![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 10 to 34 of 39. Go back in thread:
Posted by Nikkit2 on August 5, 2005, at 7:49:01
In reply to Dr Bob -- yes, Lou, it is about you this time, posted by Racer on August 4, 2005, at 22:58:40
*hugs you in a very non huggy kind of way*
*l*
nikki
Posted by Minnie-Haha on August 5, 2005, at 9:20:08
In reply to Dr Bob -- yes, Lou, it is about you this time, posted by Racer on August 4, 2005, at 22:58:40
Posted by Lou Pilder on August 5, 2005, at 10:30:10
In reply to Dr Bob -- yes, Lou, it is about you this time, posted by Racer on August 4, 2005, at 22:58:40
Friends,
I am requesting that you read the following link if you are going to respond to this thread.
The link has some aspects about scapegoating and how a group uses {blame} and {pointing a finger} and such as propaganda tools to arrouse ill-will toward another. It writes about how blaming another for what another has done is used in scapegoating. The person is blamed on misleading statements, sterotypeing, and statements showing resentment toward the person used as a scapegoat.
The Nazis carried scapegoating to the murder of millions of people. Kristallnacht was a state-sponsored scapegoating.
It is not my intention here to {disrupt the entire forum} by responding to posts here like others here or to request for educational purposes that those that are considering responding to threads that I am a discussant in, take into consideration factors that I think could be relevant in the discussion.
I believe that my requests to those considering responding to read aspects of concern, involve preventative concepts. I believe that my requests could have the potential to thwart any attempt for one to create a hostile environment toward me or another. I believe that my requests could have the potential to thwart any attempt to have a {Badge of Shame} put on me or another here.
I am requesting that you read the following for discussional purposes in this thread if you are considering responding here.
Lou
http://www.united.non-profit.nl/pages/info03n9.htm#01
Posted by AuntieMel on August 5, 2005, at 11:26:52
In reply to Dr Bob -- yes, Lou, it is about you this time, posted by Racer on August 4, 2005, at 22:58:40
I have always been supportive of Lou being able to ask for determinations and say what he needs to say.
But - and I can't completely put my finger on it - there is something about this last exchange that is really troubling me.
Perhaps it is because it is all about one part of one sentence of one post of one conversation and the rest of the conversation is ignored?
Perhaps it is because it comes at a time when Nikki least needs it?
Perhaps because when she asks (no, begs!) to have it stop it doesn't?
Maybe all these rolled into one?
So, thank you Racer.
Posted by Lou Pilder on August 5, 2005, at 13:42:17
In reply to Re: Thank you Racer, posted by AuntieMel on August 5, 2005, at 11:26:52
Friends,
I am requesting that you consider the following if you are going to respond to this thread.
A. The poster writes,[...perhaps it is because it is all about one part of one sentence of one post of one conversation...when she (NikkiT2) asks...to have {it} stopped {it} doesn't...].
I am responding to other's posts here. If {it} is to be stopped, could not others here not post statements that have the potential to have the potential for others to write about {it} that I, or anyone else, could respond to?
I am responding now to this post by AM. The poster writes,[...in a time when Nikki least needs it...].
I am asking you to ask yourself the following if you are going to respond to this thread:
A. In your opinion, does the post innitiated by the poster here that I am responding to, honor NikkiT2's request to [...have {it} stopped...]?
B. In your opinion, does the post here innitiated by the poster that I am responding to, have the potential to have others follow with posts that have the potential to not,[...have {it} stopped...]?
C. In your opinion, looking at the statement written here by the poster that innitiated my response here,[...I have always been supportive of Lou being able to ask...and say what he needs to say...],does that statement have an {invitation} in it for me to respond to the statement? And if so, could there be something written by me that could be related to what NikkiT2 has requested to,[..have it stopped...]?
D. If the above is so, could you clarify if you think, in your opinion, if there is the potential for others to have the potential to think that NikkiT2 is requesting that I not respond to other's posts here, but others can post, or , in your opinion, could there be the potential for one to have the potential to think that NikkiT2 is requesting that {all} posts that could have the potential to write about {it}, be stopped or something else?
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on August 5, 2005, at 14:52:26
In reply to Dr Bob -- yes, Lou, it is about you this time, posted by Racer on August 4, 2005, at 22:58:40
Friends,
I am requesting that if you are fgoing to respond to this thread that you read the folllowing link.
The link writes some about fascism and how that type of system of administration uses dehuminizing tactics and scapegoating and the forcible supression of points of view that are opposing to those that have obtained fascist power over others. The link is for discussion purposes and I do not endorse fascism.
Lou
http://remember.org/hist.root.what.html
Posted by NikkiT2 on August 5, 2005, at 15:03:18
In reply to Lou's response to-- yes, Lou, it is about you-fasm, posted by Lou Pilder on August 5, 2005, at 14:52:26
Lou,
are you suggesting that *anyone* here is acting in a fascist manner?
And if not, please explain WHY you would bring it up in this thread?
No one here is scapegoating. People get hurt by your "reuqests for determination / please take into account the following" type posts. Thats a fact, not an attempt at scapegoating.
I don't know how you feel about such words, but many people are shocked and offended when others suggest they could be fascist, or anti-semetic etc.
Please answer this with a real answer, and not further questions that are directed at board members for them to consider.
Nikki
Posted by crushedout on August 5, 2005, at 15:07:04
In reply to Re: Lou's response to-- yes, Lou, it is about you- » Lou Pilder, posted by NikkiT2 on August 5, 2005, at 15:03:18
just a word of advice: you might want to try banging your head against a brick wall. i find that works better. (i'm just kidding. please don't actually bang your head.)
congrats on your job!
Posted by NikkiT2 on August 5, 2005, at 15:15:37
In reply to hi nikki » NikkiT2, posted by crushedout on August 5, 2005, at 15:07:04
Ah, atleast this way doesn't cause permanent scars *laughing*
And cheers.. its a fab job and a really fantastic opportunity!
Nikki xx
Posted by AuntieMel on August 5, 2005, at 15:39:30
In reply to Re: hi nikki » crushedout, posted by NikkiT2 on August 5, 2005, at 15:15:37
Don't let this ruin your great day.
Sometimes things should just go unacknowledged.
Go celebrate. Babble will be here in the morning.
Posted by Lou Pilder on August 5, 2005, at 16:39:22
In reply to Lou's response to-- yes, Lou, it is about you-fasm, posted by Lou Pilder on August 5, 2005, at 14:52:26
Friends,
it is written here something about scapegoating from another member here.
I am requesting that if you are going to reply to this thread that you consider the followin:
Scapegoating is a word that has ancient religious meanings. The ancient Jews had the concept of the scapegoat and then the Christians .
But scapegoating here can be a little different. The aspect of scapegoating used on a person in a group has been used historically as a tactic used by other members of a group to attatch blame on a person, holding that person responsible for something that could either exist or not in the community.
Either way, scapegoating can occur if there is someone calling others in the group to have blame attached to a person in a group by the others in the group.
In fascists countries, scapegoating has been used historically against many persons and groups. Hitler's scapegoating culminated in the holocaust. Millions of people were murdered. In looking at the historical chronology of the Nazi scapegoating of jews and others, there is a succession of things that happen. The first thing is to have someone publish something to arrouse blame to the one, or ones, that are being scapgoated.
In the innitial post in this thread, in your opinion, do you see any indication that any blame for anything in this community is being attempted to be attached to me? In your opinion, is there a statement in the innitial post that could have the potential for some others to think that I (Lou) is having attached blame for ,[...disrupting the entire group...]? And in your opinion, what could be the potential for some others to think that, considering that the poster writes,[...hope that others will at least indicate whether or not they agree with me here..].
There are many others here that have responded to the poster of the innitial post that they agree with that poster. When this happens, there could be the potential for others to {bandwagon} and there could be the potential for {mob rule} to ensue.
I am not ashamed to post responses to other's posts here, or to offer to consider aspects that IMO could be relevant to discussions here, for they are for consideration for discussion only. And I feel that even if I have charactorized as the {Lone Dissenter} here, I feel that I can hold my own and protect my integrity against anything that is written here that could have the potential to be considered an accusation that could have the potential to attach blame to me for anything real or imiagined here in this community.
Lou
Posted by AuntieMel on August 5, 2005, at 17:11:04
In reply to Re: hi nikki » crushedout, posted by NikkiT2 on August 5, 2005, at 15:15:37
Posted by crazy teresa on August 5, 2005, at 17:35:58
In reply to Re: Ack! (nm), posted by AuntieMel on August 5, 2005, at 17:11:04
Posted by 10derHeart on August 5, 2005, at 17:49:53
In reply to Re: hi nikki » crushedout, posted by NikkiT2 on August 5, 2005, at 15:15:37
Posted by AuntieMel on August 5, 2005, at 18:08:16
In reply to Completely hysterical laughter! (nm), posted by crazy teresa on August 5, 2005, at 17:35:58
Posted by AuntieMel on August 5, 2005, at 18:08:46
In reply to Completely hysterical laughter! (nm), posted by crazy teresa on August 5, 2005, at 17:35:58
Posted by Lou Pilder on August 5, 2005, at 18:50:14
In reply to Lou's response to-- yes, Lou, it is about you-scpg, posted by Lou Pilder on August 5, 2005, at 16:39:22
Friends,
I am requesting that if you are going to respond to this thread that you read the following link.
The link writes about scapegoating and is from a group that deals with these type of issues on the mental- health level. It is non proffit and I am not endorsing what they write or advocating that you join the group. I am requesting that if you are going to post to this thread that you read the link for discussional purposes.
Lou
http://www.scapegoat.demon.co.uk/
Posted by crazy teresa on August 5, 2005, at 21:13:11
In reply to Re: And good for the abs, too (nm) » crazy teresa, posted by AuntieMel on August 5, 2005, at 18:08:46
Posted by sleepygirl on August 5, 2005, at 21:14:33
In reply to Dr Bob -- yes, Lou, it is about you this time, posted by Racer on August 4, 2005, at 22:58:40
Posted by spriggy on August 5, 2005, at 23:29:29
In reply to I concur and well said (nm) » Racer, posted by sleepygirl on August 5, 2005, at 21:14:33
Posted by crushedout on August 6, 2005, at 0:09:23
In reply to Lou's response to-- yes, Lou, it is about you-info, posted by Lou Pilder on August 5, 2005, at 18:50:14
Lou, have you ever heard of a self fulfilling prophecy? I request that you consider that (maybe do some internet research).I think these exaggerated analogies are undermining what might otherwise be a point that people could understand. I know people have said this to you before, Lou, but talking about your feelings would probably get you a lot more satisfaction.
I'm guessing you either cannot talk about your feelings or prefer the antagonism of the current situation. In either case, I imagine it's pretty lonely.
Posted by Sarah T. on August 6, 2005, at 0:52:17
In reply to Lou's response to Sarah T's post-whodoyu?, posted by Lou Pilder on August 5, 2005, at 1:04:13
> > >If so, it is not my intention to > Lou>
It would be a good idea to explore your intent with your psychiatrist. Is your psychiatrist aware of your participation in Psychobabble? Do you discuss the content and quantity of your posts with your psychiatrist?
Most of the people I've met here acknowledge that they suffer from mental illness. We come here to find ways to treat and/or overcome our emotional and physical pain. Most of us share with each other our experiences with various medications and our experiences in talk therapy. We do this because, as trite as it may sound, life really is short, and we want to live more productive, meaningful lives.
Posted by Dr. Bob on August 7, 2005, at 23:28:28
In reply to Dr Bob -- yes, Lou, it is about you this time, posted by Racer on August 4, 2005, at 22:58:40
> sometimes it's just plain best for the group that ONE person is not permitted to continue disrupting the entire group.
Sorry, but please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused. I've asked you to be civil before, so now I'm going to block you from posting for a week.
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.
> when I see that [my] Babble Buddies are upset by something that is written, I do tend to get a bit het up by it.
I understand, but supporting them is always an option...
> For the record, I believe that NikkiT has been an extraordinarily valuable member of this community for a very, very long time, and it upsets me that she can be hurt by Lou's posts so many times without your protection.
I believe that all members of this community are valuable. Unfortunately, it's sometimes hard for them to co-exist, and for me to protect them all.
> I believe it would ... be good for Lou to be asked to moderate his behavior in order to promote a bit more responsive to other people's feelings. Reality testing, if you want to think of it that way.
It's also reality that some things you cannot change...
Bob
Posted by gardenergirl on August 8, 2005, at 23:35:58
In reply to Re: blocked for week » Racer, posted by Dr. Bob on August 7, 2005, at 23:28:28
You're now blocked and my T is on vacation.
sniff sniff
Oh wait, there's always the phone and email.
Joy!
Take care and come back soon.
gg
Posted by chemist on August 8, 2005, at 23:43:09
In reply to Re: blocked for week » Racer, posted by Dr. Bob on August 7, 2005, at 23:28:28
hello there, chemist here...while i cannot claim to know exactly who, what, or why exactly precipitated the discourse led by the estimable and pragmatic Racer: i am, naturally, compelled to comment...at length, of course...
i do applaud her will and determination in fighting the good fight, as it were, and hope that the good will - and good vibes - continue to flow, unabated, on PB and elsewhere...
in an entirely unrelated matter: just where *is* that darned pizza??!!
all the best, chemist
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.