![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 34 to 58 of 95. Go back in thread:
Posted by twinleaf on March 11, 2008, at 10:38:28
In reply to Dr. Bob and I discussed this tonight, posted by Dinah on March 10, 2008, at 21:19:45
For me, the fact that Dinah was able to work out her own personal concerns in regard to procedural changes (apparently by means of e-mails or a phone call) doesn't change the basic facts. They are:
1. I supported Dinah as much as possible, saying how extremely important she was to Babble, and how upset I was that rules were taking precedence over her presence here. I was upset even more when I did not receive any personal acknowledgement from Dinah for what I had done in her brief, laconic message to me.
2. Dinah and Bob have ways of communicating which are not available to the rest of us. There is apparently no communication channel for us, despite our sincere and respectful efforts to open one, and our clear need to have had one during the past week.3. We hear about proposed changes in procedures and rules , not because they are being offered for our consideration, but because a particular deputy finds them unacceptable. No organization would survive very long using indirect tactics like this. They are extremely insulting to the rest of us.
For me, participating here is not exactly a matter of remaining safe. It is more a matter of feeling respected and valued as one among many people who share the joys, sorrows, victories and setbacks of their personal journeys. I feel so let down to discover how cold, heartless and impersonal this site actually is. Even if I wanted to share something of my own life and experience in the future, I couldn't do it. That requires a kind of trust which I can never feel again here.
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 11, 2008, at 10:58:00
In reply to Loss of trust, posted by twinleaf on March 11, 2008, at 10:38:28
> For me, the fact that Dinah was able to work out her own personal concerns in regard to procedural changes (apparently by means of e-mails or a phone call) doesn't change the basic facts. They are:
>
> 1. I supported Dinah as much as possible, saying how extremely important she was to Babble, and how upset I was that rules were taking precedence over her presence here. I was upset even more when I did not receive any personal acknowledgement from Dinah for what I had done in her brief, laconic message to me.
> 2. Dinah and Bob have ways of communicating which are not available to the rest of us. There is apparently no communication channel for us, despite our sincere and respectful efforts to open one, and our clear need to have had one during the past week.
>
> 3. We hear about proposed changes in procedures and rules , not because they are being offered for our consideration, but because a particular deputy finds them unacceptable. No organization would survive very long using indirect tactics like this. They are extremely insulting to the rest of us.
>
> For me, participating here is not exactly a matter of remaining safe. It is more a matter of feeling respected and valued as one among many people who share the joys, sorrows, victories and setbacks of their personal journeys. I feel so let down to discover how cold, heartless and impersonal this site actually is. Even if I wanted to share something of my own life and experience in the future, I couldn't do it. That requires a kind of trust which I can never feel again here.twinleaf,
You wrote,[...doesn't change...laconic message...no communication channel...not..offered for our consideration...indirect tactics...extremly insulting to..us...a matter of feeling respected and valued...feel so let down...heartless...a trust which I could never feel again here...]
There is a science of seeing the words of someone and being able to paint an overall profile of the psychological/emotional state that was induced into a person as a result of that person's perception from what the person wrote of. I am not an expert at that, but in some cases, would one have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows?
Lou
Posted by MidnightBlue on March 11, 2008, at 11:07:48
In reply to Re: Dr. Bob and I discussed this tonight » MidnightBlue, posted by Dinah on March 10, 2008, at 22:08:53
<smile>
MB
Posted by MidnightBlue on March 11, 2008, at 11:24:33
In reply to In a nutshell, posted by Dinah on March 11, 2008, at 8:40:40
>
> Dr. Bob wants to encourage posters to take more responsibility for the administration of Babble, and to encourage them to use the notify Administration button.
>But as I understand the rules, there is a penalty if someone reports more than three posts as uncivil if they are found to be civil. And not fully understanding the mind of Dr. Bob, I choose to err on the side of underreporting.
MB
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 11, 2008, at 11:36:01
In reply to Lou's reply to twinleaf's post-sbtraninhomskbluz » twinleaf, posted by Lou Pilder on March 11, 2008, at 10:58:00
> > For me, the fact that Dinah was able to work out her own personal concerns in regard to procedural changes (apparently by means of e-mails or a phone call) doesn't change the basic facts. They are:
> >
> > 1. I supported Dinah as much as possible, saying how extremely important she was to Babble, and how upset I was that rules were taking precedence over her presence here. I was upset even more when I did not receive any personal acknowledgement from Dinah for what I had done in her brief, laconic message to me.
> > 2. Dinah and Bob have ways of communicating which are not available to the rest of us. There is apparently no communication channel for us, despite our sincere and respectful efforts to open one, and our clear need to have had one during the past week.
> >
> > 3. We hear about proposed changes in procedures and rules , not because they are being offered for our consideration, but because a particular deputy finds them unacceptable. No organization would survive very long using indirect tactics like this. They are extremely insulting to the rest of us.
> >
> > For me, participating here is not exactly a matter of remaining safe. It is more a matter of feeling respected and valued as one among many people who share the joys, sorrows, victories and setbacks of their personal journeys. I feel so let down to discover how cold, heartless and impersonal this site actually is. Even if I wanted to share something of my own life and experience in the future, I couldn't do it. That requires a kind of trust which I can never feel again here.
>
> twinleaf,
> You wrote,[...doesn't change...laconic message...no communication channel...not..offered for our consideration...indirect tactics...extremly insulting to..us...a matter of feeling respected and valued...feel so let down...heartless...a trust which I could never feel again here...]
> There is a science of seeing the words of someone and being able to paint an overall profile of the psychological/emotional state that was induced into a person as a result of that person's perception from what the person wrote of. I am not an expert at that, but in some cases, would one have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows?
> Loutwinleaf,
In reading your post here, I think that you are concerned about the aspect of the administration here in relation to the mental-health of its members.
I think that what you posted here leads me to believe that you and I may think the same on that here and I think your post could be one of the top ten posts to be inducted if there is ever a {Hall of Fame} of posts.
Lou
Posted by Dinah on March 11, 2008, at 11:41:21
In reply to Loss of trust, posted by twinleaf on March 11, 2008, at 10:38:28
I'm sorry my message to you was brief, and not understandable enough. I'm also very sorry if I didn't express how much I appreciated what you did and said. I very much did appreciate it. And I tried to express it, to you and to all of those who were supportive, but clearly I fell flat.
I was distressed and overwhelmed, and definitely not at my best.
Yes, there are channels for Dr. Bob to speak to deputies. It would be pretty hard to deputize if there weren't.
Moreover, he wasn't able to get to my many emails for days either. And when he did get to me, I told him I'd feel very guilty if he addressed his time to me whether than to the board, and suggested that he go here first. Perhaps he felt that he couldn't adequately address the board until he addressed the initial cause of the disturbance? I don't know, I'm just guessing.
Posted by Dinah on March 11, 2008, at 11:47:42
In reply to Re: Loss of trust » twinleaf, posted by Dinah on March 11, 2008, at 11:41:21
And Kath is right, Scott. You really are sweet.
I'm sorry not to respond to all of you individually, but I *really* have to get to work. I've been trying to buckle down, and have some deadlines that I must meet.
I really do appreciate all the many kindnesses, and I regret if I don't make that known enough. Perhaps I still haven't worked out my discomfort with praise.
And I'm sure Dr. Bob will be pleased with the positive reaction to his idea.
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 11, 2008, at 11:48:36
In reply to Re: In a nutshell, posted by MidnightBlue on March 11, 2008, at 11:24:33
> >
> > Dr. Bob wants to encourage posters to take more responsibility for the administration of Babble, and to encourage them to use the notify Administration button.
> >
>
> But as I understand the rules, there is a penalty if someone reports more than three posts as uncivil if they are found to be civil. And not fully understanding the mind of Dr. Bob, I choose to err on the side of underreporting.
>
> MBMB,
You wrote above about a rule here in regards to using the notification feature.
I ask:
In your opinion does the rule go back retroactivly to the conception of the forum? If you know of a way that one can know how many posts of a particular person you may have used the notification feature for could you post that here? If you could, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
Lou
Posted by gardenergirl on March 11, 2008, at 11:53:40
In reply to Re: In a nutshell, posted by MidnightBlue on March 11, 2008, at 11:24:33
> But as I understand the rules, there is a penalty if someone reports more than three posts as uncivil if they are found to be civil. And not fully understanding the mind of Dr. Bob, I choose to err on the side of underreporting.
>
> MBIronically, that penalty was essentially that any further such notifications would be ignored, not acted upon or answered. I don't know (or remember?) who was keeping track and how it was tracked. And of course this may have changed since I was a deputy. But ignored...apparently that's a "penalty" used more than I realized. :(
gg
Posted by Dinah on March 11, 2008, at 12:05:57
In reply to thank you dinah, posted by muffled on March 11, 2008, at 9:54:41
> *Hmmmm, you guys did kinda get sucked in, and maybe this administrative change is supposed to or even will eventually help with this.
I think that the deputies became deputies and tolerate the stress involved because we feel passionately about civility. I don't want to speak for anyone else of course, but that's my sense. I can't see that the benefit would necessarily be to deputies.
I have reservations about it on a lot of counts.
I worry that notifications may not be made on incivility towards posters that people are annoyed with or even justifiably angry with. I worry that well liked posters won't often be reported while posters who are less popular might be reported quite frequently.
I worry that the civility standards of the site will become quite a bit more lax. I know a lot of posters will like that part.
I worry that posters who are pbc'd or blocked will realize that it's because someone turned them in, and all the anger now reserved for admin will be turned instead to fellow posters. I worry that this won't lead to a more supportive site. Dr. Bob's original article on the best of both worlds kind of discussed this, and I think he was right at that time.
It's not that I don't have as much faith in Babblers as Dr. Bob evidently does. I just see areas for concern.
Posted by muffled on March 11, 2008, at 13:40:07
In reply to Re: thank you dinah » muffled, posted by Dinah on March 11, 2008, at 12:05:57
sigh...
i am so ingnorant of so much stuff, politcal stuff. I just stay away from it. I don't understand people so many times. I was of the thot that there are some posts that break the rules in a very obvious manner, and if it was reported, then the deps could act.
But now I see....that this new rule was ALREADY implemented? Is that why the time I tried to get blocked and I couldn't? I practically had to beg for a PBC? If so, then that was rude on Bobs part cuz I'd never heard bout it and it caused alot of confusion.
I don't see what you admin people see going on re: reporting posts. I HATE to think anyone would report a post that was NOT offensive?????????? We are all babblers together, we need to stick together.
I am so naive I guess.
I ran into that the other day...a person who I liked and thot was so kind, I heard her talking mean and uncharitably bout another, and it was awful to hear. Cuz we all just people, we all just want to feel that we are OK, accepted, for who we are. And who we all are...are works in progress, ever improving our ways. We all in diff stages, and mebbe we can help each other on this crazy journey of life.
I guess I got blinders on.
But I like them.
Ya Dinah, I agree your not being able to easily let into yourself the many kind things said bout you(ALL of you). I am that way too. Mebbe you can just let a few in? One step at a time.
I also see you keep blaming yourself. You did NOTHING wrong. Can you hear this and be charitable towards yourownself?
Lifes challenging, we just goto keep on doing the best we can, and you DO do that dinah and I appreciate it.
Thanks again.
M
Posted by kid47 on March 11, 2008, at 13:53:25
In reply to Lou's reply to twinleaf's post-sbtraninhomskbluz » twinleaf, posted by Lou Pilder on March 11, 2008, at 10:58:00
>>I am not an expert at that, but in some cases, would one have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows?<<
Great qoute Lou. Thanks!
Kid47
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 11, 2008, at 15:24:52
In reply to Re: Lou's reply to twinleaf's post-sbtraninhomskbl » Lou Pilder, posted by kid47 on March 11, 2008, at 13:53:25
> >>I am not an expert at that, but in some cases, would one have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows?<<
>
> Great qoute Lou. Thanks!
>
> Kid47Kid47,
The pumps don't work because the vandles took the handles...
Lou
Posted by fayeroe on March 11, 2008, at 16:48:00
In reply to nuts » Dinah, posted by Toph on March 11, 2008, at 9:50:18
Toph, I have just finished reading your post and here is what came to mind....
shell game (plural shell games)
noun
Definition:
1. gambling game: a form of the game thimblerig in which spectators bet on the final location of an object hidden under one of three walnut shells or cups that have been shuffled2. fraudulent scheme: a scheme for defrauding or deceiving people.
Posted by Toph on March 11, 2008, at 18:18:16
In reply to Re: nuts » Toph, posted by fayeroe on March 11, 2008, at 16:48:00
Seriously Pat, I don't understand this whole thing at all. I mean, it's like since Dinah started this whole mess and now she's back telling us that she and Bob worked everything out we should just forget a week of multiple members of this community feeling betrayed by the administrator. Flowers and hugs for all. I can't believe that he can't say one f*ck*ng word about this whole mess. But then I have chronic mental illness so maybe its just me.
Posted by muffled on March 11, 2008, at 18:47:36
In reply to Re: nuts » fayeroe, posted by Toph on March 11, 2008, at 18:18:16
Dinah didn't start this. Bob did. This is ongoing.
Becuase perhaps in some part due to his blank affect and being in a position of power, he seems to have an effect on the site and its people. Bob does not seem to communicate well, that is why I am only too happy to see him take a backseat to the doings of this site. His lack of communication hase cause troubles B4, I tried then to no effect to get him to speak. I just don't think he has it in him. So I fear even if he does answer, it will not be enuf, cuz it never is.
It sucks all this, but maybe its all going to work out for the best.
Posted by fayeroe on March 11, 2008, at 20:11:08
In reply to Re: nuts » fayeroe, posted by Toph on March 11, 2008, at 18:18:16
Toph, I can't say that I've ever understood Bobby. I tried.
I came here and got good information from the site members. I got help on the med that I needed info on.....
However, I cannot remember a time that I turned my computer off and said to myself, "that Dr. Bob really has it going on with the posters that need the site"......I generally walk away shaking my head and worrying about someone who has been blocked for a year. (Verne comes to mind)
I'm no mind reader, but I have the feeling that Bob isn't really "into" this dustup any more than he's been "into" the others.
I am so sorry that this has happened again to PB.
Posted by rskontos on March 11, 2008, at 21:26:48
In reply to Re: nuts » Toph, posted by fayeroe on March 11, 2008, at 20:11:08
I'd say I agree Fayeroe. He just runs from a good "dusting" and I say that because he decided to just let Dinah hold the cards and explain what happened. Not a good leader trait. And not something I think the good old Presidential candidates would like to hear and not something he probably mentioned in his letter to the candidates pointing out how he maintains good communication between leadership and memberships of the internet boards unless you do assume we are lab rats and therefore unable to effectively communication and silence is golden. I for one cannot fathom a leadership position in any organization that would stay alive for long whereby the leader just ignores those under them to whom they depend on for justification to another entity like I saw in the link that AbbieNormal put up whereby he pointed how effective he has been in maintaining communication with Babble community. It just astonishes me how he says one thing and does another. He took our voice away from us in one easy swipe of the pen.
Dinah, I am happy for you, but I agree with TwinLeaf and everyone else, I am sorry I am too mad to name everyone, that he has violated our trust in ignoring our pleas for information, and in doing so I am unsure of my future plans for posting here anymore. My trust, which I do not take or give lightly, has been breached by you, Dr. Bob. And you have chosen by your silence to show you care not a whit.
Dinah, you have shown you care, but again, it is not your site. The rules have been changed without so much as a by your leave or a notification. Just done....puff, it was done. And if that could have been done, then we could have been included and notified and answered. And like Muffled said if he cared enough to answer us, alot could have been forgiven. But now, could have been is a very big if.
rsk
Posted by Phillipa on March 11, 2008, at 21:48:41
In reply to Re: In a nutshell, posted by MidnightBlue on March 11, 2008, at 11:24:33
I never heard that before. A lot I don't know. Love Phillipa
Posted by Dinah on March 11, 2008, at 22:12:11
In reply to Re: In a nutshell, posted by MidnightBlue on March 11, 2008, at 11:24:33
My understanding of that rule as it evolved is that it's three notifications about a single poster. And that after the third notification that was found to be civil, future notifications might not be investigated. I don't think there's any penalty to the reporter other than that, so I think it's safe for you to use the notification button.
Posted by Dinah on March 11, 2008, at 22:13:36
In reply to Re: In a nutshell » MidnightBlue, posted by Dinah on March 11, 2008, at 22:12:11
I probably should add that in case of abuse of the notification system, there might be penalties involved in that. But that hasn't been an issue so far, and I can only think of rare circumstances where it might be.
Posted by Phillipa on March 11, 2008, at 22:26:47
In reply to Re: In a nutshell » MidnightBlue, posted by Dinah on March 11, 2008, at 22:12:11
Dinah thanks for the clarrification as I do use it numerous times and admin a deputy always has arrived and handled the situation. Such an awesome responsibility. If I wore a hat I'd tip it to you. Love Phillipa
Posted by KAL44 on March 12, 2008, at 0:33:09
In reply to Our situation here....., posted by twinleaf on March 10, 2008, at 22:20:54
the thing is a lot of us are busy too with work, and yet we come and read and sometimes post. Being too busy in my book is an excuse. I work some 50 to 60 hours per week sometimes.
Posted by Toph on March 12, 2008, at 5:21:59
In reply to Re: nuts, posted by muffled on March 11, 2008, at 18:47:36
> Dinah didn't start this. Bob did.
I apologize Dinah for shooting the messenger. I'm frustrated.
Posted by Dinah on March 12, 2008, at 8:05:24
In reply to Re: nuts » muffled, posted by Toph on March 12, 2008, at 5:21:59
Thanks Toph.
I really do hope you are able to find a way to stay around in the long run. Clearly I understand if you can't. But I hope you can. I'd miss you if you were gone.
Dr. Bob may not be around much right now. But Babblers are.
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.