![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 18 to 42 of 57. Go back in thread:
Posted by Dinah on July 15, 2005, at 16:15:28
In reply to Re: Please cite escalating circumstance dinah, posted by so on July 15, 2005, at 14:04:23
I gave out two PBC's on the same subject, on two related threads. There were at least three posts involved.
That meets the escalation clause.
So if you ever see me give *two* PBC's at any one time, you know it's been met in my estimation.
I then emailed Dr. Bob to tell him what I'd done and to request a review by him, as is my custom.
Posted by so on July 15, 2005, at 18:52:07
In reply to Re: Please cite escalating circumstance dinah » so, posted by Dinah on July 15, 2005, at 16:15:28
Then your own actions comprise the circumstances you cite as "escalating"? How was it escalating when you first acted? What circumstances beside your own actions differentiate this circumstance from any other on the board about which you do not intervene?
> I gave out two PBC's on the same subject, on two related threads. There were at least three posts involved.
>
> That meets the escalation clause.
>
> So if you ever see me give *two* PBC's at any one time, you know it's been met in my estimation.
>
> I then emailed Dr. Bob to tell him what I'd done and to request a review by him, as is my custom.
Posted by Dinah on July 15, 2005, at 19:38:30
In reply to Re: Please cite escalating circumstance dinah, posted by so on July 15, 2005, at 18:52:07
No. What I mean is that if I think it is necessary to give two PBC's then I must have seen two posts which violate the civility guidelines (two related posts, I should add. While these two posts were on two different threads, the second thread was closely related to the first). Two posts which violate the civility guidelines constitute an escalating situation.
Therefore, what I was saying was, that it is not necessary to ask me why I intervened if you see two PBC's. Two PBC's means I saw two posts in violation of the civility guidelines. And that constitutes an escalating situation by definition.
If Dr. Bob disagrees, he'll tell me so. And his judgement of course prevails.
Posted by so on July 15, 2005, at 20:43:45
In reply to Re: Please cite escalating circumstance dinah » so, posted by Dinah on July 15, 2005, at 19:38:30
>Two posts which violate the civility guidelines constitute an escalating situation.
Did the first of those posts constitute an escalating situation? When you admonished that first poster, how did that situation differ from any another situation in which one person posted an isolated post you thought contravened site guidelines?
Posted by Dinah on July 15, 2005, at 23:20:40
In reply to Re: Please cite escalating circumstance dinah, posted by so on July 15, 2005, at 20:43:45
Please check the times. They are approximately three minutes apart.
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 16, 2005, at 1:11:32
In reply to Re: Apology to the board » Racer, posted by Nikkit2 on July 15, 2005, at 5:47:36
> the accusations and comparisons being thrown around by one single poster.
Sorry, but please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down.
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 July 16, 2005, at 7:20:59
In reply to Re: please be civil » Nikkit2, posted by Dr. Bob on July 16, 2005, at 1:11:32
Dr Bob,
Could you explain why, in your opinion, its not uncivil to suggest someone may be an anti-semetic, or defaming people?
Nikki
Posted by Dinah on July 16, 2005, at 8:01:11
In reply to Re: please be civil » Dr. Bob, posted by NikkiT2 on July 16, 2005, at 7:20:59
> Dr Bob,
>
> Could you explain why, in your opinion, its not uncivil to suggest someone may be an anti-semetic, or defaming people?
>
> NikkiI'd like to know that myself.
Posted by so on July 16, 2005, at 12:34:00
In reply to Re: please be civil » Dr. Bob, posted by NikkiT2 on July 16, 2005, at 7:20:59
> Dr Bob,
>
> Could you explain why, in your opinion, its not uncivil to suggest someone may be an anti-semetic, or defaming people?
>
> NikkiA person cannot be an adjective. Otherwise, I understand the present claim to refer not to occassions where someone has suggested another is antisemetic, but instead, occassions when a person has compared rhetorical methods, including those used by a political affiliation widely known to have latter committed genocide.
Posted by so on July 16, 2005, at 13:17:35
In reply to Re » NikkiT2, posted by so on July 16, 2005, at 12:34:00
i attempted to address this post specifically to Dinah, who wrote "I'd like to know that myself." but for some reason, another's name appears in the subject line -- most likely because Dinah's post and the other appeared similar.
> > Dr Bob,
> >
> > Could you explain why, in your opinion, its not uncivil to suggest someone may be an anti-semetic, or defaming people?
> >
> > Nikki
>
> A person cannot be an adjective. Otherwise, I understand the present claim to refer not to occassions where someone has suggested another is antisemetic, but instead, occassions when a person has compared rhetorical methods, including those used by a political affiliation widely known to have latter committed genocide.
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 17, 2005, at 1:37:55
In reply to Re: please be civil » Dr. Bob, posted by NikkiT2 on July 16, 2005, at 7:20:59
> Could you explain why, in your opinion, its not uncivil to suggest someone may be an anti-semetic, or defaming people?
Well, I can try... Can you give me an example of a suggestion like that?
Bob
Posted by NikkiT2 on July 17, 2005, at 5:43:02
In reply to Re: suggestions, posted by Dr. Bob on July 17, 2005, at 1:37:55
*blinks*
You've, um, not seen any??
Nikki
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 17, 2005, at 7:52:48
In reply to Re: suggestions, posted by Dr. Bob on July 17, 2005, at 1:37:55
DR. Hsiung,
I am requesting that you declare what constraints that I may have here to me if I wish to be a participant in this discussion that NikkiT2 is innitiating here.
A. Could I cite previous posts here?
B. Are there any posts in the archives that I can not cite here? If so, which ones, and why csn I not use them in this discussion?
C. Can another here use a post in this discussion that could have the potential, IMO, to arrouse ill-will toward me and be acceptable here? If so, could you list any reasons for such?
D. Could I post links here showing how historically the use of accusations toward jews like those that have the potential IMO to have the potential for some to think that the accusation could be saying that [...the jews killed Christ...], or,[...the religious leaders of Israel are hypocrites..]? or, [...the jews are filthy...]or,[...the jews are viruses or rats, or cancers, that will infect the community...], or posts what IMO have the potential to have me have a [...badge of shame...] put on me?, or other posts that have the potential, IMO to arrouse anti-Semitic feelings here?
I would like to know these restraints upon me, if there are any, so that I could be an equal participant here in this discussion, for I am not sure how your rule of 3's in relation to posting links to previous posts of poster that I have posted 3 of here could play a part in restricting my participation in this discussion and would like this to be declared ahead of time.
Also, I am requesting that you consider the following link in relation to this discussion because it may be relevant here.
Lou Pilder
http://xxxxxxx
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 17, 2005, at 8:55:46
In reply to Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-lvlplygfild? » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on July 17, 2005, at 7:52:48
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 17, 2005, at 9:03:01
In reply to I hav requested t th admin th the above be deleted (nm), posted by Lou Pilder on July 17, 2005, at 8:55:46
Friends,
I am having some difficulty with my system. What I wanted deleted was not the post by me but something else that is now under exploration as to the correction. The link is difficult for me to post because of my system. I still would like to offer the link and if another posts here, then I will make another attempt to post the link.
Lou
Posted by NikkiT2 on July 18, 2005, at 8:08:01
In reply to Re: suggestions, posted by Dr. Bob on July 17, 2005, at 1:37:55
OK, an example
two posts below yours (the one I am replying to), in response to me suggesting that there may have been posts that had the possibility of sounding like they are accusing someone of anti-semitism, Lou posts this..
"D. Could I post links here showing how historically the use of accusations toward jews like those that have the potential IMO to have the potential for some to think that the accusation could be saying that [...the jews killed Christ...], or,[...the religious leaders of Israel are hypocrites..]? or, [...the jews are filthy...]or,[...the jews are viruses or rats, or cancers, that will infect the community...], or posts what IMO have the potential to have me have a [...badge of shame...] put on me?, or other posts that have the potential, IMO to arrouse anti-Semitic feelings here?"
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050716/msgs/528932.html
To me, he is suggesting that my words, some how, could be anti-semitic. For, if I were suggesting what has been written by Lou, surely that would make me an anti-semite?
I'm not quite sure how asking whether you would act on such suggestions would lead *anyone* to believe I was suggesting that Jews killed Christ, and that suggestion leads me to feel put down and quite possibly defamed.
Nikki
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 18, 2005, at 8:47:12
In reply to Re: suggestions, posted by Dr. Bob on July 17, 2005, at 1:37:55
Dr. Hsiung,
I am also requesting if it will be permissible for me in this discussion that if I will be permitted to cite links that show the historical use of statements like,[...Jesus overturned the tables of the money changers in the Temple... make My Father's house a house of merchandise...] in relation to those type of statements being used to arrouse hatred toward the jews
Lou Pilder
Posted by NikkiT2 on July 18, 2005, at 9:11:08
In reply to Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-willIbeprmted? » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on July 18, 2005, at 8:47:12
Lou,
I give you *my* permission to bring up any of my posts in this thread, as this problem needs dealing with once and for all.
I am, though, *incredibly* hurt that you read hatred towards Jews in these posts of mine.
A close friend, who is a Jew and teaches Judaism, and I discussed this situation over the weekend, as I was getting increasingly upset about your accusations. She fails to see anything that resembles hatred toward Jews, or even suggests any of the things you see. What she see's is people making comments towards YOU, as Lou, as a person, not towards you as a Jew, or against any other Jew, or the foundations of Judaism.
How would you feel if someone here, who were black, were to constantly accuse you of being a racist, when there was no foudning to that claim?
How would you feel if I, as a woman, were to claim posts of yours were disciminatory against women simply because you disagreed with them?Nikki
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 18, 2005, at 9:28:35
In reply to Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-lvlplygfild? » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on July 17, 2005, at 7:52:48
> DR. Hsiung,
> I am requesting that you declare what constraints that I may have here to me if I wish to be a participant in this discussion that NikkiT2 is innitiating here.
> A. Could I cite previous posts here?
> B. Are there any posts in the archives that I can not cite here? If so, which ones, and why csn I not use them in this discussion?
> C. Can another here use a post in this discussion that could have the potential, IMO, to arrouse ill-will toward me and be acceptable here? If so, could you list any reasons for such?
> D. Could I post links here showing how historically the use of accusations toward jews like those that have the potential IMO to have the potential for some to think that the accusation could be saying that [...the jews killed Christ...], or,[...the religious leaders of Israel are hypocrites..]? or, [...the jews are filthy...]or,[...the jews are viruses or rats, or cancers, that will infect the community...], or posts what IMO have the potential to have me have a [...badge of shame...] put on me?, or other posts that have the potential, IMO to arrouse anti-Semitic feelings here?
> I would like to know these restraints upon me, if there are any, so that I could be an equal participant here in this discussion, for I am not sure how your rule of 3's in relation to posting links to previous posts of poster that I have posted 3 of here could play a part in restricting my participation in this discussion and would like this to be declared ahead of time.
> Also, I am requesting that you consider the following link in relation to this discussion because it may be relevant here.
> Lou Pilder
> http://xxxxxxx
Friends,
In this administrative discussion, I would like to be a discussant in it. But there are rules by Dr. Hsiung concerning what links, or posts can be placed on the board as to if they are more than 3 of a poster.
There is also the question as to if I can posts links that show how historical antisemitism was used by the Nazi regime and others. I am requesting from Dr. Hsiung what I can or can not post in this discussion ahead of the discussion so as to comply with his rules.
I am requesting from Dr. Hsiung for him to define more of this rule of his here so that I can know ahead of time as to how I would have to abide by his rule in oreder to be a discussant here without writing a 4th post of someone that I have posted 3 of in some way here.
There are other issues here in realtion to the rule. What about rrequests of mine where Dr. Hsiung did not write a determination that said if the post was acceptable or not in relation to the guidlines of the forum? How are those counted? That is why I requresting ahead of time for his reply. I do not want to post someone's post here that could be their "4th". This rule ,IMO, if not clarified, could have the potential to prevent me fom citing some posts in this discussion which could restrict my reply to this thread.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 18, 2005, at 10:01:32
In reply to Lou's response to aspects of this thread-the3rul, posted by Lou Pilder on July 18, 2005, at 9:28:35
Friends,
I am requesting that you consider the following if you are going to post to this thread.
I do not belive that I have posted here that anyone is antisemitic. My posts to Dr. Hsiung requesting a determination as to if a statement is acceptable or not in relation to the guidlines of the forum sometimes were about statements that IMO could have the potential to arrouse antisemitc feelings.
For instance, there was a poster using the handle,"Aryan Soldier". In your opinion, could there be the potential for that handle to arrouse antisemitic feelings? And if so, could anyone here request that Dr. Hsiung make that determination?
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 18, 2005, at 11:14:29
In reply to Lou's response to aspects of this thread-the3rul, posted by Lou Pilder on July 18, 2005, at 9:28:35
Friends,
I am requesting that you consider the following if you are going to post to this thread. It is written here something about me accusing others here of being antisemitic. I do not believe that my requesting to Dr. Hsiung for him to make a dertimnation about if a statement has the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings is accusing anyone of being antisemitic.
For instance,In the following , a poster writes here, [...the jewish people still deny that jesus was the messaiah...].
Now I may have requested to Dr. Hsiung to make a determination as to if that statement has the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings. But I ask you this. Could not anyonre here have asked Dr. Hsiung to make that determination? And to go further, if a person writes the statement in questionhere, are they antisemitic?
Friends, I can not see into people's hearts. And I make no claime to have any power to determine one's heart here as to if they harbor hatred to jews. But I ask this: Can I not be vigilant, even if I am the "lone dissenter", to have Dr. Hsiung address posts that in my opinion could have the potential to arouse antisemitic feelings?
Lou
Posted by so on July 18, 2005, at 12:18:13
In reply to Lou's response to aspects of this thread-londisntr, posted by Lou Pilder on July 18, 2005, at 11:14:29
> For instance,In the following , a poster writes here, [...the jewish people still deny that jesus was the messaiah...].
> Now I may have requested to Dr. Hsiung to make a determination as to if that statement has the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings. But I ask you this. Could not anyonre here have asked Dr. Hsiung to make that determination?Yes, but I would suggest the adminstrator is not qualified to make such a determination on his own. He can only offer an opinion. A fully qualified determination of the answer to that question could only be provided by a group of sociologists who methodically approach the question and whose conclusions are reviewed by a panel of qualified peers. The administrator here can only make a determination as to whether he will allow such statements at his site.
>Can I not be vigilant, even if I am the "lone dissenter", to have Dr. Hsiung address posts that in my opinion could have the potential to arouse antisemitic feelings?
You can, even if you were alone in your dissent but you are not.
And faithful Jews are not the only ones who do not assert that the first century heir to the Hebrew throne was a messiah. I make no such assertion either.
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 18, 2005, at 12:54:11
In reply to Re: Lou's response to aspects of this thread-londisntr » Lou Pilder, posted by so on July 18, 2005, at 12:18:13
Friends,
The poster "so", has written something like,[...you are not alone...].
It is refreshing to know that.
I am requesting to find out if there are any others here that also could write that I am not alone in requesting that Dr. Hsiung write a determination as to if it is acceptable or not in relation to the guidlines of the forum for a post like the one in question here.
On another note, Dr. Hsiung usually replies to my request for a determination as to if a statement has IMO the potential to arouse antisemitic feelings with a determination as to if the statement,[...puts down those of other faiths...]. I really do not expect Dr. Hsiung, or anyone else individually , as the poster "so" writes, to be able to make a determination as to if a statement has the potential to arouse antisemitic feelings.
But if the statement is part of historical uses of the same or similar statement that has been used historically to arouse antisemitic feelings, then I feel that that could be relevant in someone's determination as to if the statement in quesion has the potential to arouse antisemitic feelings, for if it did in the past, could it not have the potential for it to do so now?
Lou
Posted by so on July 18, 2005, at 13:38:50
In reply to Lou's reply to so's post-repthist?, posted by Lou Pilder on July 18, 2005, at 12:54:11
Looks like you might be alone again, at least in this campaign. SarahT and CrushedOut set a trap using the rediculous do-not-post rule and I slipped into it while exposeing SarahT' hateful verbal assault against me "SOme peoPLe" and you PL aka LP.
Posted by Racer on July 18, 2005, at 13:47:50
In reply to Lou's response to aspects of this thread-londisntr, posted by Lou Pilder on July 18, 2005, at 11:14:29
> It is written here something about me accusing others here of being antisemitic. I do not believe that my requesting to Dr. Hsiung for him to make a dertimnation about if a statement has the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings is accusing anyone of being antisemitic.
Hm... I'm going to try to be very, very careful here, so that I can stay within the spirit as well as the letter of the civility guidelines. Not, by the way, to avoid a public rebuke from Dr Bob, but because I really am trying to find mutual understanding on this issue.
Lou, you're right -- you have never written, that I have seen at least, that anyone is anti-semitic. You've drawn comparisons between what someone has posted here with propaganda techniques used by discriminatory entities such as the Nazis in the past, in asking that the full implications of what someone has written be considered. The problem is, as we've seen here, that the distinction may seem awfully fine to some people. While your intentions may be simply to point out that similar wordings have been used against certain groups in the past, and that using those wordings now may not be sensitive to the feelings of others, a lot of people can -- and, demonstrably, do -- read more into it than that.
"Intention" is probably a key concept here, on both sides of the issue. Your intention may not be to accuse anyone of anti-semitism, and it may distress you a great deal when someone brings that interpretation of your posts up on this board. By the same token, though, I think a lot of the posters whose words you've questioned as having "potential" to create anti-semitic feelings are equally distressed to read that unintented interpertation of their words.
The net result of all this, it seems to me, is hurt feelings, flaring tempers, and often incivility towards one another. I don't think that's what anyone wants.
> For instance,In the following , a poster writes here, [...the jewish people still deny that jesus was the messaiah...].
This may be nothing more than my own ignorance coming out, but I think that that statement is pretty much in keeping with the basic tenets of Judaism, isn't it? It may be an unfortunate choice of words to use "still", because it might be read to imply that Judaism has maintained that stance in the face of adequate evidence to the contrary, but that's a very, very thin hair to split.
One of the main differences between Judaism and Christianity is that Christianity is founded on the principle that the Messiah has already come in the form of a man known as Jesus. Judaism, on the other hand, does not recognize this man as having been the Messiah. Because what was written in the post you're using to illustrate your point is less opinion than a legitimate part of the belief system in question, I am not sure why you object to it? (Although, please note, I have not read the entire post in question.)
> And to go further, if a person writes the statement in questionhere, are they antisemitic?This is where I lose you, Lou. I really can't see what you're objecting to? A lot of people are ignorant of the beliefs of Judaism, and some of them are all too willing to share that ignorance with others, but the fact that Christians believe that Jesus was the Messiah, while Jews do not, is pretty well known.
If you take your question a little step further, it's a bit like asking whether Christianity in general should be considered uncivil here on this site, because it might have the potential to create anti-semitic feelings in some. I don't think that's what you're advocating, I'm just saying that it's possible to have misunderstandings come up around issues where everyone's intentions are innocent.
> But I ask this: Can I not be vigilant, even if I am the "lone dissenter", to have Dr. Hsiung address posts that in my opinion could have the potential to arouse antisemitic feelings?
> LouOf course you have the right to be vigilant, and to ask Dr Bob to address your concerns. I think what others are reacting to is that it sometimes seems as though you may not recognize how much pain some other people here have experienced as a result of having their words brought up, out of context, for review. Can you understand that?
I guess what I would most like to advocate myself here, for everyone, is to consider both intention and context. "Intention," because I truly believe that the people at this site have no malicious intentions when they post here, with very, very few exceptions over the years I've been here. "Context," because nearly everything in this world can be pulled out of context and seen in a very distressing light. It's like cutting words out of a newspaper to write a threatening letter: you can find the words you need to write a threat, using words that, in their original context, had no threat at all attached to them.
I hope that what I've written is clear, and that no one takes offense at it. It is meant only to try to express my own view of the issues as I see them. If I have hurt anyone's feelings, or offended anyone, due to careless use of language, I apologize in advance. It was not my intent.
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.