![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 9 to 33 of 161. Go back in thread:
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 19, 2002, at 15:47:46
In reply to Re: when i started posting » Krazy Kat , posted by Dr. Bob on April 19, 2002, at 15:29:16
> Maybe it was ... under a different name? If so, I can "deactivate" the other one and give you "credit" for starting then.
Thinking this through some more, I think it would need to be clear which names were connected. Otherwise it might be confusing. There wouldn't be any posts from you that year. And other members of your "class" would've known you by your other name.
Bob
Posted by Krazy Kat on April 19, 2002, at 16:35:08
In reply to Re: when i started posting, posted by Dr. Bob on April 19, 2002, at 15:47:46
Dr. Bob:
I think you are actually correct - I originally posted under "Kingfish" then changed it to "Krazy Kat" because I was fearful that someone was reading my posts from my personal life who would know that name. I imagine that's not too uncommon.
I Was careful to let folks know for awhile in my message content that I had changed names, because I can't abide the concept of posting under different pseudonyms.
That still doesn't really address the issue. I'm not going to post there now (she says defiantly, then the next day, there's a hello from "Kingfish" :)).
"Out of sight, out of mind"? Frankly :), I think that was an inappropriate response. I don't care if folks have their own groups. We are naturally going to be drawn to certain people more than others. I had proposed something separate amongst a few members at one point. I Do think it's more appropriate elsewhere. A separate Yahoo group, as you had mentioned once, is an idea. Perhaps it's the fact that it's "organized" by Babble - offshoots Off the Babble site make sense to me, but...
As always, I've overstated myself and am asking for restrictions to end the restrictions. I don't really care. Just wanted to express my concerns.
I think Fi summed it up best - it's just become much more complicated than it was. We could break it down into the minutest of pages if we wanted to - Babblers who speak in tongues; Babblers who secretly watch "Friends"; Babblers who are lactose intolerant...
- kk
Posted by Phil on April 19, 2002, at 20:02:16
In reply to Re: when i started posting » Dr. Bob, posted by Krazy Kat on April 19, 2002, at 16:35:08
Posted by Bekka H. on April 19, 2002, at 20:09:30
In reply to dr. b, others, hurt feeling and old timers board, posted by Krazy Kat on April 19, 2002, at 10:46:19
Hi. I agree with you Krazy Kat. When I learned of the existence of that board, I couldn't believe my eyes. It reminds me of the cliques of junior high school days.
Posted by IsoM on April 19, 2002, at 21:22:40
In reply to dr. b, others, old timers board - Krazy kat, posted by Bekka H. on April 19, 2002, at 20:09:30
I'm hardly feeling a reasonable person right now but I'd like to offer a positive slant on this new board & its exclusive membership.
We're not prevented from reading posts on the board & then connecting to the posts that we really want to answer by linking an answer to PBS instead. But for the old-timers, I don't doubt they'd love to share some thoughts that belong to them alone by reason of 'knowing' each other for so long. It also prevents anyone from posting something hurtful or stupid as an answer. I'm not implying that anyone would actually make a stupid retort to their posts, but it gives a bit more freedom for them to ask questions freely, knowing that just other old-timers will respond.
I doubt, too, that just because they have their 'own' board, they'll no longer post comments on the other boards. Rather than viewing the old-timer's board as exclusive like a separate social club, why not think of it as exclusive the way another family is?
Posted by Greg on April 19, 2002, at 21:35:26
In reply to Re: Frankly my dears, I don't give a damn!, posted by Fi on April 19, 2002, at 14:47:20
> I suppose I hope that the people who are on the 2000 board will bear in mind that the rest of us are excluded, and maybe use it accordingly (eg catching up). I hope they will still look at PSB and contribute sometimes too.
All,
I hope that the people that can't post will realize that the purpose of the 2000 board is exactly that, to catch up with old friends. Some of the people in this thread have very recently given me some much needed support over a problem with my daughter and I'm sad that the new board is causing them (and all of you) problems. You know who you are :)
I still plan to post to all the boards, I'm just a little concerned now, will anyone talk back? The new board was my idea so I hope if anyone wants to be mad, call names, throw insults, etc, they'll do it at me. If I would have had any idea that it was going to cause this much problem, I never would have brought it up. I care a lot about my old friends, but I care about my new ones too.
Greg
Posted by IsoM on April 19, 2002, at 21:51:59
In reply to Re: The new board, posted by Greg on April 19, 2002, at 21:35:26
Posted by jane d on April 19, 2002, at 22:41:34
In reply to Re: Frankly my dears, I don't give a damn!, posted by Fi on April 19, 2002, at 14:47:20
Even the occaisional old timer.
Seriously. It's fine if you're not comfortable with chatting but don't stay away because you are afraid it's an unofficial private club. It's not. All are welcome.
Jane
> More people are (explicitly anyway) chatting elsewhere, which I havent got into myself (I know I could, just havent). So I dont know people as well as the regular chatters seem to.
Posted by shar on April 19, 2002, at 23:52:13
In reply to Re: The new board, posted by Greg on April 19, 2002, at 21:35:26
Ah, Greg,
I see you are hunkering down ready to avoid any bullets, spit wads, and rotten veggies tossed in your direction due to thinking up the reunion board. I think we need a new acronym in addition to PBC (please be civil) and that is AAA (apologies all around). Sort of a blanket apology that gets you redemption.However....I am glad you had the idea of a reunion board, I am glad that it came to be, and I am sad that you would withhold your ideas because people would disagree with you.
Ain't NEVER EVER gonna mention an idea without that someone loves it, someone hates it, someone is offended by it, someone thinks it is racist, someone thinks it's sexist, someone thinks it is discriminatory in some other way, someone fears it, someone panics, someone doesn't care one way or another, and so on.
But, I hope that doesn't mean you'll stop verbalizing your ideas!!
You know I love you, Baby,
YIC
Posted by Phil on April 20, 2002, at 7:11:16
In reply to Re: The new board » Greg, posted by shar on April 19, 2002, at 23:52:13
I can't see any of the OT's just posting on one board. If one of us geezers actually say something provocative, it will spread like mad cow disease to the other boards.
I think we're old timers because we like being a part of the whole deal. And we're also old timers because: a. we like helping others b. We still need all the support we can get. I know I do.
Our topics this week at OTB are...Incontinence and amusement parks..a conundrum.
Copper headbands with magnets; hype or hope.
Golf is life; "I used to play with a stiff shaft."
Bus tours to Canada for medications(100's have signed on)
If I'm getting better, why am I so pissed off?
Polyester, sansi-belts, and sunglasses that totally wrap around your head.
Cadillac's and cataracts: Buckle up!!
and finally
Anyone seen my butt??
We're also kicking around:
Black tube socks, black shoes, bermuda shorts, and tank top t-shirts, the essence of style.
Oh, this one's BIG: Constipation in the 21st century, an abstract.
And, of course..put me in a nursing home and your ass is mine, boy.
Yall come visit.
Posted by Phil on April 20, 2002, at 7:35:25
In reply to Re: The new board, posted by Phil on April 20, 2002, at 7:11:16
Hydroponic's and the senior gardner. Or, hell no we're not sick, this is a cash crop. Plus, we like getting high.
Vegas or Viagra: Life on a fixed income.
Please, no more entertainment from church people. We want Ozzy.
I don't like the scooter but it gets me to the liquor store and head shop.
The year 2025 Stones Tour,"Kidney Stones across America."
Posted by DinahM on April 20, 2002, at 8:38:10
In reply to Re: And a few more, posted by Phil on April 20, 2002, at 7:35:25
I've been following the concept of a new board torn between amusement and irritation. Amusement finally won. What on earth is it anyway? There is nothing written on there that couldn't have been posted in Social. There isn't anything that couldn't have been replied to by the "old-timers" on Social, although admittedly they seem to feel more obligated to reply there since there are fewer posters. And the really funny part is that the whole board can be read by anyone, not just on any of the current boards but by anyone in cyberspace. The only difference is that they won't get responses from anyone who has been registered for less than a year - Wait - That's not true either. People can, and have already, responded to comments on the reunion board on Social. I suppose it's up to the old-timers whether they choose to read those responses or not, but that would be true even if all posts were on PSB. It will be kind of interesting to watch though. Will the old-timers respond to newbie comments on their posts in PSB or will that be considered a grave breach of etiquette and the rest of us will know that we should pretend we haven't read the other board.
So I'm left wondering the purpose of the new board. The only thing I can think of is that questions and comments by "old-timers" are grouped together and so you (and by you I mean "old-timers" and newbies) can read them in one place without scanning through a lot of posts. I've got no real problem with that.
In fact I have no problem with the entire concept. I just don't quite understand it.
By the way, I do think the old-timers are special. Anyone who can live through some of the unpleasantness and disruptive posters that occurred in the "good old days" deserves some recognition.
Posted by Fi on April 20, 2002, at 9:05:21
In reply to Remember chat is open to everyone » Fi, posted by jane d on April 19, 2002, at 22:41:34
Thanks for that. I know I could, and that its open to all of us, but thanks for being welcoming! I just havent got my act together to give it a try.
Fi
Posted by Krazy Kat on April 20, 2002, at 11:07:31
In reply to Gee, all we were doing was playing dominos.... (nm), posted by Phil on April 19, 2002, at 20:02:16
Posted by Krazy Kat on April 20, 2002, at 11:14:12
In reply to Babblers who play dominos... (nm) » Phil, posted by Krazy Kat on April 20, 2002, at 11:07:31
Posted by IsoM on April 20, 2002, at 12:22:11
In reply to Re: And a few more, posted by Phil on April 20, 2002, at 7:35:25
Thanks so, SO much, Phil! Even in my present state, those made me smile. Funny enough that I sent them as topics for discussion to a good friend my age (& she only lives a 1/2 mile away in real space). Those were really priceless. If you decide to write a book, can I proof-read it?
Now if those are going to be the sort of stuff you talk about on PB2000, I'll always be over there reading the posts.
Posted by shar on April 20, 2002, at 12:23:49
In reply to Re: The new board, posted by DinahM on April 20, 2002, at 8:38:10
One can never have enough laughs!
Shar
> I've been following the concept of a new board torn between amusement and irritation. Amusement finally won. What on earth is it anyway? There is nothing written on there that couldn't have been posted in Social. There isn't anything that couldn't have been replied to by the "old-timers" on Social, although admittedly they seem to feel more obligated to reply there since there are fewer posters. And the really funny part is that the whole board can be read by anyone, not just on any of the current boards but by anyone in cyberspace. The only difference is that they won't get responses from anyone who has been registered for less than a year - Wait - That's not true either. People can, and have already, responded to comments on the reunion board on Social. I suppose it's up to the old-timers whether they choose to read those responses or not, but that would be true even if all posts were on PSB. It will be kind of interesting to watch though. Will the old-timers respond to newbie comments on their posts in PSB or will that be considered a grave breach of etiquette and the rest of us will know that we should pretend we haven't read the other board.
> So I'm left wondering the purpose of the new board. The only thing I can think of is that questions and comments by "old-timers" are grouped together and so you (and by you I mean "old-timers" and newbies) can read them in one place without scanning through a lot of posts. I've got no real problem with that.
> In fact I have no problem with the entire concept. I just don't quite understand it.
> By the way, I do think the old-timers are special. Anyone who can live through some of the unpleasantness and disruptive posters that occurred in the "good old days" deserves some recognition.
Posted by CtrlAlt n Del on April 20, 2002, at 13:02:08
In reply to to be honest, i just feel left out... :() (nm), posted by Krazy Kat on April 20, 2002, at 11:14:12
Posted by Greg on April 20, 2002, at 13:02:56
In reply to Re: The new board » Greg, posted by shar on April 19, 2002, at 23:52:13
> Ah, Greg,
> I see you are hunkering down ready to avoid any bullets, spit wads, and rotten veggies tossed in your direction due to thinking up the reunion board. I think we need a new acronym in addition to PBC (please be civil) and that is AAA (apologies all around). Sort of a blanket apology that gets you redemption.
>
> However....I am glad you had the idea of a reunion board, I am glad that it came to be, and I am sad that you would withhold your ideas because people would disagree with you.
>
> Ain't NEVER EVER gonna mention an idea without that someone loves it, someone hates it, someone is offended by it, someone thinks it is racist, someone thinks it's sexist, someone thinks it is discriminatory in some other way, someone fears it, someone panics, someone doesn't care one way or another, and so on.
>
> But, I hope that doesn't mean you'll stop verbalizing your ideas!!
>
> You know I love you, Baby,
> YICMIC,
Thanks. I was extremely tired when I wrote what I did and when I'm that way I give up real easy, but you already knew that. That's probably why my kids wait to ask me for things they know I'll normally say no to until just before bedtime :)
As besides, I only have an idea about once every two or three years, so how much damage can I do?
Love you too,
GregPCI? (Poster Caves In)
Posted by Phil on April 20, 2002, at 15:36:41
In reply to Re: The new board » shar, posted by Greg on April 20, 2002, at 13:02:56
What time is bedtime. Me and Shar's gonna call you to borrow some money.
Posted by Greg on April 20, 2002, at 21:42:50
In reply to Re: Greg what time do you...Shar, posted by Phil on April 20, 2002, at 15:36:41
Posted by shar on April 21, 2002, at 2:31:09
In reply to Re: Greg what time do you...Shar, posted by Phil on April 20, 2002, at 15:36:41
Posted by Janelle on April 21, 2002, at 4:08:28
In reply to dr. b, others, hurt feeling and old timers board, posted by Krazy Kat on April 19, 2002, at 10:46:19
I'll get to that word in a moment, but first, okay, I'm coming out of self-imposed lurkerdom for this issue because I can't stand it anymore ... I can't remain silent any longer about something that has me SOOOOOO upset, angry, hurt, and confused - I do not like or understand this whole 2000 board, and I don't give a hoot who thinks I'm silly for feeling this way and who doesn't. I have a right to my FEELINGS - that's all they are is FEELINGS - and I have a right to vent them. Clearly lots of others here have done so.
In a word, the 2000 board has created a CLIQUE, which imo is abhorrent and juvenile (geez, it harkens back to junior high and high school days).
I cannot believe what I've just read here - that people are actually be BLOCKED from posting on the old timers/200 board. Huh? So, now there's the CLIQUE of INSIDERS, the inner circle, the inner sanctum and there's the OUTSIDERS, those who are literally BLOCKED OUT. This is ABSURD.
And even if I was not one of the outsiders, the blocked ones, none of my feelings would change - I do not understand why there is any BLOCKING on what is supposed to be a mutually supportive and undersanding community. It angers me, it offends me, and it hurts my feelings. I'm outraged by the hypocrisy of it - this kind of closed set up in a place that is supposed to be a supportive, caring, open forum?
The formation of an EXCLUSIONARY board, with membership limited to a CLIQUE of INSIDERS who have a special board/place for them just because of when they started posting is LUDICROUS and goes against the grain of what these boards were set up to do in the first place. It is UNsupportive and UNcaring; it is just plain mean.
And, what kind of reason is the time (year) that people first posted for forming a whole new board when PSB could have a regular OT post put up by whatever OT decided to do it??
Sorry, folks, I do not understand the reason(s) for the 2000 board to begin with when there are other venues (PSB, chat, e-mail) for OT's to catch up, share experiences, whateve. The formation of a board with limited membership makes NO sense to me. It seems hypocritical with regard to the original purpose of the PB community.
Even if I was a member of the *inner circle,* for the 2000 board, I would not post on that board, I would not want to be associated with such a revolting concept.
Yes, I'll admit that I feel left out (I certainly have a right to after all), but this pales in comparison to the other feelings I've expressed here. I'm going to be investigating other psychiatric message boards because PB is certainly NOT the same place I first joined. (and I originally joined about year ago, stopped posting, then had to re-register recently). I don't want to leave here (the info I've learned and people have been wonderful) ... I just hope I can get past some of these feelings. They're very raw right now.
Thanks to whoever might read this.
Posted by beardedlady on April 21, 2002, at 5:17:12
In reply to In a word, the new board creates a ..., posted by Janelle on April 21, 2002, at 4:08:28
I know people have a right to their own feelings and all, but I don't understand why the board is such a big deal! We are excluded from so many things in life (I gave a bunch of examples in my previous post, but I guess those clubs weren't the ones people wanted to belong to anyway. I mean, the Boy Scouts?!). But we haven't been excluded from the boards we've been using; another has been added that we didn't have before to be included in or excluded from.
I'm really not criticizing anyone; hurt feelings are beyond our control. I just want to make those who are fretting about this feel better and understand that the same people are still here. We haven't lost a thing.
So let's work on making PSB even better. Hell, we can talk about our bowel habits as well as the next guy.
beardy : )>
Posted by Janelle on April 21, 2002, at 5:23:59
In reply to In a word, the new board creates a ..., posted by Janelle on April 21, 2002, at 4:08:28
I read somewhere on here that outsiders (sorry, but that is what those who are not *allowed* to post on the 2000 board are) can respond to messages they see on the 2000 board by cross posting to PSB -- first, I'm not even sure how to do that (not that I would anyway), but second, are those who frequent the 2000 board really going to think to check both the 2000 board AND PSB for responses to what they post on 2000 board? Gimme a break. The chances of an outsider receiving a response to something they cross post on PSB seem slim imo.
Well, now the concept of the 2000 board has become laughable in addition to the adjectives I used above.
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.