![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 26 to 50 of 50. Go back in thread:
Posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 19:37:07
In reply to Re: to stumble on magic, posted by Dr. Bob on November 9, 2010, at 19:13:13
Monitor? I thought it was civility buddy, not monitor. That would be a different kettle of fish entirely.
Posted by muffled on November 9, 2010, at 19:59:32
In reply to Re: to stumble on magic » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 19:37:07
> Monitor? I thought it was civility buddy, not monitor. That would be a different kettle of fish entirely.
oH Dinah....
Learn from the past...
:(
Posted by Solstice on November 9, 2010, at 23:02:38
In reply to Re: to stumble on magic, posted by Dr. Bob on November 9, 2010, at 19:13:13
> > It's not about stumbling along until we find magic to open somebody else's mind to convince them "I'm Right!" ... Let's dispense with stumbling along.
>
> I wish it were so easy. :-)I haven't run into much that's easy. Didn't mean to imply I thought it would be easy... :-)
> > Instead of magical stumbling and mind-changing, why don't we work together to create a structure for handling inevitable incivility in a way that maximizes its decrease, and minimizes community turmoil, disruption, and pain.
>
> It's not either-or. How do we decide what structure to create? working together = stumblingI sure didn't mean to sound like I think in terms of either-or.. but I don't see much potential for the effectiveness of focusing on hoping to magically stumble into something or holding out for mind-changing powers.
Bob and Community
First.. let me say that I know I'm technically 'new,' and it might seem forward of me to be giving so much input on an issue that long-participating members have struggled with for aeons. Mine is only one voice, and I certainly don't consider mine to be more valuable. But putting together 'systems' is what I know how to do, so I'm just trying to make a contribution to the valiant effort of Babblers to have a more merciful system of managing inevitable incivility.
Bob - the way I was thinking of 'stumbling' is that for as long as it's just a lot of talk and little or no movement toward actually constructing a system, then it's just 'stumbling along.' It's the dynamic of 'all talk...no action... Dr. Bob seems to 'check-out'... enormous blocks for minor infractions continue... lots of people in pain... that is the "stumbling along" I'd suggest we dispense with.
I think the community will have no trouble coming up with ideas for what kind of structure to create. But Bob, if you are not fully participating and interested in the goal, there's no point in Babblers getting their hopes up and investing the time and effort to put something together. I'll offer my ideas. I envision it evolving like anything in its pilot stage.. won't know what works best or how well it works until we start trying it. I'd suggest starting with one piece of the system. Construct it, put it in place, and test-drive it, then tweak it. I'd also suggest that we start with the piece that will give the most bang for its buck.
BLOCKS: Many members have brought up a wholesale "Amnesty" for everyone currently blocked. I am not Jewish but there is a marvelous ancient Israelite law that provided for a wholesale forgiveness of everyone's debt every 7th year - Sabbatical. I think that after putting some provisions in place to handle incivility from that day forward, I think it would invigorate the community for all of those blocked to be 'set free.' There could be some difficulties with that, in that there would be members who've had difficulties in the past regain posting privileges all at once, in a new system. You'll have the best sense of the potential for that to be a problem - so if wholesale release isn't the best idea, then maybe reducing everyone's block to 10% of its original length or something similar would provide for a more gradual influx.
CIVILITY BUDDIES: The only way a wholesale release of Blocks will be successful is if the incivility continues to be managed. A system using Civility Buddies is worth trying. Right now, people can volunteer to be CB's, and members under threat of block can ask for help from CB's. That works great for people who have sufficient insight to realize they need to get assistance. Those folks don't generally end up with these unbelievable blocks, though. Maybe there can be a process where a member cited for incivility chooses i) get a Civility Buddy to walk them through the process of repairing the incivility and making it 'right'; or ii)default to however Bob wants to handle their incivility. This puts the power in the hands of the infractor. Maybe it can be set up for a temporary suspension of posting privileges by CB's until the infractor decides which route to take - and release of of the suspension is contingent on the infractor's cooperation with their Civility Buddy. There are a multitude of ways a Civility Buddy system can work when a potential block is being handled.
ELDER'S COUNCIL: This might be a fabulous dual-purpose group. As already suggested, the Elder's Council could serve to work with Dr. Bob on determining whether a member really has been incivil, developing a more consistent and predictable application of blocks for those who opt out of the CB route, and fill in for Bob when he is absent or unavailable.
These are all just ideas. Others may have better ideas. But it's a starting place. I don't think it has to be set up perfectly. 'Kinks' can be worked out along the way.
I just think it is really, really important that movement take place, and I think whatever the system is, it must satisfy Dr. Bob's objectives for maintaining civility. A syste that circumvents blocking like I've suggested might make it easier for Bob's sometimes narrow latitude on incivility to be better tolerated, less contentious.
> > Suggestions have been offered by community members. Do you have any intention of addressing these things? If not, please say so... because I don't want to invest my valuable time and energy thinking about it if you have no interest. If you do - then let's get to work.
>
> I'm addressing Health.?? I was referring to whether you intend to address the valuable contributions members have made as they attempt to find a way to satisfy your objectives in a manner that is less harsh and punishing than excessive blocks for every little infraction... as in an Elder's Council... a more organized system of Civility Buddies.... the system I described using Mediators. I am not sure where your answer of "Health" fits?
> One poster has offered to be a volunteer civility buddy/monitor. Do other posters have any intention of taking responsibility for anything?
>
> Bob
This community is huge, Bob. I think there needs to be a little more structure to a system handling incivility than asking for volunteers to 'take responsibility' for... what? That's why a system needs to be constructed, so it's got reliable boundaries, and defined roles and processes. It doesn't need to be complicated.. it just needs to work and be flexible enough to be tweaked as we figure out how well it works.Solstice
Posted by Solstice on November 9, 2010, at 23:05:50
In reply to Re: to stumble on magic » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 19:37:07
> Monitor? I thought it was civility buddy, not monitor. That would be a different kettle of fish entirely.
Dinah - maybe he meant to use a word I'd used - "Mediator." Monitor is indeed a different kettle of fish! :-)
Solstice
Posted by Dinah on November 10, 2010, at 1:00:14
In reply to Re: to stumble on magic » Dinah, posted by Solstice on November 9, 2010, at 23:05:50
You're right. :)
Posted by muffled on November 10, 2010, at 9:24:25
In reply to Re: to stumble on magic » Solstice, posted by Dinah on November 10, 2010, at 1:00:14
Eg. a council of elders.
They would cover for Bob when he gone.
And ultimately then maybe this site would become more 'ours', and not so much just 'His'.
My main problem is with Bobs in and out, and his judgement about some things is not what I like. he's not really that invested in Babble, yet to those who post here, it is 'home', and that is a HUGE thing. People should have some degree of safety and autonomy in their own 'home'. Then they can feel more able to more fully share etc.au·ton·o·my noun
plural au·ton·o·mies
Definition of AUTONOMY
1: the quality or state of being self-governing; especially : the right of self-government
2: self-directing freedom and especially moral independence
3: a self-governing stateA council could override Bob(an effective council would).
The balance of power would shift.
I would have more trust(over time anyways) that a broader group of people might better have the interests of the 'present' community at heart.
I think it might be a challenge for the elders council at times....but it could possibly work.
The ONLY way I would be interested in being a part of all this would be if Bob was willing to relinquish some of his control.
Ultimately, he would be the highest authority still.
And he could be the techie guy as he is good at that.
And then he himself can feel more free to participate somewhat, ask questions, study about topics etc...
Posted by Dinah on November 10, 2010, at 9:41:25
In reply to Solstice got good ideas, posted by muffled on November 10, 2010, at 9:24:25
Deputies covered for Bob when he was gone, and consulted among themselves for a consensus.
I don't recall posters feeling any better about actions.
I see it as more likely that the council would either have to allow everything to retain the good feelings of the more outspoken posters, or would grow to receive the same feelings Bob receives. In my experience, posters are less able to tolerate rage than Dr. Bob is. I think part of the secret of Babble's longevity is Bob's ability to be a container for rage.
I may be cynical, but I can't see people welcoming pbc's or blocks from anyone. Conversely I can't see all posters welcoming a lack of pbc's or blocks either. People tend to feel differently when they feel attacked.
I do agree that Solstice has good ideas.
But I don't believe the site would be better served by Dr. Bob giving over his power to a group. There would just be different problems.
I am members of sites that are entirely group led. There are still splinter factions, huge blowouts and dissolvings of the group.
This isn't utopia.
Posted by Solstice on November 10, 2010, at 14:24:19
In reply to Solstice got good ideas, posted by muffled on November 10, 2010, at 9:24:25
Hi Muffled.. I am so glad to see you contributing your ideas.
> Eg. a council of elders.well.. the credit for the council actually belongs to hyperfocus, I believe :-) I took ideas I've seen from everywhere and just tried to see how they might fit together.
> They would cover for Bob when he gone.
> And ultimately then maybe this site would become more 'ours', and not so much just 'His'.The could cover in his absence. But I think that his ownership of the site is something that we all have to figure out a way to be okay with. In many ways, it is "our" site because without us, it would not exist. But when it comes to final decisions, those things will always belong to Bob. Just as surely as he created the site, he alone has the power to dismantle it.
> My main problem is with Bobs in and out, and his judgement about some things is not what I like.
When Bob is absent, it can feel unstable. No one's at the helm. I think making peace with the reality that we won't agree with every judgment call a leader makes is something we have to do to belong to any group. Any time two people are linked in some way - there will be differences between them. What they think is important... their methods of handling situations... how they feel about things. The key to 'living together' (think of what your therapist says about your parts) is to find a way to co-exist without too much conflict. Sometimes people can reach compromises when they differ. Sometimes they can't, and one person will have to defer to the judgment of the other, even though they don't really want to. That would take place with the formal CB process I have in mind. Posters who got blocked might not agree that their post was incivil. They may think the block is unfair. But if they want the block lifted, they will have to cooperate with a CB who can help them figure out how to think and feel about what happened in a way that helps themn stay within the guidelines and make repair - even if they don't feel like what they said did any harm. You mentioned having a part that sometimes gets disruptive for you, and how you tell that part to step to the background and wait until you have time to give the attention that part's asking for. It's kind of the same with this. We have to defer to Bob's civility guidelines because it is his site. Someone has to set the standard. He gets to make the rules for the 'world' he created. A Babbler that's been blocked is a little like that 'disruptive part' you mentioned. They are told to take a back seat. Then a Civility Buddy can 'sit down with them' and try to help them figure it out.There is just no way to avoid the reality that we have a Leader who has some authority that no one else can have. It's the only way for a group to survive and thrive.
> he's not really that invested in Babble, yet to those who post here, it is 'home',I think he's invested in Babble, but in a very different way than us. He misses out on some things that we enjoy because he is alone at the top. He cannot come to us with his problems. He can't talk with us about his therapy (if he has it). So in that way, it might feel like he's not invested like we are because we open up so much of ourselves here. But, he has a lot of time consuming work he has to do behind-the-scenes that no one sees. Maybe sometimes it feels to him like we aren't as invested as he is.
> People should have some degree of safety and autonomy in their own 'home'. Then they can feel more able to more fully share etc.
I hear you Muff. It doesn't feel safe when you don't know what to expect. There probably isn't a way to eliminate all inconsistencies. But there is a way to create a structure with a high degree of predictability. Since it's less about 'punishment' and more about restoration, I think whatever inconsistencies show up won't feel as threatening. Perfection is not possible, but when the consequences have a cushion, the imperfections will feel less like sharp glass and more like little bumps.> A council could override Bob(an effective council would).
I don't think that would end up working any better than keeping it like it is.
> The balance of power would shift.
I don't think it would be good to shift the power. I think it will work if, perhaps, Bob says "I want Council to develop a classification of incivilities, and recommend the block lengths they think appropriate, and submit it to me for review." Then he could review it, discuss it with Council, tweak it, change it, and send it back to them for further review. It's not about anyone 'getting their way' as much as it's about finding something workable that satisfies Bob's and the members' objectives as closely as possible.
> I would have more trust(over time anyways) that a broader group of people might better have the interests of the 'present' community at heart.I think trust will build over time if the system works. Bob won't look like such a 'bad guy' because blocked members would have the ability to get themselves out of trouble. Not by duking it out with him over the merits of the block, but by putting themselves into the CB process to make reparations.
Thanks again Muff for sharing your thoughts... it will take all of us working together to make it work.Solstice
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 10, 2010, at 15:17:32
In reply to Re: Solstice got good ideas, posted by Solstice on November 10, 2010, at 14:24:19
>
> Hi Muffled.. I am so glad to see you contributing your ideas.
>
>
> > Eg. a council of elders.
>
> well.. the credit for the council actually belongs to hyperfocus, I believe :-) I took ideas I've seen from everywhere and just tried to see how they might fit together.
>
> > They would cover for Bob when he gone.
> > And ultimately then maybe this site would become more 'ours', and not so much just 'His'.
>
> The could cover in his absence. But I think that his ownership of the site is something that we all have to figure out a way to be okay with. In many ways, it is "our" site because without us, it would not exist. But when it comes to final decisions, those things will always belong to Bob. Just as surely as he created the site, he alone has the power to dismantle it.
>
>
> > My main problem is with Bobs in and out, and his judgement about some things is not what I like.
>
>
> When Bob is absent, it can feel unstable. No one's at the helm. I think making peace with the reality that we won't agree with every judgment call a leader makes is something we have to do to belong to any group. Any time two people are linked in some way - there will be differences between them. What they think is important... their methods of handling situations... how they feel about things. The key to 'living together' (think of what your therapist says about your parts) is to find a way to co-exist without too much conflict. Sometimes people can reach compromises when they differ. Sometimes they can't, and one person will have to defer to the judgment of the other, even though they don't really want to. That would take place with the formal CB process I have in mind. Posters who got blocked might not agree that their post was incivil. They may think the block is unfair. But if they want the block lifted, they will have to cooperate with a CB who can help them figure out how to think and feel about what happened in a way that helps themn stay within the guidelines and make repair - even if they don't feel like what they said did any harm. You mentioned having a part that sometimes gets disruptive for you, and how you tell that part to step to the background and wait until you have time to give the attention that part's asking for. It's kind of the same with this. We have to defer to Bob's civility guidelines because it is his site. Someone has to set the standard. He gets to make the rules for the 'world' he created. A Babbler that's been blocked is a little like that 'disruptive part' you mentioned. They are told to take a back seat. Then a Civility Buddy can 'sit down with them' and try to help them figure it out.
>
> There is just no way to avoid the reality that we have a Leader who has some authority that no one else can have. It's the only way for a group to survive and thrive.
>
>
> > he's not really that invested in Babble, yet to those who post here, it is 'home',
>
> I think he's invested in Babble, but in a very different way than us. He misses out on some things that we enjoy because he is alone at the top. He cannot come to us with his problems. He can't talk with us about his therapy (if he has it). So in that way, it might feel like he's not invested like we are because we open up so much of ourselves here. But, he has a lot of time consuming work he has to do behind-the-scenes that no one sees. Maybe sometimes it feels to him like we aren't as invested as he is.
>
>
> > People should have some degree of safety and autonomy in their own 'home'. Then they can feel more able to more fully share etc.
>
>
> I hear you Muff. It doesn't feel safe when you don't know what to expect. There probably isn't a way to eliminate all inconsistencies. But there is a way to create a structure with a high degree of predictability. Since it's less about 'punishment' and more about restoration, I think whatever inconsistencies show up won't feel as threatening. Perfection is not possible, but when the consequences have a cushion, the imperfections will feel less like sharp glass and more like little bumps.
>
>
>
> > A council could override Bob(an effective council would).
>
>
> I don't think that would end up working any better than keeping it like it is.
>
>
> > The balance of power would shift.
>
>
> I don't think it would be good to shift the power. I think it will work if, perhaps, Bob says "I want Council to develop a classification of incivilities, and recommend the block lengths they think appropriate, and submit it to me for review." Then he could review it, discuss it with Council, tweak it, change it, and send it back to them for further review. It's not about anyone 'getting their way' as much as it's about finding something workable that satisfies Bob's and the members' objectives as closely as possible.
>
>
> > I would have more trust(over time anyways) that a broader group of people might better have the interests of the 'present' community at heart.
>
> I think trust will build over time if the system works. Bob won't look like such a 'bad guy' because blocked members would have the ability to get themselves out of trouble. Not by duking it out with him over the merits of the block, but by putting themselves into the CB process to make reparations.
>
>
> Thanks again Muff for sharing your thoughts... it will take all of us working together to make it work.
>
> Solstice
>
Solstice,
You wrote,[...There is just xx yyy to avoid the zzzzzzz that we have a Leader who has some authority that pp qqq else can have. It's the oooo www for a group to survive and thrive...]
I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean here. If you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
1A. Do you think that Mr. Hsiung's authority is absolute? If so, could you post here your rationale for such?
2A.Why is it according to you a reality?
1B. Could there be other ways for a group to survive and thrive that could be unbeknownst to you?
2B. Would my perspective, being from a Jewish perspective,which is different from yours, be automatically deemed to be (redacted by respondent)
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 10, 2010, at 15:30:51
In reply to Lou's request-, posted by Lou Pilder on November 10, 2010, at 15:17:32
> >
> > Hi Muffled.. I am so glad to see you contributing your ideas.
> >
> >
> > > Eg. a council of elders.
> >
> > well.. the credit for the council actually belongs to hyperfocus, I believe :-) I took ideas I've seen from everywhere and just tried to see how they might fit together.
> >
> > > They would cover for Bob when he gone.
> > > And ultimately then maybe this site would become more 'ours', and not so much just 'His'.
> >
> > The could cover in his absence. But I think that his ownership of the site is something that we all have to figure out a way to be okay with. In many ways, it is "our" site because without us, it would not exist. But when it comes to final decisions, those things will always belong to Bob. Just as surely as he created the site, he alone has the power to dismantle it.
> >
> >
> > > My main problem is with Bobs in and out, and his judgement about some things is not what I like.
> >
> >
> > When Bob is absent, it can feel unstable. No one's at the helm. I think making peace with the reality that we won't agree with every judgment call a leader makes is something we have to do to belong to any group. Any time two people are linked in some way - there will be differences between them. What they think is important... their methods of handling situations... how they feel about things. The key to 'living together' (think of what your therapist says about your parts) is to find a way to co-exist without too much conflict. Sometimes people can reach compromises when they differ. Sometimes they can't, and one person will have to defer to the judgment of the other, even though they don't really want to. That would take place with the formal CB process I have in mind. Posters who got blocked might not agree that their post was incivil. They may think the block is unfair. But if they want the block lifted, they will have to cooperate with a CB who can help them figure out how to think and feel about what happened in a way that helps themn stay within the guidelines and make repair - even if they don't feel like what they said did any harm. You mentioned having a part that sometimes gets disruptive for you, and how you tell that part to step to the background and wait until you have time to give the attention that part's asking for. It's kind of the same with this. We have to defer to Bob's civility guidelines because it is his site. Someone has to set the standard. He gets to make the rules for the 'world' he created. A Babbler that's been blocked is a little like that 'disruptive part' you mentioned. They are told to take a back seat. Then a Civility Buddy can 'sit down with them' and try to help them figure it out.
> >
> > There is just no way to avoid the reality that we have a Leader who has some authority that no one else can have. It's the only way for a group to survive and thrive.
> >
> >
> > > he's not really that invested in Babble, yet to those who post here, it is 'home',
> >
> > I think he's invested in Babble, but in a very different way than us. He misses out on some things that we enjoy because he is alone at the top. He cannot come to us with his problems. He can't talk with us about his therapy (if he has it). So in that way, it might feel like he's not invested like we are because we open up so much of ourselves here. But, he has a lot of time consuming work he has to do behind-the-scenes that no one sees. Maybe sometimes it feels to him like we aren't as invested as he is.
> >
> >
> > > People should have some degree of safety and autonomy in their own 'home'. Then they can feel more able to more fully share etc.
> >
> >
> > I hear you Muff. It doesn't feel safe when you don't know what to expect. There probably isn't a way to eliminate all inconsistencies. But there is a way to create a structure with a high degree of predictability. Since it's less about 'punishment' and more about restoration, I think whatever inconsistencies show up won't feel as threatening. Perfection is not possible, but when the consequences have a cushion, the imperfections will feel less like sharp glass and more like little bumps.
> >
> >
> >
> > > A council could override Bob(an effective council would).
> >
> >
> > I don't think that would end up working any better than keeping it like it is.
> >
> >
> > > The balance of power would shift.
> >
> >
> > I don't think it would be good to shift the power. I think it will work if, perhaps, Bob says "I want Council to develop a classification of incivilities, and recommend the block lengths they think appropriate, and submit it to me for review." Then he could review it, discuss it with Council, tweak it, change it, and send it back to them for further review. It's not about anyone 'getting their way' as much as it's about finding something workable that satisfies Bob's and the members' objectives as closely as possible.
> >
> >
> > > I would have more trust(over time anyways) that a broader group of people might better have the interests of the 'present' community at heart.
> >
> > I think trust will build over time if the system works. Bob won't look like such a 'bad guy' because blocked members would have the ability to get themselves out of trouble. Not by duking it out with him over the merits of the block, but by putting themselves into the CB process to make reparations.
> >
> >
> > Thanks again Muff for sharing your thoughts... it will take all of us working together to make it work.
> >
> > Solstice
> >
> Solstice,
> You wrote,[...There is just xx yyy to avoid the zzzzzzz that we have a Leader who has some authority that pp qqq else can have. It's the oooo www for a group to survive and thrive...]
> I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean here. If you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
> 1A. Do you think that Mr. Hsiung's authority is absolute? If so, could you post here your rationale for such?
> 2A.Why is it according to you a reality?
> 1B. Could there be other ways for a group to survive and thrive that could be unbeknownst to you?
> 2B. Would my perspective, being from a Jewish perspective,which is different from yours, be automatically deemed to be (redacted by respondent)
> LouSolstice,
I am not permitted to tell members how they can find information concerning what is prohibited for me to post. This involves the foundation of Judaism and I realize that you may not be aquainted with this situation. Here is a link to outstanding requests from me to Mr. Hsiung that could offer some more information concerning this.
Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20101014/msgs/969449.html
Posted by Solstice on November 10, 2010, at 17:57:51
In reply to Lou's request-, posted by Lou Pilder on November 10, 2010, at 15:17:32
> Solstice,
> You wrote,[...There is just xx yyy to avoid the zzzzzzz that we have a Leader who has some authority that pp qqq else can have. It's the oooo www for a group to survive and thrive...]
> I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean here. If you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
> 1A. Do you think that Mr. Hsiung's authority is absolute? If so, could you post here your rationale for such?He owns the site. He created it, and he can shut it down. In the context of this site, he is the absolute authority.
> 2A.Why is it according to you a reality?See above. There is absolutely NO possibility for anyone to take away his authority.. other than to not participate.
> 1B. Could there be other ways for a group to survive and thrive that could be unbeknownst to you?of course. Considering the vast wealth of possibilities for anything, I know very, very little.
> 2B. Would my perspective, being from a Jewish perspective,which is different from yours, be automatically deemed to be (redacted by respondent)
I am not Jewish, but my entire adult life I have been immersed in Jewish culture. Working in a Jewish-family owned business, my child being in a school that happened to be founded by a Jew, and having a high ratio of Jewish students, my child ended up falling in love with a Jewish boy. When one of my dearest friends died 3 years ago, the rituals surrounding her funeral and burial were the richest, most meaningful I have ever encountered. I was included in the entire process, and the Synagogue and Rabbi she and her family chose when they first moved here 15 yrs ago - she specifically chose him because he was very inclusive of her non-Jewish friends. The children's Bar Mitzvahs, everything. Your perspective is no more or less valuable than mine - and your Jewishness and my non-Jewishness has nothing to do with the value of our perspectives.
Solstice
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 10, 2010, at 19:50:32
In reply to Re: Lou's request-, posted by Solstice on November 10, 2010, at 17:57:51
>
> > Solstice,
> > You wrote,[...There is just xx yyy to avoid the zzzzzzz that we have a Leader who has some authority that pp qqq else can have. It's the oooo www for a group to survive and thrive...]
> > I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean here. If you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
> > 1A. Do you think that Mr. Hsiung's authority is absolute? If so, could you post here your rationale for such?
>
> He owns the site. He created it, and he can shut it down. In the context of this site, he is the absolute authority.
>
>
> > 2A.Why is it according to you a reality?
>
> See above. There is absolutely NO possibility for anyone to take away his authority.. other than to not participate.
>
>
> > 1B. Could there be other ways for a group to survive and thrive that could be unbeknownst to you?
>
> of course. Considering the vast wealth of possibilities for anything, I know very, very little.
>
> > 2B. Would my perspective, being from a Jewish perspective,which is different from yours, be automatically deemed to be (redacted by respondent)
>
> I am not Jewish, but my entire adult life I have been immersed in Jewish culture. Working in a Jewish-family owned business, my child being in a school that happened to be founded by a Jew, and having a high ratio of Jewish students, my child ended up falling in love with a Jewish boy. When one of my dearest friends died 3 years ago, the rituals surrounding her funeral and burial were the richest, most meaningful I have ever encountered. I was included in the entire process, and the Synagogue and Rabbi she and her family chose when they first moved here 15 yrs ago - she specifically chose him because he was very inclusive of her non-Jewish friends. The children's Bar Mitzvahs, everything. Your perspective is no more or less valuable than mine - and your Jewishness and my non-Jewishness has nothing to do with the value of our perspectives.
>
> Solstice
>
Solstice,
You wrote,[...has nothing to do with the value of our perspectives...]
Well, without me knowing what it means here by {value}, what is the situation here could be unbeknownst to you as to how the foundation of Judaism is considerd by Mr. Hsiung here.
I am not permitted by the rules here to post that I believe, through revelation, that the god that I give service and worship to has given me a commandment that I (redacted by respondent)which is the foundation of Judaism. Then there was a post to me that stated that as I see it, that links to posts here can not be posted if what the link leads to has been sanctioned. So I can not IMO post the link to Mr. Hsiung's post to me. Concievably, that could be carried IMO to that I could not tell you where you could get that information as per the link that I have posted here leading to my outstanding requests to Mr. Hsiung that two members here have the concern about that situation and have posted in that thread about their concerns.
You see, if the foundation of Judiasm could not be posted by me here in that I believe that (redacted by respondent), which is the foundation of Judaism, then if I posted my way here to modify the administration of the site, that would be a different way of administartion than what has been posted here by other members. That difference is not permitted by Mr. Hsiung to me, which could go to or not go to what you are wanting to mean by {value of a perspective}.
This may be something that you could look into and make your own determination as to if the prohibition to me by Mr. Hsiung to post here what I believe through revelation that is the foundation of Judaism does or does not have to do with the value of my perspective which is from a Jewish perspective.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 10, 2010, at 20:24:51
In reply to Lou's reply-vhalyu » Solstice, posted by Lou Pilder on November 10, 2010, at 19:50:32
> >
> > > Solstice,
> > > You wrote,[...There is just xx yyy to avoid the zzzzzzz that we have a Leader who has some authority that pp qqq else can have. It's the oooo www for a group to survive and thrive...]
> > > I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean here. If you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
> > > 1A. Do you think that Mr. Hsiung's authority is absolute? If so, could you post here your rationale for such?
> >
> > He owns the site. He created it, and he can shut it down. In the context of this site, he is the absolute authority.
> >
> >
> > > 2A.Why is it according to you a reality?
> >
> > See above. There is absolutely NO possibility for anyone to take away his authority.. other than to not participate.
> >
> >
> > > 1B. Could there be other ways for a group to survive and thrive that could be unbeknownst to you?
> >
> > of course. Considering the vast wealth of possibilities for anything, I know very, very little.
> >
> > > 2B. Would my perspective, being from a Jewish perspective,which is different from yours, be automatically deemed to be (redacted by respondent)
> >
> > I am not Jewish, but my entire adult life I have been immersed in Jewish culture. Working in a Jewish-family owned business, my child being in a school that happened to be founded by a Jew, and having a high ratio of Jewish students, my child ended up falling in love with a Jewish boy. When one of my dearest friends died 3 years ago, the rituals surrounding her funeral and burial were the richest, most meaningful I have ever encountered. I was included in the entire process, and the Synagogue and Rabbi she and her family chose when they first moved here 15 yrs ago - she specifically chose him because he was very inclusive of her non-Jewish friends. The children's Bar Mitzvahs, everything. Your perspective is no more or less valuable than mine - and your Jewishness and my non-Jewishness has nothing to do with the value of our perspectives.
> >
> > Solstice
> >
> Solstice,
> You wrote,[...has nothing to do with the value of our perspectives...]
> Well, without me knowing what it means here by {value}, what is the situation here could be unbeknownst to you as to how the foundation of Judaism is considerd by Mr. Hsiung here.
> I am not permitted by the rules here to post that I believe, through revelation, that the god that I give service and worship to has given me a commandment that I (redacted by respondent)which is the foundation of Judaism. Then there was a post to me that stated that as I see it, that links to posts here can not be posted if what the link leads to has been sanctioned. So I can not IMO post the link to Mr. Hsiung's post to me. Concievably, that could be carried IMO to that I could not tell you where you could get that information as per the link that I have posted here leading to my outstanding requests to Mr. Hsiung that two members here have the concern about that situation and have posted in that thread about their concerns.
> You see, if the foundation of Judiasm could not be posted by me here in that I believe that (redacted by respondent), which is the foundation of Judaism, then if I posted my way here to modify the administration of the site, that would be a different way of administartion than what has been posted here by other members. That difference is not permitted by Mr. Hsiung to me, which could go to or not go to what you are wanting to mean by {value of a perspective}.
> This may be something that you could look into and make your own determination as to if the prohibition to me by Mr. Hsiung to post here what I believe through revelation that is the foundation of Judaism does or does not have to do with the value of my perspective which is from a Jewish perspective.
> Lou
>
> Solstice,
If you are considering doing your own investigation here concerning our topic in discussion here, I am requesting that you look at the following. The links will bring up one post in a thread.
I would like for you to start with this one first
Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20100714/msgs/956252.html
and then
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20100714/msgs/955927.html
>
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 27, 2010, at 2:17:37
In reply to Re: Solstice got good ideas, posted by Solstice on November 10, 2010, at 14:24:19
I started this before. Sorry about not finishing it until now.
> the way I was thinking of 'stumbling' is that for as long as it's just a lot of talk and little or no movement toward actually constructing a system, then it's just 'stumbling along.'
I agree, a lot of talk + little or no movement = stumbling along. Sometimes a lot of talk is necessary before movement. Change can be slow.
> BLOCKS: Many members have brought up a wholesale "Amnesty" for everyone currently blocked.
I've redirected follow-ups regarding amnesty to:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20101014/msgs/969322.html
> CIVILITY BUDDIES: The only way a wholesale release of Blocks will be successful is if the incivility continues to be managed. A system using Civility Buddies is worth trying.
follow-ups regarding volunteer civility buddies to:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20101014/msgs/969367.html
> ELDER'S COUNCIL: This might be a fabulous dual-purpose group.
and follow-ups regarding some kind of Elders Council to:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20101014/msgs/969323.html
> I hear you Muff. It doesn't feel safe when you don't know what to expect. There probably isn't a way to eliminate all inconsistencies. But there is a way to create a structure with a high degree of predictability. Since it's less about 'punishment' and more about restoration, I think whatever inconsistencies show up won't feel as threatening. Perfection is not possible, but when the consequences have a cushion, the imperfections will feel less like sharp glass and more like little bumps.
Predictability is in the eye of the beholder. Would you consider laws against drunk driving to have a high degree of predictability?
Some consequences will always feel like sharp glass to some posters. But though perfection isn't possible, improvement is. Could you say more about the difference between punishment and restoration?
Bob
Posted by Solstice on November 27, 2010, at 14:36:24
In reply to Re: Solstice got good ideas, posted by Dr. Bob on November 27, 2010, at 2:17:37
> I started this before. Sorry about not finishing it until now.
I'm glad you were able to get back to it..
> I agree, a lot of talk + little or no movement = stumbling along. Sometimes a lot of talk is necessary before movement. Change can be slow.Yes it can. Maybe we're at a good place for it to be focused enough to feel less like 'stumbling' (without purpose) and more like determined (even if slow) movement toward an improved system?
> > I hear you Muff. It doesn't feel safe when you don't know what to expect. There probably isn't a way to eliminate all inconsistencies. But there is a way to create a structure with a high degree of predictability. Since it's less about 'punishment' and more about restoration, I think whatever inconsistencies show up won't feel as threatening. Perfection is not possible, but when the consequences have a cushion, the imperfections will feel less like sharp glass and more like little bumps.
>
> Predictability is in the eye of the beholder. Would you consider laws against drunk driving to have a high degree of predictability?I don't know how comparable drunk driving laws are to our situation here. Drunk driving laws are implemented across 50 states in innumerable jurisdictions nation-wide by police departments and in courtrooms with a wide variety of judges. At psycho-babble we (thankfully) don't have that level of inconsistency to deal with on a practical level. As I said, I don't think there is a way to completely eliminate all inconsistencies (which create unpredictability). But I do think there is a way for there to be a higher degree of predictability than there is now.
> Some consequences will always feel like sharp glass to some posters.I am a visual thinker big-time and as such Im not always successful at putting words together that accurately represent what Im thinking. I think I failed to convey something important to understanding what I meant in the sentence youre referring to. Here goes: I think what you have right now Bob, is a community of folks who lean on each other to a high degree, and who have been traumatized to varying degrees by the current blocking system. Either they are cut off from the community for extended periods, or those they rely on are cut off. Traumatized might seem like too strong of a word, but all the similar but lesser words I came up with were not strong enough, because the impact has genuinely been very high increasing in potency over time. Ive been observing for a long, long time.. and what I see is a whole community that is perpetually braced for the next block or threat of block. If not for themselves, then for another member who might be less savvy at self-monitoring. My point is that I think its important to understand that what may appear to be an over-reaction to PBC or blocking incidents is a result of the overall effect the current practices have had on the community. Even Scott.. who cites his good fortune in having the verbal aptitude to color inside the lines.. who is well-endowed with wisdom and self-restraint.. even he alludes to what sounds like might be his own hyper-vigilance when he posts. If Scott feels hyper-vigilant, where does that leave members just as valuable, but perhaps less adept at language and expression? What I was trying to convey is that the current blocking system has resulted in a highly hyper-vigilant community. PBC or a warning about a block may sound like a little firecracker to you, Bob, but to this community it sounds like random and deadly gunfire. So my point about the sharp glass is that with a system that provides restoration, any perceived inconsistencies (which are inevitable) in the application of PBCs or blocks will feel much less like theyve stepped on sharp glass, and more like their foot landed on a smooth pebble. The hyper-vigilance will diminish.. and after a while, small things will feel like small things.
> But though perfection isn't possible, improvement is. Could you say more about the difference between punishment and restoration?Right..perfection is not possible. It also wont be possible to have a system that meets everyones criteria for ideal. Improvement, though - is indeed a goal worth pursuing!
Punishment is about causing another pain, with the intent of it teaching that person to correct a behavior. If the punished person is impulsive, stubborn, or a slow-learner the concept of punishment generally tends to increase the pain until the pain is sufficient to cause the offender to correct their behavior. Here, isolation from the community is extraordinarily painful for many.. the equivalent of being banished to a lonely island.
Restoration is more about inclusion. Let me describe my introduction to the concept, which was a profound experience. My daughter was 4, attending a private pre-school. I was there at lunchtime to pick her up and watched this unfold. A boy on the playground grabbed a handful of sand and threw it at a girl, hitting her in the face and head. She burst into tears and ran to the teacher (owner) Mr. Davies, John threw sand at me! Mr. Davies holds the little girls arm and in his gruff voice calls out John come here! John, hands at his sides, walks with his head down up onto the deck where Mr. Davies always stands as he monitors the playground during lunch. Johns mother was also there, arriving just in time to see what happened. She rushes up behind John to the deck, apologizing profusely, telling John how 'bad' he is. Mr. Davies says What are you apologizing for? She responds For giving birth to him? She was mortified.. embarrassed. She declared Mr. Davies, please do the worst thing you can do to him.. put him in timeout forever.. take away everything he likes.. I cant believe this my son is so horrible! By now Mr. Davies has John and the girl by the arm, and he tells the mom to wait off to the side. He talks very directly to the boy Why did you throw sand at Kelly? Were you defending yourself? John mumbled something about not knowing why he did it. Mr. Davies has the two kids facing each other, the girl still crying. He says.. gently.. even kindly John.. look what you did to Kelly. You got sand all over her face.. it looks like it got in her eyes too.. did you get sand in your eyes, Kelly? Did it hurt? Kelly nods. He takes Johns hand in his and says Look, its all over in her hair as he makes John feel the clumps of sand in her hair. By now Kellys sobbing is subsiding. He looks at John and says Now, what I want you to do is go in there with Kelly (inside the school), help her get the sand out of her hair.. and when youre finished with that, I want you to stay with Kelly until she is finished crying and is ready to rejoin the group out here.
Wow. It was like watching magic. My first child was only 4, and that day charted the course for the kind of parent I developed myself into. Mr. Davies didnt shame John. John did not have to become defensive. John started out cringing, but as Mr. Davies showed him the effect of his action on this little girl, the sorrow John felt came through his eyes, and the care he took at helping Kelly get the sand out of her hair. By the time Mr. Davies sent the two of them into the school, I dont think there was anywhere else John wanted to be. And he stayed with Kelly until she was ready to come back out. John was not punished or isolated. He did suffer some consequences. His play was interrupted. He feared the potential consequences. He felt his moms anger. He also felt Mr. Davies' mercy.. and the opportunity to repair was a gift. John had to experience every minute of the effect he had on the girl. It was just about the most beautiful thing Id ever seen as I saw John and Kelly walk out, her smiling.. feeling restored and him smiling.. with his head up as he went back to playing. I guarantee you that boy never picked up another handful of sand without really being aware of what was in his hand.
I hope this story leaves you with a sense of the Restoration I envision. Of course, the details of this story would not play out in exactly the same way here with incivilities. But I think the spirit of the concept is the goal. Where people arent categorized as bad or good where people are not isolated from their support system for extended periods... where the goal of maintaining civility is still upheld, but in a manner that is more compassionate that provides a way for members who were uncivil to repair and be restored were theres no administrative need to punish.
Nothing is perfect, and there will certainly be people who show up who have every intention of being disruptive. People like that may find themselves in more rigid blocking situations. But for the vast majority of members here who really want to be part of this community, who rely on each other for support, who dont want to feel afraid to speak here.. but are genuinely uncertain about their ability to self-monitor and who may from time to time be cited for incivility.. there is a way to provide a more merciful method of upholding civility guidelines without the spirit of the membership becoming collateral damage.
I think a wholesale amnesty for all those currently blocked would be merciful. I think providing a way for those who violate the civility guidelines to be returned to the community would be restorative. The current apology provision works well some of the time. But there are highly valued members here who have a less well-developed ability to take advantage of that provision. There needs to be something more assistive, that doesn't put pressure on skills that aren't as well-developed.
Solstice
Posted by alexandra_k on November 27, 2010, at 18:21:29
In reply to Re: Solstice got good ideas » Dr. Bob, posted by Solstice on November 27, 2010, at 14:36:24
> where does that leave members just as valuable, but perhaps less adept at language and expression?
> If the punished person is impulsive, stubborn, or a slow-learner the concept of punishment generally tends to increase the pain until the pain is sufficient to cause the offender to correct their behavior. Here, isolation from the community is extraordinarily painful for many..
> But there are highly valued members here who have a less well-developed ability to take advantage of that provision. There needs to be something more assistive, that doesn't put pressure on skills that aren't as well-developed.
Impulsive, stubborn, or a slow learner... I see...
Posted by alexandra_k on November 27, 2010, at 18:34:59
In reply to Re: Solstice got good ideas, posted by alexandra_k on November 27, 2010, at 18:21:29
you seem well intentioned, really, you do. and eloquently posting some concrete suggestions that could well make these boards a better place if they were implemented appropriately.
i do think that you are doing a considerable dis-service to not see or acknowledge the many others who have gone before, however.
i do worry about what may happen for you if over time things don't get implemented (if this dialogue with bob stretches on and no real changes occur). i worry about what may happen for you if bob starts to pbc and / or block you for aspects of your discourse.
i wonder how your attitude towards those who have left and or been subject to pbcs and / or blocks may change if you start to think or see 'the wheels on the bus go round'.
i hope they don't, for your sake as well as for the sake of the boards more generally. take care.
Posted by Solstice on November 27, 2010, at 20:18:37
In reply to Re: Solstice got good ideas, posted by alexandra_k on November 27, 2010, at 18:21:29
> > where does that leave members just as valuable, but perhaps less adept at language and expression?
>
> > If the punished person is impulsive, stubborn, or a slow-learner the concept of punishment generally tends to increase the pain until the pain is sufficient to cause the offender to correct their behavior. Here, isolation from the community is extraordinarily painful for many..
>
> > But there are highly valued members here who have a less well-developed ability to take advantage of that provision. There needs to be something more assistive, that doesn't put pressure on skills that aren't as well-developed.
>
> Impulsive, stubborn, or a slow learner... I see...
Alex -One of the challenges of communicating in writing like we do here is that we loose the benefit of facial expressions and other non-verbal modes of communication. Re-reading what I wrote in your excerpts here, I can see how easy it is to take it in a much different way than I meant it as I wrote it. I hate that. It sounds like I'm implying that those who color outside the lines of Bob's civility guidelines are, therefore "impulsive, stubbor, or slow-learners." I did not intend for it to come out like that. Those word choices were sort of facetious on my part.. because I was trying to call attention to the problem with punishment as a way to 'encourage' people (especially in this venue) to line up with civility guidelines... the absurdity of it... the futility of it. It was not intended to be a characterization of how I see Babble, anyone who has been blocked at Babble, etc. It was my attempt to explain a concept. I think my mistake was in combining my attempt to explain a concept with genuine Babble community experiences. I can see how easily what I wrote would be interpreted in a way that would understandably be hurtful. I wish I could re-write it, but since that's not an option, all I can do is genuinely apologize to anyone who felt offended reading what I wrote.
I honestly have a deep and abiding respect for people in general - and all the differences among us. My own beloved adult child has considerable cognitive impairments, including mental illness, so please know that even for those on the planet who are given to impulsivity, stubborness, or are slow learners... I feel only understanding, compassion, and acceptance. I am the first one to stand up on their behalf. Perhaps that is some of what drives my efforts to find a more merciful way, a more restorative way, to handle the inevitabllity of there being good people on this site who deserve to be here, but they have difficulty staying out of trouble with the civility guidelines.
Thank you, Alex, for bringing this issue to my attention.
Solstice
Posted by gardenergirl on November 27, 2010, at 21:44:16
In reply to Re: Solstice got good ideas, posted by alexandra_k on November 27, 2010, at 18:34:59
> 'the wheels on the bus go round'.
Miss you, too, and I thought of you yesterday when my 3 year old nephew started singing, "Wheels on the bus go round and round".
gg
Posted by Solstice on November 27, 2010, at 22:39:14
In reply to Re: Solstice got good ideas, posted by alexandra_k on November 27, 2010, at 18:34:59
> you seem well intentioned, really, you do.
I appreciate that you're giving me the benefit of the doubt, despite the poor initial impression I've apparently made on you..
> and eloquently posting some concrete suggestions that could well make these boards a better place if they were implemented appropriately.I appreciate the affirmation
> i do think that you are doing a considerable dis-service to not see or acknowledge the many others who have gone before, however.I have written an awful lot since I first began posting. In all of that, a number of times I have made it clear that I should get credit for nothing.. that the ideas I'm presenting are NOT mine... that they are the ideas I've been reading on this forum for years and years. I have been actively reading the forum for many years. I created a membership (in case I wanted to post) a few years ago - I don't remember - might be 3+ yrs ago. In addition, I have read the bulk of the archives for the three forums I frequent (psychology, social and admin). However, I only recently started posting. In my introduction I acknowledged the weirdness of the situation.. because I have spent years getting to know the members, but because I was silent, no one knows me. In silence, I've been here through all kinds of crisis. And please know that I have witnessed the valiant efforts of those who have gone before.. to address the chronic problems with the current system. I take credit for nothing. The grounds here are littered with great ideas.. it pains me to see them having fallen by the wayside. I am not attempting to replace their ideas with better ideas. Its just that in order for those great ideas to get implemented, someone has to pull them together and construct a framework for a system that will work. And it has to work for Bob, as well as the members. This is where I have something I can bring to the table. I am genuinely very, Very good at putting together systems that will work troubleshooting problem-solving. I know that I'm handicapped by the fact that I've been a silent member for so long. I am not a known entity. It takes time to earn trust. And unfortunately, the expertise Im offering does involve a certain amount of trust.
I am not invested in any particular idea working. But I do think bits and pieces of the ideas of all those who have gone before can be put together in a way to construct something that will significantly improve things for the members. I am willing to offer myself, but if someone else would like to do it, I am just as willing to step back. There is nothing about this that is about *me*. Its about the Babble community. Theres a piece I can offer, but my piece in no way outstrips the contributions of those who have gone before.
> i do worry about what may happen for you if over time things don't get implemented (if this dialogue with bob stretches on and no real changes occur). i worry about what may happen for you if bob starts to pbc and / or block you for aspects of your discourse.I will cross that bridge if I get to it. I don't have any axes to grind... with Bob or anyone else. But I do care about the community. For years, it provided me a place to heal. I have learned so much here. I would be humbled if granted the privilage of contributing what I can to developing a more merciful and workable method for Administration upholding civility guidelines.
> i wonder how your attitude towards those who have left and or been subject to pbcs and / or blocks may change if you start to think or see 'the wheels on the bus go round'.I'm not sure what conclusion you've drawn about my attitude.. but I have indeed watched those wheels go round and round :-)
> i hope they don't, for your sake as well as for the sake of the boards more generally. take care.
Thank you, Alex. I appreciate your having taken the time to provide me with feedback.
Solstice
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 29, 2010, at 0:24:35
In reply to Re: Solstice got good ideas » Dr. Bob, posted by Solstice on November 27, 2010, at 14:36:24
> Restoration is more about inclusion. Let me describe my introduction to the concept, which was a profound experience. My daughter was 4, attending a private pre-school. I was there at lunchtime to pick her up and watched this unfold. A boy on the playground grabbed a handful of sand and threw it at a girl, hitting her in the face and head. She burst into tears and ran to the teacher (owner) Mr. Davies, John threw sand at me! Mr. Davies holds the little girls arm and in his gruff voice calls out John come here! John, hands at his sides, walks with his head down up onto the deck where Mr. Davies always stands as he monitors the playground during lunch. Johns mother was also there, arriving just in time to see what happened. She rushes up behind John to the deck, apologizing profusely, telling John how 'bad' he is. Mr. Davies says What are you apologizing for? She responds For giving birth to him? She was mortified.. embarrassed. She declared Mr. Davies, please do the worst thing you can do to him.. put him in timeout forever.. take away everything he likes.. I cant believe this my son is so horrible! By now Mr. Davies has John and the girl by the arm, and he tells the mom to wait off to the side. He talks very directly to the boy Why did you throw sand at Kelly? Were you defending yourself? John mumbled something about not knowing why he did it. Mr. Davies has the two kids facing each other, the girl still crying. He says.. gently.. even kindly John.. look what you did to Kelly. You got sand all over her face.. it looks like it got in her eyes too.. did you get sand in your eyes, Kelly? Did it hurt? Kelly nods. He takes Johns hand in his and says Look, its all over in her hair as he makes John feel the clumps of sand in her hair. By now Kellys sobbing is subsiding. He looks at John and says Now, what I want you to do is go in there with Kelly (inside the school), help her get the sand out of her hair.. and when youre finished with that, I want you to stay with Kelly until she is finished crying and is ready to rejoin the group out here.
>
> Wow. It was like watching magic.
>
> Of course, the details of this story would not play out in exactly the same way here with incivilities.
>
> Nothing is perfect, and there will certainly be people who show up who have every intention of being disruptive. People like that may find themselves in more rigid blocking situations.
>
> The current apology provision works well some of the time. But there are highly valued members here who have a less well-developed ability to take advantage of that provision. There needs to be something more assistive, that doesn't put pressure on skills that aren't as well-developed.Can you ask Mr. Davies to work his magic here? :-)
The more restoration provisions there are, the better. Those who aren't able to take advantage of one may be able to take advantage of another. Even with more, however, some, unfortunately, may not be able to take advantage of any.
Bob
Posted by sigismund on November 29, 2010, at 1:17:43
In reply to Re: Mr. Davies got good ideas, posted by Dr. Bob on November 29, 2010, at 0:24:35
The thing with the Mr Davies analogy is that I can think of many examples of blocks where no one was hurt and where there was no intention to hurt.
Attempts to wound? Well, goodness me, if you're careful enough, you can get away with them too.
But that is what we should worry about.
Zeugma was blocked on Politics for saying that Bush was ruining the Middle East or Iraq or something. Was anyone wounded (by him saying that)?
Posted by alexandra_k on November 29, 2010, at 4:44:51
In reply to Re: Solstice got good ideas » alexandra_k, posted by Solstice on November 27, 2010, at 22:39:14
> Its just that in order for those great ideas to get implemented, someone has to pull them together and construct a framework for a system that will work. And it has to work for Bob, as well as the members. This is where I have something I can bring to the table. I am genuinely very, Very good at putting together systems that will work troubleshooting problem-solving.
> > i do worry about what may happen for you if over time things don't get implemented (if this dialogue with bob stretches on and no real changes occur). i worry about what may happen for you if bob starts to pbc and / or block you for aspects of your discourse.
> I do care about the community.Yes.
That is what makes me nervous for you.
Because the wheels on the bus...
Take care.
Posted by Solstice on November 29, 2010, at 7:48:09
In reply to Re: Solstice got good ideas » Solstice, posted by alexandra_k on November 29, 2010, at 4:44:51
Alex..
Please don't invest your energy in worrying about me. I'm pretty sturdy :-) And I can always get off a bus if it's wheels are bugging the heck out of me.
And I'll tell you what.. I just read the exchange between you and Bob regarding the elephant. You are brilliant, Alex! You seem to be what my therapist calls a "Sharpener." None of the subtleties escape you. You keep things on their toes. Keep them real. I just love it. Your value to the community is immeasurable.
Solstice
> > Its just that in order for those great ideas to get implemented, someone has to pull them together and construct a framework for a system that will work. And it has to work for Bob, as well as the members. This is where I have something I can bring to the table. I am genuinely very, Very good at putting together systems that will work troubleshooting problem-solving.
>
> > > i do worry about what may happen for you if over time things don't get implemented (if this dialogue with bob stretches on and no real changes occur). i worry about what may happen for you if bob starts to pbc and / or block you for aspects of your discourse.
>
> > I do care about the community.
>
> Yes.
>
> That is what makes me nervous for you.
>
> Because the wheels on the bus...
>
> Take care.
>
>
>
>
>
Posted by muffled on November 29, 2010, at 8:50:56
In reply to Re: Solstice got good ideas » alexandra_k, posted by Solstice on November 29, 2010, at 7:48:09
Maybe solstice would be willing to be a full co-administrator?
Or would Bob be willing to reliquish that much control....
Or could Solstice be able to even work w/Bob.
And vice versa....Hmmm.
This is the end of the 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.