![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 9 to 33 of 33. Go back in thread:
Posted by Sad Sara on November 7, 2004, at 15:21:56
In reply to Re: Lou's request » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on November 7, 2004, at 12:53:36
I don't want to put words in Dr. Bobs mouth, but it's starting to be painful to watch this now... and he has been trying to convey that it has been enough discussions around this in this post:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041027/msgs/412311.htmlI interpret that post as: you two make up between you.
Nikki has said sorry for what she said, which means that she does not find it acceptable what she said herself. Everyone(correct me if I am wrong) has agreed as far as I have seen that it is not acceptable to say something like that... AND everyone (correct me if I am wrong) has forgiven Nikki for saying it, knows that she did not mean it and said it out of anger and frustration. Please, forgiving someone is also to accept that it has happened and put it behind as past.
She is practically begging to you about taking this discussion with HER, instead of through a third party. She is willing to, everyone (correct me if I am wrong) think it would be great if you two could just make up between you two and go on to other quests in life.
I think that in the light of all this, dr. Bob does NOT feel like it is a need for him.
And don't you think it should be possible for two grown up persons to make peace between each other?
Posted by NikkiT2 on November 7, 2004, at 15:57:13
In reply to Re: Lou's response to NikkiT2 » NikkiT2, posted by Lou PIlder on November 7, 2004, at 15:11:32
I think others have said it best Lou.
I know and accept that I hurt you. I admit that I should not have said certain things in my two posts directed toward you, and I am sorry for it.
I hope you are able to understand how I was hurt also, and that we can simply draw a line under all of this and move on.
Respectfully
Nikki
Posted by Noa on November 7, 2004, at 16:10:12
In reply to Re: Lou's response to NikkiT2 » Lou PIlder, posted by NikkiT2 on November 7, 2004, at 15:57:13
Nikki. Wow. I am really impressed that you are able to do this.
Posted by fayeroe on November 7, 2004, at 20:34:35
In reply to Re: Lou's response to NikkiT2 » Lou PIlder, posted by NikkiT2 on November 7, 2004, at 15:57:13
Nikki!!! Good for you!! You're a better person for this and I applaud you!! Pat
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 7, 2004, at 21:03:06
In reply to Re: Lou's request, posted by Dr. Bob on November 5, 2004, at 15:47:23
> > I have reviewed your reply to me about my request for a determination...
>
> Sorry, which reply to which request?
>
> BobDR. Hsiung,
In your request to me in the above post from you to me, you asked, [...which reply to which post...?]
I feel that we may have a misunderstanding and I would like for us to clear up any misunderstanding.
You asked me which reply to which post? The posts in question that I made a request to you about that I do not know if you have made a determination as to if the posts are acceptable or not in relation to the guidlines of the forum are listed below. In those links that are titled,[..Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung...] there is a link to the post in question that I am requesting from you a determination as to the acceptability of the post here.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041012/msgs/403973.html
and,
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041012/msgs/404334.html
Lou Pilder
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 7, 2004, at 21:40:30
In reply to Re: Lou's request, posted by Dr. Bob on November 5, 2004, at 15:47:23
Dr. Hsiung,
In continuing with my summery to clear up any misunderstandings, you asked me, [...which reply...?].
The reply that I was writing about is the reply from you to me that wrote,[...but if addressing part of a post or one of a number of posts, is enough to decide what to do, then I may leave it alone...].
I feel that you reply here does not , at least to me, give a determination as to the acceptability or not here for the posts in question. Your reply writes that , IMO, that you addressed one post in a number of posts, or part of a post and left either the other part or the other posts alone without comment from you. This leaves more than one, IMO, interpretation for what you did. Of the interpretations that I think has the potential to be thought by examining this statement from you is that :
A. Since you wrote that one part of the post is uncivil, that the other part is not acceptable either.
B. Since you wrote that one part is uncivil that the other part may , or may not, also be uncivil.
In relation to [...one of a number of posts...], some interpretations that IMO could have the potential for others to think are as follows.
C. Since you wrote that part of a post by this poster is uncivil, then only that part is uncivil and all the rest of the posters posts in that number of posts in that thread are acceptable
D. Since you wrote that part of a post is uncivil, then IMO I believe that there is the potential for some others to think that only that part is uncivil and posts by that poster in question outside of that thread are not a part of your writing that one part of one post in another thread is uncivil.
If you could clarify as to if other posts or parts of the same post are uncivil because you wrote that one part of a post is uncivil, then I could have a better understanding of your reply to me.
Lou Pilder
Posted by fayeroe on November 7, 2004, at 21:51:20
In reply to Re: Lou's response to NikkiT2 » Lou PIlder, posted by NikkiT2 on November 7, 2004, at 15:57:13
Nikki said: I know and accept that I hurt you. I admit that I should not have said certain things in my two posts directed toward you, and I am sorry for it.
Lou, how in the h*ll do you explain ignoring this post? After all the time you've taken up with this, all the space you've used and after so many people have simply thrown up their hands in dismay........HOW can you not answer this post? I know you don't like to answer questions, so if you want to fritter away some of the last remaining goodwill you have here.......do as you usually do and either ask me for a clarification or just ignore this. Instead of answering Nikki's post, you're still after a frigging determination!!! This is totally beyond the pale. I will never, ever again try to hep you.
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 7, 2004, at 22:10:01
In reply to Re: Lou's response to NikkiT2 » NikkiT2, posted by fayeroe on November 7, 2004, at 21:51:20
Friends,
It is written here that [...how the (expletive)..can you ignore ...?].
It is not my intention to ignore the post in question. I have not replied to it yet because my reply will be very lengthly and I need more time to compose my reply. I also appreciate the reply from Nikki to me and feel very good about it. But our relationship goes back several years and I would like to cover all of that so I will need more time to reply.
Lou
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 8, 2004, at 2:08:48
In reply to Lou's summery to Dr. Hsiung » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on November 7, 2004, at 21:03:06
> The posts in question that I made a request to you about that I do not know if you have made a determination as to if the posts are acceptable or not in relation to the guidlines of the forum are listed below.
She's apologized:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041027/msgs/412979.html
So IMO, whether they're acceptable is moot. I'd like to focus on moving forward now...
Bob
Posted by fayeroe on November 8, 2004, at 9:40:51
In reply to Lou's clarification to responding, posted by Lou Pilder on November 7, 2004, at 22:10:01
Lou wrote:Friends,
It is written here that [...how the (expletive)..can you ignore ...?].
It is not my intention to ignore the post in question. I have not replied to it yet because my reply will be very lengthly and I need more time to compose my reply. I also appreciate the reply from Nikki to me and feel very good about it. But our relationship goes back several years and I would like to cover all of that so I will need more time to reply.
LouLou, I do not believe that Nikki is referring to years of posts. I believe that she is talking about what has been happening recently. That you would say that you're going to cover all of the several years of posts means to me that there will be more time taken up...more space used.....and more people will turn away from you. I feel that you've got your chance and you're going to use your usual tactics to obscure issues and get more attention. Well, Lou, I think the time has come to put up or shut up. Pat....yes, I feel the authority hovering...but I had to say it. It's time this board was used for something other than this nonsense that has taken over.
Posted by mair on November 8, 2004, at 12:42:28
In reply to Re: Lou's summery, posted by Dr. Bob on November 8, 2004, at 2:08:48
Posted by fayeroe on November 8, 2004, at 14:00:37
In reply to Has Lou Ever Apologized to Nikki? (nm), posted by mair on November 8, 2004, at 12:42:28
Mair, the way I see it is if Lou apologized to Nikki, that would end his reign on the board right now. He's have to take something else up and he's not willing to do that. Nikki showed that she is sincere and only wants what is best for the board by apologizing to Lou.
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 8, 2004, at 15:04:01
In reply to Re: Lou's clarification to responding, posted by fayeroe on November 8, 2004, at 9:40:51
fayeroe,
You wrote,[...board was used for something other than this nonsense...].
Could you clarify what you are referring to as "nonsense"? If you could, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 8, 2004, at 15:16:56
In reply to Re: Lou's clarification to responding, posted by fayeroe on November 8, 2004, at 9:40:51
fayeroe,
You wrote, [...Lou,....more people will turn away from you...your usual tactics to obscure issues...get more attention...].
It is not my intention to [...get more attention...]. Could you clarify what you mean by "usual tactics" ? If you could, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
Lou
Posted by fayeroe on November 8, 2004, at 15:22:39
In reply to Lou's reply to fayeroe » fayeroe, posted by Lou Pilder on November 8, 2004, at 15:04:01
Lou, I'm pretty sure you know the definition of nonsense. You talk, in 2003, of buying and selling thousands of stocks, etc. etc.....so I feel confident that you know what I mean.
Posted by fayeroe on November 8, 2004, at 15:24:00
In reply to Lou's reply to fayeroe-ptafyutoigma » fayeroe, posted by Lou Pilder on November 8, 2004, at 15:16:56
I'll only respond to one post at a time, Lou. And I just responded to one.
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 8, 2004, at 15:28:33
In reply to Re: Has Lou Ever Apologized to Nikki? » mair, posted by fayeroe on November 8, 2004, at 14:00:37
In regards to the following being posted here: [...if Lou apologised...that would {end his reign}...he's have to take something else up...he's not willing to do that...].
I have no idea what is meant by {end his reign} or the part about {take something else up}. I would like to hear from anyone if they could expalin what they think these statements mean.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 8, 2004, at 15:35:06
In reply to Re: Lou's reply to fayeroe » Lou Pilder, posted by fayeroe on November 8, 2004, at 15:22:39
fayeroe,
You wrote about me trading stocks. I did use the internet to do that, but I am not trading in the market, for the last couple of years have been a market that I do not like to trade in. But could you clarify how my trading stocks is comnnected in your posts to me? If you could then I could have a better understnding of what you wrote to me.
Lou
Posted by fayeroe on November 8, 2004, at 15:39:56
In reply to Lou's reply to some aspect of this thread-ehrtseu » fayeroe, posted by Lou Pilder on November 8, 2004, at 15:35:06
Lou, this could go on til the cows come home. You know perfectly well that I meant that if you were intelligent enough to trade stocks, you were intelligent enough to know the definition of the word I used. I won't play your game. And it is a game.
Posted by fayeroe on November 8, 2004, at 15:42:16
In reply to Lou's reply to some aspect of this thread-ehrtseu » fayeroe, posted by Lou Pilder on November 8, 2004, at 15:35:06
That was the last post that I'll reply to with you asking for explanation or clarification. You either address what I post or forget it.
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 9, 2004, at 1:44:41
In reply to Re: Lou's clarification to responding, posted by fayeroe on November 8, 2004, at 9:40:51
> I feel that you've got your chance and you're going to use your usual tactics to obscure issues and get more attention.
Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down. Sorry, but the last time you were blocked it was for 4 weeks, so this time I'm going to make it for 8.
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 Jai Narayan on November 9, 2004, at 17:32:05
In reply to Re: blocked for 8 weeks » fayeroe, posted by Dr. Bob on November 9, 2004, at 1:44:41
so everytime you get blocked double?
I am totally confused.
1 week
2 weeks
4 weeks
8 weeks
16 weeks
32 weeks?
etc
Is this really how this goes?
Jai
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 10, 2004, at 9:35:14
In reply to Dr. Bob every time you get blocked double?, posted by Jai Narayan on November 9, 2004, at 17:32:05
> Is this really how this goes?
More or less, see:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#enforce
Bob
Posted by Shar on November 11, 2004, at 0:40:02
In reply to Re: every time you get blocked double more or less, posted by Dr. Bob on November 10, 2004, at 9:35:14
Well, what a shame!
Some deserve blocks so much more than others! Only IMHO, of course!
Shar
> > Is this really how this goes?
>
> More or less, see:
>
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#enforce
>
> Bob
Posted by Shar on November 11, 2004, at 22:54:08
In reply to Lou's reply to some aspect of this thread-ehrtseu » fayeroe, posted by Lou Pilder on November 8, 2004, at 15:35:06
I think, Lou, Fayerody was just commenting on how smart you are!
Shar
> fayeroe,
> You wrote about me trading stocks. I did use the internet to do that, but I am not trading in the market, for the last couple of years have been a market that I do not like to trade in. But could you clarify how my trading stocks is comnnected in your posts to me? If you could then I could have a better understnding of what you wrote to me.
> Lou
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.