![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 134 to 158 of 180. Go back in thread:
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 31, 2009, at 9:46:13
In reply to Re: power differential, posted by Dr. Bob on January 29, 2009, at 9:17:48
> > Somehow, this seems punitive.
>
> I can see how it might seem punitive in the sense of "a penalty inflicted on an offender through judicial procedure". But I didn't intend it as "suffering, pain, or loss that serves as retribution".
>
> > Getting PBC's off the boards actually hurts more than a public slapping of the hand. I guess if one of them results in a block, no one will even know that I'm gone. Where's the transparency gone around here?
> >
> > PartlyCloudy
>
> There are pros and cons to both ways. I'm sure both can hurt. If someone's blocked off the boards and wants others to know, we can post something.
>
> --
>
> > It must be nice to be a deputy, to sanction posts made against one's self.
>
> > if you are personally involved in a thread, a please be civil ... seems ... to be an abuse of power or unfairness due to a power differential between the both of you.
>
> > Regular posters have to use the notify button , and hope that someone on the other end helps them take care of it, which could take a long time.
> >
> > SlugSlimersSoSlided
>
> That's true, regular posters have less power. They have to depend on us, and being dependent can be stressful.
>
> OTOH, with power comes responsibility, and having responsibility can be stressful, too. I think the deputies use their power responsibly. In some ways, regular posters have more freedom.
>
> BobMr. Hsiung,
You wrote,[...with power comes {responsibility}...].
I am unsure as to what you are wanting to include as a {responsibility} here. Could you post here a list of identifications of some of the responsibilities that you are referring to? If you could, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
Lou Pilder
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 31, 2009, at 11:18:20
In reply to Lou's request for identifications-whtrdehy? » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on January 31, 2009, at 9:46:13
> > > Somehow, this seems punitive.
> >
> > I can see how it might seem punitive in the sense of "a penalty inflicted on an offender through judicial procedure". But I didn't intend it as "suffering, pain, or loss that serves as retribution".
> >
> > > Getting PBC's off the boards actually hurts more than a public slapping of the hand. I guess if one of them results in a block, no one will even know that I'm gone. Where's the transparency gone around here?
> > >
> > > PartlyCloudy
> >
> > There are pros and cons to both ways. I'm sure both can hurt. If someone's blocked off the boards and wants others to know, we can post something.
> >
> > --
> >
> > > It must be nice to be a deputy, to sanction posts made against one's self.
> >
> > > if you are personally involved in a thread, a please be civil ... seems ... to be an abuse of power or unfairness due to a power differential between the both of you.
> >
> > > Regular posters have to use the notify button , and hope that someone on the other end helps them take care of it, which could take a long time.
> > >
> > > SlugSlimersSoSlided
> >
> > That's true, regular posters have less power. They have to depend on us, and being dependent can be stressful.
> >
> > OTOH, with power comes responsibility, and having responsibility can be stressful, too. I think the deputies use their power responsibly. In some ways, regular posters have more freedom.
> >
> > Bob
>
> Mr. Hsiung,
> You wrote,[...with power comes {responsibility}...].
> I am unsure as to what you are wanting to include as a {responsibility} here. Could you post here a list of identifications of some of the responsibilities that you are referring to? If you could, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
> Lou PilderMr. Hsiung,
In regards to my concerns as to what you are wanting to identify here as a {responsibility}, a generally accepted mesaning of {responsibility} is something that one is to be responsible for.
Then to be {responsible}, a generally accepted meaning is that the one responsible has an obligation or duty to perform or answer to or something that the conscience would bind someone to perform or restrict. It could be a service assigned.
In any reply to me here could you include if the functions of the administration here are {responsibilities} or not under my understanding of what the generally accepted meaning of the word purports? If you could , then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
Lou Pilder
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 31, 2009, at 11:27:37
In reply to Hmmm...., posted by Dinah on January 25, 2009, at 16:23:29
> > Since there seems to be a substantial opinion that this should be ok under site guidelines,
>
> I do believe I made my own leap to conclusions there. I'm sorry for that. It's all too easy to do.
>
> However, it hasn't come up before, so I'll ask Dr. Bob.Dinah,
Under the circumstances from what you have written above, would you be willing to redact the sanction to me here untill Mr. Hsiung rules on your request to him to make a rulling?
If you could, then if Mr. Hsiung does post his rulling, then I could then follow his policy from thast point on since this has not come up before?
Lou Pilder
Posted by Dinah on January 31, 2009, at 11:42:00
In reply to Lou's request for a redaction-ehcsphostphaktogh? » Dinah, posted by Lou Pilder on January 31, 2009, at 11:27:37
He has commented on it to me. He believes my interpretation was correct, so please don't ask the board at large to give their opinions about what a poster meant by their post.
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 1, 2009, at 11:08:17
In reply to Re: Lou's request for a redaction-ehcsphostphaktogh? » Lou Pilder, posted by Dinah on January 31, 2009, at 11:42:00
> He has commented on it to me. He believes my interpretation was correct, so please don't ask the board at large to give their opinions about what a poster meant by their post.
Dinah,
You wrote,[...don't ask...to give their {opinions} about what a poster meant...]
I am unsure as to what this could mean. Could then a member ask others to post what they consider to be {fact} about what a poster means by their post?
Lou
Posted by Dinah on February 1, 2009, at 11:31:16
In reply to Lou's reply-facquvsohpin » Dinah, posted by Lou Pilder on February 1, 2009, at 11:08:17
> At this time, if you could post your opinions, if anyone has them, here after reading this post, then I think that I could have a better understanding of what Dinah is wanting to mean by using your opinions and then respond accordingly.
This is what Dr. Bob agreed was in violation of civility guidelines.
> Could then a member ask others to post what they consider to be {fact} about what a poster means by their post?
It would also be a violation of the site's civility guidelines to ask other posters to post what they consider to be fact about another poster's posts.
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 1, 2009, at 12:07:40
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-facquvsohpin » Lou Pilder, posted by Dinah on February 1, 2009, at 11:31:16
> > At this time, if you could post your opinions, if anyone has them, here after reading this post, then I think that I could have a better understanding of what Dinah is wanting to mean by using your opinions and then respond accordingly.
>
> This is what Dr. Bob agreed was in violation of civility guidelines.
>
> > Could then a member ask others to post what they consider to be {fact} about what a poster means by their post?
>
> It would also be a violation of the site's civility guidelines to ask other posters to post what they consider to be fact about another poster's posts.Dinah,
I am still unsure about all that this could mean. For instance, you wrote,[...It would be a violation...to {ask other posters} to post what they consider to be fact about another poster's post...]. Now is it that it is the {asking} that is the issue? If so, then could members post what they {believe} about what something in another member's post means if they are not asked by another poster here?
For instance, could someone post,[...I think that (unnamed poster) meant XXX when he/she posted YYY...]?
Or in another case, could someone here post,[...Sigmund Freud meant ZZZ in his writing QQQ in his book on dreams...]
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 3, 2009, at 10:06:23
In reply to Lou's reply-nohoazch? » Dinah, posted by Lou Pilder on February 1, 2009, at 12:07:40
> > > At this time, if you could post your opinions, if anyone has them, here after reading this post, then I think that I could have a better understanding of what Dinah is wanting to mean by using your opinions and then respond accordingly.
> >
> > This is what Dr. Bob agreed was in violation of civility guidelines.
> >
> > > Could then a member ask others to post what they consider to be {fact} about what a poster means by their post?
> >
> > It would also be a violation of the site's civility guidelines to ask other posters to post what they consider to be fact about another poster's posts.
>
> Dinah,
> I am still unsure about all that this could mean. For instance, you wrote,[...It would be a violation...to {ask other posters} to post what they consider to be fact about another poster's post...]. Now is it that it is the {asking} that is the issue? If so, then could members post what they {believe} about what something in another member's post means if they are not asked by another poster here?
> For instance, could someone post,[...I think that (unnamed poster) meant XXX when he/she posted YYY...]?
> Or in another case, could someone here post,[...Sigmund Freud meant ZZZ in his writing QQQ in his book on dreams...]
> Lou
>Here is a link to a post that I think could be relevant to this discussion.
Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20061123/msgs/718638.html
Posted by fayeroe on February 27, 2009, at 9:51:20
In reply to Please be civil » Lou Pilder, posted by Deputy Dinah on January 25, 2009, at 12:11:24
""Also, please do not ask others to post their opinions as to what any given poster meant by what they said. This would be encouraging other posters to jump to conclusions, which would be against site guidelines."
What if the other posters were able to not jump to conclusions? This isn't exactly a herd of sheep or a whatever of lemmings.
I saw no pressure in Lou's message.
Posted by Sigismund on February 27, 2009, at 14:20:21
In reply to Please be civil » Lou Pilder, posted by Deputy Dinah on January 25, 2009, at 12:11:24
>Also, please do not ask others to post their opinions as to what any given poster meant by what they said. This would be encouraging other posters to jump to conclusions, which would be against site guidelines.
This feels to me as if the objection is simply to Lou's posting style.
Posted by fayeroe on February 27, 2009, at 14:28:20
In reply to Re: power differential, posted by Dr. Bob on January 29, 2009, at 9:17:48
> > Somehow, this seems punitive.
>
> I can see how it might seem punitive in the sense of "a penalty inflicted on an offender through judicial procedure". But I didn't intend it as "suffering, pain, or loss that serves as retribution".
>
> > Getting PBC's off the boards actually hurts more than a public slapping of the hand. I guess if one of them results in a block, no one will even know that I'm gone. Where's the transparency gone around here?
> >
> > PartlyCloudy
>
> There are pros and cons to both ways. I'm sure both can hurt. If someone's blocked off the boards and wants others to know, we can post something.
>
> --
>
> > It must be nice to be a deputy, to sanction posts made against one's self.
>
> > if you are personally involved in a thread, a please be civil ... seems ... to be an abuse of power or unfairness due to a power differential between the both of you.
>
> > Regular posters have to use the notify button , and hope that someone on the other end helps them take care of it, which could take a long time.
> >
> > SlugSlimersSoSlided
>
> That's true, regular posters have less power. They have to depend on us, and being dependent can be stressful.
>
> OTOH, with power comes responsibility, and having responsibility can be stressful, too. I think the deputies use their power responsibly. In some ways, regular posters have more freedom.
>
> BobI have an island in Arizona.................
Posted by Deputy Dinah on February 27, 2009, at 21:58:38
In reply to Re: power differential » Dr. Bob, posted by fayeroe on February 27, 2009, at 14:28:20
> I have an island in Arizona.................
Please respect the views of others even if you think they're wrong. Please don't be sarcastic.
Dr. Bob is always free to override deputy decisions. His email is on the bottom of each page. Please feel free to email him if you believe this decision was made in error.
If you choose to post anything on board about this decision, please do not post anything that could lead others, including posters who act as deputies, to feel accused or put down.
Dinah, acting as deputy to Dr. Bob
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 28, 2009, at 10:25:10
In reply to Re: Please be civil, posted by Sigismund on February 27, 2009, at 14:20:21
Friends,
I am preparing a response to aspects of this thread and if you could email me with any input that you may have concerning any of the aspects that can be seen in this thread or parallel threads, I could then use your input in my posted response without posting your name here.
I am circulating this thread widely with my collegues and it could be in other data bases also.
Members's posts here bring out various aspects and Dena's posts are of a particular nature and others also. If you could read all the posts in this thread if you are going to email me, I think that that could give you a better understanding of the issues involved in the thread and in parallel threads also. If you would want me to reply to any email from you with spacific posts to save time for you, I could do that.
In Sigismund's post about my {style}, it is my concern that I would like to respond to member's statements if I could rightly divide what a member here posts. This could then have me have a want for clarification as to be able to divide a statement so that I do not jump to a conclusion concerning what could be purpoted in another member's statement.
I sometimes ask others for their opinions, which in my understanding is different from a conclusion because an opinion lacks the requierd componants to substantiate a conclusion, or then it could be a conclusion if it had the requierd substantiation. Also, my requests are just that, requests which are at the option of the member to respond or not to my requests. These requests give me the opportunity to respond according to any reply to my requests, for without a reply I do not have the opportunity to respond unless I guess, which could be a jump to a conclsion as to what the member is wanting to mean.
So please state in any email to me as to if what you are writing is to be meant as an opinion or a conclusion with the idea that substantiating references could be supplied if needed.
If you would like to email me but do not want for your address to be known, another way is to set up a Yahoo or other email account or email to a member that emails to me that you also email with and the email could be forwarded to me from the other member without your address given to me.
I sm in particular being of interest in any concerns that you may have concerning statements here that IMO have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings or have the potential to lead a Jew to feel put down/accused that are allowed to stand without being notated by the administration as being uncivil in the thread where they first are posted. If you would like some of those directly, I could give you them by email. Also, I am interested in any member's here thoughts that they could send me by email concerning the requests here by me to the administration that are outstanding as can be seen on this board now and in the archives as to your opinion concerning those.
Lou
lpilder_1188@fuse.net
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 28, 2009, at 11:03:22
In reply to Lou's request to members by email-, posted by Lou Pilder on February 28, 2009, at 10:25:10
> Friends,
> I am preparing a response to aspects of this thread and if you could email me with any input that you may have concerning any of the aspects that can be seen in this thread or parallel threads, I could then use your input in my posted response without posting your name here.
> I am circulating this thread widely with my collegues and it could be in other data bases also.
> Members's posts here bring out various aspects and Dena's posts are of a particular nature and others also. If you could read all the posts in this thread if you are going to email me, I think that that could give you a better understanding of the issues involved in the thread and in parallel threads also. If you would want me to reply to any email from you with spacific posts to save time for you, I could do that.
> In Sigismund's post about my {style}, it is my concern that I would like to respond to member's statements if I could rightly divide what a member here posts. This could then have me have a want for clarification as to be able to divide a statement so that I do not jump to a conclusion concerning what could be purpoted in another member's statement.
> I sometimes ask others for their opinions, which in my understanding is different from a conclusion because an opinion lacks the requierd componants to substantiate a conclusion, or then it could be a conclusion if it had the requierd substantiation. Also, my requests are just that, requests which are at the option of the member to respond or not to my requests. These requests give me the opportunity to respond according to any reply to my requests, for without a reply I do not have the opportunity to respond unless I guess, which could be a jump to a conclsion as to what the member is wanting to mean.
> So please state in any email to me as to if what you are writing is to be meant as an opinion or a conclusion with the idea that substantiating references could be supplied if needed.
> If you would like to email me but do not want for your address to be known, another way is to set up a Yahoo or other email account or email to a member that emails to me that you also email with and the email could be forwarded to me from the other member without your address given to me.
> I sm in particular being of interest in any concerns that you may have concerning statements here that IMO have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings or have the potential to lead a Jew to feel put down/accused that are allowed to stand without being notated by the administration as being uncivil in the thread where they first are posted. If you would like some of those directly, I could give you them by email. Also, I am interested in any member's here thoughts that they could send me by email concerning the requests here by me to the administration that are outstanding as can be seen on this board now and in the archives as to your opinion concerning those.
> Lou
> lpilder_1188@fuse.net
>Friends,
Here is a link to a thread's posts that I would like to include for your review if you like.
Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl?post=/babble/admin/20070304/msgs/744164.html
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 28, 2009, at 11:44:01
In reply to Lou's request to members by email-thread, posted by Lou Pilder on February 28, 2009, at 11:03:22
> > Friends,
> > I am preparing a response to aspects of this thread and if you could email me with any input that you may have concerning any of the aspects that can be seen in this thread or parallel threads, I could then use your input in my posted response without posting your name here.
> > I am circulating this thread widely with my collegues and it could be in other data bases also.
> > Members's posts here bring out various aspects and Dena's posts are of a particular nature and others also. If you could read all the posts in this thread if you are going to email me, I think that that could give you a better understanding of the issues involved in the thread and in parallel threads also. If you would want me to reply to any email from you with spacific posts to save time for you, I could do that.
> > In Sigismund's post about my {style}, it is my concern that I would like to respond to member's statements if I could rightly divide what a member here posts. This could then have me have a want for clarification as to be able to divide a statement so that I do not jump to a conclusion concerning what could be purpoted in another member's statement.
> > I sometimes ask others for their opinions, which in my understanding is different from a conclusion because an opinion lacks the requierd componants to substantiate a conclusion, or then it could be a conclusion if it had the requierd substantiation. Also, my requests are just that, requests which are at the option of the member to respond or not to my requests. These requests give me the opportunity to respond according to any reply to my requests, for without a reply I do not have the opportunity to respond unless I guess, which could be a jump to a conclsion as to what the member is wanting to mean.
> > So please state in any email to me as to if what you are writing is to be meant as an opinion or a conclusion with the idea that substantiating references could be supplied if needed.
> > If you would like to email me but do not want for your address to be known, another way is to set up a Yahoo or other email account or email to a member that emails to me that you also email with and the email could be forwarded to me from the other member without your address given to me.
> > I sm in particular being of interest in any concerns that you may have concerning statements here that IMO have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings or have the potential to lead a Jew to feel put down/accused that are allowed to stand without being notated by the administration as being uncivil in the thread where they first are posted. If you would like some of those directly, I could give you them by email. Also, I am interested in any member's here thoughts that they could send me by email concerning the requests here by me to the administration that are outstanding as can be seen on this board now and in the archives as to your opinion concerning those.
> > Lou
> > lpilder_1188@fuse.net
> >
>
> Friends,
> Here is a link to a thread's posts that I would like to include for your review if you like.
> Lou
> http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl?post=/babble/admin/20070304/msgs/744164.html
>Friends,
Here is a link to a post that brings up a thread.If you could examine the posts there, I think that some aspects of the issues here could be clearer. Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041109/msgs/429282.html
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 28, 2009, at 13:18:14
In reply to Re: power differential, posted by Dr. Bob on January 29, 2009, at 9:17:48
> > Somehow, this seems punitive.
>
> I can see how it might seem punitive in the sense of "a penalty inflicted on an offender through judicial procedure". But I didn't intend it as "suffering, pain, or loss that serves as retribution".
>
> > Getting PBC's off the boards actually hurts more than a public slapping of the hand. I guess if one of them results in a block, no one will even know that I'm gone. Where's the transparency gone around here?
> >
> > PartlyCloudy
>
> There are pros and cons to both ways. I'm sure both can hurt. If someone's blocked off the boards and wants others to know, we can post something.
>
> --
>
> > It must be nice to be a deputy, to sanction posts made against one's self.
>
> > if you are personally involved in a thread, a please be civil ... seems ... to be an abuse of power or unfairness due to a power differential between the both of you.
>
> > Regular posters have to use the notify button , and hope that someone on the other end helps them take care of it, which could take a long time.
> >
> > SlugSlimersSoSlided
>
> That's true, regular posters have less power. They have to depend on us, and being dependent can be stressful.
>
> OTOH, with power comes responsibility, and having responsibility can be stressful, too. I think the deputies use their power responsibly. In some ways, regular posters have more freedom.
>
> BobYou wrote,[...posters have less power...]
That is true and your power could easily keep me from having the statements here that could have the potential IMO to arrouse antisemitic feelings an/or lead a Jew to feel put down/accused to be left to stand without there being a notation from you that they are uncivil in the thread that they first are posted, but is that good for this community as a whole?
Your power could extend to that you will leave significant time lapses between my requests to you for your rationales/feedback and any response. But is that good for the community as a whole?
Your power could extend to allow other members to belittle me and mock and taunt me because I am a Jew, but is that good for the community as a whole?
Your power can allow you to threaten to expell me from the forum if I was to post that my God has revealed to me a commandment to me that I XXX.Is that going to be good for the community as a whole?
Your power can allow you to allow other faiths to post that their faith is the XXX way to the Father. Is that good for this community as a whole?
Your power can allow all forms of hatred against Jews to be posted with out those statements being said to be uncivil by you. Is that good for this community as a whole?
Your power can allow a statement to stand that says that someone outside of Chriastianity can not enter heaven. Is that good for this community as a whole?
Your power could extend to allow statements that purport that Jews are of the XXX religion, for not having their agenda centerd on Jesus Christ. Is that good for your community as a whole?
What is your conception of support?
Lou Pilder
Posted by fayeroe on February 28, 2009, at 13:41:47
In reply to Lou's response to Mr. Hsiung-power differential » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on February 28, 2009, at 13:18:14
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 3, 2009, at 8:08:17
In reply to Re: Lou's response {{{{{Lou}}}}} (nm), posted by fayeroe on February 28, 2009, at 13:41:47
Friends,
I would like for interested members to examine the fallacies listed in the link here.
These fallacies then could be known to you, if they are now unbeknownst to you, and if you see them in arguments put forth here, then you could have a better understanding IMO of the issues that concern me here in relation to the allowing of statements to stand here that IMO have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings or to lead a Jew to feel put down/accused without there being a notation by the administration that the statements in question are not civil. You could also have a better understanding IMO of what the issues are in parallel threads here and if you would like to see the statements in questionj you could email me if you like.
Some of the fallacies that I would like you to read is the fallacy of {changing the subject} and {appeal to force} and the fallacy of {quoting out of context}. You may want to do a separate search for {quoting out of context}.
Lou
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html
Posted by fayeroe on March 3, 2009, at 9:18:45
In reply to Lou's request to members-falarg, posted by Lou Pilder on March 3, 2009, at 8:08:17
Lou, I guess that my not going on the Faith board means that I am missing the antisemitic posts that you frequently want Bob to do something about.
I can't even remember what happened last month and I noticed that you are still trying to get answers from 2007, if I am not mistaken. By now I'm thinking that Bob isn't going to act upon those posts.
I know after being here for 7 years that these alleged antisemitic posts bother you greatly. I have seen snippets of some of the posts and I do see, sometimes, that the post could be upsetting to a Jewish person. However, if all of us took everything to heart here that another fellow Babbler said, we'd be up the proverbial creek without a paddle..because in that process we would be giving our power away to that poster.
Have you ever received clarification concerning the dissection of those posts? I don't know if that makes sense, but I think you know what I'm getting at.
I have been enjoying our music exchanges on Social and I was thinking last night that I am learning what makes "Lou" tick in one part of his life. And I am enjoying have that thread go on smoothly without having to try to tell you "why, how, where, when I pick a particular video from YouTube. I would have folded by now and left the thread had I been asked to clarify my choices of songs.
Would there be a way for you to detach from asking Bob for clarifications and just enjoy the boards as they are? I believe that most posters here would enjoy that very much. ( am not speaking for other posters..just a guess upon my part)
I think that if we worship the way we want to and not give up our powers to others, we're ahead by a country mile. Another aspect of being here with you on Babble is that your posts (concerning your beliefs) are very confusing to me and I will never attempt to become a part of the thread.
I believe in sweat lodges. I don't care if anyone else here believes in them. I've been discriminated against by people from organized religion but that doesn't change the fact that I am part Indian. In a nutshell, I could give a rats*** what others think of how I connect with my higher power. Being discriminated against comes with the territory of being American Indian. "drunk injun"..."savage".."backwards" "second class citizens"..all sorts of racial slurs have rolled off my back.
I was involved and witness to a faith discussion not long ago and all that happened is people got hurt and angry. Nothing was resolved.
I believe that it's time for moving on and enjoying the social aspects of the board. On the Politics board we're able to post and enjoy one another without much fuss.
.
Lou, here comes the hard part for you. I will not reply to you if you ask for clarification of this post.. I am of the mind that you will know what I am saying and being asked for clarification can make me tired and cranky.Lou, there will always be discrimination. Enjoy this life. We never know when it will end. I learned that two weeks ago when Fayeroe died.
Pat
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 3, 2009, at 14:37:42
In reply to Re: Lou's request to members-falarg » Lou Pilder, posted by fayeroe on March 3, 2009, at 9:18:45
Friends,
Here is a link to more examples of fallacious argumentation and how to spot the fallacy. There is a short introduction to the fallacy of {quoting out of context} and {straw man} and one could find more in their own search if they like.
If you are interested in where you could see these fallacies posted, you could email me if you like.
Lou
http://www.dianahsieh.com/misc/fallacies.html
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 7, 2009, at 7:11:52
In reply to Re: Lou's request to members-falarg » Lou Pilder, posted by fayeroe on March 3, 2009, at 9:18:45
> Lou, I guess that my not going on the Faith board means that I am missing the antisemitic posts that you frequently want Bob to do something about.
>
> I can't even remember what happened last month and I noticed that you are still trying to get answers from 2007, if I am not mistaken. By now I'm thinking that Bob isn't going to act upon those posts.
>
> I know after being here for 7 years that these alleged antisemitic posts bother you greatly. I have seen snippets of some of the posts and I do see, sometimes, that the post could be upsetting to a Jewish person. However, if all of us took everything to heart here that another fellow Babbler said, we'd be up the proverbial creek without a paddle..because in that process we would be giving our power away to that poster.
>
> Have you ever received clarification concerning the dissection of those posts? I don't know if that makes sense, but I think you know what I'm getting at.
>
> I have been enjoying our music exchanges on Social and I was thinking last night that I am learning what makes "Lou" tick in one part of his life. And I am enjoying have that thread go on smoothly without having to try to tell you "why, how, where, when I pick a particular video from YouTube. I would have folded by now and left the thread had I been asked to clarify my choices of songs.
>
> Would there be a way for you to detach from asking Bob for clarifications and just enjoy the boards as they are? I believe that most posters here would enjoy that very much. ( am not speaking for other posters..just a guess upon my part)
>
> I think that if we worship the way we want to and not give up our powers to others, we're ahead by a country mile. Another aspect of being here with you on Babble is that your posts (concerning your beliefs) are very confusing to me and I will never attempt to become a part of the thread.
>
> I believe in sweat lodges. I don't care if anyone else here believes in them. I've been discriminated against by people from organized religion but that doesn't change the fact that I am part Indian. In a nutshell, I could give a rats*** what others think of how I connect with my higher power. Being discriminated against comes with the territory of being American Indian. "drunk injun"..."savage".."backwards" "second class citizens"..all sorts of racial slurs have rolled off my back.
>
> I was involved and witness to a faith discussion not long ago and all that happened is people got hurt and angry. Nothing was resolved.
>
> I believe that it's time for moving on and enjoying the social aspects of the board. On the Politics board we're able to post and enjoy one another without much fuss.
>
> .
> Lou, here comes the hard part for you. I will not reply to you if you ask for clarification of this post.. I am of the mind that you will know what I am saying and being asked for clarification can make me tired and cranky.
>
> Lou, there will always be discrimination. Enjoy this life. We never know when it will end. I learned that two weeks ago when Fayeroe died.
>
> Pat
>
Friends,
It is written here,[...I know that the alleged posts in question (posts that have statements that could arrouse antisemitic feelings or lead a Jew to feel put down/accused) bother you greatly...I do see...posts that could be upsetting to a Jewish person...if we took..what other posters said..up the.. creek..giving our power away to that poster...].
There is much more to this. Mr. Hsiung has posted that if there is not a sanction by the administration to a statement that others could think that what is not sanctioned is acceptable here. (citation A)
By then the nature of Mr. Hsiung's administration in this matter, others could have the potential to think that the statements in question are what the thinking is IMO for the forum to be acceptable, and also others outside the forum's membership that read the posts in question in other data bases could also have IMO that same idea.
So I will continue to use all my might to have statements that have been determined in the historical record to be those that could have the potential to fuel antisemitic feelings or lead a Jew to feel put down/accused to have a notation by the administration placed in the thread where they first appear as to be not civil.
You see, the historical record has shown that psychiatry and universities have the potential to indoctrinate. And I think that when a university member, being a psychiatrist, is the owner of a forum that others could think that what is promulgated on the forum is some type of official line which is different from, let's say, a private indiividual that is not affiliated with a university, hosting a web forum like this one here. Those type of forums IMO do not have the same degree of potential to indoctrinate as one that is run by a someone of university affiliation and being a psychiatrist.
The member here has posted that the posts in question bother me and could see that. They do, for I see them as haveing the potential foe some others to consider that they have the potential to be an attack on Jews here and much more as having the potential IMO to be an attack on humanity itself. What is your conception of support? I would like those that would want to answer that question to email me with your conception by emailing me a post from here to show that. And for every post you send me, I'll send you three.
Lou
(citation A)
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041109/msgs/424336.html
Posted by fayeroe on March 7, 2009, at 9:16:29
In reply to Lou's response t aspects of fayerore's post, posted by Lou Pilder on March 7, 2009, at 7:11:52
I also do not give a rat's*** about what Bob thinks. That is very empowering in my participation on the boards. And I don't put that much value on whether or not administration sees things the way I see them....I doubt that Bob has ever seen an Indian. :-) I just have a very different outlook than you......Take care and good luck, Pat
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 8, 2009, at 8:58:13
In reply to Re: Lou's response t aspects of fayerore's post » Lou Pilder, posted by fayeroe on March 7, 2009, at 9:16:29
> I also do not give a rat's*** about what Bob thinks. That is very empowering in my participation on the boards. And I don't put that much value on whether or not administration sees things the way I see them....I doubt that Bob has ever seen an Indian. :-) I just have a very different outlook than you......Take care and good luck, Pat
Friends,
It is written here,[...I don't give a..about what (Mr. Hsiung) thinks...good luck...].
The aspect here that I see is that Mr. Hsiung has posted here that he agrees that if there is a post where he has it brought to his attention and that he does nothing about it, that he thinks that it is not against the rules. (citation B)
Now that is part of all of this in my attempt to have the statements in question notated by the administration as not civil. For if members think that it is not against the rules as being unnotated as being not civil, then could they not then believe that they can post the same here?
Lou
citation B
http://www.dr-bob.org/bable/admin/20041109/msgs/423771.html
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 8, 2009, at 9:01:55
In reply to Lou's response toaspects of fayerore's post-~agnst, posted by Lou Pilder on March 8, 2009, at 8:58:13
> > I also do not give a rat's*** about what Bob thinks. That is very empowering in my participation on the boards. And I don't put that much value on whether or not administration sees things the way I see them....I doubt that Bob has ever seen an Indian. :-) I just have a very different outlook than you......Take care and good luck, Pat
>
> Friends,
> It is written here,[...I don't give a..about what (Mr. Hsiung) thinks...good luck...].
> The aspect here that I see is that Mr. Hsiung has posted here that he agrees that if there is a post where he has it brought to his attention and that he does nothing about it, that he thinks that it is not against the rules. (citation B)
> Now that is part of all of this in my attempt to have the statements in question notated by the administration as not civil. For if members think that it is not against the rules as being unnotated as being not civil, then could they not then believe that they can post the same here?
> Lou
> citation B
> http://www.dr-bob.org/bable/admin/20041109/msgs/423771.html
>
>
>
corrected link for [...not against the rules...]
Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041109/msgs/423771.html
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 8, 2009, at 10:22:59
In reply to correction to link for not against the rules, posted by Lou Pilder on March 8, 2009, at 9:01:55
Friends,
I would like to have an email discussion concerning the following. If you would like, then I could point out what I think could be of importance in this discussion..
Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faith/20080809/msgs/884390.html
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.