![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 133 to 157 of 159. Go back in thread:
Posted by Dinah on July 22, 2002, at 21:14:18
In reply to Re: Hmmm. » Dinah, posted by Phil on July 22, 2002, at 21:12:07
Posted by krazy kat on July 22, 2002, at 21:16:49
In reply to Re: things we may regret... » krazy kat , posted by Dinah on July 22, 2002, at 21:09:14
i can't speak for anyone else, but i imagine many folks think about what they post, reread it, and feel comfortable with it. no regrets usually I would imagine. i rarely have regrets. i regret losing my temper. that's about it, because i do reread my posts and try very hard to be reasonable and logical, and to keep my emotions, which may interfere with the clarity, out of the way.
Posted by kiddo on July 22, 2002, at 21:21:51
In reply to Re: Kiddo dear... » kiddo, posted by Dinah on July 22, 2002, at 21:05:39
> I was answering Oddipus' post about whether Dr. Bob would issue Jesus a PBC. It had nothing whatsoever to do with you.
>
> I was the one who said long ago that this was out of hand.I was the one that used the term hypocrites in that post, it looks as if dr. bob pasted some of my comments into the same one.
I think a *lot* of ppl said that a long time ago as well...
Posted by kiddo on July 22, 2002, at 21:24:19
In reply to Re: Hmmm. » kiddo, posted by Dinah on July 22, 2002, at 21:13:04
Posted by Dinah on July 22, 2002, at 21:39:12
In reply to i don't know... » Dinah, posted by krazy kat on July 22, 2002, at 21:16:49
> i can't speak for anyone else, but i imagine many folks think about what they post, reread it, and feel comfortable with it. no regrets usually I would imagine. i rarely have regrets. i regret losing my temper. that's about it, because i do reread my posts and try very hard to be reasonable and logical, and to keep my emotions, which may interfere with the clarity, out of the way.
But kk, how can you regret losing your temper if you keep your emotions out of the way? I'm sorry I still don't quite understand.But I would think that most people have a lot of regrets in their lives. I congratulate you on having so few.
Posted by krazy kat on July 22, 2002, at 21:49:05
In reply to Re: i don't know..., posted by Dinah on July 22, 2002, at 21:39:12
i guess the key word is "try". emotions are key to our humanity, but in certain situations, they are better kept "checked". this board seems to be one of them since it is often when people let loose their emotions that they get pbc'd. i'm talking a range of emotions, not just niceties.
so, here, it is best to be distant and polite and sweet. that's how it's become over the last six months and why i don't fit in very well (i am by nature very polite, but the issues here are close to the heart). so i try to be rational and reasonable with my posts so that i don't regret them. when i loose my temper, i regret it.
i hope that clarifies my thoughts some.
and, in a general sense, if one has many things to regret, then i would hope one would reconsider how they are living their lives. that sounds like either a potentially bad life being lived, or a huge amount of shame that needs to be banished. just my very humble opinion of course, and not directed at anyone in particular.
Posted by Dinah on July 22, 2002, at 21:56:59
In reply to i try to keep my emotions out of the way » Dinah, posted by krazy kat on July 22, 2002, at 21:49:05
>
> and, in a general sense, if one has many things to regret, then i would hope one would reconsider how they are living their lives. that sounds like either a potentially bad life being lived, or a huge amount of shame that needs to be banished. just my very humble opinion of course, and not directed at anyone in particular.Well, maybe it just suggests that the person has a well developed conscience. Guilt was put in mankind for a purpose, to let us know when we have done something worthy of regret. Of course those of us with OCD have a biochemical problem with the whole anxiety/guilt system. I don't actually consider it a character flaw. After all that's what this site is here for.
Not that I am in any way implying that anyone on this board considers OCD to be a character flaw.
Posted by krazy kat on July 22, 2002, at 21:59:41
In reply to Re: i try to keep my emotions out of the way, posted by Dinah on July 22, 2002, at 21:56:59
Posted by Dinah on July 22, 2002, at 22:03:53
In reply to shame is very different than guilt (nm) » Dinah, posted by krazy kat on July 22, 2002, at 21:59:41
yes it is kk. are you trying to say something?
you're more cryptic than dr. bob.
i believe the topic was regret though.
Posted by tabitha on July 23, 2002, at 0:13:04
In reply to Re: please be civil » Lou Pilder , posted by Dr. Bob on July 22, 2002, at 18:34:52
> (To digress a bit, I think there's some tension between administration and support. I can administrate better if people inform me about questionable posts, but that's inevitably somewhat accusatory.)
You know, that's a good point. I think from now on I'll just trust you to either catch things or not, and keep myself out of it.
-tabitha
Posted by beardedlady on July 23, 2002, at 7:48:13
In reply to Re: i try to keep my emotions out of the way, posted by Dinah on July 22, 2002, at 21:56:59
> Guilt was put in mankind for a purpose, to let us know when we have done something worthy of regret.
That's one way to look at it, but what if it's a bad purpose? I bet most therapists will tell you that guilt is actually unhealthy and counterproductive. Guilt is usually imposed on us by others who don't like us or our actions, and it's manipulative. I have rarely felt guilty. When I say something that might have come out wrong, I apologize and explain, but I don't feel guilty or have regrets.
A lack of self-confidence can make one more susceptible to feeling guilty AND to making others feel guilty.
> Well, maybe it just suggests that the person has a well developed conscience.
I would say we do the right thing initially because we have a conscience.
I know lots of people who often feel guilt and often have regrets. I also know a lot who rarely feel guilt and who rarely have regrets. It's just what makes you you. I believe KK when she says she has few. I don't have many either.
beardy
Posted by Dinah on July 23, 2002, at 8:10:36
In reply to regrets and guilt » Dinah, posted by beardedlady on July 23, 2002, at 7:48:13
Hi Beardy, I was expecting you. :)
I certainly never said I didn't believe KK. And I believe you as well.
Now I do have regrets. I regret being drawn into this discussion. It must make newcomers to the board feel very uncomfortable.
So to elucidate, I was trying to ascertain if KK's pointed references were to my various meltdowns on the board, which I do regret and find embarassing. However, I also am proud of myself for overcoming my embarassment and continuing to try to contribute to the board. I am not again going to explain the relationship of my meltdowns to my OCD. I have done that at least one time too many already. I was rather hoping however, that she was not referring to my meltdowns, as such reminders would not be in keeping with my image of KK. And so I was giving her a chance to explain what she did mean before leaping to conclusions.
I hope that leaves those who have come to the board since my last meltdown feeling less like they are in the presence of those who are speaking in code.
Posted by beardedlady on July 23, 2002, at 8:25:51
In reply to Re: regrets and guilt » beardedlady, posted by Dinah on July 23, 2002, at 8:10:36
Dinah:
I wasn't speaking about you at all! It had nothing to do with anyone's meltdowns or disorders or anything else. And I wasn't even implying you didn't believe KK.
My response was about guilt and regrets and how different people deal with them.
Was I really that cryptic?
beardy
P.S. And about those newcomers: What did we say that would make a newcomer uncomfortable? I guess that's where the guilt thing comes in. But people who are uncomfortable with debate or discussion will simply avoid it and post what they like elsewhere, won't they? I don't really understand what you mean.
Posted by Dinah on July 23, 2002, at 8:30:30
In reply to But it wasn't about you! » Dinah, posted by beardedlady on July 23, 2002, at 8:25:51
KK and I were involved in a long discussion last night in which I tried to get her to explain more clearly what she meant and she continued to make highly pointed statements.
I was hoping it wasn't about me.
I do not intend to explain again. You may believe me to be self centered if you wish. And you are not going to make me angry.
I also stand by my statement about guilt. Healthy guilt is a good thing.
Posted by Mashogr8 on July 23, 2002, at 11:48:30
In reply to But it wasn't about you! » Dinah, posted by beardedlady on July 23, 2002, at 8:25:51
beardedlady,
I think you underestimate the calmness and understanding of newcomers. As a newcomer, I would approach the administration board first. First, because I would want to see how the whole system worked and then again, because reviewing the board becomes a way to see who the "most posting" people are. While the topics here are generally administrative, they definitely veer off topic at least, as I read them. It is difficult to keep track of whom is on one side and to an OUTSIDER, there definitely appears to be sides. For myself, I pretend that it is 1999 and all is calm and all is bright on these boards because I need it to be for my hope and sanity. I've seen it that way in the past. The turmoil used to be our feelings and coping with the world. Now, at times, I feel like a debate club where sometimes facts are overcome by opinions. My gosh, some points are made so many times, I don';t see how you people can keep it straight. To say that we, newcomers, should not read is really difficult. For one, I want to know whether the discussion ends. Is there a winner or does everyone agree to disagree? And two, I personally am compulsed to read everything just in case I miss a clue to eternal happiness :(.
That however, is definitely my issue. I just thought perhaps my thoughts might help you understand why people may feel the current discussion is worrisome to the new guys.
Thanks for listening. I meant no disrespect to anyone. I just wanted to offer my thoughs. And, I just can't decide whether to use whom or who after that preposition of ;).
MA
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 23, 2002, at 12:18:59
In reply to please be civil Dr. Bob, posted by krazy kat on July 22, 2002, at 19:50:55
> Maybe I'm misunderstanding something, Dr Bob.
> It's beginning to get confusing. Are you saying a Christian can't say that Christ is the only way?
> That's central to the religion.
>
> PhilYes, that's what I'm saying. I'm sorry if something central to a religion can't be discussed here, but as I've tried to explain, the *primary* purpose of this site is to provide support.
----
> I think it was great of you to set up the faith board. However, you do not like debate here
Thanks. No, I'd rather see support than debate.
> > Christians have come to consider all Pharisees as hypocritical due to the stories in the Gospels, but this is seriously unfair to the majority of Pharisees.
>
> That is absolutely, unequivicaobly bashing Christians. It does not even state "SOME Christians. Please acknowledge this.
>
> krazy katGood point, yes, they should've qualified that.
Bob
Posted by beardedlady on July 23, 2002, at 13:15:37
In reply to Re: PS about newcomers, posted by Mashogr8 on July 23, 2002, at 11:48:30
>I don';t see how you people can keep it straight.
I think that's one of those statements you shouldn't use here. (YOU people, I mean.)
> That however, is definitely my issue.
And the issue of others, too, I would imagine.
> Thanks for listening. I meant no disrespect to anyone. I just wanted to offer my thoughs.It's not disrespectful to disagree or to share one's thoughts. But the administration board is for topics pertaining to the running of the boards, and some people are upset by it at times. It may take many posts by multiple posters to get a point across, as we are (all of us and often) convinced we are right. Sometimes we're not. (That includes the moderator, too.)
When you like something, you often want to fix its faults. Know what I mean? You get married to a guy who's late all the time. You don't like the lateness, so you try to encourage him to change. Sometimes it takes others to tell the guy they're tired of their time being taken for granted and that lateness is bothersome. Eventually, it sinks in. Or it doesn't. But it's not a "be on time, or we're getting a divorce" issue, just as it's not "love it like it is, or leave it" on this board.
> And, I just can't decide whether to use whom or who after that preposition of ;).
If you think it's tough to figure it out, you should try having to explain it!
beardy
Posted by krazy kat on July 23, 2002, at 14:38:12
In reply to Re: shame is very different than guilt, posted by Dinah on July 22, 2002, at 22:03:53
I used the word "shame" instead of "guilt" because I agree, guilt can be very useful.
I guess people are Really different in the sense of regret -- I don't regret much, yet I have a Very Strong Conscience. I just am really careful about my choices in life I guess.
Again, not important. Maybe this Very long thread can end with my post...
Posted by krazy kat on July 23, 2002, at 14:42:23
In reply to Re: regrets and guilt » beardedlady, posted by Dinah on July 23, 2002, at 8:10:36
Dinah:
I did not make "pointed references" to your various meltdowns" and take offense that you would suggest that.
I also do not "speak in code". That is partly why I have not fit in here for last few months. My open and straightforward, yet polite, approach to support started to be frowned upon.
Please don't read into my posts. I will be direct if I "pointing" them at a particular person.
- KK
Posted by krazy kat on July 23, 2002, at 14:46:09
In reply to Re: Again I will elucidate » beardedlady, posted by Dinah on July 23, 2002, at 8:30:30
> KK and I were involved in a long discussion last night in which I tried to get her to explain more clearly what she meant and she continued to make highly pointed statements.
Can you please give me examples of this so I can do my Utmost not to use the tone or whatever it was that bothered you? Again, I was not making pointed statements..
>
> You may believe me to be self centered if you wish. And you are not going to make me angry.I know this is directed at Beardy, but when did she say this in this thread? I'm just worried that I'm missing things? And don't get angry - that's what we're all trying to keep in check I think. So that's good!!!
>
> I also stand by my statement about guilt. Healthy guilt is a good thing.I agree - see my post below. But shame is bad.
Posted by krazy kat on July 23, 2002, at 14:48:03
In reply to Re: PS about newcomers, posted by Mashogr8 on July 23, 2002, at 11:48:30
I agree with you.
What if newcomers saw Kiddo's rhetoric called "anti-semitic"? Those of us who have been here longer and know Kiddo, know this is unfair, but they might develop a very bad view of her instantly. UG!
Posted by beardedlady on July 23, 2002, at 15:17:54
In reply to Re: Again I will elucidate » beardedlady, posted by Dinah on July 23, 2002, at 8:30:30
Dinah:
> KK and I were involved in a long discussion last night in which I tried to get her to explain more clearly what she meant and she continued to make highly pointed statements.
I was talking about guilt and regrets. How would I know what KK was saying (and whether it was really pointed), and what did it have to do with my post?
> I was hoping it wasn't about me.Right. That's what I don't understand. Why would it have been? I was just responding to the notion of guilt and regrets from the posts about that topic, not anything from conversations to which I wasn't privy.
> I do not intend to explain again. You may believe me to be self centered if you wish. And you are not going to make me angry.
I am terribly confused. Explain again? And did you think I was trying to make you angry? Why on earth would I want to do that? Yes, I write posts that sometimes disagree with a point you make (and points others make, too!). And yes, we are very different types of people. But you made a comment below that sounded to me as if you were clucking some disapproval of me (regarding what's worthy of admiration). And now you say, "And you are not going to make me angry."
That sounds like an accusation to me. Why would you say that unless you were accusing me of trying to make you angry?
I am a very nice person, Dinah. I may be opinionated and argumentative, but I have a good heart, and I am kind. I feel like I need to tell you this because some of your posts tell me you think otherwise.
beardy
Posted by mashogr8 on July 23, 2002, at 17:18:47
In reply to Re: PS about newcomers » Mashogr8, posted by beardedlady on July 23, 2002, at 13:15:37
I can't believe I said you people. That was something that could really be misunderstood since I had no intention of referring to YOU guys particularly (whoever would read it). I should have said PBAers. Ireally am sorry. I spent a lot of time checking out the grammar. I forgot to check for possibly tessty text. I'll do better next time, I hope.
I guess I feel a bit like Dinah in that I think she likes everyone to be happy as do I. I've spent my life trying to keep everybody happy. I figure if all is running smoothly, I've done it right. If not, then I'm wrong. Ridiculous thought I know, but if I could reconcile that thought process I might have half a chance at beating depression. It seems like that is the only way to make a difference in the world if you are not rich or famous.
By the way, I was going to diagram that who/whom sentence to see which was right but I got lost trying. Oh well
Ma
Posted by beardedlady on July 23, 2002, at 17:52:30
In reply to Re: PS about newcomers/beardedlady, posted by mashogr8 on July 23, 2002, at 17:18:47
> I guess I feel a bit like Dinah in that I think she likes everyone to be happy as do I. I've spent my life trying to keep everybody happy. I figure if all is running smoothly, I've done it right. If not, then I'm wrong. Ridiculous thought I know, but if I could reconcile that thought process I might have half a chance at beating depression.
You are no more responsible for the happiness of others than they are responsible for yours. And who says happiness is everyone else's goal? Maybe we just want to be intelligent or no longer depressed or thoughtful or wild.
In line with the goals of this board, I'd support you in your quest to be happy. But if my goal here isn't happiness, couldn't you support me by allowing me to correct what I see as injustices or just bad grammar?
beardy
Posted by shar on July 24, 2002, at 0:44:46
In reply to Lou's resonse to Shar's post » shar, posted by Lou Pilder on July 21, 2002, at 10:12:16
> Shar,
> I am referring to Kiddo's posts in total. Dr. Bob only flagged the one part about the "wrong" road, "right" road . But to me, all of Kiddo's post are of one thought and I believe that.........Lou, I didn't make it beyond this point. Just FYI, in case there is something down below you want to reiterate. Shar
the total thought of those posts "cross the line into anti_Semitic rhetoric." I have read and reread Kiddo's post and I deduce from them that:
> 1) Only people that are "in accordance to the word", and Kiddo's jesus was defined as the word, were on the right road, and all others were on the "wrong" road . So it is unmistakable that Kiddo's posts imply, to me, that jews are on the wrong road because jews do not accept the new testament or the jesus that Kiddo is referring to as the word. Now me and Dr. Bob agree that that is not acceptable on this board because of the reasons stated by him. Dr, Bob did not block Kiddo, but only flagged the post to say at that point that Kiddo should reevaluate her direction with the thought, in total ,that she was presenting, IMO.
> 2) Also, I deduce from Kiddo's post that the jews in history were against the jesus that Kiddo is talking about because of the defamation of the religiuos jewish leaders as "hypocrites" and that they did not accept that the jesus that Kiddo is talking about did his works, by the power of God , but by Beelzabub, which Kiddo has aknowleged to be the satanic. Actually, the bible passage that Kiddo is citing is much more than what is presented here. I offered a historical background as to the history of Beelzabub , but no one asked me to post it.
> 3) Also, I posted the edict by Queen Isabel of Spain that expelled the jews from Spain in 1492. I posted that as educaton to show that historically, similar thought as Kiddo postd was used to persecute the jewish people and that is one of the reasons that I thought that Kiddo's posts were rhetoric that was crossing into anti-Semitic thought. Now I do not believe that anyone here is anti-Semitic. When people post these type of posts, I view them as innocent posts for I believe that when they post them, they know not what they do. It is my position to stop the posts from getting out of control, so I object to them, for I believe that if these type of posts were not flagged by Dr. Bob, that they would have the opportunity to arrouse real anti-
> Semitic feelings toward me with posters demanding my expulsion, with posters posting links to anti_Semitic web sites, with posters using epithets and profane language toward me, with posters citing bible passage that defame jewish people, maufacturing falsehoods about me, conspiering with others to ostracise me, post responses to me to not answer their posts, accuse me of not answering them, posting that I should not be allowed to get away with it, etc. etc. until I would be forced to leave.
> 4) another aspect of this, although it is not going into the rhelm of anti-Semitism, is the position that Kiddo takes in regards to people not knowing God. It appears to me that what was attempted to be put forth was that people can only know God through reading the new testament. I may be wrong about what Kiddo was trying to say in that post of hers about the people that did not know God, and I am asking Kiddo, if she reads this post of mine, to clarify what she meant by that post so that I would be better able to understand it and, perhaps, discuss it further with her.
> Thamks,
> Lou
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.