![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 33 to 57 of 138. Go back in thread:
Posted by Sigismund on March 13, 2008, at 2:08:52
In reply to Re: dinah..., posted by Dinah on March 12, 2008, at 20:45:25
Dinah
Don't be ridiculous.
Of course I'm not angry with you.
Anyway, IMO, these troubles, they come from ourselves.
Of course the civility rules suck.
But anyway....
Posted by AbbieNormal on March 13, 2008, at 6:22:27
In reply to Re: (((((Dinah))))), posted by All Done on March 12, 2008, at 22:53:40
You mean she's human???
Casting stones...blah blah. Must be nice to be perfect, eh? :-)
Abbie
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 13, 2008, at 7:49:48
In reply to Re: dinah... » Dinah, posted by Fayeroe on March 12, 2008, at 21:49:42
> Dinah said "I wasn't trying to incite anything. I didn't even want people to be mad at Dr. Bob at all."
>
> I've seen the administration cause enormous pain for the posters here and true to form, Bob goes scot free. It would be refreshing if just one time , no one enabled his irresponsible behavior.
>
>
> Dinah, I have to ask you this, did you think through what might happen to the site when you and Bob started down the slippery slope of the private discussions (that you then hinted at in your posts) concerning rule changes for PB?
>
> The safety of the posters here should be the first concern of the administration.
>
> Can you imagine a CEO and a vice-president of a large corporation handling personal differences the way this played out? Surely you understand the complexities of a large mental health support site and what the reactions will be of people left in the dark.
>
> I do not think you should have made any of it public. As several have said, you have a direct pipeline to him and the posters don't have that priviledge.
>
> I'm going to change this old saying, somewhat, as I don't want it to sound as harsh as it is orginally, "the road to chaos is paved with good intentions".
>
> This is my last word on this mess as I refuse to provide anything else for Bob's projects.fayeroe,
You wrote,[...I've seen...first concern...mental health support site...left in the dark...you have..posters don't...word on this...]
What you have posted points out that the administration wants to have the community to have an access to the administrator that governs his assistants. The TOS of Mr. Hsiung writes this in his statement that he wants to have feedback. Further, whatever is done here could be thought to be for the good of the group because the TOS here writes that he does what in his thinking will be good for the community as a whole and that what he does is with in some way {fair} and to {trust} him that what is done is to that concept.
So I think that with that type of TOS here, members have rightfully thought that they have an expectation that the administration will deliver what they write as the {Terms Of Service} to the members. Since members are expressing in their posts their feelings as a result of the TOS in relation to them not receiving feedback from Mr. Hsiung yet, I think that members could feel that since they abide by the rules in the terms of service here for them, that Mr. Hsiung, that writes that he wants feedback, also abide by his terms of service to the members.
In all respect to Dinah, let us reason that if Mr. Hsiung was to have posted in the innitiation of this, then would all of this have happened?
Then there is IMO the concern that Mr. Hsiung's not posting concerniing this situation yet, when he was communicating with Dinah, could lead some others to have the potential to think things about as to why he has not posted here when he was communicating with Dinah. That could IMO have the potential to cause the emotional/ psychological feelings that members are posting about.
I think that for the good of the community as a whole, we could focus on a remedy for those members here that are experiancing problematic psychological/emotional states as a result of this situation. One way suggested is to have discussion continually untill a remedy happens. I think that that is a good idea but in my experiance there is much more to that such as:
A.IMO. a moderator that is impartial to the situation could be appointed untill Mr. Hsiung returns to the forum. Perhaps someone from the University of Chicago could be contacted to enter the forum as a member and moderate the discussion.
B. another solution IMO could be to set up something like an instant messaging system for interested members to participate in off the forum's control.
C. another solution IMO could be close the forum in its entirerty untill Mr. Hsiung returns to the forum.
D. Another solution IMO would be to delete all the threads concerning this situation.
E. Another solution IMO could be for Mr. Hsiung to provide a buddy of his to take his place
F. Another solution IMO would be to change the TOS here and delete the part that feedback is wanted from the members.
G. other good and just solutions.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 13, 2008, at 8:23:36
In reply to Lou's reply to fayeroe's post-noghwrtotrn » Fayeroe, posted by Lou Pilder on March 13, 2008, at 7:49:48
> > Dinah said "I wasn't trying to incite anything. I didn't even want people to be mad at Dr. Bob at all."
> >
> > I've seen the administration cause enormous pain for the posters here and true to form, Bob goes scot free. It would be refreshing if just one time , no one enabled his irresponsible behavior.
> >
> >
> > Dinah, I have to ask you this, did you think through what might happen to the site when you and Bob started down the slippery slope of the private discussions (that you then hinted at in your posts) concerning rule changes for PB?
> >
> > The safety of the posters here should be the first concern of the administration.
> >
> > Can you imagine a CEO and a vice-president of a large corporation handling personal differences the way this played out? Surely you understand the complexities of a large mental health support site and what the reactions will be of people left in the dark.
> >
> > I do not think you should have made any of it public. As several have said, you have a direct pipeline to him and the posters don't have that priviledge.
> >
> > I'm going to change this old saying, somewhat, as I don't want it to sound as harsh as it is orginally, "the road to chaos is paved with good intentions".
> >
> > This is my last word on this mess as I refuse to provide anything else for Bob's projects.
>
> fayeroe,
> You wrote,[...I've seen...first concern...mental health support site...left in the dark...you have..posters don't...word on this...]
> What you have posted points out that the administration wants to have the community to have an access to the administrator that governs his assistants. The TOS of Mr. Hsiung writes this in his statement that he wants to have feedback. Further, whatever is done here could be thought to be for the good of the group because the TOS here writes that he does what in his thinking will be good for the community as a whole and that what he does is with in some way {fair} and to {trust} him that what is done is to that concept.
> So I think that with that type of TOS here, members have rightfully thought that they have an expectation that the administration will deliver what they write as the {Terms Of Service} to the members. Since members are expressing in their posts their feelings as a result of the TOS in relation to them not receiving feedback from Mr. Hsiung yet, I think that members could feel that since they abide by the rules in the terms of service here for them, that Mr. Hsiung, that writes that he wants feedback, also abide by his terms of service to the members.
> In all respect to Dinah, let us reason that if Mr. Hsiung was to have posted in the innitiation of this, then would all of this have happened?
> Then there is IMO the concern that Mr. Hsiung's not posting concerniing this situation yet, when he was communicating with Dinah, could lead some others to have the potential to think things about as to why he has not posted here when he was communicating with Dinah. That could IMO have the potential to cause the emotional/ psychological feelings that members are posting about.
> I think that for the good of the community as a whole, we could focus on a remedy for those members here that are experiancing problematic psychological/emotional states as a result of this situation. One way suggested is to have discussion continually untill a remedy happens. I think that that is a good idea but in my experiance there is much more to that such as:
> A.IMO. a moderator that is impartial to the situation could be appointed untill Mr. Hsiung returns to the forum. Perhaps someone from the University of Chicago could be contacted to enter the forum as a member and moderate the discussion.
> B. another solution IMO could be to set up something like an instant messaging system for interested members to participate in off the forum's control.
> C. another solution IMO could be close the forum in its entirerty untill Mr. Hsiung returns to the forum.
> D. Another solution IMO would be to delete all the threads concerning this situation.
> E. Another solution IMO could be for Mr. Hsiung to provide a buddy of his to take his place
> F. Another solution IMO would be to change the TOS here and delete the part that feedback is wanted from the members.
> G. other good and just solutions.
> LouFRiends,
Here is a link to the TOS here where Mr. Hsiung writes that he wants to be open to feedback and about {trust} and {fair} and good for the community as a whole. It is about half way on the page and is in relation to being civil. These are the expectations that members IMO could understand to be part of the community standards.
Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
Posted by twinleaf on March 13, 2008, at 9:16:47
In reply to Re: I have to disagree... » twinleaf, posted by gardenergirl on March 13, 2008, at 0:20:36
We clearly differ in how we are evaluating what has happened here.
I respect your views, although I hold differing ones. The only thing that is hard to take is that you have been disrespectful, argumentative, and provocative to both me and Adelaide Curtis in this one thread. Apparently, we are fit to be subjects of your hostility because we do not hold the same views that you do. You are a good example of what I am talking about when I say that there are now higher levels of distress on these boards. You have never posted in this manner before.
Posted by gardenergirl on March 13, 2008, at 11:42:38
In reply to Re: I have to disagree... » gardenergirl, posted by twinleaf on March 13, 2008, at 9:16:47
Thanks for thinking better of me than a review of the archives would indicate.
gg
Posted by karen_kay on March 13, 2008, at 12:47:37
In reply to sheesh, how soon we forget » twinleaf, posted by gardenergirl on March 13, 2008, at 11:42:38
twinleaf's post kinda made me chuckle, jsut because this isn't near the first time you've posted in this manner :)
hey, i hope that isn't taken the wrong way!everyone likes a little spunk, don't they?
Posted by seldomseen on March 13, 2008, at 14:00:03
In reply to Re: dinah... » star008, posted by Dinah on March 12, 2008, at 22:35:34
I love the pragmatist in you!
I don't think there is any way that you could have predicted what would have happened here, nor do I think it is realistic for you to take all the responsibility for what other people post/feel.
Like others have expressed, I would have been much more upset if you had just left the boards altogether without saying anything.
I'm glad you're back and I hope you will stay a while
Seldom
Posted by fayeroe on March 13, 2008, at 14:05:02
In reply to Re: dinah... » Fayeroe, posted by Dinah on March 12, 2008, at 22:01:42
> You're right. I should have just left without saying anything.
>
> I'm sorry.That is not what I said, Dinah. I was referring to not saying anything while things are in limbo.
You had a disagreement with Bob about rules here. People were hearing things but not knowing exactly what the changes might be. It is understandable that getting hints of changes gets everyone's interest up concerning "their home".
You announced that you were leaving due to something concerning administration changing procedures...
THEN you and Bob worked it out. Had you not said you were leaving, which, rightly so, upset people here and just worked behind the scenes with Bob,, the confusion, pain and anger could have been prevented.
NOW, I feel that the entire thing could have been prevented if Bob had cooperated with you from the first to work things out. I think that since Bob is the owner of the site, he handled this incorrectly. Reference what I said about a CEO and an officer of his company not handling problems "out front" of the "employees"...
I, again, say to you that I did not say you should have left without saying anything to the posters.
Do you understand what I am talking about?
Posted by fayeroe on March 13, 2008, at 14:23:47
In reply to Re: I have to disagree... » twinleaf, posted by gardenergirl on March 13, 2008, at 0:20:36
**Yikes, of course you have ways to resolve feelings. Perhaps if folks examine their feelings and reactions and parse out what parts they've "picked up" from Dinah, what parts are their own, what parts are about this event specifically and what parts are about something else in the poster's experiences; well perhaps they could make progress in resolving them independently. I think it's adaptive and helpful to do so as it puts the power for resolution back where it belongs, in the individual versus in someone or something separate from the individual.**
I believe that in a perfect world, folks are able to do what is suggested above. But this isn't the perfect world here, it is a support forum and posters here have mental health issues.
I, personally, believe that since alot of people here look to Dinah for guidance, (and they get it) it was very frightening and frustrating to not know exactly what was going to happen to them and why it was happening.
For myself, I might know how to separate feelings and get down to "the bone" with problems, BUT when I am scared or upset, I can fail miserably on that front.
I know that all of us come from different life experiences and we all aren't going to handle problems the same.
>
Posted by Deputy 10derHeart on March 13, 2008, at 17:49:13
In reply to Re: I have to disagree... » gardenergirl, posted by twinleaf on March 13, 2008, at 9:16:47
>you have been disrespectful, argumentative, and provocative
Per the FAQ, and to avoid being uncivil yourself, please use the Notify the Administrators button if you feel there is a problem with a post or posts on the boards.
If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
Follow-ups regarding these issues should be directed to Psycho-Babble Admin and should of course be civil. Dr. Bob has oversight over deputy decisions, and he may choose a different action.
-- 10derHeart, acting as deputy for Dr. Bob
Posted by adelaide curtis on March 13, 2008, at 18:35:43
In reply to Please be civil/ follow site guidelines » twinleaf, posted by Deputy 10derHeart on March 13, 2008, at 17:49:13
does this mean that a member of this site pressed a "notify the administartor" on twinleaf's post, but not on gg's ?
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 13, 2008, at 20:18:22
In reply to Lou's reply to fayeroe's post-noghwrtotrn » Fayeroe, posted by Lou Pilder on March 13, 2008, at 7:49:48
> > Dinah said "I wasn't trying to incite anything. I didn't even want people to be mad at Dr. Bob at all."
> >
> > I've seen the administration cause enormous pain for the posters here and true to form, Bob goes scot free. It would be refreshing if just one time , no one enabled his irresponsible behavior.
> >
> >
> > Dinah, I have to ask you this, did you think through what might happen to the site when you and Bob started down the slippery slope of the private discussions (that you then hinted at in your posts) concerning rule changes for PB?
> >
> > The safety of the posters here should be the first concern of the administration.
> >
> > Can you imagine a CEO and a vice-president of a large corporation handling personal differences the way this played out? Surely you understand the complexities of a large mental health support site and what the reactions will be of people left in the dark.
> >
> > I do not think you should have made any of it public. As several have said, you have a direct pipeline to him and the posters don't have that priviledge.
> >
> > I'm going to change this old saying, somewhat, as I don't want it to sound as harsh as it is orginally, "the road to chaos is paved with good intentions".
> >
> > This is my last word on this mess as I refuse to provide anything else for Bob's projects.
>
> fayeroe,
> You wrote,[...I've seen...first concern...mental health support site...left in the dark...you have..posters don't...word on this...]
> What you have posted points out that the administration wants to have the community to have an access to the administrator that governs his assistants. The TOS of Mr. Hsiung writes this in his statement that he wants to have feedback. Further, whatever is done here could be thought to be for the good of the group because the TOS here writes that he does what in his thinking will be good for the community as a whole and that what he does is with in some way {fair} and to {trust} him that what is done is to that concept.
> So I think that with that type of TOS here, members have rightfully thought that they have an expectation that the administration will deliver what they write as the {Terms Of Service} to the members. Since members are expressing in their posts their feelings as a result of the TOS in relation to them not receiving feedback from Mr. Hsiung yet, I think that members could feel that since they abide by the rules in the terms of service here for them, that Mr. Hsiung, that writes that he wants feedback, also abide by his terms of service to the members.
> In all respect to Dinah, let us reason that if Mr. Hsiung was to have posted in the innitiation of this, then would all of this have happened?
> Then there is IMO the concern that Mr. Hsiung's not posting concerniing this situation yet, when he was communicating with Dinah, could lead some others to have the potential to think things about as to why he has not posted here when he was communicating with Dinah. That could IMO have the potential to cause the emotional/ psychological feelings that members are posting about.
> I think that for the good of the community as a whole, we could focus on a remedy for those members here that are experiancing problematic psychological/emotional states as a result of this situation. One way suggested is to have discussion continually untill a remedy happens. I think that that is a good idea but in my experiance there is much more to that such as:
> A.IMO. a moderator that is impartial to the situation could be appointed untill Mr. Hsiung returns to the forum. Perhaps someone from the University of Chicago could be contacted to enter the forum as a member and moderate the discussion.
> B. another solution IMO could be to set up something like an instant messaging system for interested members to participate in off the forum's control.
> C. another solution IMO could be close the forum in its entirerty untill Mr. Hsiung returns to the forum.
> D. Another solution IMO would be to delete all the threads concerning this situation.
> E. Another solution IMO could be for Mr. Hsiung to provide a buddy of his to take his place
> F. Another solution IMO would be to change the TOS here and delete the part that feedback is wanted from the members.
> G. other good and just solutions.
> LouFriends,
Here is another suggestion that IMO could turn this situation and other situations around.
I suggest that a system where a rating is given to each poster next to their handle be implimented here. This is how it could work:
A. Each member starts out with a rating of 1500.
B. There could be moderators whose job would be to flag the usual infractions of the rules here. C. Each infraction could have a weighted value that would be deducted from the person's rating.
D. After a drop of a member's rating to let's say 10% of what their rating was before the infraction's weighted value is deducted, the member would be not allowed to post for 10 days.
Here is a hypothetical example between two hypothetical members, A and B.
Lets pick up the dialog...
A:
I'm voting for Barbara and not because she is a woman.
B:
Then why are you voting for her, A?
A:
Because (redacted for civility purposes)
Moderator:
A, I'm deducting 10 points from your rating for language that could offend others.
Now A had already had 145 points deducted from her/his rating of 1500 so that her/his ratimg was 1355 at the time, so now with the other 10 points deducted her/his rating drops to 1345 and there now is the 10% drop in her rating to be now 1345 and so she incurrs a 10 day ostracism.
Now let's see what happens when A returns. Her/his rating is now 1345.
A is in dialog with C.
C: A, will you go skydiving with me?
A:
You have to be(redacted for civility puposes).
moderator: A, I'm deducting 50 points from your rating for posting what could lead another to feel put down.
A's rating was 1345 at the time. The deduction of 50 points takes her/his rating to 1295. Now her/his rating of 1345 has a 10% factor of that to be 134 1/2 points before she reaches another 10 day ostracism which would be 1260 1/2, so she/he is not having a 10 day loss of posting here in this case until her/his rating falls below 1260 1/2.
There could be more to this but
I would like members to list here any benifits or not to this system that you see.
Lou
Posted by KAL44 on March 13, 2008, at 21:26:27
In reply to Re: I have to disagree... » twinleaf, posted by gardenergirl on March 13, 2008, at 0:20:36
It seems to me a lot of people get upset when a deputy or ex-deputy seem to be able to say whatever they want, but an ordinary soul has to watch it, or they will get cautioned or blocked. I don't know if this is true or not. This is my observation of what seems to be what some people think and why people do not feel safe here. I may be off the wall here, but that's what it looks like from here. I have been just reading and observing, and it seems to me that lots of people feel hurt, angry, frustrated, and now out of sorts too--insults flying in all directions from all sides. what to do. what to do. what to do. My solution is to stay away from posting as much as possible and to maybe just stay away. It is hard to listen to the sadness and hurt. I don't know what Dinah should have said from the beginning. She tried to say and if it made things worse, then Bob should step in and explain what is or has changed. No one has done that yet. That creates a lot of anxiety. There seems to be some new rule that nobody knows what it is. So now people are scared to post. Gee I;m not sure if I will get blocked for this now or not. I have no idea what this new rule is.
Posted by Dinah on March 13, 2008, at 21:52:48
In reply to Re: (((((Dinah))))) » All Done, posted by MidnightBlue on March 12, 2008, at 23:56:51
Posted by Dinah on March 13, 2008, at 21:58:59
In reply to Re: I have to disagree... » twinleaf, posted by gardenergirl on March 13, 2008, at 0:20:36
I figured you would. :)
Posted by Dinah on March 13, 2008, at 22:01:06
In reply to Re: dinah..., posted by Sigismund on March 13, 2008, at 2:08:52
Thanks, Sigismund.
Posted by Dinah on March 13, 2008, at 22:02:48
In reply to Re: (((((Dinah))))), posted by AbbieNormal on March 13, 2008, at 6:22:27
Thanks, Abbie.
It doesn't take much of reviewing the archives to realize how very human I am. :)
Posted by Dinah on March 13, 2008, at 22:06:35
In reply to Re: dinah..., posted by seldomseen on March 13, 2008, at 14:00:03
You're right. There was no way I could predict this. I didn't even have any idea that Dr. Bob wouldn't be around.
So much for a graceful exit.
Thanks, Seldomseen, for being understanding.
Posted by Dinah on March 13, 2008, at 22:11:25
In reply to Re: dinah... » Dinah, posted by fayeroe on March 13, 2008, at 14:05:02
Things weren't in limbo so far as I was concerned. I only hoped to work things out so that I could remain as poster, and I wasn't hopeful of that. I stated things exactly as they were. That I was trying to work things out to remain as poster. That's all I was doing.
I *had* already worked with Dr. Bob behind the scenes.
It may not look like it, but I've been entirely consistent, at least in my own eyes. And far from acting impulsively, I'd consulted with my therapist in length, and while he ordinarily supports my staying even when I don't want to, this time he thought that I was doing what was best for me.
Posted by Dinah on March 13, 2008, at 22:15:51
In reply to Re: I have to disagree... » gardenergirl, posted by fayeroe on March 13, 2008, at 14:23:47
> I, personally, believe that since alot of people here look to Dinah for guidance, (and they get it) it was very frightening and frustrating to not know exactly what was going to happen to them and why it was happening.
That's why it's scary to be Dinah. I'm a mental health board poster myself. I've been going to therapy for thirteen years because I need to. I try to be who Dr. Bob would have me be. But sometimes I'm just a scared little girl myself.
> For myself, I might know how to separate feelings and get down to "the bone" with problems, BUT when I am scared or upset, I can fail miserably on that front.
Yes. I frequently fail miserably when I'm scared or upset.
I am not saying that my initial post came from a state of fear or upset. But when things snowballed, I think I did get scared. I did my best. Sorry it wasn't enough.
Posted by Dinah on March 13, 2008, at 22:42:46
In reply to Re: I have to disagree... » fayeroe, posted by Dinah on March 13, 2008, at 22:15:51
defending me.
That's kind of anti-Dinah.
And I don't need defending. I knew that some people would be very angry with me when I agreed to stay on, and yet I agreed to stay on anyway.
I try to clarify when I think there's a misunderstanding, but beyond that what will be will be. Hopefully people will judge me on the sum total of the time I've spent with them, of which this is only a part. I'm not sure how that will tally up but there's nothing to do about it now.
Posted by fayeroe on March 14, 2008, at 10:41:11
In reply to I'd feel awful if anyone got in trouble for, posted by Dinah on March 13, 2008, at 22:42:46
I am well aware that some will read whatever it is that they want to read into my posts.
I own that I am very outspoken when I see the turmoil that Bob creates here as he is wont to do. I've been doing that for years and will continue to voice my opinion about the way this place is "not run".I said that I was going to quit posting about this and to that end, I am sending you a babblemail, Dinah, as I will be taking this off the boards from now on.
Bob, enjoy!
Posted by SLS on March 14, 2008, at 13:14:56
In reply to I'd feel awful if anyone got in trouble for, posted by Dinah on March 13, 2008, at 22:42:46
> I knew that some people would be very angry with me when I agreed to stay on,
I can't imagine that happening. What makes you say this?
CBT: Mind reading; Fortune telling; Catastrophism, Personalization.
From where I sit, these are the cognitive distortions that still reside in your mind as to the way you interpret the world around you, especially with your expectation that people will reject you for your recent behavior.
I don't have the energy to read the whole board, but can you cite me an example of a legitimation of your expectations regarding an angry response by the PB community?
> and yet I agreed to stay on anyway.
Despite people hating you?
Dinah - no way. It just ain't happening.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on March 14, 2008, at 13:47:09
In reply to Re: dinah... » fayeroe, posted by Dinah on March 13, 2008, at 22:11:25
> It may not look like it, but I've been entirely consistent, at least in my own eyes.
In whose eyes are you inconsistent?
I can see that there is some very real anger directed your way. If not you, it would have been someone else. It is too bad that you appear like such an easy target to the people who are actually angry with Dr. Bob. My advice is that you focus on who you are in your own eyes, and not what you see in others' - real or imaginary.
Don't sweat it, Dinah. You are a great source of positive energy that both soothes and motivates. It is constructive. The converse of this is represented by people who project negative energy everywhere they go. They are depressing and destructive. Such people are genuinely malicious.
I'm glad that all of these generalizations will earn me but one PBC. It's the truth, though. If there is anyone here who takes what I have written here personally, I lament for them. Their degree of indignation is commensurate with the accuracy of my descriptions of them.
Dinah, you see, all of this drama is a waste of your time and energy. It is sometimes an effective strategy to suffer ignorance and smile. I don't usually participate in dramas, but I felt a need to write this on your behalf.
- Scott
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.