![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 28 to 52 of 79. Go back in thread:
Posted by Dinah on July 31, 2008, at 19:46:14
In reply to Re: This is all a bit difficult » Dinah, posted by fayeroe on July 31, 2008, at 19:37:09
Thanks, Pat.
I didn't actually take any offense at anything you said.
Those remarks came straight from my heart.
No one (well, Deneb maybe) misses Dr. Bob's on board presence more than I do. I'll bet my fellow deputies agree.
Posted by 10derHeart on July 31, 2008, at 21:09:44
In reply to Re: This is all a bit difficult » fayeroe, posted by Dinah on July 31, 2008, at 19:46:14
Posted by Zeba on July 31, 2008, at 22:39:19
In reply to Announcement of Policy Changes, posted by Deputy Dinah on July 30, 2008, at 21:50:35
How is one supposed to know what that means--the spirit vs. the letter of the law??? I have no idea what this will mean, and it seems to me that this will make things even more subjective and open to interpretation such that unpopular folk can get blocked more easily????? This does not feel good or seem to be a good solution to whatever problems there are.
I just don't understand what is/was the problem in the first place. Who cares how often someone posts or does not post. I think either is okay. I would think the only safe thing to do at this point would be to post just about myself and not comment on anything anyone else says for fear of being blocked. I guess it would be okay to answer a question. Oh well, need to go to bed as I have to get up early for therapy tomorrow.
Zeba
Posted by okydoky on July 31, 2008, at 22:53:48
In reply to Yes. I agree wholeheartedly (nm) » Dinah, posted by 10derHeart on July 31, 2008, at 21:09:44
In the spirit of Dr Bobs changes in policy will we as a community now be examining the semantic meaning in the context with which the post is written as well as the pragmatic in order to conform to both the civility rule and the spirit with which it was written? Social convention or context was irrelevant in the application of the rule.
To put it crudely, what counts is not what is true or right (in some sense independent of the community of language users), but what you can get away with or get others to accept.
--------------------------------Wittgenstien
I feel there is no application toward meaningful purpose of the admin site in many instances. I feel that the civility rules are being enforced pragmatically.I mostly feel for a lot of potentially vulnerable people (we all are) getting riled up because they feel that they are being treated unjustly. Excuse me uncivilly. This is what bothers me but I do believe there is intention, it serves a purpose.
The feeling I came away with was that there was a tacit acceptance by some how the civility guidelines are applied practically and a frustration by others as language as a tool for meaning making and meaning exchange in this social context seems not to be amenable to any meaningful discussion as intent might be implied.
practical as opposed to idealistic <pragmatic men of power have had no time or inclination to deal withsocial morality K. B. Clark
---------------------------------Websters
.
Im starting to question my own use of the words I feel and my intention in the application of their use.Well maybe some of this is nonsense. I feel I tried.
Posted by Sigismund on July 31, 2008, at 23:26:18
In reply to Re: This is all a bit difficult » fayeroe, posted by Dinah on July 31, 2008, at 19:46:14
I remember CS saying that part of a deputy's training back then was to assess posts for civility out of context.
Assessing intent is going to be subjective (but everything is) but taking context into account seems sensible.
Posted by Justherself54 on August 1, 2008, at 0:32:18
In reply to Re: This is all a bit difficult, posted by Sigismund on July 31, 2008, at 23:26:18
I think business will carry on an usual and a gentle reminder here and there can only help to keep things on track. I think if we could all speak to each other they way we would like to be spoken to, with respect...there would be far less admin sanctions.
It's the three word sarcastic zingers that could cause some problem..the tone is there but is there enough words to give a please post in the spirit, etc. For some reason these posts are the ones that bother me the most. I've seen threads on the med board that can get heated and where posters have apologized...I was happy to see that..
Enough rambling from me!
Posted by Daisym on August 1, 2008, at 1:17:36
In reply to Re: This is all a bit difficult » fayeroe, posted by Dinah on July 31, 2008, at 19:24:33
Dinah,
Thanks for taking on this announcement. I must say that I don't understand how Bob has time to ask you to do this but not time to just write a post himself. That makes no sense.But as someone else said, it is what it is.
You have a generous spirit.
Posted by Dinah on August 1, 2008, at 5:51:02
In reply to Re: This is all a bit difficult, posted by Daisym on August 1, 2008, at 1:17:36
Thank you, Daisy.
Don't ask me the ways of Bob. He was apparently on board last night. I am, of course, happy to see him.
Posted by Lemonaide on August 1, 2008, at 6:28:12
In reply to Announcement of Policy Changes, posted by Deputy Dinah on July 30, 2008, at 21:50:35
I thought I understood, but I think I am more confused as ever. Perhaps some made up examples to show the change?
Posted by okydoky on August 1, 2008, at 10:42:30
In reply to Re: This is all a bit difficult, posted by Justherself54 on August 1, 2008, at 0:32:18
In light of what Daisym and Justherself54 said:
I feel it is all a part of this experiment, a part which observes how or if we react.
I dont know if either of the two issues were by design or not.
I feel by posting here I have allowed myself to be an active participant in what I feel is a disrespectful use of behavioral science with respect to the participants. But perhaps it is for the greater good. And mostly perhaps no one really gives a hoot what I feel :)
I have used the medication board as a resource, and I am most thankful to those that have helped me and to the experiment that made it possible.I checked out information on group social dynamics or other applicable search terms on the internet. Here are a couple I feel had applicable information (I have no background or knowledge on the topic)
http://hsd.soc.cornell.edu/curricular/axelrod_evolution_cooperation.pdf
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Social_Psychology/Introduction (The concerns of social psychology, Research ethics, External links )The American Association for Technology in Psychiatry had their 2008 annual meeting in May. One workshop was COMPUTER-MEDIATED RELATIONSHIPS: BLOGS,
ONLINE COMMUNITIES, AND VIRTUAL WORLDS
American Association for Technology in Psychiatry
Chp.: Robert C. Hsiung, M.D.
Participants: Steven Daviss, M.D., Jerald Block, M.DBut you have to pay to belong to read it. Has anyone on the site read it? I feel it would be interesting for us. I see DR Bob posts on the site what and where his talks are but not their content.
If you actually read this whole thing, thanks. I apologize for not being concise in my writing.
A kind and caring Community. I thank all of you.
Posted by Dinah on August 1, 2008, at 13:53:51
In reply to Re: This is all a bit difficult, posted by okydoky on August 1, 2008, at 10:42:30
Several years ago, after perhaps the first of Dr. Bob's long and unexplained absence from the boards, I told him that people were sure he was disappearing so that he could examine the effects of his absence. That we were sure we were lab rats in an experiment.
He asked me if I thought people felt more secure to think that he was watching and experimenting, rather than that he just wasn't watching at all. That he just wasn't there.
I was impressed. It was not particularly Bob-like at the time to say anything so shrinky, but I thought maybe he was on to something there.
I just thought I'd pass it along, in case anyone else found it as helpful a question as I did.
Posted by muffled on August 1, 2008, at 16:58:36
In reply to Re: This is all a bit difficult, posted by Dinah on August 1, 2008, at 13:53:51
> He asked me if I thought people felt more secure to think that he was watching and experimenting, rather than that he just wasn't watching at all. That he just wasn't there.
>
> I was impressed. It was not particularly Bob-like at the time to say anything so shrinky, but I thought maybe he was on to something there.*Dinah, you a sweet cake.
Bob's...well...say no more.But that statement seems SO Boblike to my interpretation of it.
Cuz, what would make me secure?:
1. Bob to f*ck w/my head in the name of science? Watching to see how I react to pain stimulus? Like a lab rat? C-O-L-D.
2. Bob to go away and just be gone and not torment me with false hopes?
Hmmmmm.
I pick #2
I'd rather he just be gone. I'm not into letting him torment me.
I am a rational human being, NOT a rat.
I'm not sure he knows that.
Certainly I think the average lab rat is communicated to more than babblers are from Bob.
I wish Bob would at least bother to actually communicate.
But he doesn't.
Not even in the name of politeness.
So, thats Bob. He's human and has failings, so do I.
Unfortunately I can't tolerate his failings cuz they hurt me and others, and I hate to see it.
Too bad, so sad.
I wish all babblers well.
Hurts my heart.
:-(
Take care,
M
Posted by okydoky on August 1, 2008, at 17:17:30
In reply to Re: This is all a bit difficult, posted by Dinah on August 1, 2008, at 13:53:51
You said:
> Several years ago, after perhaps the first of Dr. Bob's long and unexplained absence from the boards, I told him that people were sure he was disappearing so that he could examine the effects of his absence. That we were sure we were lab rats in an experiment.
>He asked me if I thought people felt more secure to think that he was watching and experimenting, rather than that he just wasn't watching at all. That he just wasn't there.
>I just thought I'd pass it along, in case anyone else found it as helpful a question as I did.Who are you referring to that people... and . ..we were sure?
Were you satisfied with receiving a question that was not supportive of your observation that people were sure he was disappearing so that he could examine the effects of his absence. That we were sure we were lab rats in an experiment?
His question to you dealt with another subject matter altogether.
I wont repeat it, it is posted above.
I feel like the question to the observation was obfuscation.
Thank you for being so helpful.
oky
Posted by okydoky on August 1, 2008, at 17:34:02
In reply to Indeed, posted by muffled on August 1, 2008, at 16:58:36
>2. Bob to go away and just be gone and not torment me with false hopes?
Not seeing Dr Bob on the board does not imply he is not:
>Watching to see how I react to pain stimulus? Like a lab rat? C-O-L-D.What do you think?
oky
Posted by Dinah on August 1, 2008, at 18:36:06
In reply to What relevance does this have » Dinah, posted by okydoky on August 1, 2008, at 17:17:30
I considered the question to be more than sufficient answer. One, moreover, that is supported by my own subsequent observations both as poster and deputy.
I offered it to others for them to interpret as they wish because Dr. Bob may well be right. Perhaps it lends a certain sense of safety to Babblers to believe that he is out there, watching all. An all knowing, all powerful figure. I've acknowledged the wish myself.
But on the other hand, perhaps it's not as obvious an answer to others because it was intended for me, and he knew me well enough to know that I would find it an answer. In which case I apologize for being more confusing than I intended.
However, I think that would probably be a near delusional assumption of familiarity on Dr. Bob's part. :)
Is it really cryptic to others? I didn't mean it to be.
Perhaps one day I'll search the archives and try to interpret it. But perhaps not. A few illusions on my part do no harm.
Posted by okydoky on August 1, 2008, at 18:53:03
In reply to Re: What relevance does this have » okydoky, posted by Dinah on August 1, 2008, at 18:36:06
Posted by Dinah on August 1, 2008, at 19:09:17
In reply to Indeed, posted by muffled on August 1, 2008, at 16:58:36
I'm not all that sweet.
I just really enjoyed that answer. It was more effective than all the assurances in the world would have been. But maybe that's me.
It's funny how different people can respond to the exact same words spoken by the exact same person in a completely different way.
Posted by fayeroe on August 1, 2008, at 20:00:15
In reply to What relevance does this have » Dinah, posted by okydoky on August 1, 2008, at 17:17:30
I believe that he does this to throw the poster off balance and to retain the power that he sees himself having.
I think that anyone who answers a question with a question didn't have the answer in the first place.
It is called trying to pass the pain back to us.....I do not like it at all.
Posted by fayeroe on August 1, 2008, at 20:04:32
In reply to Re: What relevance does this have » okydoky, posted by Dinah on August 1, 2008, at 18:36:06
"I offered it to others for them to interpret as they wish because Dr. Bob may well be right. Perhaps it lends a certain sense of safety to Babblers to believe that he is out there, watching all. An all knowing, all powerful figure. I've acknowledged the wish myself."
I have alot of problems seeing Bob as "an all knowing, all powerful figure". I see him more as a person who reads our posts and decides what he will use and what he will discard.
I'm just not seeing "all knowing" and for him to be "all powerful" to me means I would have a totally different take on him. I've said it before and I'm saying it again, I haven't got that much invested here. I try to discuss and cuss and then take it all with a grain of BIG salt. :-)
Dinah, this has nothing to do with your personal observation. I just picked up on the descriptive part of your post. No harm intended to you.
Pat
Posted by muffled on August 1, 2008, at 20:08:54
In reply to Re: What relevance does this have » Dinah, posted by fayeroe on August 1, 2008, at 20:04:32
well FWIW when Bob was present alot, he DID have a presence. I think we made of him what we would as he is so blank slate.
He seemed important, a part of the community.
It WAS like he watched over us. At least it was IMHO.
But I always had doubts.
Now methinks I know why.
Its too bad really.
M
Posted by okydoky on August 1, 2008, at 21:19:23
In reply to Bob answers questions with his own question....... » okydoky, posted by fayeroe on August 1, 2008, at 20:00:15
Posted by Justherself54 on August 1, 2008, at 22:38:42
In reply to His own Questions with his own Questions.... (nm) » fayeroe, posted by okydoky on August 1, 2008, at 21:19:23
Maybe Bob gets burnt out and needs extented breaks? I quess I'd rather think that than feeling I was part of an experiment to see how much fur flies when babblers feel abandoned..just a thought that popped into my head..
Posted by Dinah on August 1, 2008, at 22:45:51
In reply to His own Questions with his own Questions.... (nm) » fayeroe, posted by okydoky on August 1, 2008, at 21:19:23
May be a poor way to disseminate information.
But it is an excellent way to illuminate truth.
Which I suppose could be frustrating for all parties involved, if different goals are held by each. I can picture it now. Dr. Bob wondering why we are having such a difficult time grasping the truth, while posters are wondering why Dr. Bob refuses to disseminate information. :)
Perhaps it would be helpful to clarify which is the goal. We could say, "Dr. Bob, we're not looking for truth or wisdom, although we thank you kindly for trying to lead us to it. We're just asking for some information please. Now, what time is it?"
However, I think I may be wandering from Administration to Philosophy. Which is definitely far afield from any knowledge base I may have.
And I am certainly not trying to be disrespectful to anyone or their concerns in this post. I hope that posters who are also deputies may occasionally be allowed some playfulness? I had started writing the post and it struck me as an amusing picture, is all.
Posted by Dinah on August 1, 2008, at 23:08:06
In reply to Answering questions with questions, posted by Dinah on August 1, 2008, at 22:45:51
It has come to my attention that Dr. Bob's answer really was cryptic. And perhaps my post was too.
I hadn't really realized that.
I guess I do have an odd thought pattern. Or maybe just a Bobly one.
It was a very clear answer that he wasn't there. When we were speculating over whether he was there and experimenting, he was not there. If he'd have come out and said "I wasn't there. I wasn't experimenting." I might not have believed him. If he'd have laughed at the idea of experimentation, or just said he wasn't there, I might have felt embarrassed or angry/abandoned.
But by leading me to the truth by asking me the question, he was acknowledging that it could be scary to think he wasn't around. By acknowledging that it could be comforting to think he was an all powerful being who was toying with us, but was at least all powerful, he was saying that he was neither all powerful nor experimenting with us.
My subsequent experiences with him validated his statement to me. And it was a statement, even if formed as a question.
I hesitate to say this, for what may be the same reasons he formulated it as a question. To realize for oneself can be sad. To be told can hurt.
I don't wish to hurt.
To me, Dr. Bob's way of telling was preferable. I received a truth through that question that was far more valuable than the information it also gave. I wanted to share that with anyone who wanted to receive it.
But to those of you who do not prefer this method, I do not wish you to feel that I'm toying with you.
I don't toy.
Posted by Zeba on August 1, 2008, at 23:20:52
In reply to Re: This is all a bit difficult, posted by Dinah on August 1, 2008, at 13:53:51
Personally I don't care if he is around or not. What I do not like is when he does come around, all of a sudden some heads roll (not deputies). He has his own ideas, and sometimes gives no warning to people, just blocks them.
Zeba
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.