![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 198 to 222 of 272. Go back in thread:
Posted by AuntieMel on March 28, 2006, at 14:22:54
In reply to Re: openings for deputy administrators, posted by Dr. Bob on March 28, 2006, at 9:35:01
Posted by special_k on March 28, 2006, at 23:47:55
In reply to Re: openings for deputy administrators, posted by Dr. Bob on March 28, 2006, at 9:35:01
> > I think we could accommodate 2 additional deputies now. Let say the deadline for volunteering is in 2 weeks = through Feb. 20.
>
> I'm delighted to report that we have 3 volunteers: ClearSkies, Racer, and 10derHeart. Thanks for stepping forward! FYI, next is an orientation, and then there are practice scenarios and a final exam...Er... And then two will be selected?
If so... Then don't you think it would have been nicer to have just let us know after the decision had been made?
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 29, 2006, at 0:07:21
In reply to Re: openings for deputy administrators » Dr. Bob, posted by special_k on March 28, 2006, at 23:47:55
> Er... And then two will be selected?
That's the plan...
> If so... Then don't you think it would have been nicer to have just let us know after the decision had been made?
I know what you mean, but this way, others can have input into the decision.
Bob
Posted by special_k on March 29, 2006, at 0:11:34
In reply to Re: openings for deputy administrators, posted by Dr. Bob on March 29, 2006, at 0:07:21
Posted by ClearSkies on March 29, 2006, at 7:52:22
In reply to ok but i hope you told them that and they agreed.. (nm), posted by special_k on March 29, 2006, at 0:11:34
Hmm.
I hadn't realised that there was competition until I saw Dr Bob's post here. I figure that if 3 people are being put on a test run, then there would be 3 open positions being considered. Ah well.Why wouldn't we find a 3rd deputy to be beneficial? I'd think that the more deputies we have, the better the boards would be. And the deputies would have an easier time with sharing the monitoring of the boards.
Just my thoughts.
ClearSkies
Posted by justyourlaugh on March 29, 2006, at 9:29:01
In reply to Re: ok but i hope you told them that and they agreed.., posted by ClearSkies on March 29, 2006, at 7:52:22
wow.. a popularity contest?
Posted by LegWarmers on March 29, 2006, at 11:16:14
In reply to Re: openings for deputy administrators, posted by Dr. Bob on March 28, 2006, at 9:35:01
> > I think we could accommodate 2 additional deputies now. Let say the deadline for volunteering is in 2 weeks = through Feb. 20.
>
> I'm delighted to report that we have 3 volunteers: ClearSkies, Racer, and 10derHeart. Thanks for stepping forward! FYI, next is an orientation, and then there are practice scenarios and a final exam...
>
> BobWhy were we told of this? Wy not just announce the decision once made with including who might not pass the tests?
Posted by 10derHeart on March 29, 2006, at 14:48:32
In reply to Re: ok but i hope you told them that and they agreed.., posted by ClearSkies on March 29, 2006, at 7:52:22
I hadn't realized that either. ALthough, to be fair, Bob's Feb 6 post did say 2 more specifically, so I suppose I should have put that together with unlimited numbers of possible volunteers and volia! - a competition, of sorts. Oh, well, sometimes I miss the obvious.
I haven't quite decided how I feel about it yet, so I won't say too much more here and now. Not to imply I'm terribly upset or anything, just a tad puzzled and....would 'caught up short by the delivery method' describe it?
I, too, was wondering how it's decided...the need for 2 more vs. 3, or 1, or 4...or whatever. Since it's a voluntary thing, and not required to be performed 24/7 (deputy duties, I mean), seems a few more might be better - less pressure and guilt for not pulling one's weight when one isn't emotionally up to it for a while, or terribly busy IRL - stuff like that?
Just things I've wondered.
Posted by special_k on March 29, 2006, at 18:01:15
In reply to Re: openings for deputy administrators » Dr. Bob, posted by LegWarmers on March 29, 2006, at 11:16:14
>Wy not just announce the decision once made with including who might not pass the tests?
He said:
> I know what you mean, but this way, others can have input into the decision.
Posted by special_k on March 29, 2006, at 18:08:33
In reply to Re: ok but i hope you told them that and they agre » ClearSkies, posted by 10derHeart on March 29, 2006, at 14:48:32
> I hadn't realised that there was competition until I saw Dr Bob's post here. I figure that if 3 people are being put on a test run, then there would be 3 open positions being considered...
> I hadn't realized that either...
Now why doesn't this surprise me?
Jeepers Bob you could have at least *informed* them that this was how it was going to go (that there had been three volounteers and so you wanted to post that to the boards so as to get feedback and that you were planning on only taking two on) BEFORE posting it to the boards like that.
Remember how I say 'be careful with people's feelings' sometimes? Well this is precisely the kind of thing I meant.
Posted by Phillipa on March 29, 2006, at 18:43:09
In reply to IMO... Badly done Dr Bob, badly done indeed :-(, posted by special_k on March 29, 2006, at 18:08:33
I have a suggestion. A Deputy doesn't get paid right? They volunteer right? Well why not have a deputy on one or two of their spcialities or intersts or where they post the most. that would mean that they would know the people better and be able to judge if someone were being uncivil or not? Just a thought. Love Phillipa
Posted by Deneb on March 29, 2006, at 19:05:55
In reply to IMO... Badly done Dr Bob, badly done indeed :-(, posted by special_k on March 29, 2006, at 18:08:33
> Remember how I say 'be careful with people's feelings' sometimes? Well this is precisely the kind of thing I meant.
Maybe Dr. Bob has some trouble reading situations and figuring out people's feelings. I have some trouble with that too. It's okay, Dr. Bob, I like you just the way you are, flaws and all.
Deneb
Posted by wildcard11 on March 29, 2006, at 19:08:40
In reply to Re: IMO... Badly done Dr Bob, badly done indeed :-(, posted by Phillipa on March 29, 2006, at 18:43:09
I really think that is a great idea...
Posted by special_k on March 29, 2006, at 21:17:43
In reply to IMO... Badly done Dr Bob, badly done indeed :-(, posted by special_k on March 29, 2006, at 18:08:33
> Jeepers Bob you could have at least *informed* them that this was how it was going to go (that there had been three volounteers and so you wanted to post that to the boards so as to get feedback and that you were planning on only taking two on) BEFORE posting it to the boards like that.
because that would have given them a chance to think about it and about whether they wanted it to go that way...
it would have given someone the opportunity to say 'no thanks very much i don't want to do that' and then you wouldn't have to choose between them it would be more about their goign through the training process okay. and people could still have posted what they thought. i mean jeepers what do you envisage happening? people babblemailing you and saying 'i think these two people should get to do it but not this one'. do you want it to turn into that on the boards.
how do you think the third person is going to feel?????
did you even think about that?
i don't think you did...
please tell me you didn't think about it.
because thinking that you did think about it and you just don't give a flying f*ck is much much worse IMO.
Posted by 10derHeart on March 29, 2006, at 22:28:45
In reply to Re: IMO... Badly done Dr Bob, badly done indeed :-(, posted by special_k on March 29, 2006, at 21:17:43
While I so very much appreciate everyone's concern for my feelings and those of the other two prospective deputies (you guys really ARE the best - THE reason I care enough to try to help by being a deputy here)...but I think....being charitable to Dr. Bob right now would be a wonderful thing.
I maybe shouldn't have posted about what I knew or didn't know, and when. Silence is golden sometimes, and I may have forgotten that in this instance. So, I just learned something, and that's always good. :-)
Because there may have been some misunderstanding, unfortunate bad timing, miscommunication or plain and simple forgetfulness on Dr. Bob's part here. I'm not saying that, 'cause I don't know yet. But I am saying I remain confident this will be worked out just fine for all concerned.
And my feelings are doing really fine so far :-) I hope Racer and Clearskies are okay, too. I think they are. Perhaps...it all sounds much worse than it is, if that makes sense?
A charitable viewing - as special k has so eloquently reminded me about - particularly when the complete picture, full intention, etc. is unclear, or all facts aren't in yet?
Please?
Posted by Racer on March 29, 2006, at 23:02:14
In reply to Being charitable, posted by 10derHeart on March 29, 2006, at 22:28:45
While I can see that feelings could be hurt, I kinda feel better knowing that, if I don't make the grade, or it feels like to much for me, I won't be letting anyone down. The job will still be done, even if I'm not up to it.
That's a pretty liberating feeling for me, means I can make a mistake and no lasting damage will occur.
I'm gonna try to hold on to that, and hope that I still feel that way if Dr Bob flunks me, or the rest of the people here vote me out of the running.
(Just in case anyone thought there was any reason for my silence on the matter. It wasn't hurt feelings, I didn't know about this thread until I saw wildcard11's post below.)
Posted by special_k on March 30, 2006, at 1:26:38
In reply to For my part, this reduces the pressure, posted by Racer on March 29, 2006, at 23:02:14
good campaigning guys...
i have a lot of respect for all three of you and i think all of you would most probably make terrific deputies and i support you all in that.
all the facts aren't in...
but lets just say dr bob has made something of a habit of this kind of thing...
it has come up many times before...
sure i can be charitable, he is often 'forgetful' or 'not mindful' of other people's feelings when it comes to this kind of thing.
and that is my point.
but yeah.
maybe you guys just passed your first test...
Posted by special_k on March 30, 2006, at 1:41:18
In reply to Re: For my part, this reduces the pressure, posted by special_k on March 30, 2006, at 1:26:38
i'm gonna block myself for a while or something 'cause otherwise i'm just working myself up to getting blocked which will just be even more painful to me.
it isn't you guys at all
((((guys))))just my sh*t.
been winding up to it for a week or so now...
etcsee ya around.
Posted by gardenergirl on March 31, 2006, at 12:48:09
In reply to Being charitable, posted by 10derHeart on March 29, 2006, at 22:28:45
The process was discussed among Dr. Bob and the deputies before he announced openings for deputies. Some of the concerns expressed here were also expressed in that discussion.
For what its worth...
gg
Posted by special_k on March 31, 2006, at 18:09:42
In reply to Re: Being charitable, posted by gardenergirl on March 31, 2006, at 12:48:09
> The process was discussed among Dr. Bob and the deputies before he announced openings for deputies. Some of the concerns expressed here were also expressed in that discussion.
sorry still having a little trouble here...
the current deputies thought it would be a good idea to have three prospectives trained and the opportunity for other posters to give feedback on what they thought...
at which point the current deputies thought it would be interesting if two were selected / one was 'deselected'.
the current deputies thought it would be a good idea for the prospectives to find this out SURPRISE! on the boards rather than giving them some time before hand to check that they really wanted to be part of that process?
sorry i'm not really understanding the role of the current deputies in all this...
trying to be charitable...
and thinking... you guys didn't really have a lot to do with it...
also thinking...
dinah
gg
auntiemel
would you guys have volounteered if you had known all three of you would be trained and only two would be selected?
would you guys have volounteered under this current process?
Posted by special_k on March 31, 2006, at 18:13:25
In reply to Re: Being charitable » gardenergirl, posted by special_k on March 31, 2006, at 18:09:42
or.. maybe to be charitable to the deputies... maybe dr bob informed you guys of this process and you tried to dissuade him?
the bit i'm having the most trouble with...
is that he couldn't even tell the prospectives of how he was planning on running this BEFORE posting it to the boards.
can you understand how people might feel hurt about that dr bob?
i mean that really very genuinely...
and if you can understand... THEN WHY THE HELL DO YOU GO AROUND DOING THINGS LIKE THAT?????
i mean how hard is it to send fairly much what you posted to the boards on to each prospect and say 'are you okay with this process want me to go ahead and post it to the boards?'
how hard?
Posted by Dinah on March 31, 2006, at 18:45:54
In reply to Re: Being charitable, posted by special_k on March 31, 2006, at 18:13:25
yes, you should be charitable to us.
and no, we didn't know he wouldn't tell them.
and no, i probably wouldn't have volunteered under those circumstances.
but i won't tell him "i told you so". (except i guess i just did)
so it's ok to be charitable to dr. bob too.
Posted by special_k on March 31, 2006, at 19:00:27
In reply to Re: Being charitable » special_k, posted by Dinah on March 31, 2006, at 18:45:54
> yes, you should be charitable to us.
sure.
> and no, we didn't know he wouldn't tell them.of course you didn't. i know you guys (especially you) better than that ;-)
> and no, i probably wouldn't have volunteered under those circumstances.no. i'm wondering who would...
> but i won't tell him "i told you so". (except i guess i just did)lol.
> so it's ok to be charitable to dr. bob too.er how come?
because you told him you didn't think it was a good idea (hence the i told you so)
and yet... he blunders on.
hrm.
i don't think he understands how much hurts can hurt. i don't think he understands. and that is BEING charitable. because the uncharitable option is that he understands and he just doesn't give a f*ck.
Posted by muffled on March 31, 2006, at 19:04:52
In reply to Re: Being charitable » Dinah, posted by special_k on March 31, 2006, at 19:00:27
Posted by Dinah on March 31, 2006, at 19:16:01
In reply to Re: Being charitable » Dinah, posted by special_k on March 31, 2006, at 19:00:27
He does care.
And to be fair to him, this was a consensus compromise from his original plan. So I guess you could say that we all did agree to this, in the sense that this was the compromise.
I guess I no longer think in terms of absolutes here. I think in terms of getting things as good as I can get them. Which would be this. And would be the xxxx'ng out of names in the post at the source of controversy now.
Except we really didn't know Dr. Bob didn't tell them.
And I really did tell him I thought it was unfair to announce it before the very end. I just accepted that he thought this was better for Babble and that if his heart was set on it, it was set on it.
I think he was focusing on the other end. On trying to allow more input in the choosing of deputies. On going more in the direction of democracy here, by allowing input from the very beginning.
His motives were good, I'm sure. I think he was just thinking of the board, and of the benefits of involving the board more, and he gave credit to the board that it wouldn't end up a popularity contest. And gave credit to the deputy candidates that they could tolerate the stress.
So, I can't really say that it wasn't the consensus agreement. But you can still give us credit for moderating the original plan to this. :)
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.