![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 188 to 212 of 224. Go back in thread:
Posted by Toph on March 16, 2005, at 10:13:34
In reply to Re: my opinion » Toph, posted by Dinah on March 16, 2005, at 8:41:04
> Don't underestimate the role the community plays now in setting "societal" norms. But I wouldn't want that role to spill over into discipline. We wouldn't want a society where violation of the norms was confused with an offense.
True, but I wouldn't underestimate the role the community could play in discerning civil conduct and appropriate consequences on its own. I like the empowering idea in high schools and college of student disciplanry boards. Having been unfairly treated here in the past, maybe I'm speaking from a sour grapes point of view. One should always strive for the ideal, however, and, while admittedly improbable, we should strive for an autonomous, self-reliant community where there is no Bob.
Toph
Posted by AuntieMel on March 16, 2005, at 12:25:04
In reply to Re: my opinion, posted by Toph on March 16, 2005, at 10:13:34
If someone is being uncivil it is perfectly acceptable to give them a heads up about their postings.
As long as the heads up is civil.
Isn't that peer pressure at it's best?
Posted by Toph on March 16, 2005, at 12:44:47
In reply to Re: but we can do some of that now » Toph, posted by AuntieMel on March 16, 2005, at 12:25:04
> If someone is being uncivil it is perfectly acceptable to give them a heads up about their postings.
>
> As long as the heads up is civil.
>
> Isn't that peer pressure at it's best?Yes, but my experience in relaying my concerns about another's conduct usually got me in trouble.
I'm really just making an argument of principle. I have no idea how true democratic policing model could be implimented in practice.
Posted by alexandra_k on March 16, 2005, at 12:57:02
In reply to Re: but we can do some of that now, posted by Toph on March 16, 2005, at 12:44:47
Hard to be democratic when polls are considered 'divisive'...
Hard to be democratic when Dr Bob overthrows the majority and I am fairly sure that he has absolutely no intention of changing that...
Think about it Dr Bob.
Do you really want us to decide most / all things
Or do you have certain decisions in mind (ie the ones you don't really care about one way or the other)?People already can and do warn people to be civil.
People already can and do email you with their concerns.
I guess you could formalise that process if you wanted...
It isn't much different IMO.But of course it is a good idea.
Democracy = liberty freedom and justice for all
By definition so it must be true.
Who in their right mind would stand up and say
'Democracy is a bad idea - we don't want to be democratic'Only in America...
Posted by alexandra_k on March 16, 2005, at 13:25:57
In reply to Re: but we can do some of that now, posted by alexandra_k on March 16, 2005, at 12:57:02
Though of course if you formalised the procedure so that people hit a 'complain about the post' button then you wouldn't need to read the boards anymore. Just the posts that people complained about.
Or you could just set it so that if x number of complaints were received then that person got a warning or blocking or whatever.
I guess it must be kind of fun to just throw questions out there and see what people will say...
Posted by alexandra_k on March 16, 2005, at 13:31:43
In reply to Re: but we can do some of that now, posted by alexandra_k on March 16, 2005, at 13:25:57
In one of the classes I am tutoring we have a 'self marked test'. The students sit the test in the lecture. Then they are supposed to swap the test with their neighbor (ha!) and the lecturer goes through the answers and they are supposed to mark it themselves.
Of course it turns into an absolute fiasco every year.
The tests are then handed in and assigned to a proper marker. They then get properly marked. The wrong answers that were marked right are changed and vice versa.
The point of the exercise is that at the end of that process students are less likely to complain about the marking. In fact we have never had a student complain about the marking of a 'self-marked test' even though the majority of their answers are changed.
We also get a lot less complaints about marking errors as the students realise that marking is harder than it looks...
Same with determining whether someone should be warned or blocked or whatever I suppose...
It works. Why not?
Posted by AuntieMel on March 16, 2005, at 13:41:22
In reply to Re: but we can do some of that now, posted by alexandra_k on March 16, 2005, at 12:57:02
Posted by Toph on March 16, 2005, at 16:11:04
In reply to Re: are you ok alexandra? (nm) » alexandra_k, posted by AuntieMel on March 16, 2005, at 13:41:22
Posted by Toph on March 16, 2005, at 16:23:29
In reply to Re: but we can do some of that now » Toph, posted by AuntieMel on March 16, 2005, at 12:25:04
I hope I'm not going off on a tangent, Mel, but consider this scenario. Two posters disagree and one is uncivil to the other. The offending poster apologizes to the offended and the offended accepts the apology. No harm, no foul? Or must the administrator, in the name of consistency and some need to teach a lesson to others, punish the offender. Isn't the greater lesson to all that 2 people can rectify their uncivil conduct? And couldn't a wise and just facilitator facilicate such a civil reconciliation by asking the parties to kiss and make up? Call me a dreamer but I believe that adults here are capable of such things. If not, off with their heads.
Toph
Posted by AuntieMel on March 16, 2005, at 16:27:08
In reply to Re: but we can do some of that now » AuntieMel, posted by Toph on March 16, 2005, at 16:23:29
But there isn't usually any administrative action if there is an apology.
And a PBC amounts to the same as saying you weren't playing nice.
Posted by Gabbi-x-2 on March 16, 2005, at 17:43:03
In reply to Re: but we can do some of that now, posted by alexandra_k on March 16, 2005, at 12:57:02
changing that...
> Think about it Dr Bob.
> Do you really want us to decide most / all thingsDidn't Dr. Bob already make it pretty clear he wasn't going to change his mind about the blocks? I don't even think he brought the topic up. I don't think he's ever said he wanted us to decide most things either.
Posted by alexandra_k on March 16, 2005, at 21:20:01
In reply to Re: but we can do some of that now » alexandra_k, posted by Gabbi-x-2 on March 16, 2005, at 17:43:03
Posted by alexandra_k on March 16, 2005, at 21:25:46
In reply to Re: but we can do some of that now » alexandra_k, posted by Gabbi-x-2 on March 16, 2005, at 17:43:03
> Didn't Dr. Bob already make it pretty clear he wasn't going to change his mind about the blocks?
He ended up saying he would need a 'good reason' to change his mind. His only objection to the notion was that the 'equilibrium' may be thrown off. But it is unclear that 1) That is inevitable and 2) What the hell that means anyway. He didn't comment on the reasons that were offered. I suppose one can only assume that they didn't seem good to him. Not that he said why they weren't any good or anything like that...
But yeah, I think you are right.
I can be too much of an optimist sometimes.>I don't even think he brought the topic up. I don't think he's ever said he wanted us to decide most things either.
He does talk about Babble being 'more democratic'. Mostly when people are upset with some of his decisions.
The suggestion that he should fairly much 'leave us to it' tends to be enough to have people back off and stop voicing being upset with some of his decisions.
Useful strategy I suppose...
Posted by verne on March 16, 2005, at 21:40:54
In reply to Re: but we can do some of that now, posted by alexandra_k on March 16, 2005, at 12:57:02
I think I know what you're getting at Alexandra. The debate about a "democracy" at psychobabble is a "bad-faith" fiction.
It seems like real-world ideas are encouraged, and even inserted into the babble petri dish and allowed to flourish, not for the purpose of any real change but for the sheer spectacle of watching the petri-mites wrestle over the unattainable or some scrap of an ideal.
I don't think the elaborate "civility rules" have as much to do with making this site supportive as to do with creating friction. The long blocks are more designed for the optimal, maximum, crazy-making potential than for remedy, peace, or reform.
I'm a long-time member at another site that has yet to ban or block anyone in several years. Thousands come and go. Once in awhile, a post is edited. The uncivil offender leaves in frustration, outraged that any part of their post was removed. It deflates them. Any conflict dissipates and the deleted poster, if they come back, conforms to a civilized discussion - after all, they want to be heard.
Whereas, here, a block is a challenge and call to arms, for not just the errant poster but anyone remotely interested. (lots of collateral damage) Rather than just delete a few words, move on, and treat people with respect (like adults) there's a kind of parental "scolding" and, of course, the fight is on.
The current system of blocks isn't designed to protect anyone or bring peace to the community but to maximize tension and conflict. I have to view this model as a success since the purpose and goal have been realized.
a petri mite.
Posted by Gabbi-x-2 on March 16, 2005, at 22:02:47
In reply to Re: but we can do some of that now » Gabbi-x-2, posted by alexandra_k on March 16, 2005, at 21:25:46
> I can be too much of an optimist sometimes.
>
: )When I wrote that post I was thinking "I wonder why Alex was surprised?" and then I remembered that I've been here a lot longer than you..
I thinking in order to stay, certain parts of you have to go numb.
Posted by Toph on March 16, 2005, at 22:22:52
In reply to Re: but we can do some of that now » Toph, posted by AuntieMel on March 16, 2005, at 16:27:08
> But there isn't usually any administrative action if there is an apology.
I really don't know but I suspect that there have been instances when a sincere apology has been ignored.
>
> And a PBC amounts to the same as saying you weren't playing nice.I agree. I admit that I was relieved to receive one or two of those when I was cringing about a consequence.
Has Bob ever asked or assisted two posters who have let their differences get the better of them to find a way of reconciling, compromising or fostering each to repect those differences?
Having asked this , it dawns on me that I am giving two conflicting messages. One, for Bob to butt out and let us try to run the asylum, while, two, asking Bob to open up his role as more of a facilitator of positive group dynamic. Either way its a win, win, as I see it.
Some thoughts:
1) this place is ultimately an experiment, so let's experiment (unless someone is destined to get hurt, of course).
2) a rigid, externally controlled group is severely handicapped in developing all the benefits of a positive group dynamic.
3) people can be very comfortable with a less than optimal environment and resist any change.
4) it's easy for me to suggest change without knowing exactly how to implement it, sorry.
Toph
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 17, 2005, at 1:01:30
In reply to Re: but we can do some of that now » AuntieMel, posted by Toph on March 16, 2005, at 22:22:52
> Please don't ask for volounteers if you only have certain people in mind.
>
> It is exceptionally hurtful for someone to offer and for you to ignore them...
>
> alexandra_kI don't only have certain people in mind. And if I ignored someone, it wasn't intentional, and I wish they'd contact me again.
--
> couldn't a wise and just facilitator facilicate such a civil reconciliation by asking the parties to kiss and make up?
>
> TophCouldn't wise and just posters? I don't see myself as needed for that. I see myself as needed for failures to reconcile.
--
> My recollection was that no one had any problem iwth the button idea
Sorry, I didn't mean to raise that issue again, let's redirect discussion of it back to that previous thread:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050219/msgs/471936.html
> (p.s. There are problems with pure democracies. Didn't we de-facto consider you our representative in a representative democracy by choosing to post here?)
>
> DinahThat's one way to look at it. But still it would be a question, what an *even more* democratic structure might be...
> Do you really want us to decide most / all things
Not now, no, but I do think I'd like to move in that direction, yes.
> Democracy = liberty freedom and justice for all
>
> alexandra_kI disagree, democracy = more people being involved in determining the limits of liberty and freedom and the view of justice to be imposed.
> it dawns on me that I am giving two conflicting messages. One, for Bob to butt out and let us try to run the asylum, while, two, asking Bob to open up his role as more of a facilitator of positive group dynamic.
>
> 3) people can be very comfortable with a less than optimal environment and resist any change.
>
> TophIs any environment optimal? One way to look at it is that this site has selected for posters who are comfortable with, or at least willing to tolerate, me running it. Whereas a more democratic structure would require people who wanted to run it themselves. Again, if people would like to try, I'm still looking for volunteers. They can also contact current or past deputies rather than me if they'd prefer...
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on March 17, 2005, at 2:15:13
In reply to Re: volunteers, posted by Dr. Bob on March 17, 2005, at 1:01:30
> > Do you really want us to decide most / all things
> Not now, no, but I do think I'd like to move in that direction, yes.> democracy = more people being involved in determining the limits of liberty and freedom and the view of justice to be imposed.
Then why do you ignore it when posters do express a fairly strong consensus on certain issues? Just as an example: the length of Chemists block. Another example: small boards. It is examples like these that had me figure that you don't really want decisions to be based on what the majority of posters want after all. If you thought that the posters who voiced their opinion on the issue were not representative then there could have been a proper anonymous poll (through Yahoo).
You don't really seem to be moving towards letting us make those kinds of decisions...
Yet they would seem to be small (fairly minor) steps on the way to us making more decisions.
> a more democratic structure would require people who wanted to run it themselves.
So we have you running it on the one hand, and us running it on the other. But we aren't required to choose between them. There must be a middle ground.
I would prefer you to run it than posters.
But I do think that when posters have a clear preference and you disagree then you would be better to take peoples opinion seriously. Instead of (in effect) ignoring the issue and going on your merry way.
Posted by Dinah on March 17, 2005, at 9:41:26
In reply to Re: volunteers, posted by Dr. Bob on March 17, 2005, at 1:01:30
> > couldn't a wise and just facilitator facilicate such a civil reconciliation by asking the parties to kiss and make up?
> >
> > Toph
>
> Couldn't wise and just posters? I don't see myself as needed for that. I see myself as needed for failures to reconcile.That almost never works when I try it, and people just get madder. :(
> > Do you really want us to decide most / all things
>
> Not now, no, but I do think I'd like to move in that direction, yes.Why, Dr. Bob? Are you getting tired of us?
What would happen to those who selected this site because they were comfortable with you running it? What would happen to me?
Posted by partlycloudy on March 17, 2005, at 9:51:44
In reply to Re: volunteers » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on March 17, 2005, at 9:41:26
> > > Do you really want us to decide most / all things
> >
> > Not now, no, but I do think I'd like to move in that direction, yes.
>
> Why, Dr. Bob? Are you getting tired of us?
>
> What would happen to those who selected this site because they were comfortable with you running it? What would happen to me?And me, too?
Posted by AuntieMel on March 17, 2005, at 10:31:54
In reply to Re: volunteers, posted by partlycloudy on March 17, 2005, at 9:51:44
Posted by AuntieMel on March 17, 2005, at 10:46:05
In reply to Re: but we can do some of that now » alexandra_k, posted by Gabbi-x-2 on March 16, 2005, at 22:02:47
It's called 'serenity.'
Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
The courage to change the things I can,
And the wisdom to know the difference.
Posted by AuntieMel on March 17, 2005, at 10:57:47
In reply to Re: but we can do some of that now » AuntieMel, posted by Toph on March 16, 2005, at 22:22:52
1) this place is ultimately an experiment, so let's experiment (unless someone is destined to get hurt, of course).
Life is an experiment, all net forums are experiments, we experiment with meds, therapies and alternative treatments .....
But many are drawn to here instead of 'brand x' because of the feeling of comfort and safety, because real lives are in turmoil and a constantly changing babble would be too much to handle.
2) a rigid, externally controlled group is severely handicapped in developing all the benefits of a positive group dynamic.
We are all suffering from varying degrees of different mental conditions. Aren't we already handicapped when it comes to group dynamics?
I personally like having a 'controlled' way to work on how I relate to other people. If it were left up to other posters to tell me when I was wrong - well I'd never know if it is me or them with the problem. While the punishments may (and do) seem unfair at times the *concept* of what is acceptable and what is not is pretty constant. It doesn't change based on personalities, time of year, weather or phase of the moon.
How many of us had problems with constantly changing or unrealistic expectations while growing up? How many were unaccepted because of being 'different' for some reason or another? I fit both of those - and am grateful I don't see it here.
Posted by Jai Narayan on March 17, 2005, at 17:25:09
In reply to Sounds Better Than OK, posted by verne on March 16, 2005, at 21:40:54
Posted by Toph on March 17, 2005, at 18:18:51
In reply to Re: some thoughts » Toph, posted by AuntieMel on March 17, 2005, at 10:57:47
>
> Life is an experiment, all net forums are experiments, we experiment with meds, therapies and alternative treatments .....
>
> But many are drawn to here instead of 'brand x' because of the feeling of comfort and safety, because real lives are in turmoil and a constantly changing babble would be too much to handle.
>I'm glad you like it here, mostly I do too. I can't speak for Bob but I suspect that he is relying on a sort of evolutionary theory of change. Some change is good and some change is not so good, but as someone said the only thing in life that is consant, is change.
> 2) a rigid, externally controlled group is severely handicapped in developing all the benefits of a positive group dynamic.
>
> We are all suffering from varying degrees of different mental conditions. Aren't we already handicapped when it comes to group dynamics?
>You know, there are some incredibly capable people here, including you, Mel, so I say, no, our group might just be different from the others.
> I personally like having a 'controlled' way to work on how I relate to other people. If it were left up to other posters to tell me when I was wrong - well I'd never know if it is me or them with the problem. While the punishments may (and do) seem unfair at times the *concept* of what is acceptable and what is not is pretty constant. It doesn't change based on personalities, time of year, weather or phase of the moon.
>
Yeah, I think its a good idea to coerce competent adults to wear seatbelts. I would wear them anyway, but I don't have to like it.> How many of us had problems with constantly changing or unrealistic expectations while growing up? How many were unaccepted because of being 'different' for some reason or another? I fit both of those - and am grateful I don't see it here.
Me too, if that's what you think would happen then it would be a big mistake to even try anything different. I am beginning to be convinced by some people here that have a greater investment in PB than I, that a tribunal would foster even more resentment which would be bad.
I'll stick to my guns that mitigating circumstances, character witnesses for someone unfamiliar to Bob, plea bargaining, and a simple right to confront one's accuser (Bob) with their interpretation of the facts would be an improvement and hopefully not divisive. Some of this indeed goes on here. I've seen Bob change blocks because of compelling advocacy by members. Let's see if PB can develop some wings.
I appreciate you discussing this with me Mel.
Toph
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.