![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 71. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by SLS on February 15, 2008, at 18:07:45
Compared to 1 1/2 years ago, it seems to me that there has been a significant reduction in the posting on the medical board.
Has there been?
The "Neurotransmitter" board seems to be particularly inactive.
Is Psycho-Babble dying?
It seems to be.
Why is this?
- Scott
Posted by ClearSkies on February 15, 2008, at 18:58:05
In reply to Anyone notice a reduction in posting?, posted by SLS on February 15, 2008, at 18:07:45
Definitely. I attributed it to the hacking episode that happened last summer.
ClearSkies
Posted by Dinah on February 15, 2008, at 19:55:06
In reply to Anyone notice a reduction in posting?, posted by SLS on February 15, 2008, at 18:07:45
I think there are a lot of reasons, but I'm guessing the main one is the google search results have changed so not as many new posters are finding Babble.
Posted by muffled on February 15, 2008, at 22:36:03
In reply to Anyone notice a reduction in posting?, posted by SLS on February 15, 2008, at 18:07:45
I am posting less due to concerns about how babble is run. Its hurts too much to see what to me seems senseless hurt. :-(
But change is slow. Too slow.
:-(
Good people here.
But I swear, Bob, for all that he provides this site for us. I don't know his motivation.
I don't understand so many things that he won't do.
I don't know WHY??? and the answers he gives are incomplete.
Scared, sad.
Thats why.
M
Posted by Phillipa on February 16, 2008, at 0:01:17
In reply to Re: Anyone notice a reduction in posting?, posted by muffled on February 15, 2008, at 22:36:03
It seems to me that lots of the old posters left for places can't divuldge and the threat of blocks has some afraid to write. Used to be fun not anymore and knowledge and support but I too am looking been invited to go elsewhere. The babble experts aren't posting and some are already blocked. That's how I feel. Love Phillipa
Posted by Dr. Bob on February 17, 2008, at 1:13:28
In reply to Re: Anyone notice a reduction in posting?, posted by muffled on February 15, 2008, at 22:36:03
> I don't understand so many things that he won't do.
> I don't know WHY??? and the answers he gives are incomplete.Sorry, what kinds of things? I'd like to see more activity, too.
Bob
Posted by muffled on February 17, 2008, at 21:13:16
In reply to Re: Anyone notice a reduction in posting?, posted by Dr. Bob on February 17, 2008, at 1:13:28
> > I don't understand so many things that he won't do.
> > I don't know WHY??? and the answers he gives are incomplete.
>
> Sorry, what kinds of things? I'd like to see more activity, too.
>
> BobI presume this is directed at me. I gonna answer as best I can down below.
Though input from others would be nice.
Thx
M
Posted by rskontos on February 18, 2008, at 13:22:33
In reply to Re: Anyone notice a reduction in posting? » Dr. Bob, posted by muffled on February 17, 2008, at 21:13:16
I will post on some things but some things I feel I would get blocked on, I just move on and don't say a word. I don't know sometimes what is or is not going to get a PBC or more. I have recently written and deleted I don't know maybe 10+ posts to various threads and boards. Sometimes in my current mental state trying to be Babblespeak neutral is too hard.
rsk
Posted by SLS on February 19, 2008, at 6:05:11
In reply to Anyone notice a reduction in posting?, posted by SLS on February 15, 2008, at 18:07:45
> Is Psycho-Babble dying?
Yes.
Is it dead yet?
Not quite.
Where did everybody go?
I don't know. However, I would guess that a sizable percentage of people migrated to other sites. These people, de facto, find their new posting environment more appealing than that of Psycho-Babble.
There is the possibility that changes in the administration of this website could resurrect it from its demise.
I need to think about this some more.
All I know is that my reduced desire to post is directly attributable to the rate of attrition at Psycho-Babble. Nothing turns me on anymore.
Shall I be more specific regarding the posting environment here? I think I will leave this discussion to the administration to answer for themselves after they deliberate on the causes for the decay of Psycho-Babble.
I would hate to leave here so soon after my return, but I am afraid that this is a possibility. I doubt that my personal dilemma is shared by everyone here. Maybe Scott must change.
Yeah, right.
- Scott
Posted by Deneb on February 19, 2008, at 7:00:27
In reply to Psycho-Babble is dying., posted by SLS on February 19, 2008, at 6:05:11
Psycho-Babble is dying? Noooooo! :-( I don't want it to die!
I will post more.
I've noticed the reduction in posting as well. :-(
Hopefully this is phase and we will reach an equilibrium soon.
Posted by Emme on February 19, 2008, at 18:16:03
In reply to Psycho-Babble is dying., posted by SLS on February 19, 2008, at 6:05:11
IMHO, Psychobabble has "over-procedured" itself to death. That is one of the reasons I seldom post. But that's just my personal opinion. Because it could be construed as a criticism (although not of a person, just the site administration), I don't actually know if what I have just written is considered civil or not by the site guidelines. That is another reason I seldom post. When I do, I feel compelled to keep it *extremely* succinct lest I wander into PBC territory.
emme
Posted by Jamal Spelling on February 20, 2008, at 8:14:48
In reply to Re: Psycho-Babble is dying., posted by Emme on February 19, 2008, at 18:16:03
Yes, Psycho-Babble is dying. Let us be kind to her in her final months.
Posted by SLS on February 20, 2008, at 9:08:25
In reply to Re: Psycho-Babble is dying., posted by Jamal Spelling on February 20, 2008, at 8:14:48
> Yes, Psycho-Babble is dying. Let us be kind to her in her final months.
Sad.
:-(
- Scott
Posted by kezia on February 20, 2008, at 10:46:17
In reply to Re: Psycho-Babble is dying., posted by Emme on February 19, 2008, at 18:16:03
I think you hit the nail on the head!! It's hard to know what is acceptable and what is not. Frankly, it has gotten to the point of being ridiculous and, at times, hurtful. When "enforcing" civility becomes uncivil, then I don't think the whole exercise is working very well.
Oh well, this site was here for me when I needed it most, but now . . .
> IMHO, Psychobabble has "over-procedured" itself to death. That is one of the reasons I seldom post. But that's just my personal opinion. Because it could be construed as a criticism (although not of a person, just the site administration), I don't actually know if what I have just written is considered civil or not by the site guidelines. That is another reason I seldom post. When I do, I feel compelled to keep it *extremely* succinct lest I wander into PBC territory.
>
> emme
>
>
>
>
Posted by Sigismund on February 20, 2008, at 13:15:29
In reply to Re: Psycho-Babble is dying. » Emme, posted by kezia on February 20, 2008, at 10:46:17
Is this the price of civilty then?
Have we reached the limits of supportiveness?
We could sit at our screens and not post?
Posted by Toph on February 20, 2008, at 21:21:09
In reply to Psycho-Babble is dying., posted by SLS on February 19, 2008, at 6:05:11
I may be mistaken but the vitality of Psycho-Babble seems to mirror the interest it's founder has in it.
Posted by Phillipa on February 20, 2008, at 21:48:03
In reply to Re: Psycho-Babble is dying., posted by Sigismund on February 20, 2008, at 13:15:29
Which I feel many may be doing. Phillipa
Posted by SLS on February 21, 2008, at 5:59:43
In reply to Re: Psycho-Babble is dying., posted by Toph on February 20, 2008, at 21:21:09
> I may be mistaken but the vitality of Psycho-Babble seems to mirror the interest it's founder has in it.
Could be. I haven't been here over the last 1 1/2 years, so I really did not witness those variables that may have affected the membership here.
I have never been blocked, although I did earn a PBC. If I were to be blocked, I don't think I would take it personally. I guess that's a healthy thing, but there are many who are emotionally vulnerable (or even not so vulnerable) whom, having depression, are more likely to take blocks personally.
Is it possible that some people left without earning posting sanctions whom just refused to be treated like children, and suffer punishments from the administration for not being Victorian in their diction? I think these things might be taken into consideration when trying to explain the reduction in posting on the medical board.
The Internet is usually thought of as a place where free speech is advocated. For those people whom subscribe to this idea, this is not an outlet for their freedom of speech. On the contrary, it is a suppression of free speech. Regardless of my personal likes and dislikes, it is I whom chooses to participate here under the current guidelines. It is not my blog board. So, I will try to adhere to the guidelines of the administration.
I haven't gone foraging for a new site. Quite frankly, I don't want to nor or need to. However, I doubt I will participate much here anymore. There is nothing that captures my interest. New and not-so-new people ask the same questions over and over. In the past, I answered these questions over and over. However, I see that I have done this enough to have had my hunger for doing it satiated. Usually, these questions are fielded first by people whom have been here for a little while. But no longer does this segment of the population exist. People leave too soon. So now, we have posters who are in need of questions answered, but no veterans interested in answering them. I think the process of attrition, once started, can be self-perpetuating in a posting community.
I could go on, so I will.
When the enactment of sanctioned guidelines of civility were first enforced, I remember feeling choked. I'm sure many novices come to feel this way as well. The newbies are tolerant of it in the beginning. Thus, the result is that enthusiastic novices feel choked and resentful, and probably leave at that stage of their participation here. I hope Linkadge comes back, as much as I disagree with him. I wish Larry Hoover posted more regularly. I wish the current environment were conducive to my posting more. Perhaps Dr. Hsiung is aiming to produce what he believes is a utopian society. When it comes to human beings having differing opinions, this is hard to accomplish.
There is no more room for passion here. Posts are rewarded for being robotic and without the use of words that demonstrate adversarial content. While I am glad that we don't see the persistent flaming and trolling that once occurred here, I believe the administration is much too intrusive right now. Maybe we should run a social experiment to see how the posting habits change in the absence of such moderation. Afterall, Dr. Hsiung is running a social experiment of sorts. Why not experiment with moderation with the objective of enhancing or optimizing membership participation.
One of the objectives of the civility guidelines is to produce dispassionate content and filter out content that is allowed to be freely adversarial.
Of course, all of this is conjecture on my part.
Apparently, there has been a reduction in posting volume that has been occurring for a long time. Administration ought to recognize this and produce conjecture of their own - and act on it.
Compared to the years between 2000 and 2002, things were very, very interesting, being mostly constructive, and ideal for the synthesis of ideas. People were interesting. Debate was interesting. Most all of the posts allowed for subjective content. Now, everything is to be of an objective nature. Where is the allowance for conflict? Conflict is a healthy thing. Perhaps a less intrusive moderation of free speech would be conducive to attracting new members and prevent old members from emigrating away.
I thought things were pretty cool back in the "old days". Now, things pretty much suck.
I suggest that this post be given a PBC because one could come to the conclusion that my saying that things now suck is an attempt, by insinuation, that Dr. Hsiung sucks. Is this too far a reach?
Hmm.
- Scott
Posted by Toph on February 21, 2008, at 10:07:39
In reply to Psycho-Babble is dying - really. What a shame., posted by SLS on February 21, 2008, at 5:59:43
Its your last sentence Scott that is at the crux of my objections to the punishment system here - the assumptions, the insinuations. I and others get pissed because posters are punished because of something said that MIGHT lead others to feel accused or put down not neccessarily because the poster actually intended this or even if the reader actually felt these things. Sure, there are clever ways of avoiding this with "I" statements and the like, so in essence they are teaching us to be disingenuous, to say something other than what you truely feel. Many of us just say f*ck it, I'll say want I want and suffer the consequences.
Posted by Jamal Spelling on February 21, 2008, at 10:16:58
In reply to Re: Psycho-Babble is dying., posted by Jamal Spelling on February 20, 2008, at 8:14:48
For Psycho-Babble to die, Dr Bob would have to shut down the website. Until such time, Psycho-Babble is technically still alive, even if only part of the living dead.
The fact that Yahoo! still exists and some people still use ICQ means there's a long way to go before Psycho-Babble would truly die.
I just see it as going through a rough patch, a normal cyclical phenomenon for web sites.
I also find Psycho-Babble less interesting than say two years ago, but that may be simply because I have grown as a person. The whole medication thing was cool when I first discovered it, but it gets a bit boring after a while. Maybe that's why other people leave eventually.
Posted by Jamal Spelling on February 21, 2008, at 10:25:03
In reply to Psycho-Babble is not dying, posted by Jamal Spelling on February 21, 2008, at 10:16:58
There's a little red square in the top right hand corner of your browser that you can click if you find Psycho-Babble objectionable.
Why do people keep coming back for more if they find Psycho-Babble so terrible?
Vote with your feet!
I'm sure Dr Grohol will be happy to see you at PsychCentral.
Posted by ClearSkies on February 21, 2008, at 10:48:56
In reply to Psycho-Babble is not dying, posted by Jamal Spelling on February 21, 2008, at 10:16:58
I don't see this as a dying place, either. Gone through some tough times, for sure. Maybe more like growing pains? And maybe some of the growth has been uncomfortable, been perceived as stifling. Maybe some of the things Dr Bob has tried, like the extra boards, haven't worked out as well as he thought. I think that redirects, for example, are "death" to most threads, especially when they're sent to a board that isn't frequently posted to.
But I mostly see Babble as an organic thing, a community, not a static thing - and that's its appeal for me. I know that the traffic will slow or speed up sometimes. I know that discussions can become lively, though less likely they are now to become flame wars (and oh so thankful am I for that! God bless the Notification Button). I, for one, like the fact that people aren't tolerated to be all-out *ssh*l*s towards each other here, as I've seen on other forums.
It's not that I think this makes Babble a homogenized, bland environment. I think it makes lively discussions even more challenging - and at times might keep some of us silent at times. But is that a bad thing, if the alternative would have been to say something offensive? I really think that there's plenty enough of that in our society (just turn on the radio sometime to an AM station, or a cable news channel to get your fill of offensive communication), and I welcome the relative peace of this place, where opinions and feelings can be aired with *civility*.
I'm staying, and this place isn't dead yet.
ClearSkies
Posted by rskontos on February 21, 2008, at 12:54:28
In reply to Re: Psycho-Babble is dying. » Emme, posted by kezia on February 20, 2008, at 10:46:17
I must say that I agree. I have too much else to deal with then always trying to decide if I am breaching some PBC rules I usually delete my post and close my browser or go to another site where I can feel freer to post. :(
rsk
Posted by SLS on February 21, 2008, at 16:13:10
In reply to Re: Psycho-Babble is not dying, posted by ClearSkies on February 21, 2008, at 10:48:56
> I don't see this as a dying place, either. Gone through some tough times, for sure. Maybe more like growing pains?
Which rough times?
When did these growing pains begin?
You know, I really don't have to be right about this. In fact, I hope my postulations are wrong. I just thought it important to help save PB if PB indeed needed saving. It seems that PB is always going through rough times. I am not convinced that three years of "growing pains" should be allowed to continue ad infinitum.
- Scott
Posted by ClearSkies on February 21, 2008, at 16:27:25
In reply to Re: Psycho-Babble is not dying, posted by SLS on February 21, 2008, at 16:13:10
> > I don't see this as a dying place, either. Gone through some tough times, for sure. Maybe more like growing pains?
>
> Which rough times?
>
> When did these growing pains begin?
>
> You know, I really don't have to be right about this. In fact, I hope my postulations are wrong. I just thought it important to help save PB if PB indeed needed saving. It seems that PB is always going through rough times. I am not convinced that three years of "growing pains" should be allowed to continue ad infinitum.
>
>
> - Scott
>
>My thoughts were that with a community where members were joining and leaving - not a static environment - that growth and change would be a constant, and not a period through which we'd go through, and then we'd be Done. Maybe I was projecting my own "rough times" at Babble - becoming and then unbecoming a Deputy, and then the period last summer when the site was hacked. Perhaps any individual here can point to their own Rough Times at Babble...
My point was that a place such as this should be always changing, sometimes growing, maybe sometimes drawing itself smaller, as needs be - for instance, I think when the smaller boards were created, overall traffic might have gone down because people tended to get lost. Or when threads were redirected, they died as people didn't follow them to the redirected board.
Too early to call the time of death, IMO. Did you know this is Babble's 10th birthday year?
CS
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.