![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 18 to 42 of 42. Go back in thread:
Posted by yxibow on March 16, 2006, at 13:34:43
In reply to Thank you. G.G » gardenergirl, posted by Gabbix2 on March 16, 2006, at 13:00:08
> I should have added of course, that I appreciate the spirit of the civility rules, I really do.
> And overall, I'm glad that they exist.
>
>I appreciate the concept of civility rules, but as they say you can't please all the people all the time. What is said online, in text, is not what you would see if we all gathered in a group support room, with a moderator. As they say, you can't please all the people all the time. Yes, there are individuals on here who may have emotional fragility because of their conditions, but sometimes I think things go a bit overboard. As as also they say, ____ happens.
Tidings
Jay
Posted by Gabbix2 on March 16, 2006, at 14:14:55
In reply to Re: Thank you. G.G » Gabbix2, posted by yxibow on March 16, 2006, at 13:34:43
but sometimes I think things go a bit overboard. As as also they say, ____ happens.
>I agree fully!
Posted by wildcard11 on March 16, 2006, at 14:42:44
In reply to Why did ED_UK Get Blocked?, posted by Phillipa on March 14, 2006, at 22:16:31
to me... we can say sh*t, f*ck, *ss, etc. and the little symbol makes it okay but you say UNKIND and get blocked?????! maybe it should say u*kind...
i admit it must be tough determining PBC's, blocks, etc. but in all the time i have been here, I have NEVER read a negative post from Ed so i think a PBS or PBC would have been way more warranted. just my 2 cents...
Posted by Declan on March 16, 2006, at 15:56:21
In reply to mystery, posted by wildcard11 on March 16, 2006, at 14:42:44
Why cannot the meaning of the word be considered in the rules? Unkind is a pretty civil description, as we all seem to agree. I can't seem to remember these distinctions, the ones Gabbi was talking about above. I'd have to write them out 50 times.
Declan
Posted by Gabbix2 on March 16, 2006, at 16:04:37
In reply to mystery, posted by wildcard11 on March 16, 2006, at 14:42:44
You crack me up!
Hope you're doing well.
Oh I want to write to you about the girl baby thing..
Well, I will write to you!
Posted by 10derHeart on March 16, 2006, at 16:28:36
In reply to mystery, posted by wildcard11 on March 16, 2006, at 14:42:44
>>I have NEVER read a negative post from Ed
That being so, I still think the thing is what he said there and then on that thread, on that day/time that determined appropriate admin action, not his general 'behavior' or 'attitude' here.... as it is with anyone...
>>..so i think a PBS or PBC would have been way more warranted. just my 2 cents...
But Ed *did* get a PBC just before for a similar comment about a post. So, the 2nd *offense* brought on the block. Which is how it works, no?
I wish Ed hadn't been blocked. I wish no one ever got blocked. But I didn't see any problem with this sequence of events or the decision.
Posted by gardenergirl on March 16, 2006, at 17:08:23
In reply to Re: mystery » wildcard11, posted by 10derHeart on March 16, 2006, at 16:28:36
> >>I have NEVER read a negative post from Ed
I'm not sure I have until recently, either. I wondered about what might be going on, and I babblemailed him about the situation, although I never received a reply.
>
> I wish Ed hadn't been blocked. I wish no one ever got blocked. But I didn't see any problem with this sequence of events or the decision.I wish that, too. And I agree with the decision as well. Thanks for posting this.
gg
>
>
Posted by wildcard11 on March 16, 2006, at 18:33:00
In reply to Re: mystery » wildcard11, posted by 10derHeart on March 16, 2006, at 16:28:36
i didn't see the previous PBC but the word *unkind*??? that's just not IMO enough to warrant a block...
Posted by Phillipa on March 16, 2006, at 18:52:48
In reply to Re: mystery » 10derHeart, posted by gardenergirl on March 16, 2006, at 17:08:23
GG Since Ed went to work he's working six days a week and where I used to get an E-mail or a babblemail everyday now I'm glad to get one once a week. I think he's an amazing person to leave so early in the morning take trains work in different pharmacies each day and still find the time to try and help the others here. And culture is something to think about too. As I think the British seem to use different phrases than we do. I not going to argue the block just that he knows so much about meds that with all the recent discussion on MAOI's someone could be seriously harmed without his extensive research and knowledge. Not to say that there are so many wonderful med experts on the meds board. But they each have their own specialty so to speak. I think this is civil isn't it? Fondly, Phillipa
Posted by Jakeman on March 16, 2006, at 20:49:30
In reply to Re: Why did ED_UK Get Blocked? » Jakeman, posted by Gabbix2 on March 15, 2006, at 22:35:43
Thanks for your thoughtful reply Gabbix. I've gotten tired of debating about the rules and what is civil or not. I have some anger, but I feel I can't express it on this forum.
warm regard, Jake
Posted by gardenergirl on March 16, 2006, at 21:24:24
In reply to Re: mystery » gardenergirl, posted by Phillipa on March 16, 2006, at 18:52:48
I think quite highly of Ed, too. It's not about whether I respect a poster, how much they do or do not contribute, or the perceived value of their contributions.
Would it really be fair and consistent to factor those issues in when reviewing a post for civility? And how could you measure it so that all of the deputies and Dr. Bob might come to the same decision?
And yes, people from different cultures vary in the way they express things. But we are asked to express ourselves in a certain manner here. There are many resources here for understanding what's expected--the FAQ, posts on admin., looking at examples of what's been PBC'd before... We can also ask questions.
>I not going to argue the block just that he knows so much about meds that with all the recent discussion on MAOI's someone could be seriously harmed without his extensive research and knowledge.
I would feel a terrible burden of responsibility if someone were to say that about me. And I believe posters here in search of information should add what they get here to what they learn from other sources. I don't think Babble should be their only source of information. Nor should one poster be the sole source that one uses for info. I guess I'm saying that if someone were "harmed" by Ed's absence, I'm not sure I'd agree with that interpretation.
>I think this is civil isn't it? Fondly, Phillipa
If you mean your post, it seems so to me, but I read it as a poster, not as a deputy. I don't have my deputy hat on this evening.
gg
Posted by agent858 on March 16, 2006, at 21:34:57
In reply to Re: Thank you. G.G » yxibow, posted by Gabbix2 on March 16, 2006, at 14:14:55
:-(
(((((ed))))
miss you
:-(
Posted by 10derHeart on March 16, 2006, at 22:21:44
In reply to Re: mystery » 10derHeart, posted by wildcard11 on March 16, 2006, at 18:33:00
> i didn't see the previous PBC but the word *unkind*??? that's just not IMO enough to warrant a block...
My read on that is that *any* negative description of a poster or their post, happening after a PBC for the same thing, will result in a block. It just happened to be the word unkind in this case.
As far as the word, I think I see where you're coming from, and I do respect your opinion. Maybe it's that 'unkind' as a word used to protest, complain about or describe a post is pretty 'gentle' as those sorts of words go? But I see the trouble being that posters, being the unique human beings that we are, will often view a word and react to it quite differently. For me personally, kindness is way up there on *my* list, and if forced to choose (thankfully at Babble I'm not) I'd rather have someone refer to a post of mine as stupid, irritating, illogical, silly, off topic, confusing, unhelpful...and a bunch of other things *before* unkind.
I dunno. That's me. Merriam-Webster says:
UNKIND: 2 : lacking in kindness or sympathy : HARSH, CRUEL
--------------------------:-( I'm not presuming to know what ed meant, it's just that some *would* really feel hurt by that word, and if it's allowed to stand, the purpose of civility is defeated as the two posters (may) hurt one another's feelings with more descriptions...and round we go. And I arrive back at the civility rules, to include not characterizing a post we are upset by with *any* negative word, but speaking very personally of how we feel.
Sorry to go on so. I'm done now. Peace - 10der
Posted by Phillipa on March 16, 2006, at 22:29:57
In reply to Re: mystery » Phillipa, posted by gardenergirl on March 16, 2006, at 21:24:24
GG you say look to other resourses for the answer to meds. Did you mean our own pdocs or other posters? Because today I saw my pdoc and he didn't know that luvox potentiated the effects of valium. I told him this and he had to look it up on one of those hand held computers they have. And when he saw I was right. He admitted it. If my doctor doesn't know who can I trust? The way I found out was it was on the form they give you in the pharmacy when they give you your prescription. Are those the resorces you meant. And my pdoc is from one of the largest practices in Charlotte NC affiliated with two huge phych hospitals. Love Phillipa
Posted by gardenergirl on March 16, 2006, at 22:35:07
In reply to Re: mystery » gardenergirl, posted by Phillipa on March 16, 2006, at 22:29:57
That's a good example, yes.
gg
Posted by yxibow on March 17, 2006, at 1:23:33
In reply to Re: mystery » Phillipa, posted by gardenergirl on March 16, 2006, at 22:35:07
> That's a good example, yes.
>
> ggI agree -- I think I've pointed out more than once the importance of the P450 cytochrome system in the liver which controls elimination of all sorts of medications from your body, and some block them and require less of the other, some release them and require more of the other, some are compatible or non-interacting. Paying attention to P450 was not something done a decade or two ago, and thus even medications listed in the PDR dont mention much, its a trial by error territory and something every Pdoc especially and even every GP should have CE credits on. But anyway this is a side tangent as this is the admin board. There are several excellent tables on the web that can be searched.
Posted by Sobriquet Style on March 17, 2006, at 8:34:49
In reply to Re: mystery » gardenergirl, posted by Phillipa on March 16, 2006, at 18:52:48
>discussion on MAOI's someone could be seriously harmed without his extensive research and knowledge.
I don't believe babble is the kind of place where people should rely on other posters for medical advice where it has the potential to harm people.
For emample, if posters choose to use other posters for medical information in place of their own Pharmacists and Doctors.
~
Posted by Sobriquet Style on March 17, 2006, at 8:38:38
In reply to Re: mystery » gardenergirl, posted by Phillipa on March 16, 2006, at 22:29:57
>If my doctor doesn't know who can I trust?
Its my knowledge that doctors routinely seek the advice from pharmacists for knowledge about medications.
:-)
~
Ps To make a positive out of Ed's block, I think its great to see that many, including myself, value the time that Ed spends here supporting others.
Posted by pseudoname on March 17, 2006, at 11:32:39
In reply to Re: id' feel upset if someone called me 'unkind', posted by agent858 on March 16, 2006, at 21:34:57
If anyone wants to contribute, I started a sort of “card” to Ed a couple days ago on the Social board. Folks can “sign” it just by posting: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20060310/msgs/620599.html
I hope that's not too corny. ;-)
Posted by Gabbix2 on March 18, 2006, at 13:32:09
In reply to Re: Why did ED_UK Get Blocked? » Gabbix2, posted by Jakeman on March 16, 2006, at 20:49:30
Posted by tizza on March 19, 2006, at 2:18:29
In reply to you're welcome! (nm) » Jakeman, posted by Gabbix2 on March 18, 2006, at 13:32:09
I have read this thread and I still can't understand why ed was blocked. It must be a cultural thing, ed is from the UK and I'm from Australia. I just don't get it at all, I don't think I ever will. All english speaking countries find different things offensive from different perspectives I suppose, That's the only way I can sort of get my head around it, to try and understand it, Paul.
Posted by Declan on March 19, 2006, at 14:39:51
In reply to Re: still confused, posted by tizza on March 19, 2006, at 2:18:29
Posted by tizza on March 19, 2006, at 21:40:05
In reply to There's certainly some fine distinctions (nm) » tizza, posted by Declan on March 19, 2006, at 14:39:51
hey declan, would you mind babble mailing me, I'm a bit confused about your message. Paul
Posted by tealady on March 25, 2006, at 5:26:27
In reply to Re: still confused, posted by tizza on March 19, 2006, at 2:18:29
I agree with you. Then again, I'm from Australia too. This forum has certauinly highlighted the huge differences in what I consider to be basic manners :-)
I too thought ed-uk was acting as the gentleman that he is. He even was big enough to try to make amends for perhaps acting to hastile and for any misunderstanding caused , I thought, before Dr Bob stepped in.
I did read the thread a while ago, and I'm not going to waste my time going over it in fine detail again:-)
It seems I don't agree with the perceptions of many from Nth America here, and I've come to accept that this difference in thiking must be just "how it is". It' strange isn't it that I garee with all of those from Britain, NZ and Australia too.
A pity really, but I'm sure not going to change my values or actions ..and that includes style of writing posts.
I've found ed-uk to have high standards in his posts, and while in that thread I did see his point, I also could have presented some, I think, valid arguements that may have led him to reconsider ..if I'd had time at that time. I don't follow the main babble board usually due to time constraints.Still I do read some of ed-uk's posts where he tries to help others on the alter board freely giving of his expertise formed from years of experience.
If you can't guess, yes it's another ban I disagreed with Dr Bob on. I also thought the public comment added by DrBob was uncalled for.
Since then I have not had the heart to post much on later or elsewhere.
I guess as it came on top of Declan's and Teejay's bans and reading on the politics board which also seemed to be highlighting this rift in values and/or perceptions and the inability to be able to bridge or discuss it on here.
I used to be confused too, now I've given up trying to understand.
Posted by tizza on March 25, 2006, at 23:32:19
In reply to Re: still confused. » tizza, posted by tealady on March 25, 2006, at 5:26:27
great reply tealady, I didn't post for awhile either, I just mainly read posts now but I'm finally starting to contribute again.
This is the end of the 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.