![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 21 of 21. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by AXA on March 10, 2002, at 4:42:41
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20020307/msgs/97014.html
Does this mean that Jill K. is blocked?
Or just that spike4848's block has been extended?Why would either of those things happen as a consequence of the quoted post?
Do you think Jill K. = spike4848?? I don't...
In her previous posts she seemed to be really asking for help.Am I missing something?
Posted by JohnX2 on March 10, 2002, at 4:57:46
In reply to Is Jill K. blocked??, posted by AXA on March 10, 2002, at 4:42:41
I saw "Jill K" get re-blocked, but
couldn't find the initial block? could you?conspiracy theory..
-John
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20020307/msgs/97014.html
>
> Does this mean that Jill K. is blocked?
> Or just that spike4848's block has been extended?
>
> Why would either of those things happen as a consequence of the quoted post?
>
> Do you think Jill K. = spike4848?? I don't...
> In her previous posts she seemed to be really asking for help.
>
> Am I missing something?
Posted by NikkiT2 on March 10, 2002, at 11:12:18
In reply to Is Jill K. blocked??, posted by AXA on March 10, 2002, at 4:42:41
I think Jill K *was* spike!! Thats how I understand it anyway!
Nikki
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 10, 2002, at 12:09:25
In reply to Re: Is Jill K. blocked??, posted by NikkiT2 on March 10, 2002, at 11:12:18
> I think Jill K *was* spike!! Thats how I understand it anyway!
Right, I thought I said that, but I guess I didn't confirm it. Here:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20020308/msgs/3371.html
Bob
Posted by AXA on March 10, 2002, at 17:00:37
In reply to Re: Jill K. is blocked, posted by Dr. Bob on March 10, 2002, at 12:09:25
> > I think Jill K *was* spike!! Thats how I understand it anyway!
>
> Right, I thought I said that, but I guess I didn't confirm it.
>I wonder if you might be mistaken..
I didn't get the feeling from her posts that Jill K. was spike4848 *at all*. Here is a post from one of her first threads: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20020301/msgs/96301.htmlWhy would spike come back as a girl in need? it seems like if he were to come back w/ a new alias he'd be over in PSB arguing again; not asking questions about about wellbutrin increasing dopamine! (see her 1st post in above thread).
normally I wouldn't question your judgement.. but I think she may have been getting some needed support here - esp. from JohnX2.respectfully, AXA
spike 4848.5, OTOH.....hmph!
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 10, 2002, at 17:22:06
In reply to Re: Jill K. is blocked » Dr. Bob, posted by AXA on March 10, 2002, at 17:00:37
> I wonder if you might be mistaken..
I might be. It's hard to be sure about some of these things.
> Why would spike come back as a girl in need? it seems like if he were to come back w/ a new alias he'd be over in PSB arguing again...
> normally I wouldn't question your judgement.. but I think she may have been getting some needed support herePeople are complicated. He (or she) might want to argue and to get support at the same time?
Bob
Posted by misty99 on March 10, 2002, at 19:27:34
In reply to Re: Jill K. is blocked » Dr. Bob, posted by AXA on March 10, 2002, at 17:00:37
AXA,
I had the same reaction as you did. It also seemed the questions she or he asked were not ones a physician which Spike claimed to be would be asking. But then again, what Dr. Bob said about the situation, makes alot of sense.
If Spike is Jill K., I feel bad for JohnX2 because he went out of his way to be helpful thinking like the rest of us that Jill K. was who she said she was and look what happens.
Anyway, I just wanted to let you know that you weren't alone with your thoughts.
Misty
Posted by christophrejmc on March 10, 2002, at 20:52:16
In reply to Re: Jill K. is blocked, posted by Dr. Bob on March 10, 2002, at 17:22:06
I assume you have access to certain information that we do not which would support the Jill K., Spike4848 connection? Or atleast something more convincing than "> Spike4848 would be upset with you."?
-Spi^H^H^HChristophre
Posted by AXA on March 10, 2002, at 21:05:59
In reply to Re: Jill K. is blocked, posted by misty99 on March 10, 2002, at 19:27:34
thanks misty!
I am not convinced that Jill K. is spike4848.
She was never uncivil or disruptive. She got blocked for mentioning spike, (which is admittedly suspicious). I think that the blocking is a disservice to Jill. I understand that if it were spike, he shouldn't have been posting. But even if Jill IS spike, he was never disruptive posting AS Jill. Jill really seemed to have real questions and a sensitivity that spike4848 never displayed. Spike is an MD, and not new to this board. I just don't think he'd be asking that stuff, or giving Jason911 the time of day, or keep up the charade for so long w/ John X2.
But it seems that NOW spike4848 HAS come back with new aliases and is being VERY disruptive!
I guess he's upset because his block was extended because someone else (Jill K.) mentioned him. I don't think his block should have been extended at that time, because I don't think it was him posting.BUT - I think now he should be banned FOREVER, because I reckon spike4848.5 and the fake Dr. Bobs that are 'blocking' people - probably ARE spike4848. But how to block someone forever? Maybe he'll get bored wasting energy creating chaos on a board that once helped him.
I hope so.
I wonder if he's been taking his meds...
I'm glad he's not my doctor!I hope Jill K. can be reinstated. I'd like to know how she's doing.
I'll feel real stupid if I'm wrong about this, but we'll never know if Dr. Bob doesn't lift the ban on Jill K.
Posted by JohnX2 on March 10, 2002, at 21:55:21
In reply to Re: Jill K. is blocked, posted by AXA on March 10, 2002, at 21:05:59
Does mischievous twin spike4848.5 wear a goatee?
Honestly, I don't care what's going on as long as people
are being helped. But I have been getting some weird vibes
on another pos(t)er... (maybe i should restart the zyprexa) ;)-John
> thanks misty!
>
> I am not convinced that Jill K. is spike4848.
>
> She was never uncivil or disruptive. She got blocked for mentioning spike, (which is admittedly suspicious). I think that the blocking is a disservice to Jill. I understand that if it were spike, he shouldn't have been posting. But even if Jill IS spike, he was never disruptive posting AS Jill. Jill really seemed to have real questions and a sensitivity that spike4848 never displayed. Spike is an MD, and not new to this board. I just don't think he'd be asking that stuff, or giving Jason911 the time of day, or keep up the charade for so long w/ John X2.
>
> But it seems that NOW spike4848 HAS come back with new aliases and is being VERY disruptive!
> I guess he's upset because his block was extended because someone else (Jill K.) mentioned him. I don't think his block should have been extended at that time, because I don't think it was him posting.
>
> BUT - I think now he should be banned FOREVER, because I reckon spike4848.5 and the fake Dr. Bobs that are 'blocking' people - probably ARE spike4848. But how to block someone forever? Maybe he'll get bored wasting energy creating chaos on a board that once helped him.
> I hope so.
> I wonder if he's been taking his meds...
> I'm glad he's not my doctor!
>
> I hope Jill K. can be reinstated. I'd like to know how she's doing.
>
> I'll feel real stupid if I'm wrong about this, but we'll never know if Dr. Bob doesn't lift the ban on Jill K.
Posted by misty99 on March 10, 2002, at 22:47:04
In reply to Re: Jill K. is blocked, posted by AXA on March 10, 2002, at 21:05:59
> I wonder if he's been taking his meds...
> I'm glad he's not my doctor!Me too!
> I'll feel real stupid if I'm wrong about this, but we'll never know if Dr. Bob doesn't lift the ban on Jill K.
How the heck are we suppose to know one way or another? So please don't feel stupid if you're wrong. Your reasoning is sound and like you said, the behaviors of Spike and Jill are so different. Therefore, it's hard to believe they are the same people. But obviously, Dr. Bob feels they are and that's that.
Misty
Posted by misty99 on March 10, 2002, at 22:59:50
In reply to Re: Jill K. is blocked, posted by JohnX2 on March 10, 2002, at 21:55:21
> > Honestly, I don't care what's going on as long as people
> are being helped.I had the feeling you would say that John and that's so admirable. To be honest, I don't think I would have been as gracious as I would have felt I was being taken advantage of. Because I have had a problem with being too naive in the past, anybody who deliverately posts under more than one identity and tries to hide that they are doing it is a real hot issue for me. But that is my issue and it doesn't mean it has to be yours.
But I have been getting some weird vibes
> on another pos(t)er... (maybe i should restart the zyprexa) ;)
>
> -John
>
If that's the case, you need to leave this board:)) which of course, we would never let happen:)) Anyway, this place is lucky to have you.Misty
Posted by JohnX2 on March 11, 2002, at 0:00:14
In reply to Re: Jill K. is blocked » JohnX2, posted by misty99 on March 10, 2002, at 22:59:50
> > > Honestly, I don't care what's going on as long as people
> > are being helped.
>
> I had the feeling you would say that John and that's so admirable. To be honest, I don't think I would have been as gracious as I would have felt I was being taken advantage of. Because I have had a problem with being too naive in the past, anybody who deliverately posts under more than one identity and tries to hide that they are doing it is a real hot issue for me. But that is my issue and it doesn't mean it has to be yours.Hi Misty,
This is a *serious* issue to me if this person is *not* really ill and I am wasting
my time with some prankster.Thanks for your kind words BTW!
JohnPS who was jo(h)nhill again? just wondering..... ;)
>
> But I have been getting some weird vibes
> > on another pos(t)er... (maybe i should restart the zyprexa) ;)
> >
> > -John
> >
> If that's the case, you need to leave this board:)) which of course, we would never let happen:)) Anyway, this place is lucky to have you.
>
> Misty
Posted by ST on March 11, 2002, at 4:40:07
In reply to Re: Jill K. is blocked, posted by JohnX2 on March 11, 2002, at 0:00:14
I don't think Jill was Spike, and I feel bad for her! (I hope I don't get blocked now for mentioning Spike...;-D )
ST
Posted by beardedlady on March 11, 2002, at 6:26:33
In reply to I don't think Jill was Spike..., posted by ST on March 11, 2002, at 4:40:07
I thought Jill was Jill, and Spike was Spike. I understood that Jill was telling another poster, who might have gotten some advice from Spike, that Spike would be upset with him if he knew that this other poster was discontinuing his meds or whatever.
I also thought that Spike's block was extended for pretending to be Spike's twin with a decimal and then his cousin.
But where is Jill K to tell us what's going on? And who is Dr. Bobb and Di. Bob, and why didn't he choose the funnier name: Dr. Boob?
And what of Naomi?
: )>
Posted by misty99 on March 11, 2002, at 11:25:00
In reply to Like sands through the hourglass..., posted by beardedlady on March 11, 2002, at 6:26:33
>
> But where is Jill K to tell us what's going on?Beardedlady,
In thinking this situation over, it could now make perfect sense that Spike and Jill K were the same people. Spike probably to avoid getting caught deliberately made sure that his Jill K Posts didn't sound like his Spike Posts. Unfortunately for him, when he made the post that you quoted above, his cover was blown. Of course, I would starve if I had to make a living as a detective so take what I say with a grain of salt.
>why didn't he choose the funnier name: Dr. Boob?
I am glad someone shares my wacky sense of humor:))
Misty
Posted by Krazy Kat on March 12, 2002, at 8:47:46
In reply to I don't think Jill was Spike..., posted by ST on March 11, 2002, at 4:40:07
Dr. Bob:
Awhile back I mentioned that two posters seemed to be the same person and was reprimanded for it. What gives? Has that changed now?
Feeling a little targeted... KK
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 12, 2002, at 17:54:51
In reply to Change in policies - Dr. Bob, posted by Krazy Kat on March 12, 2002, at 8:47:46
> Awhile back I mentioned that two posters seemed to be the same person and was reprimanded for it. What gives? Has that changed now?
>
> Feeling a little targeted...Hmm, I see what you mean. I don't remember that situation, but I guess I think posters should be given the benefit of the doubt, and speculation about two posters being the same person tends to make for a more suspicious and less supportive atmosphere. But in this case, I had already blocked them, and it was more a discussion was about whether I was right or not. Does that make any sense?
Bob
Posted by Mitchell on March 12, 2002, at 19:50:50
In reply to Re: policies, posted by Dr. Bob on March 12, 2002, at 17:54:51
> Hmm, I see what you mean. I don't remember that situation, but I guess I think posters should be given the benefit of the doubt, and speculation about two posters being the same person tends to make for a more suspicious and less supportive atmosphere. But in this case, I had already blocked them, and it was more a discussion was about whether I was right or not. Does that make any sense?
>
> BobAnother instance was the response to a Sept. 15 post I referenced above, in which a writer not only speculated about the identity of another discussant, but also labeled the other as cowardly if they were indeed using two identities.
My observation of some casual, open, scientific discussion groups, in which the debate often becomes much more heated that it is allowed to get here, is that members tend to agree that the identity of a discussant is irrelevant, unless perhaps a person uses multiple identities, in a specific debate, to bolster an argument. The consensus in those groups, more or less, by my observation, appears to be that discussions are about ideas, not about identities. If a person cannot criticize or comment on an idea without discrediting the author of the idea, many conclude that the person has no valid criticism to offer of the idea. I think that tendency is a product of group members training in formal logic, which recognizes ad hominum arguments as fallacious.
I endorse the "no guessing about identity" policy. I tend to frown on admin efforts to publicly identify handles that might be in use by the same person. By using information provided in confidence, such as registration info, IP address or cookie information, admin can, perhaps inadvertently, defeat an individual's effort to distance themself from posts that could tend to personally identify them. Some people, perhaps naive to the nuance of on-line communication, post information about themselves or about family members or friends. Some later decide they would like a bit more privacy, and register under a new handle so readers cannot connect matters discussed in new posts with personal information posted earlier about them or their friend. I think the best policy would be that if someone were blocked for suspicion of reregistering after they were blocked, the new suspected new identity would be blocked without comment.
The other problem with admin speculating about identities is that admin could be wrong. In such case, it might be better to be silent and thought a fool than to speak and erase all doubt.
The easiest way for me to rest with apparent administrative inconsistencies is to simply acknowledge that the administration is sometimes inconsistent. From there, I can contemplate the reason and the effect of any inconsistency, and perhaps offer recommendations that would facilitate administration that is more consistent.
From what I know of people who have interacted here, inconsistent administration can be frustrating and potentially painful. But I also know it is a fact of life, perhaps resulting from the limited administrative capacity of the site. They say you get what you pay for. Sometimes you get more, even lots more - especially if one is paying nothing.
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 13, 2002, at 20:23:21
In reply to Re: policies, posted by Mitchell on March 12, 2002, at 19:50:50
> I tend to frown on admin efforts to publicly identify handles that might be in use by the same person... I think the best policy would be that if someone were blocked for suspicion of reregistering after they were blocked, the new suspected new identity would be blocked without comment.
I decided a while ago not to post suspected old identities as such. This time, I did because I was asked.
I do think it's important to say something when I block people because (1) it makes it less mysterious and (2) it may deter others.
> Some people... post information about themselves or about family members or friends. Some later decide they would like a bit more privacy, and register under a new handle so readers cannot connect matters discussed in new posts with personal information posted earlier about them or their friend.
That's one reason new handles are OK. But as a way to avoid being blocked, they're not.
> The other problem with admin speculating about identities is that admin could be wrong. In such case, it might be better to be silent and thought a fool than to speak and erase all doubt.
I wouldn't say I do much "speculation" here. And I don't *like* to block people, you know...
> The easiest way for me to rest with apparent administrative inconsistencies is to simply acknowledge that the administration is sometimes inconsistent. From there, I can contemplate the reason and the effect of any inconsistency, and perhaps offer recommendations that would facilitate administration that is more consistent.
I'm only human. And if you rest better, I will, too. :-)
Bob
Posted by Mitchell on March 14, 2002, at 3:41:28
In reply to Re: policies, posted by Dr. Bob on March 13, 2002, at 20:23:21
> I decided a while ago not to post suspected old identities as such. This time, I did because I was asked.
Thanks, then, for letting us know where you're thinking is at on this matter these days. And yeh, it is apparent that you were drawn into explaining yourself on the instance that led to this discussion, so that's all good by me.
> I'm only human. And if you rest better, I will, too. :-)
I still loose a lot of sleep as a result of my general dissatisfaction with Western industrial capitalism. An appreciation of the meaninglessness of human endeavor sometimes helps me.
This is the end of the 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.