![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 64 to 88 of 102. Go back in thread:
Posted by Crazy_Charlie on November 4, 2004, at 9:48:04
In reply to Re: I must be stupid or something...????????????? » Crazy_Charlie, posted by Dinah on November 4, 2004, at 9:15:36
I am really not doubting that he is a person with feelings, since I don't believe that it exist any person without feelings. I am also a person who feel passionate about what I feel is important, and one of those things are protecting people that struggle with mental problems. It is not only a passionate interest of mine, it is also a duty of mine to protect those sufferers, since I am a clinical psychologist. In this situation I clearly see Lou as mentally stronger than the person it all started with (Nikki), and to be honest, I don't really see the motivation behind. I can only see a suffering human being stabbed in the back. I think it is important to try to make a difference, but I don't see the value of trying to do that at all costs, but I am sorry I used such harsh words in describing mr. Lou. I have been looking for a long time for a page like this on the internet, and I have been seeing some pretty unserious "copies" of something like this. It has made me a bit paranoid about the identity behind some people on these boards.
I could explain further with giving examples, but I'll leave it here, I think I have already said sorry to mr. Lou, it's not really more I can do.
Posted by Dinah on November 4, 2004, at 10:18:28
In reply to Re: I must be stupid or something...????????????? » Dinah, posted by Crazy_Charlie on November 4, 2004, at 9:48:04
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
Yes, you did say you were sorry to Lou, but if I were Lou reading your last two posts, I wouldn't feel significantly less hurt.
Surely it's possible to help one person while being respectful of another? Most of us here are vulnerable in one way or another. Isn't it your duty to protect *all* the vulnerable? Didn't I see on another thread that you were learning to be non-judgemental in your classes? Perhaps you could bring this dialog to one of your professors to explore the possibilities of being both supportive of all parties and non-judgemental. It may come in handy for any couples or family therapy you might choose to do.
Posted by Crazy_Charlie on November 4, 2004, at 10:38:53
In reply to Re: I must be stupid or something...????????????? » Crazy_Charlie, posted by Dinah on November 4, 2004, at 10:18:28
Its quite a while since I ended my studies and last say these professors, and I also live in a different country now.
You see, my misunderstanding was mostly mr. Lous intentions. If I had seen his intentions as pure and clean, as taking care of others, I would have responded totally different. I am now trying to explain that I was harsh and unjustful to him because I misinterpreted his motives and intentions with his post. My interpretation of it was harassment, simply because I can't see what he sees in the post. I do undestand that it was not meant as that, but I try to defend my right of explaining why I misinterpreted him.
My main duty is to protect mentally instable or sick persons, first. The rest is strictly speaking outside of my work field, so that is a part of the duty as a human being. I'm sorry I didn't see mr. Lou as vurlnerable, that was another misinterpretation of the way he is stating himself. I guess I am lead by the falicious assumption that people that are vulnerable are also sensitive to not hurt others, and espescially not someone is a vulnerable situation. Again I am sorry. I have tried to make it clear that I am not critizising mr. Lou as a person, only his actions. And that is not in th eintention of being mean to him.
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 4, 2004, at 10:52:54
In reply to dear dr Bob (mr Lou) » Dr. Bob, posted by Crazy_Charlie on November 4, 2004, at 9:38:35
> What I did was acting under the law I have been under the last year as a clinical psychologist in Norway.
Everyone has their reasons for posting. I try to stick to what they post rather than what their reasons are, and sometimes I consider the former not to be civil despite the latter.
> I saw his attack towards this woman as very harsh and cruel
Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused. I already asked you to be civil, so now I'm going to block you from posting for a week.
If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
Follow-ups regarding these issues, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by nikkit2 on November 4, 2004, at 11:11:09
In reply to dear dr Bob (mr Lou) » Dr. Bob, posted by Crazy_Charlie on November 4, 2004, at 9:38:35
Just as an interesting aside..
I am meeting with a group of Norwegian Psychiarists / Psychologists next week to discuss Acute care and Personality Disorders, and Service User Involvement with them!!!
Nikki x
Posted by TofuEmmy on November 4, 2004, at 11:31:30
In reply to Re: blocked for week » Crazy_Charlie, posted by Dr. Bob on November 4, 2004, at 10:52:54
Welcome to Babble!! That might just be a new speed record for arrival to first block! :-)
If you are bored this week, you might try visiting another American site:
www.psychcentral.com
It's also an interesting place to hang out, and you'll find the welcome party lasts longer. Then please come back and continue to get to know the great people here as well.
emmy
Posted by Toph on November 4, 2004, at 11:34:33
In reply to Re: I must be stupid or something...?????????????, posted by Crazy_Charlie on November 4, 2004, at 10:38:53
Crazy_Charlie I read this thread and identify with your experience in adjusting to BabbleWorld. As a new person how could you, without knowing the styles of these posters, assume anything different than what you did? Instead of being supported as someone defending an individual who you apparently thought was being attacked in a vulnerable emotional state, you are sanctioned. Then, after people explain some history and dynamics here, you apologize and try to reiterate your motivations only to be sanctioned again. Been there, done that.
It's like you stumble on a couple fighting in front of neighbors. You suggest to the angry man that he find a safer way of resolving his differences with his wife only to provoke everyone, including the wife and neighbors, to turn their attack on you, the stranger. I hope your block won't discourage you from returning.
-Toph
Posted by fayeroe on November 4, 2004, at 12:54:12
In reply to blocked for week (that was fast!) Crazy Charlie, posted by TofuEmmy on November 4, 2004, at 11:31:30
I was going to issue you the same invitation, but Ems beat me to it!! Come over and hang out with us.....we'll help you pass the week. Go to the Internet Travelers Lounge when you get there. Pat
Posted by NikkiT2 on November 4, 2004, at 15:05:54
In reply to blocked for week (that was fast!) Crazy Charlie, posted by TofuEmmy on November 4, 2004, at 11:31:30
"and you'll find the welcome party lasts longer."
Thats not exactly true Tofu.. I posted once.. and didn't get a single welcome!!! Strangely, I've not returned since
Posted by Larry Hoover on November 4, 2004, at 15:41:29
In reply to Re: blocked for week (that was fast!) Crazy Charlie » TofuEmmy, posted by NikkiT2 on November 4, 2004, at 15:05:54
> "and you'll find the welcome party lasts longer."
>
> Thats not exactly true Tofu.. I posted once.. and didn't get a single welcome!!! Strangely, I've not returned sinceWell, you just go on back, and try again, missy.
Lar
Posted by partlycloudy on November 4, 2004, at 16:05:12
In reply to Re: blocked for week (that was fast!) Crazy Charlie » TofuEmmy, posted by NikkiT2 on November 4, 2004, at 15:05:54
> "and you'll find the welcome party lasts longer."
>
> Thats not exactly true Tofu.. I posted once.. and didn't get a single welcome!!! Strangely, I've not returned sinceIt's not my kind of place. I've tried it a couple of times and keep coming back here.
pc
Posted by TofuEmmy on November 4, 2004, at 16:25:45
In reply to Re: blocked for week (that was fast!) Crazy Charlie » TofuEmmy, posted by NikkiT2 on November 4, 2004, at 15:05:54
Well, that happens everywhere sometimes. Posts just get missed. I'm sorry that was your experience! I think both sites have their strong points...the wonderful people who post there.
emmy
Posted by NikkiT2 on November 4, 2004, at 16:41:54
In reply to Re: blocked for week (that was fast!) Crazy Charlie » NikkiT2, posted by Larry Hoover on November 4, 2004, at 15:41:29
I have other issues with psych central I'm afraid.. nothing to do with the actual place or Dr Grohol.. just personal things.
Maybe one day I'll return..
But I admit it did hurt to post in a thread asking who was there from PB, only to have my post ignored..
But, like I say, there are other reasons.. else I'd have been there long ago ifonly for Cam when he was there
Nikki
Posted by NikkiT2 on November 4, 2004, at 16:43:42
In reply to Re: blocked for week (that was fast!) Crazy Charlie » NikkiT2, posted by TofuEmmy on November 4, 2004, at 16:25:45
Also, this might sound wussy, but I don;t like being a "newbie" on sites *l* The sites I use regularly still are ones that I have been using for years and years, and have known people there years!!
Posted by AuntieMel on November 5, 2004, at 10:56:33
In reply to Re: blocked for week » Crazy_Charlie, posted by Dr. Bob on November 4, 2004, at 10:52:54
> I saw his attack towards this woman as very harsh and cruel
Dr. Bob - CC was explaining his reaction. He wasn't saying that he *still thinks* it is harsh and cruel, he was saying that that was why he was harsh himself at first. The same paragraph says he can see that his words were too strong and tthat he didn't mean to offend.
It was an explanation of what he was thinking when he first posted judgemental things. Not trying to justify why he can still be uncivil.
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 5, 2004, at 14:34:11
In reply to Re: blocked - is this fair? » Dr. Bob, posted by AuntieMel on November 5, 2004, at 10:56:33
> > I saw his attack towards this woman as very harsh and cruel
>
> CC was explaining his reaction.I'm sorry if I seem harsh, too, but I'd like explanations also to be civil, for example, something like:
> > I didn't understand his reaction towards this woman considering the state she was in when she wrote that letter, and I tried to explain that to him so he would understand why.
Bob
Posted by Sad Sara on November 5, 2004, at 16:27:59
In reply to Re: blocked - is this fair?, posted by Dr. Bob on November 5, 2004, at 14:34:11
> > > I saw his attack towards this woman as very harsh and cruel
> >
> > CC was explaining his reaction.
>
> I'm sorry if I seem harsh, too, but I'd like explanations also to be civil, for example, something like:
>
> > > I didn't understand his reaction towards this woman considering the state she was in when she wrote that letter, and I tried to explain that to him so he would understand why.
>
> Bob
Isn't this just hacking on details on peoples way of expressing themselves? If "I saw his attack towards this woman as very harsh and cruel" (which is past tense and do not imply that the person still think so)and "I didn't understand his reaction towards this woman considering the state she was in when she wrote that letter, and I tried to explain that to him so he would understand why" (which is a very elaborate way of saying almost the same thing, just sifting out negative sounding words like harsh and cruel).Are you sayng that being civil means excluding words with negative content?
And wouldn't being so spesific in how you want people to phrase themselves lead to excluding people that is not so good in expressing themselves and finding the right words?
If you really want to be strict, then if "I" said "I just wanted to explain this to him so he would understand why" could imply that "I" think the person is stupid since he doesn't understand (he doesn't understand this so he must be stuoid and I must make sure he understand it because I am smarter than him and it's my duty to teach him blablabla)
Isn't the matter of civilness being pulled a bit too far soon?
Posted by Sad Sara on November 5, 2004, at 16:36:35
In reply to Re: blocked - is this fair?, posted by Dr. Bob on November 5, 2004, at 14:34:11
Isn't it also wise to consider that the discussion about persons that are blocked; what they said, what they meant, etc etc still continues after the person is blocked so the person it is all about CANNOT comment on it themselves?
Do you really think that is fair? To openly discuss someones posts; the intention with them, the meaning with them, what was actually written and what that meant, what should have been written instead... when this someone has lost the right to speak? So they can read what is said, but not be able to comment on it or correct anything if it is wrong? Do you think that is an ethical thing on a board like this, with many people with different mental problems?
I'm just wondering, I see this eagerness in it becoming a perfect board where no one can hurt each other, but I also see how this can turn out wrong for many people and make it a bad board rather than a good one.
Posted by AuntieMel on November 5, 2004, at 17:54:26
In reply to Re: blocked - is this fair?, posted by Dr. Bob on November 5, 2004, at 14:34:11
Yes, but I read it that he/she was recognizing that he/she was being judgemental at first. Using those words just emphasizes that he realizes he was wrong.
I didn't read it as a judgement on anyone else but himself.
Posted by Sad Sara on November 5, 2004, at 19:02:55
In reply to Re: blocked - is this fair? » Dr. Bob, posted by AuntieMel on November 5, 2004, at 17:54:26
> Yes, but I read it that he/she was recognizing that he/she was being judgemental at first. Using those words just emphasizes that he realizes he was wrong.
>
> I didn't read it as a judgement on anyone else but himself.
You make a good point there. Sometimes I get the idea that for some subjects it is enough if it is potentially possible to be hurt by the content (read: words), despite that both the grammar and meaning says something else. When form start being more important than meaning in a conversation, I find it difficult to actually extract meaning sometimes.I also sometimes wonder whether a board that request people to be able to be so creative in how they express themselves is a good place for people who for example have problems with expressing themselves of some reason (some depressives can have problems expressing themselves because depression can affect cognition, people who has never had the chance of getting a good education might have problems expressing themselves because they might not be used to "play with words" like this, people that have a lot lower than average intelligence might of understandable causes have problems expressing themselves, and some people are simply not good with words) and whether it then should be open for everybody to join?
Posted by Dena on August 9, 2008, at 19:58:03
In reply to Re: Lou's request to Dr.Hsiung » Lou Pilder, posted by NikkiT2 on October 16, 2004, at 15:35:06
> Don't tell me, I was being anti semetic by being upset with my husband because my husband has a jewish great aunt?!!!!!!!
>
> Thanks Lou, I was so close to breaking point, and you have helped me just HUGELY today. (that was sarcasm by the way)
>
> Cheers
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~This entire past situation alarms me.
Here, we have a poster using sarcasm to lash out at another person, bringing out a false charge of claiming he objected to her post due to anti-Semitism.
Lou objected to Nikki's mentioning of wanting to commit suicide. THAT was the reason for his objection to the post.
It was assumed, by Nikki and others, that his objection must be due to anti-Semitism, and so this is the lash-out against Lou.
It was allowed to remain.
Then, this, even worse post, in which Lou is accused of being evil (no matter how carefully worded), also which was not sanctioned: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041012/msgs/404068.html
Finally, we get this, which is supposed to be Dr. Bob's sanction of Nikki, but which only reminds her to not respond to someone who's requested "no posting to me".
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041012/msgs/404346.html
Why is it permissable to accuse anyone of being evil? During the Nazi Holocaust, Jews were accused of being inferior, sub-human, dangerous, and yes, evil, in a huge propaganda campaign that turned an entire nation against one race of people.
Can any of us imagine what that must have been like? To be turned on by those in power, to be looked at suspiciously, to be demonized by those who could inflict harm? To be at the mercy of frenzied mobs who had the back-up of the official government? To watch helplessly while those you love are abused, beaten, tortured, brutalized and then killed?
And can we be sensitive to those who either lost family to that madness, or who have lived under the fear that such a thing could happen again (particularly when there are those who claim that it never happened!)?
Can we perhaps try to understand how it might feel to hear those words again, "You are evil", which stirs up all manner of fear, and concern that they are, once again, being targetted with accusations and hatred?
If we do and say nothing, then we are like those who tried to be "uninvolved", and turned a blind eye to what was going on. And yet history has shown that the ones who were silent were guilty of not speaking out, not defending those who were being wrongly attacked.
While we do not need to attack people, we must point out when someone's actions are harmful.
And when we do not, we set a precedent for such things to be condoned, repeated, and perpetuated.
Put yourselves in Lou's shoes -- and ask yourself how you would feel, if these things were said about you, and your people.
If we do not stand up for those who are victimized, who will stand up for us...?
Shalom, Dena
Posted by Deputy 10derHeart on August 10, 2008, at 1:08:10
In reply to Re: Lou's request to Dr.Hsiung, posted by Dena on August 9, 2008, at 19:58:03
> Here, we have a poster using sarcasm
> and so this is the lash-out against Lou.
> Then, this, even worse post,Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down, or jump to conclusions about others, and please follow site guidelines regarding reporting posts you find objectionable. Please use the Notification system to do that instead of posting about them here.
> While we do not need to attack people, we must point out when someone's actions are harmful.
While it is, of course, perfectly fine to feel you must point certain things out, here on Babble Dr. Bob asks we do it within the current civility guidelines. Even when we are feeling really strongly about something, and even when we are feeling strongly that Dr. Bob made mistakes in the past, etc. The idea being, two wrongs don't make a right...
It may also help to remember when reading older threads, that the civility guidelines have changed re: pointing out uncivil posts publicly, asking others not to post to you publicly, etc.
If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternate ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
Follow ups regarding these issues should be directed to Admin, and should of course, be civil. Dr. Bob has oversight over deputy decisions, and he may choose a different action.
Respectfully,
--10derHeart, acting as deputy for Dr. Bob
Posted by Lou Pilder on August 11, 2008, at 20:13:53
In reply to Please be civil/follow site guidelines » Dena, posted by Deputy 10derHeart on August 10, 2008, at 1:08:10
> > Here, we have a poster using sarcasm
> > and so this is the lash-out against Lou.
> > Then, this, even worse post,
>
> Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down, or jump to conclusions about others, and please follow site guidelines regarding reporting posts you find objectionable. Please use the Notification system to do that instead of posting about them here.
>
> > While we do not need to attack people, we must point out when someone's actions are harmful.
>
> While it is, of course, perfectly fine to feel you must point certain things out, here on Babble Dr. Bob asks we do it within the current civility guidelines. Even when we are feeling really strongly about something, and even when we are feeling strongly that Dr. Bob made mistakes in the past, etc. The idea being, two wrongs don't make a right...
>
> It may also help to remember when reading older threads, that the civility guidelines have changed re: pointing out uncivil posts publicly, asking others not to post to you publicly, etc.
>
> If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternate ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
>
> Follow ups regarding these issues should be directed to Admin, and should of course, be civil. Dr. Bob has oversight over deputy decisions, and he may choose a different action.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> --10derHeart, acting as deputy for Dr. BobDeputy 10derHeart for Mr. Hsiung,
In regards to the policy to direct follow-ups here on the administration board to discuss rationales, rules, policy and such, I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean in your post here. If you could clarify the following concerning that you wrote,{...please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down, or jump to conclusions about others...}, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
A.Who are the others that could feel accused or put down in what you cited as the basis for writing that? I see my name there and I do not feel accused or put down by what the poster wrote that you cited here.
B. Of the three things that you cited that the member posted, are all three of them statements that could cause the people that you identified in (A) above to feel accused or put down? If not, which are the one or ones that you are referring to or something else?
C.Could you post here your criteria (rationale) that you used as to what constitutes a statement that could or could not lead one to feel put down?
D. The generally accepted meaning of to {accuse} is to {blame}. If you agree with that definition of {accused}, and if there is something in the statments that you cited that accuses, could you post here who it accuses and what the person is being blamed {accused} for?
E. If there are statements in what you cited that {jump to a conclusion about others, could you post here who the others are and what conclusion was jumped to? This could also bring into what is meant by {jumped}, so if that is part of your reply to me, could you also list the criteria that you use to determine if a conclusion was jumped to or not?
Lou
Posted by Dena on August 11, 2008, at 23:19:54
In reply to Please be civil/follow site guidelines » Dena, posted by Deputy 10derHeart on August 10, 2008, at 1:08:10
So, now the policy here is that when one points out an injustice, a problem -- the one who points out the problem BECOMES the problem...?
Those are the same tactics used in mind-controlling groups. Having escaped from one, I'm quite familiar with that. Blame shifts from the offending party to the whistle-blower.
You see, when we adhere to the procedures and guidelines given, and yet there is no recourse, an injustice is allowed to not only remain, but to flourish. And yet when you who have authority continue to remind us to use the clearly inconsistent and therefore defunct procedures, the entire situation becomes ridiculous.
If you do what you've always done, you'll get what you've always had ... in this case: Nuthin'.
I'm thinking the name here needs to be changed from Psycho Babble to Politico Babble.
I don't know why I expected more. I am rather disillusioned and disgusted with this forum.
Shalom, Dena
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > Here, we have a poster using sarcasm
> > and so this is the lash-out against Lou.
> > Then, this, even worse post,
>
> Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down, or jump to conclusions about others, and please follow site guidelines regarding reporting posts you find objectionable. Please use the Notification system to do that instead of posting about them here.
>
> > While we do not need to attack people, we must point out when someone's actions are harmful.
>
> While it is, of course, perfectly fine to feel you must point certain things out, here on Babble Dr. Bob asks we do it within the current civility guidelines. Even when we are feeling really strongly about something, and even when we are feeling strongly that Dr. Bob made mistakes in the past, etc. The idea being, two wrongs don't make a right...
>
> It may also help to remember when reading older threads, that the civility guidelines have changed re: pointing out uncivil posts publicly, asking others not to post to you publicly, etc.
>
> If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternate ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
>
> Follow ups regarding these issues should be directed to Admin, and should of course, be civil. Dr. Bob has oversight over deputy decisions, and he may choose a different action.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> --10derHeart, acting as deputy for Dr. Bob
>
>
>
>
Posted by Dr. Bob on August 11, 2008, at 23:36:31
In reply to Re: Please be civil/follow site guidelines » Deputy 10derHeart, posted by Dena on August 11, 2008, at 23:19:54
> So, now the policy here is that when one points out an injustice, a problem -- the one who points out the problem BECOMES the problem...?
It depends on how one points out the problem, two wrongs don't make a right.
Bob
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.