![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 92 to 116 of 224. Go back in thread:
Posted by gardenergirl on February 24, 2005, at 19:25:40
In reply to Of course it is » alexandra_k, posted by mair on February 24, 2005, at 17:05:56
I wonder how many people even return to Babble after a block that long. Although I suppose people could lurk until their block was up.
gg
Posted by justyourlaugh on February 24, 2005, at 22:41:15
In reply to Re: blocked for 8 weeks » 64bowtie, posted by Dr. Bob on February 23, 2005, at 22:29:55
i looked around?
64 has a right to his thoughts..
he was hurt..
why was he punished while others were not?
64 has always stated his intentions..he is here to supprot..to educate..to learn from others..
never would i believe his life experiences were tossed aside...silly but valid...why was i never blocked?
j
Posted by AuntieMel on February 25, 2005, at 10:14:17
In reply to Re: blocked for 8 weeks..really?, posted by justyourlaugh on February 24, 2005, at 22:41:15
Why don't you get blocked?
because:
You always ask questions in such a sweet way you could never be accused of being even remotely uncivil. Even when you don't agree with something you word it in such a kind way that shows *your* feelings and never says anything bad about another person.
People don't get angry with you. We all want to adopt you.
Posted by AuntieMel on February 25, 2005, at 10:31:59
In reply to Of course it is » alexandra_k, posted by mair on February 24, 2005, at 17:05:56
A while back I emailed Dr. Bob about establishing a point system for blocks so that the length of time fits the crime.
Possible things to consider would be intent - if it could be determined, past blocks, the seriousness of the offense, etc. Points would be subtracted if the uncivil post was provoked or others did the baiting first (often the case with chemist.) I'm sure there are many other things that could be added to the list.
He seemed very agreeable to considering it, but wanted a proposal first.
I've been thinking about it since, but I don't feel I'm qualified to do it all.
How about if we get together to put together a proposal??
Posted by AuntieMel on February 25, 2005, at 10:34:42
In reply to For: Mair, Dinah, Alexandra, jyl, gardenergirl, posted by AuntieMel on February 25, 2005, at 10:31:59
Posted by verne on February 25, 2005, at 10:41:51
In reply to Re: Isn't a year a bit excessive????? » Dr. Bob, posted by alexandra_k on February 24, 2005, at 14:26:29
I think anything over a week or two is excessive. By then the thread with the offending post is played out and forgotten.
Blocks of several weeks or months isn't remedial but just plain punitive. I have to think hard to remember a time when I was punished in this way - perhaps grade school, time-out in a corner. Or being put on the "closed" ward while in the hospital. But in those cases, there's forgiveness within minutes or, in the case of the psych ward, a couple weeks.
Except for this post, I'm no longer participating at this site. I'll still browse for information on meds but otherwise I'm done. I've left kindergarten for good.
Verne
Posted by AuntieMel on February 25, 2005, at 11:57:47
In reply to Re: Isn't a year a bit excessive?????, posted by verne on February 25, 2005, at 10:41:51
Everything you need to learn in life comes from kindergarden.
Posted by alexandra_k on February 25, 2005, at 15:25:30
In reply to For: Mair, Dinah, Alexandra, jyl, gardenergirl, posted by AuntieMel on February 25, 2005, at 10:31:59
I think that if we don't like the present system then the burden is on us to suggest something better. I would be more than happy to discuss alternatives (I have been trying to get people interested in doing just that for a while now...)
One thing to bear in mind might be that the present system is relatively simple. If we want a whole bunch of factors taken into account then it could be complicating things rather a lot. Also, things like 'intent' can be hard to establish...
But yeah, I think that is a good idea.
>if the uncivil post was provoked or others did the baiting first (often the case with chemist.)
Yeah. Though, I guess that we are supposed to learn not to respond to 'baiting'..
> He seemed very agreeable to considering it, but wanted a proposal first.Hmm. IMO asking for a proposal is a good way to let the matter drop ;-) But yeah, we could take him up on that.
Posted by alexandra_k on February 25, 2005, at 15:26:37
In reply to Re: Isn't a year a bit excessive?????, posted by verne on February 25, 2005, at 10:41:51
(((Verne)))
I have had bad experiences with 'time out' as well.
Hope you keep hanging around.
And maybe start posting again one day.
Posted by TamaraJ on February 25, 2005, at 15:34:57
In reply to Re: New blocking system???? » AuntieMel, posted by alexandra_k on February 25, 2005, at 15:25:30
I think one thing that needs to be given some consideration is giving people a chance to rephrase, retract or repent (the opportunity to come into compliance with the civility rules) before being handed a block. Maybe I am just being naive.
Posted by Dinah on February 25, 2005, at 15:35:35
In reply to Re: blocked for 8 weeks..really?, posted by justyourlaugh on February 24, 2005, at 22:41:15
Others were blocked as well.
And if anyone wants to get blocked the tried and true way is to immediately do something that you were told by Dr. Bob not to do. If Dr. Bob gives you a PBC for saying XXX and you say anything even remotely sounding like XXX right afterwards, you have close to a hundred percent chance of being blocked.
You can email Bob and say XXX to your heart's content.
Or you can find a way to say how you feel without characterizing another poster or another poster's posts negatively and be just fine.
Posted by Dinah on February 25, 2005, at 15:39:05
In reply to Re: Isn't a year a bit excessive?????, posted by verne on February 25, 2005, at 10:41:51
I don't think a year is excessive at all. I was a bit disapproving when Dr. Bob put in the cap of a year.
I do think that it shouldn't automatically double or triple without judgement on Dr. Bob's part, leaving minor violations to lead to inordinately long blocks. But Dr. Bob's generally been pretty good lately about using judgement and mercy. He's definitely learning and growing as an administrator.
Posted by Dinah on February 25, 2005, at 15:42:45
In reply to For: Mair, Dinah, Alexandra, jyl, gardenergirl, posted by AuntieMel on February 25, 2005, at 10:31:59
While Dr. Bob's current system isn't perfect, I think I prefer a human administrator doing his best and making judgement calls to an elaborate system of automation which would just leave a lot of points to argue with him about.
But that's just me.
I do like the way he's giving more "Please rephrases" and working with people when they fall short. And I like that he doesn't automatically double or triple sentences the way he did for a while there.
I actually think he's gotten so lenient that my eyebrows have raised in more than a few situations, and I've been glad they weren't escalating and I didn't have to step in because I'd have been stricter.
So thank Bob. :)
Posted by alexandra_k on February 25, 2005, at 16:23:34
In reply to Re: New blocking system???? » alexandra_k, posted by TamaraJ on February 25, 2005, at 15:34:57
I think that is a good point. It is something that we can do already, however, so long as we get to it BEFORE he gets to the boards. If you have said something uncivil to another poster then an apology to them would probably go down well.
> I think one thing that needs to be given some consideration is giving people a chance to rephrase, retract or repent (the opportunity to come into compliance with the civility rules) before being handed a block. Maybe I am just being naive.
Posted by TamaraJ on February 25, 2005, at 16:31:46
In reply to Re: New blocking system???? » TamaraJ, posted by alexandra_k on February 25, 2005, at 16:23:34
And, perhaps to keep in mind is that we should not be afraid or shy to "police" ourselves. I see it done often where a poster or two will pass on a civility warning to another poster, who in turn has the opportunity to take corrective action before Dr. Bob has to intervene.
> I think that is a good point. It is something that we can do already, however, so long as we get to it BEFORE he gets to the boards. If you have said something uncivil to another poster then an apology to them would probably go down well.
>
> > I think one thing that needs to be given some consideration is giving people a chance to rephrase, retract or repent (the opportunity to come into compliance with the civility rules) before being handed a block. Maybe I am just being naive.
>
>
Posted by alexandra_k on February 25, 2005, at 16:35:01
In reply to Re: For: Mair, Dinah, Alexandra, jyl, gardenergirl » AuntieMel, posted by Dinah on February 25, 2005, at 15:42:45
>I don't think a year is excessive at all. I was a bit disapproving when Dr. Bob put in the cap of a year.
I guess it depends. I mean if someone persistently came here and posted things that many people considered *grossly offensive* then it may well not be long enough to inspire a change of heart in them. But my concern is for people who aren't at all *grossly offensive*. I don't know.
>I do think that it shouldn't automatically double or triple without judgement on Dr. Bob's part, leaving minor violations to lead to inordinately long blocks.
Yes. That is what gets me the most. That is the thing I would like changed. Thats where I thought that the length of the block could be capped at maybe one month. For the posters who offer a lot of helpful and / or supportive posts but may also have *short fuses* or whatever.
>But Dr. Bob's generally been pretty good lately about using judgement and mercy. He's definitely learning and growing as an administrator.
Sure, and I don't want to take that away from him. Just thinking about imporvements... But the length of blocks IMO gets a bit excessive. And it frightens away posters who have a lot to offer. Some people leave because of it and don't come back. I guess it could be seen as a downside to the system - but maybe the system could be improved so that that doesn't happen. Or so that doesn't happen for as many people.
> While Dr. Bob's current system isn't perfect, I think I prefer a human administrator doing his best and making judgement calls to an elaborate system of automation which would just leave a lot of points to argue with him about.
Agreed.
> I do like the way he's giving more "Please rephrases" and working with people when they fall short. And I like that he doesn't automatically double or triple sentences the way he did for a while there.Yup.
> I actually think he's gotten so lenient that my eyebrows have raised in more than a few situations, and I've been glad they weren't escalating and I didn't have to step in because I'd have been stricter.But they worked out okay???
> So thank Bob. :)yeah, thanks.
Don't get me wrong, I think he does a pretty good job. Just looking at a way to offer improvements (IMO)
Posted by alexandra_k on February 25, 2005, at 16:39:41
In reply to Re: New blocking system???? » alexandra_k, posted by TamaraJ on February 25, 2005, at 16:31:46
Yes. I really appreciate it when people Babblemail me or post something on the boards to let me know to be careful. Or that I have stepped out of line. It gives me a chance to apologise and try to deescalate the situation before Dr Bob hits the boards and people get warnings or blockings or whatever. I also try to do this for other people. Babblemail them usually telling them that IMO they should be careful..
But yeah. If we did that more ourselves then there may well be less warnings and blockings required.
> And, perhaps to keep in mind is that we should not be afraid or shy to "police" ourselves. I see it done often where a poster or two will pass on a civility warning to another poster, who in turn has the opportunity to take corrective action before Dr. Bob has to intervene.
Posted by Larry Hoover on February 25, 2005, at 17:08:07
In reply to Re: Isn't a year a bit excessive????? » Dr. Bob, posted by alexandra_k on February 24, 2005, at 14:26:29
> I still think one or maybe two months is a hell of a long time.
>
> > > How about capping the length of blocks?
> > >
> > > alexandra_k
> >
> > They *are* capped now, at 52 weeks.I think that blocks in excess of 4 to 8 weeks are cruel and unusual punishment, excessively punitive, and without merit.
Lar
Posted by Dinah on February 25, 2005, at 17:32:22
In reply to Re: Isn't a year a bit excessive????? » alexandra_k, posted by Larry Hoover on February 25, 2005, at 17:08:07
Not administrative, I know.
Posted by henrietta on February 25, 2005, at 19:23:17
In reply to Re: Isn't a year a bit excessive????? » alexandra_k, posted by Larry Hoover on February 25, 2005, at 17:08:07
Agree with Larry Hoover .
Posted by Jai Narayan on February 26, 2005, at 10:48:01
In reply to Re: Isn't a year a bit excessive????? » Larry Hoover, posted by henrietta on February 25, 2005, at 19:23:17
what do other boards do?
PC deleats posts...I would vote for 6 weeks being the limit for blocking.
If that person can't get it together in 40 days....
well they can have another 40 days to think about it "after" getting PBC and earning another long block....
but to move to 8 weeks....I say cap it at 6 weeks.
Ja*
Posted by AuntieMel on February 26, 2005, at 11:25:45
In reply to Re: New blocking system???? » alexandra_k, posted by TamaraJ on February 25, 2005, at 16:31:46
Posted by Dr. Bob on February 26, 2005, at 12:44:26
In reply to Of course it is » alexandra_k, posted by mair on February 24, 2005, at 17:05:56
> the length of the block has everything to do with the number of times you've been blocked before, and generally nothing to do with the seriousness of the offense.
It may *primarily* have to do with that. IMO, the more times someone "offends", the more serious it is...
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on February 26, 2005, at 15:34:49
In reply to Re: the seriousness of the offense, posted by Dr. Bob on February 26, 2005, at 12:44:26
> It may *primarily* have to do with that. IMO, the more times someone "offends", the more serious it is...
Sure, but more than one or two months?????
I mean currently it is capped at 12 months
But you could cap it at 4 or 6 or 8 and there is still some room to increase it for reoffending.
Posted by alexandra_k on March 1, 2005, at 17:44:23
In reply to Re: the seriousness of the offense » Dr. Bob, posted by alexandra_k on February 26, 2005, at 15:34:49
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.