![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 53 to 77 of 348. Go back in thread:
Posted by Deneb on October 23, 2010, at 22:16:51
In reply to Re: Reduced rate of posting » Phillipa, posted by Dinah on October 23, 2010, at 21:11:24
That's what I often do Dinah. LOL
I'll post about something that really doesn't belong on meds, but then I add a medication question to it and then it can stay on meds LOL. I hope Dr. Bob doesn't mind. rofl
I'm devious. LOL
Posted by maxime on October 23, 2010, at 22:51:28
In reply to Re: Reduced rate of posting, posted by Phillipa on October 14, 2010, at 0:01:47
> Well from some of the e-mails I get from old posters they have voiced a lot of dissention on here with good threads turning into somewhat battles, too many redirects is a definite as the posts die thereafter. Quite a few that left are now on facebook as they feel they can control who they accept as friends and you can delete your own post if you write some and then have posters regret. It's kind of happier too lots of joking and positives. No blocks either. Phillipa
You mean people are using Facebook to discuss their meds? That doesn't sound right .... are you sure?
Posted by maxime on October 23, 2010, at 22:57:57
In reply to Re: Reduced rate of posting » Free, posted by Phillipa on October 23, 2010, at 12:45:00
> Free good job and for those questioning validity of redirecting a thread to another board see mine from meds to social on guilt. Died. This is just the most recent example I see. Off to work now yikkee ah oh!!!!!! Phillipa
But Phillipa, you have to agree that your thread had nothing to do with meds. It belonged on another board. Personally, I would have placed it on the psychology board.
Posted by maxime on October 23, 2010, at 23:00:24
In reply to Re: Reduced rate of posting » Dinah, posted by Deneb on October 23, 2010, at 22:16:51
> That's what I often do Dinah. LOL
>
> I'll post about something that really doesn't belong on meds, but then I add a medication question to it and then it can stay on meds LOL. I hope Dr. Bob doesn't mind. rofl
>
> I'm devious. LOLWell now that we know ... your posts will probably get redirected now.
Posted by Deneb on October 23, 2010, at 23:07:54
In reply to Re: Reduced rate of posting » Deneb, posted by maxime on October 23, 2010, at 23:00:24
Oh I don't mind getting re-directed. :)
Posted by maxime on October 23, 2010, at 23:39:14
In reply to Re: Reduced rate of posting » maxime, posted by Deneb on October 23, 2010, at 23:07:54
> Oh I don't mind getting re-directed. :)
>
>But you just wrote that you add a med question at the of your post to make it "med" related. Why would you bother doing that if you don't mind being re-directed. What is the point of that deception?
I'm so confused. I am going to bed.
Posted by Phillipa on October 24, 2010, at 0:08:08
In reply to Re: Reduced rate of posting » Phillipa, posted by maxime on October 23, 2010, at 22:51:28
Only per private message. Not threads they are fun threads or learning threads have a lot of professional musicians also, and neighbors, family, only those taking meds from babble either e-mail me directly or from facebook. Phillipa
Posted by Deneb on October 24, 2010, at 2:04:52
In reply to Re: Reduced rate of posting » Deneb, posted by maxime on October 23, 2010, at 23:39:14
I just like having the most people read my post. After that I don't care what happens to my post. I just like the initial attention. :)
Posted by Maxime on October 28, 2010, at 20:29:48
In reply to Re: Reduced rate of posting » maxime, posted by Phillipa on October 24, 2010, at 0:08:08
> Only per private message. Not threads they are fun threads or learning threads have a lot of professional musicians also, and neighbors, family, only those taking meds from babble either e-mail me directly or from facebook. Phillipa
Well then that doesn't really replace PB does it? You are only posing questions to a few, rather than a large group here at PB. So I don't think people left PB to go to Facebook. They have entirely different functions.
Posted by Maxime on October 28, 2010, at 20:34:39
In reply to Re: Reduced rate of posting » maxime, posted by Deneb on October 24, 2010, at 2:04:52
> I just like having the most people read my post. After that I don't care what happens to my post. I just like the initial attention. :)
Deneb, I have noticed that you start a lot threads and people take the time to respond to you and give you advice. But then you never return to the thread! Don't be like the boy who cried wolf.
Try to figure out why you like the initial attention and why does it wear off when people start responding to you. Is it because you don't want to read what they have to say?
Maxime
Posted by PartlyCloudy on October 28, 2010, at 20:43:37
In reply to Re: Reduced rate of posting » Deneb, posted by Maxime on October 28, 2010, at 20:34:39
> > I just like having the most people read my post. After that I don't care what happens to my post. I just like the initial attention. :)
>
> Deneb, I have noticed that you start a lot threads and people take the time to respond to you and give you advice. But then you never return to the thread! Don't be like the boy who cried wolf.
>
> Try to figure out why you like the initial attention and why does it wear off when people start responding to you. Is it because you don't want to read what they have to say?
>
> MaximeThis can be very off putting for me when I take the time to construct a response to a post. I try not to take it personally though, but instead am apt to not post at all.
Posted by Deneb on October 28, 2010, at 20:50:34
In reply to Re: Reduced rate of posting, posted by PartlyCloudy on October 28, 2010, at 20:43:37
I do return to the thread. Sometimes I don't know what to say. I do read all the responses.
Posted by Deneb on October 28, 2010, at 20:57:20
In reply to Re: Reduced rate of posting, posted by Deneb on October 28, 2010, at 20:50:34
I'm not crying wolf. I'm not even making threats. I don't know why you think I'm crying wolf.
Posted by Dr. Bob on October 29, 2010, at 0:25:33
In reply to Re: Reduced rate of posting » ron1953, posted by twinleaf on October 15, 2010, at 12:57:24
> the capriciousness of all of it.
>
> ron1953> That was so outlandish as to be funny
>
> twinleafI'd like to ask those who care about ron or twinleaf -- or object to blocks in general -- to do what they can to try to prevent more blocks.
Protests haven't proved all that effective at preventing blocks and may even encourage behaviors that lead to them. You have the right to protest (as long as you're civil), but if your goal is to prevent more blocks, please consider a different strategy.
Bob
--
> You all seen my 6 week ban ... i recieved e mails from babbler,s saying sorry for the ban.But only a couple spoke on babble. That speak,s to me as you wanted me banned, or you didnt give a sh*t. I think thats what bob means about helping each other. The Block didnt hit me hard but the lack of support did.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20100716/msgs/956872.html
> You have the power to pick your battles.
>
> Battling Dr. Bob on PB Admin? Generally results in frustration and effects on policy ranging from
> - none
> - the exact opposite of what you intended to accomplish
> - some other seemingly random policy change that isn't what you wanted.
>
> Choose wisely!http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20090302/msgs/893534.html
Posted by twinleaf on October 29, 2010, at 6:26:12
In reply to Re: more blocks, posted by Dr. Bob on October 29, 2010, at 0:25:33
I didn't write that with the intention of being critical. I was just expressing my personal reaction to what seemed to me to be an unusual reason for a block.. It did not cross my mind that my post would result in a block. I certainly do not want to be blocked for a year for a statement which was innocent in its intentions, so I would like to withdraw that statement.
Posted by twinleaf on October 29, 2010, at 6:37:43
In reply to Re: more blocks, posted by twinleaf on October 29, 2010, at 6:26:12
"Protests are not all that effective...." Those of us who do protest do so because we believe, deeply, in the values we are expressing. How these values are received cannot change that.
Posted by ron1953 on October 29, 2010, at 12:14:28
In reply to Re: more blocks, posted by Dr. Bob on October 29, 2010, at 0:25:33
One of the Merriam-Webster definitions for capricious is unpredictable, and that's how I meant it. That's how I see blocks, etc. - unpredictable. Is my seeing it as unpredictable somehow uncivil? I honestly and sincerely don't think so.
Posted by maxime on October 29, 2010, at 17:21:08
In reply to Re: Reduced rate of posting, posted by Deneb on October 28, 2010, at 20:57:20
> I'm not crying wolf. I'm not even making threats. I don't know why you think I'm crying wolf.
>
>Because you said you like people's initial response to the thread/post. But then you don't really post again or respond to what people have posted to you. So naturally, people are going to think about posting to the threads you start.
Then one day you are really going to need to post and have a quick response. No one will respond because of your past behaviour. That is what I meant my crying wolf. I know that you have never made threats to hurt yourself.
Posted by sigismund on October 29, 2010, at 20:14:59
In reply to Re: more blocks, posted by twinleaf on October 29, 2010, at 6:26:12
You two have to be very careful, don't you?
Posted by twinleaf on October 29, 2010, at 20:31:40
In reply to Re: more blocks, posted by sigismund on October 29, 2010, at 20:14:59
Yes, it would seem so. It means a lot that you noticed.
Posted by sigismund on October 29, 2010, at 20:50:51
In reply to Re: more blocks » sigismund, posted by twinleaf on October 29, 2010, at 20:31:40
Far be it from me to suggest that people are singled out and picked on.
Posted by twinleaf on October 29, 2010, at 21:11:16
In reply to Re: more blocks » twinleaf, posted by sigismund on October 29, 2010, at 20:50:51
Some people get preferential treatment. They go straight to "more blocks" without having to waste precious time on PBC's.
Posted by Phillipa on October 29, 2010, at 22:44:11
In reply to Re: more blocks » sigismund, posted by twinleaf on October 29, 2010, at 21:11:16
Twinleaf I think I agree with you. Now don't get blocked again okay? Phillipa
Posted by sigismund on October 30, 2010, at 0:30:04
In reply to Re: more blocks » sigismund, posted by twinleaf on October 29, 2010, at 21:11:16
It's like Monopoly then?
Go to jail, go directly to jail, do not pass go, do not collect $200.
Posted by Zeba on October 30, 2010, at 1:19:58
In reply to Re: more blocks, posted by twinleaf on October 29, 2010, at 6:26:12
> I didn't write that with the intention of being critical. I was just expressing my personal reaction to what seemed to me to be an unusual reason for a block.. It did not cross my mind that my post would result in a block. I certainly do not want to be blocked for a year for a statement which was innocent in its intentions, so I would like to withdraw that statement.
Twinleaf - no matter what you say, you are likely to be blocked soon. Best to just drop it. Some folks are definitely in the headlights, and well, I think you understand what I mean. From what I can see, it appears you are definitely one of those people.
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.