![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 43 to 67 of 193. Go back in thread:
Posted by Phillipa on October 26, 2009, at 20:47:12
In reply to I still don't understand » floatingbridge, posted by floatingbridge on October 26, 2009, at 18:12:45
Just home I see the do not twitter button do you touch it or leave it alone? I signed the do not share my posts on twitter in the past. P
Posted by 10derHeart on October 26, 2009, at 21:02:56
In reply to Re: I still don't understand » floatingbridge, posted by Phillipa on October 26, 2009, at 20:47:12
It's not a button.
It is just a link to the old opt-out thread from this summer.
Click on it and you can tell Bob what you already told him before.
Posted by Phillipa on October 26, 2009, at 22:20:17
In reply to Re: I still don't understand » Phillipa, posted by 10derHeart on October 26, 2009, at 21:02:56
10der more important now there is extremly suicidal person on substance abuse we're notifying and if you know how to get Bob could you please???? So I push it and then it's extra protection? But the poster. Phillipa
Posted by 10derHeart on October 26, 2009, at 23:14:06
In reply to Re: I still don't understand » 10derHeart, posted by Phillipa on October 26, 2009, at 22:20:17
> 10der more important now there is extremly suicidal person on substance abuse we're notifying and if you know how to get Bob could you please????
See Dinah's post from 4 or 5 hours ago:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20090813/msgs/922709.html
I am not a deputy and have deleted/disposed of any information I used to have on how to contact Dr. Bob. Sorry. i don't have any access you don't have. I am not much help in those situations overall anyway.
>So I push it and then it's extra protection?
I don't think so. You are just repeating your prior request to Dr. Bob. But who knows and can specifically explain? ....only one person and that will have to wait, as it generally does.
Posted by Dr. Bob on October 27, 2009, at 3:51:19
In reply to Re: This sucks and I don't trust Dr. Bob at all, posted by rskontos on October 26, 2009, at 8:55:03
> He is not trustworthy.
Please don't post anything that could lead others (including me) to feel accused or put down.
But please don't take this personally, either, this doesn't mean I don't like you or think you're a bad person, and I'm sorry if this hurts you.
More information about posting policies and tips on alternative ways to express oneself, including a link to a nice post by Dinah on I-statements, are in the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#enforceFollow-ups regarding these issues, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on October 27, 2009, at 4:59:06
In reply to Now I am confused » Dr. Bob, posted by 10derHeart on October 26, 2009, at 15:17:09
Hi, everyone,
Sorry about surprising so many of you like this!
Anxiety is a natural response to change, and I think the reaction here is in part a sign of cohesiveness and a desire to protect this community from disruption. Like you, however, Facebook and Twitter users are real people who can benefit from support and education. Sharing and tweeting might lead them to the many thoughtful and intelligent posts here, and then they might join Babble and contribute new perspectives and energy. I think good can come of this -- for current posters, for new posters, and for this community as a whole. I'd like to ask you to try to be open to that possibility.
As several of you have mentioned, posts here have always been public and available for sharing, including on Facebook and Twitter when they came along. A dialectic of this community is that it is public, yet can feel private. Maybe another way the new buttons can help is as reminders of the public aspect.
I understand that because of the private aspect, some of you may feel exposed and vulnerable. Posts can, however, be personal without identifying you. It's up to you not to post identifying information.
Still, what you post may conceivably be used against you. As in 10der's hypothetical example. But all use of Facebook and Twitter is subject to their terms of service:
http://www.facebook.com/terms.php
http://twitter.com/tosI added a link to the "do not share/tweet" list so people can take into account the preferences of posters. And posters can continue to make their preferences known. I assume those who don't want me tweeting their posts don't want others doing so, either. If that's not the case, they can clarify that there.
By default, sharing/tweeting includes the subject line and the URL of the post. In the case of Facebook, it also includes the beginning of the post (the same "preview", which excludes quoted text, that you get when you mouse over a link to it here). In both cases, people can edit before they submit.
Yes, babblemail remains private.
Yes, if you become a fan of Psycho-Babble on Facebook or follow @psycho_babel on Twitter, your Facebook or Twitter account links you to Babble. But that doesn't mean you're necessarily a Babbler, and if you are a Babbler, it doesn't identify which Babbler you are. And using the share/tweet buttons doesn't automatically make you a Facebook fan or a Twitter follower.
I don't think it would necessarily be sick, twisted, outrageous, or demeaning to share/tweet a post about suicidality or rape or abuse. People post in the first place because they're looking for support or information, and they're more likely to find it if more people see their post.
Bob
--
> And how does this work? If a post contains a history of several posts, can someone's writing end up where they don't want it just by virtue of being buried in another post?
>
> emme> I am unhappy and angry about this. I really get a lot of support from this community. Dr. Bob promised--promised--this would not happen earlier this year w/ the no tweet list. This new system seems crazy. Sharing one's own post is one thing. Frankly, I find this situation open to abuse and leaving anyone vulnerable. ... Certainly I will babblemail henceforth unless there is a change in policy. I assume babblemail privacy has remained unchanged. Does anyone know if this is correct?
>
> fb> I also think there should be a warning that tweeting or linking to your real life twitter or facebook accounts links babble to your real self.
>
> Dinah> discussions that should be private, helpful information (including this post) [are] splattered all over Google FOREVER
>
> yxibow> While I realize anyone can cut and past what we've wrote and put it on their facebook account, I think its intrusive to encourage people to do this - its encouraging by the ease of clicking that button, plus it may be make it tempting just for it being there.
>
> There are people discussing their suicidal feelings on this site. It seems sick and twisted to have facebook and twitter icons at the bottom of their posts, along with many others....
>
> psych chat> the web is a public place. I suppose as far as the linking goes, people could always do that. Nothing I know of prevents anyone from placing a linked URL to anything on Babble on any other web page, to include Facebook and Twitter. Any URL can be copied and pasted in a couple seconds...many of us probably do it all the time in passing on info we've like someone else to read.... Not that I do it with someone's individual post here, but that's more of an ethical thing for me personally. Babble and all its posts are public, non-restricted, and have been all along. The little buttons just perhaps make it easier, more convenient, for someone to create the link??
>
> 10derHeart> This has changed things for me. I realize that what we write here is available for the galaxy to read and that links can be posted on other web pages, but a direct pipeline to facebook and twitter makes me very uncomfortable.
>
> emme> I would have hoped that there would have been some advanced notice/discussion of this prior its implementation. This linking just makes it more likely that someone could discover our real identities, and we should have been made aware of increased likelihood of that adverse event.
>
> I also wish that the ability to link would show up only on posts that I wrote. Something just feels very amiss now that anyone, and not just Dr. Bob could tweet my posts. By posting, I freely gave permssion to Dr. Bob to use my posts, I did not specifically give any one else that permission.
>
> I am aware that the internet is free game, and anyone can do anything with what I write, but this is giving the immediate tools to do so.
>
> Surely Dr. Bob would not consider allowing other posters to share people's posts on a rape crisis board, or a sexual abuse board. It would be outrageous and demeaning. Sometimes that level of intimacy is reached on the psych board.
>
> Seldom> If I say, disliked Poster ABC intensely, was tired of them and wanted to paint them in the worst light, embarrass them or bully them, couldn't I collect up their posts fairly quickly and easily and list them en masse, on say, my Facebook page (don't have one, but this is hypothetical), with accompanying derisive commentary, AND if I were so inclined, might I not be MORE encouraged seeing they'd asked YOU not to Twitter, etc., their posts? Might I not kinda LIKE that, even? Would I give a damn if I were that type of person??
>
> 10derHeart
Posted by 10derHeart on October 27, 2009, at 5:09:12
In reply to Re: tweet / facebook options, posted by Dr. Bob on October 27, 2009, at 4:59:06
Posted by Deneb on October 27, 2009, at 5:29:03
In reply to So why are the buttons disabled? (nm) » Dr. Bob, posted by 10derHeart on October 27, 2009, at 5:09:12
They're not disabled for me.
Posted by Dinah on October 27, 2009, at 6:05:40
In reply to Re: tweet / facebook options, posted by Dr. Bob on October 27, 2009, at 4:59:06
> It's up to you not to post identifying information.
Unfortunately, it's only up to me in the future to choose what to post in terms of this understanding of Babble. I can't choose what to post in the past. In the past I posted with a level of vulnerability that was commensurate with my comfort with the risk involved. Now you've changed the level of risk, but I can't change the level of vulnerability in what I've already posted.
I understand that you are determined to do this. But I am asking that you respect your current posters enough to apply this only to new posts, so that posters can choose what to post under these conditions. Or else to allow people to remove prior posts.
I know you think you've explained your reasoning, but I certainly don't understand it. Why do you see people choosing to tweet someone else's post? Would they be tweeting it to their friends and coworkers? Will they understand the risk to that? You currently have people actively consent to be your twitter friend or facebook friend because you acknowledge that it could lead others in their lives to Babble and that there could be consequences. Are you warning them about that each time they tweet? What would be the difference that you considered informed consent necessary in one and not in the other?
Who do you see tweeting these posts? Given the inherent risk involved, why would those searching for answers, as we were, tweet anyone's posts? Even their own? Presumably most of us came here for privacy and anonymity. Perhaps we do wish to protect ourselves from those who might take our innermost thoughts and feelings and tweet them to whoever will listen. You haven't shared all that much here. You haven't made yourself vulnerable. So please don't in any way presume to understand to guess how we feel. Maybe you could ask.
Even in this, I notice the vulnerability is all on our side. You haven't said why you are doing this, or explained how you think it will work. Your thoughts and feelings are still private. Ours aren't.
You didn't answer my question. Does this have anything to do with the proposal that is in, on using social media to build an online community? If so, oughtn't you use social media to build a *new* online community? What is the nature of this proposal? I'm sure, since this information is already on the web on your Twitter page, that you won't mind if it is brought here to babble. If this is to be a paper given, perhaps babblers would appreciate a chance to speak and let the hearers know how it feels to be on this end.
I can't believe, it sickens me to think of it, that Twitter and Facebook would accept "contributions" from babble under these conditions. I would not think very kindly of anyone who was careless enough of my vulnerability to tweet or link on facebook anything I've written here, without first asking. Nor of someone who would edit my previous posts to include an icon that says tweet this post, or link this post to facebook.
I can add that request to every single post I write from now on. Can I please edit every single post I've written in the past to include that information right above the twitter icons you've edited those previous posts to include? Icons, that being present on my previous posts, leave the impression that they were there when I posted them.
Also, by linking to Twitter and Facebook terms of service, are you implying that you bear no responsibility for use of our posts through buttons you edited our posts to contain? I don't know whether you have legal responsibility, but in providing those buttons you have, in my opinion, made yourself morally responsible for their use.
{I request that no one tweet or link any of my posts without asking me first.}
Posted by Dinah on October 27, 2009, at 6:10:26
In reply to Re: tweet / facebook options, posted by Dr. Bob on October 27, 2009, at 4:59:06
So the sum total of your adjustments is to add another icon linking to a thread of people who don't want their intimate thoughts exploited in this manner?
Without even a "Here is a list of people who prefer not to have their posts exploited by clicking one of the other two buttons."
{I request that no one tweet or link any of my posts without asking me first.}
Posted by Dinah on October 27, 2009, at 6:23:26
In reply to Re: tweet / facebook options » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on October 27, 2009, at 6:10:26
Why not include above those icons:
Please ask the original poster if they mind before using these buttons. If they don't respond in a week, you can go ahead and use them. Using them without asking first will be considered a privacy violation subject to Babble civility guidelines.
Posted by Deneb on October 27, 2009, at 6:24:19
In reply to Re: tweet / facebook options, posted by Dr. Bob on October 27, 2009, at 4:59:06
Dr. Bob,
I'm going to add "Tweet Me!" to some of my more interesting and informative posts. I want to be read by more people. Maybe I should link to my Twitter account too. I want more followers! I only have 6! I'm not popular enough!
Posted by Deneb on October 27, 2009, at 6:28:43
In reply to Or..., posted by Dinah on October 27, 2009, at 6:23:26
Hey Dinah,
That sounds like a good idea except that anyone who has an Internet connection can Tweet or Facebook any our our posts without being a member of Babble and therefore will have no means of communicating with you.
Posted by Dinah on October 27, 2009, at 6:30:02
In reply to Re: Or..., posted by Deneb on October 27, 2009, at 6:28:43
Which they can now.
But without being invited to by Dr. Bob in such a way that it appears that I approved this when I originally posted.
I am asking Dr. Bob to modify his invitation.
Posted by Dinah on October 27, 2009, at 6:33:14
In reply to Re: tweet / facebook options » Dr. Bob, posted by Deneb on October 27, 2009, at 6:24:19
It might be polite of you not to do that on any posts where you quote others, unless they also wish to be tweeted.
Posted by 10derHeart on October 27, 2009, at 6:34:51
In reply to Re: So why are the buttons disabled? » 10derHeart, posted by Deneb on October 27, 2009, at 5:29:03
Posted by Deneb on October 27, 2009, at 6:36:49
In reply to Re: tweet / facebook options, posted by Dinah on October 27, 2009, at 6:33:14
No problem Dinah. I won't put Tweet Me on any post where I'm quoting others.
Posted by Dinah on October 27, 2009, at 6:36:59
In reply to Really? that is weird-mine changed tonight (nm) » Deneb, posted by 10derHeart on October 27, 2009, at 6:34:51
They flicker in and out. And are misaligned. Dr. Bob probably did it quickly.
Posted by 10derHeart on October 27, 2009, at 6:43:40
In reply to Re: Really? that is weird-mine changed tonight, posted by Dinah on October 27, 2009, at 6:36:59
Yes, I know, but even after I play with the mouse, and they 'light up' they now do not work and are not clickable for me at all.
When they wouldn't click, I was hopeful that...well, you know, but Deneb's apparently work.But now I am just so disgusted that I want to _______ and _____ and ________.
Becasue it's really clear __ _______ is truly __ ___.
Posted by Dinah on October 27, 2009, at 7:11:36
In reply to Re: Really? that is weird-mine changed tonight » Dinah, posted by 10derHeart on October 27, 2009, at 6:43:40
Oh, I had no hope that he'd decide not to do this.
But I did hope he'd be respectful enough to mitigate his invitation and facilitation.
That hope is rapidly dwindling.
Posted by psych chat on October 27, 2009, at 8:32:03
In reply to Re: tweet / facebook options » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on October 27, 2009, at 6:05:40
> > It's up to you not to post identifying information.
>
> Unfortunately, it's only up to me in the future to choose what to post in terms of this understanding of Babble. I can't choose what to post in the past. In the past I posted with a level of vulnerability that was commensurate with my comfort with the risk involved. Now you've changed the level of risk, but I can't change the level of vulnerability in what I've already posted.
>
> I understand that you are determined to do this. But I am asking that you respect your current posters enough to apply this only to new posts, so that posters can choose what to post under these conditions. Or else to allow people to remove prior posts.
>
> I know you think you've explained your reasoning, but I certainly don't understand it. Why do you see people choosing to tweet someone else's post? Would they be tweeting it to their friends and coworkers? Will they understand the risk to that? You currently have people actively consent to be your twitter friend or facebook friend because you acknowledge that it could lead others in their lives to Babble and that there could be consequences. Are you warning them about that each time they tweet? What would be the difference that you considered informed consent necessary in one and not in the other?
>
> Who do you see tweeting these posts? Given the inherent risk involved, why would those searching for answers, as we were, tweet anyone's posts? Even their own? Presumably most of us came here for privacy and anonymity. Perhaps we do wish to protect ourselves from those who might take our innermost thoughts and feelings and tweet them to whoever will listen. You haven't shared all that much here. You haven't made yourself vulnerable. So please don't in any way presume to understand to guess how we feel. Maybe you could ask.
>
> Even in this, I notice the vulnerability is all on our side. You haven't said why you are doing this, or explained how you think it will work. Your thoughts and feelings are still private. Ours aren't.
>
> You didn't answer my question. Does this have anything to do with the proposal that is in, on using social media to build an online community? If so, oughtn't you use social media to build a *new* online community? What is the nature of this proposal? I'm sure, since this information is already on the web on your Twitter page, that you won't mind if it is brought here to babble. If this is to be a paper given, perhaps babblers would appreciate a chance to speak and let the hearers know how it feels to be on this end.
>
> I can't believe, it sickens me to think of it, that Twitter and Facebook would accept "contributions" from babble under these conditions. I would not think very kindly of anyone who was careless enough of my vulnerability to tweet or link on facebook anything I've written here, without first asking. Nor of someone who would edit my previous posts to include an icon that says tweet this post, or link this post to facebook.
>
> I can add that request to every single post I write from now on. Can I please edit every single post I've written in the past to include that information right above the twitter icons you've edited those previous posts to include? Icons, that being present on my previous posts, leave the impression that they were there when I posted them.
>
> Also, by linking to Twitter and Facebook terms of service, are you implying that you bear no responsibility for use of our posts through buttons you edited our posts to contain? I don't know whether you have legal responsibility, but in providing those buttons you have, in my opinion, made yourself morally responsible for their use.
>
> {I request that no one tweet or link any of my posts without asking me first.}
>I feel the same way.
Posted by psych chat on October 27, 2009, at 8:47:11
In reply to Re: tweet / facebook options, posted by Dr. Bob on October 27, 2009, at 4:59:06
I don't think it would necessarily be sick, twisted, outrageous, or demeaning to share/tweet a post about suicidality or rape or abuse. People post in the first place because they're looking for support or information, and they're more likely to find it if more people see their post.
Bob
--
Well I think if a victim put a huge banner on the front of their house "I was raped" or "I want to kill myself"- they are more likely to find more support...but people don't do that Bob. And the people those sought support from should not do that either, because it would be considered out of line.
If a person was suffering and sought help from another after being raped/sexually abused, and the person they sought help from went and told a bunch of people that person was raped -it WOULD be considered socially unacceptable and sick or twisted.
I believe you are wrong. ***I think people just want social mores to apply here like they do outside of here. I believe your assertion that people are feeling anxiety because of change is nowhere even close to the truth.
I don't even think this is a matter of opinion. Just observe reality, how our culture functions.
Posted by Dinah on October 27, 2009, at 9:21:04
In reply to Re: tweet / facebook options » Dr. Bob, posted by psych chat on October 27, 2009, at 8:47:11
Thank you. I was trying to figure out how to respond to that comment from Dr. Bob, and you did it much better than I could have.
Posted by seldomseen on October 27, 2009, at 10:29:37
In reply to Re: tweet / facebook options, posted by Dr. Bob on October 27, 2009, at 4:59:06
Dr. Bob,
Thank you for your response to our concerns.
I suppose you and I could argue all day about what constitutes increased risk of identity disclosure by deduction. I maintain that there is increased risk here. However, one could also argue, that via our posts, that the increased risk to participants has been disclosed. So in my mind, that is resolved.
I absolutely agree with you that there is a lot of wisdom on babble and would further add that it is worth sharing, which is why I did not opt out of letting *you* tweet anything you may have found of value in any of my posts.
I know that you realize that beyond babble and behind each and every post, there is a person - not just a posting name.
I just have to hope that others will realize the same.
Then again, I guess that hope has always been there. This is the internet. Every post I make becomes a part of it - searchable, linkable and exploitable by all comers.
In my opinion, ultimately all that has been shattered here is an illusion of privacy - expedited by the presence of two little buttons at the bottom of each post. It's almost funny.
I guess I'm grieving the loss of that illusion.
It's hard to know if that loss will end up changing my posting habits. Ironically, as of right now, I'm posting more, but sadly sharing less. I can't say if that will be the case in the future.
Seldom.
Posted by floatingbridge on October 27, 2009, at 11:09:59
In reply to Re: tweet / facebook options » Dr. Bob, posted by psych chat on October 27, 2009, at 8:47:11
Yes, ditto, psyh chat.
> Well I think if a victim put a huge banner on the front of their house "I was raped" or "I want to kill myself"- they are more likely to find more support...but people don't do that Bob. And the people those sought support from should not do that either, because it would be considered out of line.
>
> If a person was suffering and sought help from another after being raped/sexually abused, and the person they sought help from went and told a bunch of people that person was raped -it WOULD be considered socially unacceptable and sick or twisted.
>
> I believe you are wrong. ***I think people just want social mores to apply here like they do outside of here. I believe your assertion that people are feeling anxiety because of change is nowhere even close to the truth.
>
> I don't even think this is a matter of opinion. Just observe reality, how our culture functions.
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.