![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 15 of 15. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by llrrrpp on July 2, 2006, at 22:23:14
Hi everyone,
just wanted to inform you that we are no longer civil when we write about the actions of a country.http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20060610/msgs/663455.html
Dr. Bob, while Teejay's post was generally critical of Israel, the phrase that you highlight as incivil may be an empirically demonstrable fact.
For instance, if I say that:
The USA has lost over 2000 US soldiers in the war in Iraq.
Is that an offense to the supporters of the USA? I don't think so. I think it is simply a report of a fact.
I wish you had allowed Teejay to rephrase or provide a source for his information. Information is usually not uncivil, right?
Thanks for your attention, and perhaps for writing a bit more about your reasoning for this block.
-ll
Posted by 10derHeart on July 3, 2006, at 8:49:58
In reply to Confused about Teejay's block, posted by llrrrpp on July 2, 2006, at 22:23:14
Posted by madeline on July 3, 2006, at 12:39:50
In reply to Confused about Teejay's block, posted by llrrrpp on July 2, 2006, at 22:23:14
Posted by Jost on July 3, 2006, at 19:19:56
In reply to Confused about Teejay's block, posted by llrrrpp on July 2, 2006, at 22:23:14
First, I don't agree that Teejay should have been blocked, because I have no problem with freewheeling or rather aggressive political discussion, including on the Politics board of Pbabble.
Having said that, I found Teejay's remarks tending to be uncivil, although not unacceptable because politics can make people to say things that make others uncomfortable..
What Teejay said isn't a fact, IMO, in the sense that if you isolate certain aspects of a situation and state them baldly, they aren't true, because they're so incomplete. While narrowly not false (although one could quibble about tone, and even word-choice), they misrepresent the state of play of a more complex situation. Esp. when they aren't very apropos to a serious discussion.
I don't really want to go into the whole situation in the mideast, particularly involving Israel and the Palestinians--but there are categories of discussion that invoke many intense feelings so if you're ever going to be careful, you should be careful then . To me, this is one. Certainly, it could be discussed, but one would be walking near minefields, I think, given the rules of Pbabble.
But again, I'm not in favor of blocking Teejay. Hope this isn't perceived to be uncivil of me.
Jost.
Posted by Jakeman on July 3, 2006, at 23:37:31
In reply to Confused about Teejay's block, posted by llrrrpp on July 2, 2006, at 22:23:14
There's no discussion allowed about important issues on politics. OK, let's all be supportive, etc. etc. If we can't allow peole to disagree and discuss then the board is useless.
warm regards, Jake
Posted by llrrrpp on July 3, 2006, at 23:44:49
In reply to Re: Confused about Teejay's block » llrrrpp, posted by Jakeman on July 3, 2006, at 23:37:31
> There's no discussion allowed about important issues on politics. OK, let's all be supportive, etc. etc. If we can't allow peole to disagree and discuss then the board is useless.
>
> warm regards, JakeYeah, okay.
thanks for warm regards. Somethings I may never be meant to understand. If I never understand what happened to Teejay, I guess I just will have to accept it, like so many other mysteries of the world.warm regards right back atcha
(winking)
(or was that a stray eyelash that was irritating my cornea?)
-ll
Posted by Jakeman on July 4, 2006, at 0:00:28
In reply to Re: Confused about Teejay's block » Jakeman, posted by llrrrpp on July 3, 2006, at 23:44:49
Warm regards is my sign-off because I think every human being, everywhere, is basically worthy of respect and compassion.
That doesn't mean what they have said or done does not piss me off to the max or is right.
Warm regards, Jake
Posted by llrrrpp on July 4, 2006, at 0:59:05
In reply to Re: Confused about Teejay's block » llrrrpp, posted by Jakeman on July 4, 2006, at 0:00:28
> Warm regards is my sign-off because I think every human being, everywhere, is basically worthy of respect and compassion.
>
> That doesn't mean what they have said or done does not piss me off to the max or is right.
>
> Warm regards, JakeYep, agreed on all counts. thanks for explaining. I appreciate sincerity, even though I often fail to demonstrate it.
(lacking brains to understand this TJ block- why did I bring it up in the first place? I'm not much of a rabble-rouser)
(lacking a stable sign-off salutation)
-ll
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 4, 2006, at 5:34:42
In reply to Confused about Teejay's block, posted by llrrrpp on July 2, 2006, at 22:23:14
> Dr. Bob, while Teejay's post was generally critical of Israel, the phrase that you highlight as incivil may be an empirically demonstrable fact.
>
> For instance, if I say that:
>
> The USA has lost over 2000 US soldiers in the war in Iraq.
>
> Is that an offense to the supporters of the USA? I don't think so.I'm sorry he's blocked, but the idea here is to be supportive, not critical. It also tends to be more constructive if things are put things in terms of what other countries might do better rather than what they have done "wrong". And I think it's more civil to say "the USA has lost over 2000 US soldiers" than "Iraq has killed over 2000 US soldiers".
Bob
Posted by llrrrpp on July 4, 2006, at 6:07:06
In reply to Re: the idea here is to be supportive, posted by Dr. Bob on July 4, 2006, at 5:34:42
> > Dr. Bob, while Teejay's post was generally critical of Israel, the phrase that you highlight as incivil may be an empirically demonstrable fact.
> >
> > For instance, if I say that:
> >
> > The USA has lost over 2000 US soldiers in the war in Iraq.
> >
> > Is that an offense to the supporters of the USA? I don't think so.
>
> I'm sorry he's blocked, but the idea here is to be supportive, not critical. It also tends to be more constructive if things are put things in terms of what other countries might do better rather than what they have done "wrong". And I think it's more civil to say "the USA has lost over 2000 US soldiers" than "Iraq has killed over 2000 US soldiers".
>
> BobOkay. I think I'm starting to figure it out. It's not just civility, it's civility in the context of the mission of this online support website. I'm still terrified to speak of political matters. I guess it's good to have alternate venues for such debate. There are many online political forums where one can express political opinions without fear of Dr. Bob blockade. I am too lazy to do any research right now to find one, but political party websites are probably a good place to start.
Dr. Bob, you didn't allow Teejay an opportunity to rephrase or retract his statement. Is this because you failed to detect a supportive message in his post? Or is this because his post was so uncivil that a PBC was too weak?
thanks again for your response. Why are you up at 5:34 am? Perhaps you might need to join a support group for insomniac moderators of online support groups? :o)
-ll
Posted by verne on July 4, 2006, at 9:45:12
In reply to Not so confused about Teejay's block, posted by Jost on July 3, 2006, at 19:19:56
Jost, I was about to weigh in but after reading your lucid post, I discovered I had little to add. I think you're getting to the heart of the babble-politics conundrum. Can one serve both Babble and Politics?
I especially liked your comment: "but there are categories of discussion that invoke many intense feelings so if you're ever going to be careful, you should be careful then."
If I were to add anything, I might have wandered into the brambles and said something about "kidnap" being a bit of a loaded word, that there are more neutral, less judgmental, ways to describe what happened. But that's the wrong approach since there's really no words to replace "kill" without being laughably euphemistic.
Looking back at some of my babble transgressions, I remember discussing Australian adventures in the South Pacific. I deliberately used words like "invade" and "occupy" for maximum torkage and blockage. I knew I was causing trouble. I guess I was making a point at the time but I was still being mean-spirited and uncivil.
I was *accusing* Australia of bad intentions; judging and blaming them.So back to the comment about Israel's actions. Even though the words may be technically correct, there's the suggestion that Israel is at fault with the attendant accusing, judging, blaming, jumping to conclusions, and so forth.
Like you said, the situation is more complex than just picking a side and blaming the other. So we're left with mined areas best left untrodden.
That's as murky as I can make it after only one cup of coffee.
verne
Posted by 10derHeart on July 4, 2006, at 12:31:57
In reply to Re: Not so confused about Teejay's block » Jost, posted by verne on July 4, 2006, at 9:45:12
Both your posts together helped me. Now I get it.
I was seeing the trees and missing most of the rest of the forest this time, I think. Focusing strictly on the possibility the statement could be researched and found to be factual, without taking a broader view of other considerations.
Thanks again.
Posted by Jost on July 5, 2006, at 14:38:30
In reply to Thanks verne and Dr. Bob..., posted by 10derHeart on July 4, 2006, at 12:31:57
Thanks verne (and Dr. Bob), for helping 10derHeart to understand. (And thanks verne, for understanding, I was wondering if someone did.)
Jost
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 5, 2006, at 21:21:05
In reply to Re: the idea here is to be supportive » Dr. Bob, posted by llrrrpp on July 4, 2006, at 6:07:06
> Dr. Bob, you didn't allow Teejay an opportunity to rephrase or retract his statement.
Do you think I should've?
Bob
Posted by Jakeman on July 5, 2006, at 22:26:53
In reply to Re: the idea here is to be supportive, posted by Dr. Bob on July 5, 2006, at 21:21:05
> > Dr. Bob, you didn't allow Teejay an opportunity to rephrase or retract his statement.
>
> Do you think I should've?
>
> Bob
>Personally I don't think that's the point. In this particular forum we were talking about world events, information quoted in thousands of media outlets. Maybe someone can suggest a proper supportive statement that could be made about the kidnappings (done by both sides btw) and the military actions which ensued.
warm regards, Jake
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.