![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 111 to 135 of 224. Go back in thread:
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
Posted by Dinah on March 1, 2005, at 20:01:14
In reply to Re: Don't you agree Dr Bob?? (nm), posted by alexandra_k on March 1, 2005, at 17:44:23
there wouldn't be a one year cap. :)
Posted by alexandra_k on March 1, 2005, at 20:21:28
In reply to Well, if he did... » alexandra_k, posted by Dinah on March 1, 2005, at 20:01:14
Hmm. Well maybe he is working on changing it ;-)
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 2, 2005, at 8:19:43
In reply to Re: the seriousness of the offense » Dr. Bob, posted by alexandra_k on February 26, 2005, at 15:34:49
> you could cap it at 4 or 6 or 8 and there is still some room to increase it for reoffending.
But then it wouldn't really be capped at 4 or 6 or 8...
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on March 2, 2005, at 14:09:52
In reply to Re: cap, posted by Dr. Bob on March 2, 2005, at 8:19:43
If it was capped at 4 then there is room to increase it for reoffending as follows:
1st block - 1 week
2nd block - 2 weeks
3rd block - 3 weeks
4th block - 4 weeks
5th block - 4 weeks (that is where the cap kicks in - see??)
and if it was six weeks then it would be different as follows:5th block - 5 weeks
6th block - 6 weeks
7th block - 6 weeks
(There the cap kicks in)And if it was an 8 week cap then
7th block - 7 weeks
8th block - 8 weeks
9th block - 8 weeks
(Cap is there at 8 weeks instead - see?)And of course you can continue to use discretion with respect to whether the next block increases or remains the same as the last one etc.
Clearer?
> > you could cap it at 4 or 6 or 8 and there is still some room to increase it for reoffending.
>
> But then it wouldn't really be capped at 4 or 6 or 8...
>
> Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 2, 2005, at 22:31:38
In reply to Re: to clarify » Dr. Bob, posted by alexandra_k on March 2, 2005, at 14:09:52
> If it was capped at 4 then there is room to increase it for reoffending as follows...
Ah, I see what you mean, thanks. A year is definitely a long time. But as far as whether it's *too* long, maybe we should just agree to disagree?
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on March 3, 2005, at 0:52:14
In reply to Re: to clarify, posted by Dr. Bob on March 2, 2005, at 22:31:38
> Ah, I see what you mean, thanks. A year is definitely a long time. But as far as whether it's *too* long, maybe we should just agree to disagree?
Well, I don't suppose there is much I can say in response to that...
How about changing the 2X and 3X blocking system to a +1 and +2 week blocking system then???
So instead of the 2X system there is:
1st block: 1 week
2nd block: 2 weeks
3rd block: 3 weeks
etc.And instead of the 3X system there is:
1st block: 1 week
2nd block: 3 weeks
3rd block: 5 weeks
etc.That way it takes longer for people to get to the very large number of weeks blocks???
Posted by Jai Narayan on March 3, 2005, at 18:11:18
In reply to Re: to clarify, posted by Dr. Bob on March 2, 2005, at 22:31:38
is the blocking system difficult to change?
or is it your mind that is difficult to change?"remember it's not the spoon that bends....."
quote from "The Matrix"
Ja* Narayan
Posted by alexandra_k on March 4, 2005, at 0:10:38
In reply to Dr. Bob, is it difficult to change this?, posted by Jai Narayan on March 3, 2005, at 18:11:18
You been reading about Toeplitz matrix eigenproblems Jai???
Posted by Gabbi-x-2 on March 4, 2005, at 1:57:48
In reply to Rod is desperate for attention, posted by MCK on February 17, 2005, at 19:23:38
Thank you
I didn't really believe what you had said, when I read your post, however I have reason to now.
Thanks.
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 5, 2005, at 19:06:43
In reply to Dr. Bob, is it difficult to change this?, posted by Jai Narayan on March 3, 2005, at 18:11:18
Posted by alexandra_k on March 5, 2005, at 23:33:31
In reply to Re: the latter (nm), posted by Dr. Bob on March 5, 2005, at 19:06:43
Posted by Dinah on March 6, 2005, at 9:35:35
In reply to Re: why? (nm) » Dr. Bob, posted by alexandra_k on March 5, 2005, at 23:33:31
If you mean why is it so difficult to have a meaningful dialog with Dr. Bob where you feel understood and understand, welcome to my world.
If you mean why is he adamant on this point, I can say that having experienced both sides of administrating, I have considerable empathy for his position. Which isn't to say that I always agree with his longer blocks. I think they should only be imposed for uncivil behavior against other posters, not for nonthreatening actions toward Dr. Bob. And not for those who are trying but fall short in interpreting the civility rules.
And don't many sites ban people for life? Not only does Dr. Bob cap people's block at one year, but if they email him and present him with a reasonable reason for doing so (here we get back to issue one) he can and has lowered the time involved. He's promised to let us know in the future when he does that, though.
Posted by alexandra_k on March 6, 2005, at 14:41:03
In reply to Re: why? » alexandra_k, posted by Dinah on March 6, 2005, at 9:35:35
I guess I posted something once about people not returning if they got a very long block. I can understand why it might be nice to push out 'trolls' for a while. Give them some time to maybe change their posting style or something. But when someone is mostly supportive and / or informative then it is a shame that they get blocked for such long periods of time.
I wonder what the longest block length is that someone has properly returned from...
Posted by alexandra_k on March 6, 2005, at 14:43:26
In reply to Re: why? » Dinah, posted by alexandra_k on March 6, 2005, at 14:41:03
Also, my understanding (though I might need to be corrected here) is that once upon a time in Babble history people started running riot.
Strict civility rules were introduced to bring people back under control...
And that worked out well.
I just wonder whether they need to be so very strict to be effective. Whether we lose people because of them. I think Dr Bob said something once before about it being sad when that happens. I guess I am just wondering whether it could be prevented.
Posted by alexandra_k on March 9, 2005, at 1:03:41
In reply to Re: the latter (nm), posted by Dr. Bob on March 5, 2005, at 19:06:43
Do you want to tell us why you don't want to tell us why?
Are you afraid we might make you change your mind?
Posted by alexandra_k on March 9, 2005, at 21:49:36
In reply to Re: hmm. » Dr. Bob, posted by alexandra_k on March 9, 2005, at 1:03:41
Well... Not give up exactly. Make a strategic retreat...
No doubt this will come up again at some point...
Posted by gardenergirl on March 9, 2005, at 22:40:39
In reply to Re: its okay I give up..., posted by alexandra_k on March 9, 2005, at 21:49:36
It always does.
The wheels on the bus go round and round, round and round...
gg
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 9, 2005, at 23:11:43
In reply to Re: its okay I give up..., posted by gardenergirl on March 9, 2005, at 22:40:39
> Do you want to tell us why you don't want to tell us why?
>
> alexandra_k> The wheels on the bus go round and round, round and round...
>
> ggIt's not that I don't want to tell you why, it's that this wheel has gone round before...
> > > is the blocking system difficult to change?
> > > or is it your mind that is difficult to change?
> >
> > the latterBecause this is an equilibrium we've reached and to upset it there should to be a compelling reason?
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on March 9, 2005, at 23:14:04
In reply to Re: its okay I give up..., posted by gardenergirl on March 9, 2005, at 22:40:39
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.