![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 50. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by NikkiT2 on November 1, 2004, at 16:19:10
Can we email this guy off board with our thoughts?
I also respond better to questions, so maybe you could set some questions out so my brain has somewhere to lead from - it tends not to work without prompting!
I'd really like to take part - I think most here know how strongly I feel about "us" getting our word out there, and heard by all kind of professionals.
Nikki
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 1, 2004, at 17:52:17
In reply to Dr Bob - re your above post, posted by NikkiT2 on November 1, 2004, at 16:19:10
> Can we email this guy off board with our thoughts?
Do you have comments you'd rather not post? May I ask why?
Our idea, and the procedure that was approved, was that comments needed to be posted to be considered...
Bob
Posted by NikkiT2 on November 2, 2004, at 2:01:11
In reply to Re: emailing this guy, posted by Dr. Bob on November 1, 2004, at 17:52:17
You need to know why I don't wish I post any of my comments on the board??
Its because I don't wish for them to be held up for a civility review. I can't face putting energy and passion into writiing how I feel about this place, only to have everything pulled apart as to whether it is civil or not.
Thanks, nikki
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 2, 2004, at 10:44:19
In reply to Re: emailing this guy » Dr. Bob, posted by NikkiT2 on November 2, 2004, at 2:01:11
> I don't wish for them to be held up for a civility review.
By Lou? How many times has he requested a review of a post of yours already?
> I can't face putting energy and passion into writiing how I feel about this place, only to have everything pulled apart as to whether it is civil or not.
If you're careful, I doubt it would be uncivil, but you could also run it by someone else first to make sure...
Bob
Posted by nikkit2 on November 2, 2004, at 11:15:35
In reply to Re: emailing this guy, posted by Dr. Bob on November 2, 2004, at 10:44:19
> > I don't wish for them to be held up for a civility review.
>
> By Lou? How many times has he requested a review of a post of yours already?I'm afraid I can't answer that for fear of breaking civility rules. And I no longer have the time, or inclination, to go through the past few weeks of Admin boards to count how many times it has been. Lets just say too many for me.
>
> > I can't face putting energy and passion into writiing how I feel about this place, only to have everything pulled apart as to whether it is civil or not.
>
> If you're careful, I doubt it would be uncivil, but you could also run it by someone else first to make sure...
>But, it seems, that most (not all) of my posts aren't deemed uncivil by you, so I guess they aren't. Whether or not this is the case, they can, and are, still put up for review. I am not opening my heart (and talking about how I feel about babble, and my experiences here, would be opening my heart) only for my words to be pulled apart and their intent questioned.
Sorry. I'm happy to post this and that, but no longer things that matter I'm afraid.
Nikki
Posted by fayeroe on November 2, 2004, at 11:41:59
In reply to Re: emailing this guy, posted by Dr. Bob on November 2, 2004, at 10:44:19
> I don't wish for them to be held up for a civility review.
By Lou? How many times has he requested a review of a post of yours already?
Where have you been lately?????
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 2, 2004, at 12:30:48
In reply to Re: emailing this guy, posted by Dr. Bob on November 2, 2004, at 10:44:19
Friends,
There is some part of this thread that writes something like that I am requesting a determination from Dr. Hsiung as to if some part of a post, or the whole post is {civil or not}.
The requests by me to Dr. Hsiung are for the determination as to if the post , or part of it, {is acceptable or not in relation to the guidlines of the forum}. I am not requesting if the part in question is civil, although the civility rules are part of the guidlines of the forum.
When I ask for this determination, I feel that {all} the members of the forum could benifit by knowing whether or not the requested part is acceptable or not. One way or the other, we could have guidance in relation to what is being requested for determination by having the determination from Dr. Hsiung given. The determination could be a lamp to our feet.
There are those determinations that I have requested resulting in a determination that something was {not} acceptable. I feel that that is good for the community as a whole, for now it is established in that way by Dr. Hsiung's determination. There are posts or parts of posts that Dr. Hsiung writes {are} acceptable. Now we all can follow that example as being acceptable.
There are posts and parts of posts that have been requested for a determination that Dr.Hsiung has not replied to as being one way or the other. Dr. Hsiung has now given a procedure to follow in order to remind him to that.
But Dr. Hsiung is only asked by me to give a determination as to the guidlines of the forum. He could just say it is or it isn't acceptable with out any comment, for that is the only thing that I am requesting of him to do. He could ask the poster to rephrase the statement. He could also make a notation about the civility of it.
If it is important to anyone here, I would just like Dr.Hsiung to give a determination as to {the acceptability or not in relation to the guidlines of the forum} and that is all. I base that on that the requests are made on the administration board and I feel that the administartive board could have something like an {immunity from prosecution} concept in it in order to alleviate any concern about being blocked as a result of this being requested for a determination. Also, these requests got to the administrative board because someone wanted to know about whatever it is and Dr. Hsiung has written that this is one of the acceptable ways to request that here. And I agree with Dr. Hsiung in respect to that.
Lou Pilder
Posted by fayeroe on November 2, 2004, at 12:54:10
In reply to Lou's response -imun -fm -pros » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on November 2, 2004, at 12:30:48
I have a question, Lou, so that I can better understand what you're doing. Do you feel that the majority of the posters on the boards feel that we need you to ask Bob for these determinations concerning what is acceptable and what is not? I, personally, read a post and evaluate it on my own. I'm comfortable with my abilities to read and sift and take what I need and discard the rest.
I think this must take up a lot of your time, Lou. What do you feel that you'll achieve if Bob eventually says the post is not acceptable? Do you feel that the board will be better? And if you feel that it will, in what way? Pat
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 2, 2004, at 13:17:33
In reply to Re: Lou's response -imun -fm -pros » Lou Pilder, posted by fayeroe on November 2, 2004, at 12:54:10
fayeroe,
You wrote,[....will the board be better?...in what way?...]
I have a masters in school administration. Ther are various concepts about administration. We could have a continuem from the ancient Greeks to what is called the enightenment to John Adams and Thomas Jefferson to Marx Lenin and Stalin and to fascism and on.
I believe in that a community is {better} as you ask, if there is a provision to redress the administrators about the administration of the community. This could be like a towne meeting of board meeting. I liken the administrative board to that. And I feel , like in a towne meeting, that evryone have the opportunity to voice their concerns. And I think that the community can be better for that.
Lou
Posted by fayeroe on November 2, 2004, at 13:21:51
In reply to Lou's response to fayeroe-betr4it » fayeroe, posted by Lou Pilder on November 2, 2004, at 13:17:33
Do you feel that the majority of the posters are with you one this? Pat
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 2, 2004, at 13:31:53
In reply to Lou's response to fayeroe-betr4it » fayeroe, posted by Lou Pilder on November 2, 2004, at 13:17:33
fayeroe,
You asked ,[...in what way...?].
When dterminations are made by the administration, more ability to know what is acceptable or not is given.
For instance, in our city there is a rule that pprohibits erecting a structure on your property.
A man put up a 40 foot flagpole with a flag of the USA. There was dispute as to what was acceptsble or not in relation to the guidlines of the community and town meetings were held about it. The question was if the flagpole was acceptable or not {in relation to the guidlines of the community}.
Lou
Posted by SLS on November 2, 2004, at 13:35:29
In reply to Lou's response -imun -fm -pros » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on November 2, 2004, at 12:30:48
> The requests by me to Dr. Hsiung are for the determination as to if the post , or part of it, {is acceptable or not in relation to the guidlines of the forum}.
Hi Lou.
What are some hypothetical examples of posts that would be unacceptable that would not be considered uncivil?
Thanks.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on November 2, 2004, at 13:40:25
In reply to Lou's response to fayeroe-iww, posted by Lou Pilder on November 2, 2004, at 13:31:53
Hi again.
Is it that you would prefer to define all of the possible violations in advance of them occurring?
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 2, 2004, at 13:50:38
In reply to Re: Lou's response to fayeroe-iww » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on November 2, 2004, at 13:40:25
Scott,
You wrote,[...define ...possible (unacceptable statements) in advance...]
In [my] administrative theory, rules are {well-defined} and {applied equally}. So if the rule in {my} administatrive theory is not well-defined, then if one breaks it according to the administraion,in my administrative theory, then I do not consider it to be uncivil.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 2, 2004, at 13:53:54
In reply to Lou's response to SLS » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on November 2, 2004, at 13:50:38
Scott,
Let us look at the flagpole situation. Let us be in the towne meeting. It is your turn to speak. What would you say?
Lou
Posted by fayeroe on November 2, 2004, at 13:54:57
In reply to Re: Lou's response -imun -fm -pros » Lou Pilder, posted by fayeroe on November 2, 2004, at 12:54:10
I have a question, Lou, so that I can better understand what you're doing. Do you feel that the majority of the posters on the boards feel that we need you to ask Bob for these determinations concerning what is acceptable and what is not? I, personally, read a post and evaluate it on my own. I'm comfortable with my abilities to read and sift and take what I need and discard the rest.
**Lou, I'm still curious about my question above. Do you feel like you have a mandate from other posters to do this? Because, as I've said before, it really does take up so much of your time and that concerns me.
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 2, 2004, at 14:07:42
In reply to Re: Lou's response -imun -fm -pros, posted by fayeroe on November 2, 2004, at 13:54:57
fayeroe,
You wrote,[...takes up your time...that concerns me...].
Could you clarify why you are concerned? If you could , then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
Lou
Posted by SLS on November 2, 2004, at 14:10:19
In reply to Lou's response to SLS » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on November 2, 2004, at 13:50:38
> Scott,
> You wrote,[...define ...possible (unacceptable statements) in advance...]
> In [my] administrative theory, rules are {well-defined} and {applied equally}. So if the rule in {my} administatrive theory is not well-defined, then if one breaks it according to the administraion,in my administrative theory, then I do not consider it to be uncivil.
> Lou
But the guidelines of civility have already been defined.
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 2, 2004, at 14:17:31
In reply to Re: Lou's response to SLS, posted by SLS on November 2, 2004, at 14:10:19
SLS,
You wrote,[...the guidlines... have... been defined..].
Let us look at the guidline for [...writing ways of harming yourself or others...].
In that guidline, I requested a determination and it was determined as acceptable. Now we know that we can write that type of statement and not have the statement be deemed unacceptable.
Lou
Posted by fayeroe on November 2, 2004, at 14:23:07
In reply to Re: Lou's response -imun -fm -pros, posted by Lou Pilder on November 2, 2004, at 14:07:42
I'm very busy. I work 7 days a week and don't have the time, always, to research as much as I would like. My concern would be that you might lack time to do other things that you enjoy. I know that I find myself behind at times and I miss getting to do the "fun" things I like.
Posted by SLS on November 2, 2004, at 14:27:45
In reply to Re: Lou's response to SLS-flgpol, posted by Lou Pilder on November 2, 2004, at 13:53:54
> Let us look at the flagpole situation. Let us be in the towne meeting. It is your turn to speak. What would you say?
LouThe regulation (guidelines of civility) existed prior to the erection of the flagpole. Ignorant or not to the regulation, the erector behaved in a manner that might have represented a violation of that regulation. Whether or not there was a violation is the job of the magistrate (administrator) to determine. I don't think it is desirable to "flag" every "civil" behavior as a possible violation of every possible interpretation of every possible regulation. (Some humor was attempted in the previous sentence). It is cumbersome on the system. You may do that, of course, but it might be redundant here on Psycho-Babble as this function is already performed by the administrator.
Perhaps it would be desirable to wait 3 days before bringing to the attention of the moderator a questionable post. That would give him sufficient time to review it on his own, and avoid the redundancy and collection of unnecessary posts on the administration board. You could ask the doctor what would be a sufficient time as I don't know what his review cycle period is.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on November 2, 2004, at 14:31:21
In reply to Re: Lou's response to SLS » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on November 2, 2004, at 14:17:31
> SLS,
> You wrote,[...the guidlines... have... been defined..].
> Let us look at the guidline for [...writing ways of harming yourself or others...].
> In that guidline, I requested a determination and it was determined as acceptable. Now we know that we can write that type of statement and not have the statement be deemed unacceptable.
> Lou
I understand your logic. I disagree with its necessity.
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 2, 2004, at 14:32:27
In reply to Re: Lou's response -imun -fm -pros, posted by fayeroe on November 2, 2004, at 14:23:07
fayeroe,
Thank you for being concerned about the time I spend on this forum. I will take your concern in consideration as to how much time I spend on this forum.
Thanks,
Lou
Posted by gardenergirl on November 2, 2004, at 14:36:45
In reply to Re: Lou's response -imun -fm -pros » fayeroe, posted by Lou Pilder on November 2, 2004, at 14:32:27
I'm enjoying this discussion. It's helping me understand more what has been going on.
gg
Posted by gardenergirl on November 2, 2004, at 14:38:54
In reply to Re: Lou's response -imun -fm -pros » fayeroe, posted by Lou Pilder on November 2, 2004, at 14:32:27
Hi Lou,
I was wondering how you anticipate Babblers might use the information gained from determinations. You stated that (paraphrasing) [now we know that kind of statement is acceptable]. I do read determinations and most of your requests. However, I know I don't remember them. I still go by the civility rules when deciding whether something I want to say is within the guidelines of the site.How do you use this information you gain?
gg
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.