature to him to just know. Likewise, when we sat down with the town's Council and local business men, they thought we knew everything. Compared to them, we did know a lot about our areas of expertise - and they relied on us to guide them through some difficult decision making that had to be done. But we lived, breathed and ate the expertise we had. It was our frame of mind. My cohort noticed everything about marketing and demographics. I noticed everything about jurisdictional zoning & governmental compliance integrity.
I think it probably works similarly with Bob. He notices things that we, as a rule, may just not notice. It can feel real personal, though - because we haven't asked him to notice whether our reaction to something he's done is marking a sensitivity based on our early relationships with authority figures. It's such common thinking to him, though - that he just talks about it like I might go on and on about how poorly designed the roadways are at a commercial intersection. To me it's obvious! Others don't notice it - and have little or no interest. So maybe we really do need to cut Bob some slack. He's a psychiatrist - and he thinks like one. He notices things we don't. It makes us uncomfortable when he puts icky names to it that feel so dang personal.. but he may not be doing it to provoke reactions - or even to make us uncomfortable. he may just be stating what is obvious to him. Also - he does know he's talking to a community of mental health-savvy people. It's not like he's speaking Greek here, ya know? He's talking a language we're familiar with.
Anyway.. I just tho't I'd throw that out there. We may be more sensitive to some of his comments than is helpful. We may attribute meaning to it that isn't there.
And I really do think that the healthiest thing to do is to give people the benefit of the doubt... to assume they mean no harm - unless they really show us that they mean harm. And I mean *real* harm.
As far as Bob responding in ways that are odd - I've officially encountered it. :-) I've called him on it. But I don't think he's the only one who does that. I think we all do it from time to time. I think it's just because we all come from so many different life experiences. For cryin' out loud - we come from continents half way around the world from each other! It would be impossible for all the differences between us culturally and life-experience-wise to not affect our communications. So I think we need to be generous with each other - including with Bob.
I hope all that makes sense.
Solstice
Posted by Deneb on December 12, 2010, at 22:39:22
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference...., posted by Solstice on December 12, 2010, at 22:01:16
I don't really know what Dr. Bob does exactly, but he worked in the Student Counselling Center at the U of C. I think he saw students.
Now he has a private practice. I am assuming he sees patients.
I think Dr. Bob treats Babblers more like patients than regular people. I don't mind.
Posted by twinleaf on December 12, 2010, at 23:27:43
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference...., posted by Solstice on December 12, 2010, at 22:37:04
Well, yes, I do agree that it always helps to understand where the other person is coming from, and to remember that we ourselves have as many blind spots as anyone else. It can be hard to strike the right balance, and I know that I don't always get it right. When I mentioned what appeared to me to be a problematic communication style, I did so because attributing another's thoughts and feelings to transference, or answering a question which has not been asked have the effect of stopping a dialogue altogether. This is obviously far from desirable in someone in an administrative position.
I have been reading your posts and wondering what your profession was- how very interesting!!
Maybe I should say that, like Bob, I am a physician. I am not a psychiatrist, but as part of my training for my own specialty (rehabilitation medicine), I took two years of psychiatric residency training at the New England Medical Center. One of the first things you learn is the importance of clear communication, and of doing your best to clear up even tiny misunderstandings. I'd have to say that the communication style we are discussing, with its deflections and distortions, seems pretty unusual.
Posted by Solstice on December 12, 2010, at 23:28:41
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference.... » Solstice, posted by Deneb on December 12, 2010, at 22:39:22
> I don't really know what Dr. Bob does exactly, but he worked in the Student Counselling Center at the U of C. I think he saw students.
>
> Now he has a private practice. I am assuming he sees patients.No longer at U of C?
> I think Dr. Bob treats Babblers more like patients than regular people. I don't mind.I don't think he treats people here like patients at all. Thank goodness. That would be weird.. and probably unethical :-)
Sol.
Posted by Solstice on December 12, 2010, at 23:39:25
In reply to communicating, posted by twinleaf on December 12, 2010, at 23:27:43
> Well, yes, I do agree that it always helps to understand where the other person is coming from, and to remember that we ourselves have as many blind spots as anyone else. It can be hard to strike the right balance, and I know that I don't always get it right. When I mentioned what appeared to me to be a problematic communication style, I did so because attributing another's thoughts and feelings to transference, or answering a question which has not been asked have the effect of stopping a dialogue altogether. This is obviously far from desirable in someone in an administrative position.
>
> I have been reading your posts and wondering what your profession was- how very interesting!!
>
> Maybe I should say that, like Bob, I am a physician. I am not a psychiatrist, but as part of my training for my own specialty (rehabilitation medicine), I took two years of psychiatric residency training at the New England Medical Center. One of the first things you learn is the importance of clear communication, and of doing your best to clear up even tiny misunderstandings. I'd have to say that the communication style we are discussing, with its deflections and distortions, seems pretty unusual.
>
You do make a lot of legitimate points. You don't say anything here that I have an argumemt with.That said - we've got what we've got. Let's do what we can to make it the best place possible for those who need and want to be here.
Solstice
Posted by Deneb on December 13, 2010, at 0:00:58
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference.... » Deneb, posted by Solstice on December 12, 2010, at 23:28:41
> > I don't really know what Dr. Bob does exactly, but he worked in the Student Counselling Center at the U of C. I think he saw students.
> >
> > Now he has a private practice. I am assuming he sees patients.
>
> No longer at U of C?I don't know. I've been wondering about that.
> > I think Dr. Bob treats Babblers more like patients than regular people. I don't mind.
>
> I don't think he treats people here like patients at all. Thank goodness. That would be weird.. and probably unethical :-)
>
> Sol.Well it's just he has so many darned boundaries with us! LOL I highly doubt he treats us like his cycling buddies for example.
Oh well. I don't mind. Maybe I like boundaries. Maybe this is why I love him.
Posted by twinleaf on December 13, 2010, at 0:06:47
In reply to Re: communicating, posted by Solstice on December 12, 2010, at 23:39:25
Yes, you are right. Babble means a lot to me, as it does to many others, and we do need to be accepting and supportive of what we have. Dwelling on problem areas tends to make me forget how important that is.
However, any block I get now will be for a year. So in order for me to continue as a regular poster, and not just as an occasional advocate for change here on Administration, I urgently need a more moderate blocking policy to be in place.
Posted by sigismund on December 13, 2010, at 0:50:31
In reply to Re: communicating » Solstice, posted by twinleaf on December 13, 2010, at 0:06:47
>However, any block I get now will be for a year. So in order for me to continue as a regular poster, and not just as an occasional advocate for change here on Administration, I urgently need a more moderate blocking policy to be in place.
We need to get rid of the formula.
Posted by alexandra_k on December 13, 2010, at 3:42:16
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference.... » Deneb, posted by Solstice on December 12, 2010, at 23:28:41
> I don't think he treats people here like patients at all.You think he suggests that colleagues and friends who disagree with him are acting from their pathology?
> Thank goodness. That would be weird.. and probably unethical :-)
Indeed.
Has been said before (and not just by 'consumers')
Posted by alexandra_k on December 13, 2010, at 3:44:22
In reply to Re: communicating » Solstice, posted by twinleaf on December 13, 2010, at 0:06:47
> However, any block I get now will be for a year. So in order for me to continue as a regular poster, and not just as an occasional advocate for change here on Administration, I urgently need a more moderate blocking policy to be in place.But that would be to bypass the whole 'and what does a blocking mean to you' process thing. And even if you do get blocked for ages perhaps it will benefit you by helping you to 'move on' (something that was suggested in another thread).
fun and games with - oh i mean for bob.
indeed.
Posted by twinleaf on December 13, 2010, at 7:05:29
In reply to Re: communicating, posted by alexandra_k on December 13, 2010, at 3:44:22
I ceased reading administrative posts addressed to me about two weeks ago because I knew that I would find them very insulting and hurtful. It's a simple matter to do the same with yours.
Posted by Solstice on December 13, 2010, at 11:19:15
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference...., posted by alexandra_k on December 13, 2010, at 3:42:16
Alex - you are so much fun to read. You can find needles in haystacks like no one else - and you have a way of turning things on their heads that entertains me endlessly.
> > I don't think he treats people here like patients at all.
>
> You think he suggests that colleagues and friends who disagree with him are acting from their pathology?There are a couple of things here that I'm not sure fit my statement.
Deneb said she thought he treats people here like patients. I said I don't think he does trhat at all. I'm not sure that not treating us like patients = treating us like his friends and colleagues. I think there's an enormous difference between patients, an online bunch of folks you've never met who post on a website forum you created, and ones friends and colleagues. Gosh - I think there's a big difference between friends and colleagues!
Maybe my life experience has characteristics that affect my perceptions. I have two close MD friends who are in the "10 Top Docs" thingy. One is a specialist in infectious diseases (as in third world countries). The other is a renowned psychiatrist whose name I would not want to reveal. He is well-published, and has traveled the world speaking at conferences about the area he specializes in. Weird for me to think about - because I rarely do - but I googled his name while writing this and nearly fell over at the overhwhelming volume of stuff on him. He's quoted everywhere. Weird to remember that he has this professional life. These relationships were forged by our each parenting children with similar disabilities.. in the same school. My kid very close to each of their kids. For 112-13 yrs. now. Lots of intertwining of our lives in a million different ways. My psychiatrist friend and I never talk about his work - but if I have a question about my kid's meds and want what I consider to be the *best* consult - who do you think I discuss it with? The vast majority of the time, though - I am completely out-of-touch with their professional personas. They are both brilliant - Yale/Stanford guys. Waaay smarter than me. Maybe that's why it *works*. I know them as people - and rarely think of 'who' they are professionally. We're just parents of kids with serious issues, and have shared our daily - weekly - yearly struggles coping together. We've shared tears - and we've shared the excitement of our kids' progress that parents of 'typical' kids wouldn't even notice. When we get together for a Memorial Day bar-b-q and I bring the ribs - and my psychiatrist friend grills - and we swim with the kids - and are immersed in the environment we create together - the gentle accommodations we make for the disabilities of each others' kids - we're just some people who have bonded over a painful part of life that we share. My heart is moved by the compassion they show my kid - and I'm guessing that my instinctive compassionate responses to their kids moves them as well. There are no professional achievements (or lack of achievements) that mean anything when you are simply observing another parent taking the time and love to care for your kid - a kid who rarely experiences 'fitting in.' What these guys 'do' (and maybe my comparative lack of achievement) is not easy to remember in those times... because all I see is their relationship with my kid.. and all they see is my relationship with theirs. Everything else pales in comparison.
So my life experience may make it harder for me to be suspicious of MD's in general - including the profession of psychiatry. A close friend of mine happens to be one - one whose name is well known in the field... but to me he's just a friend.
As for Bob - to me he's just a website adminstrator, who is also a psychiatrist, probably a husband, maybe a parent, and likely has plenty of friends that he relies on for support. He will react to to things here from his own life experience - which includes his cultural background, his education, his profession. Just like me. And just like you.
Solstice
Posted by Solstice on December 13, 2010, at 11:25:24
In reply to Re: communicating, posted by alexandra_k on December 13, 2010, at 3:44:22
Twinleaf - - I think Alex was doing a tongue-in-cheek thing here regarding Bob. She's being hard on him here, in her side-ways kinda way of doing that. I don't think what she says here has anything to do with you at all. It may not have occurred to Alex that you might not have seen the thread she's referring to - and as a result she didn't anticipate that you would not know how to interpret it the way she meant it.
I'll leave it to Alex to 'xplain what she meant. :-)
Solstice
>
> > However, any block I get now will be for a year. So in order for me to continue as a regular poster, and not just as an occasional advocate for change here on Administration, I urgently need a more moderate blocking policy to be in place.
>
> But that would be to bypass the whole 'and what does a blocking mean to you' process thing. And even if you do get blocked for ages perhaps it will benefit you by helping you to 'move on' (something that was suggested in another thread).
>
> fun and games with - oh i mean for bob.
>
> indeed.
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.