![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 19 of 19. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by floatingbridge on November 20, 2010, at 17:02:48
Dr. Bob,
One aspect on the handling of blocks and pbc's is bothering me, and I want to bring it to your attention. Perhaps it's been discussed.
Timing. If there are rules, they need to be enforced within a consistent, therefore expected, timeframe.
To let some threads go on and on, rife with incivilities, erodes morale and hurts
individuals expecting a modicum of safety because PB is a moderated board.To let individual requests sit without reply is irresponsible to forum members. Administration should set and adhere to a specific turn around time. If one
person is too busy, or two people, then
there needs to be more.To lack consistency seems irresponsible. If forum members are expected to abide by site guidelines, administration needs to as well--that is, given that there is equal interest on both sides to have a beneficial site.
I'm pretty much done here.
Respectfully,
fb
Posted by Solstice on November 20, 2010, at 17:32:27
In reply to a note to Dr. Bob, posted by floatingbridge on November 20, 2010, at 17:02:48
> Dr. Bob,
>
> One aspect on the handling of blocks and pbc's is bothering me, and I want to bring it to your attention. Perhaps it's been discussed.
>
> Timing. If there are rules, they need to be enforced within a consistent, therefore expected, timeframe.
>
> To let some threads go on and on, rife with incivilities, erodes morale and hurts
> individuals expecting a modicum of safety because PB is a moderated board.
>
> To let individual requests sit without reply is irresponsible to forum members. Administration should set and adhere to a specific turn around time. If one
> person is too busy, or two people, then
> there needs to be more.
>
> To lack consistency seems irresponsible. If forum members are expected to abide by site guidelines, administration needs to as well--that is, given that there is equal interest on both sides to have a beneficial site.
>Floating Bridge...
I hear you. You are very legitimately citing one of the things that seems to play a large role in outcrys of injustice (some uncivil posts not be held accountable, and others held overly-accountable). If civilty starts slipping when Bob is absent, they can genuinely get pretty far off track. I think what you are calling attention to is an inherent problem with there being a single administrator, particularly if that administrator's career necessitates long absences at times. I don't think there is a way to solve that problem, though, without constructing another way to deal with incivilities. A less harsh blocking system would probably help a lot. Extended blocks for repeated (but minor) infractions emphasize the disparity when posters whose equal (or worse) infractions are overlooked because Bob isn't here. If the worst thing that happened was someone got a 4 week block when he was here, and someone with an equal incivility that got overlooked because he wasn't - then it wouldn't be such a big deal. But when someone gets a block that lasts months (or a year), and then someone else who does the same thing doesn't.. the disparity is enormous
I don't think it's realistic for us to expect Bob (or any administrator) to be able to have a completely (or even near-completely) even-handed system for dealing with incivilities.. I just don't think it's humanly possible. There will always be things that escape notice. BUT - - I can't help but wonder if there was just a standard block - i.e. 2 weeks for each and every incivility - regardless.. maybe the incivilities that are 'let go' because he's not here wouldn't be so offensive? If no one was blocked longer than 2 weeks.. and the only thing that would cause them to be 'gone' for a long time is if every time they come back they are uncivil again and get repeated 2 week blocks.. maybe that would make the inevitable unequal application of blocks less potent? Maybe that's an idea worth re-exploring with Bob?
Solstice
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 27, 2010, at 0:23:00
In reply to Re: a note to Dr. Bob, posted by Solstice on November 20, 2010, at 17:32:27
> If there are rules, they need to be enforced within a consistent, therefore expected, timeframe.
>
> To let some threads go on and on, rife with incivilities, erodes morale and hurts individuals expecting a modicum of safety because PB is a moderated board.
>
> If one person is too busy, or two people, then there needs to be more.
>
> fb> If civilty starts slipping when Bob is absent, they can genuinely get pretty far off track. I think what you are calling attention to is an inherent problem with there being a single administrator, particularly if that administrator's career necessitates long absences at times.
>
> SolsticeI wish I could be here all the time. Well, I wish the board could be moderated all the time. :-)
I do get too busy sometimes. More deputies would help. PartlyCloudy did consider returning, which I appreciated. Is it a job that would appeal to either of you?
Of course there would be less need for administrators if posters helped each other stay civil.
Bob
Posted by Solstice on November 27, 2010, at 23:47:20
In reply to Re: Timing of enforcement, posted by Dr. Bob on November 27, 2010, at 0:23:00
> I wish I could be here all the time. Well, I wish the board could be moderated all the time. :-)
>
> I do get too busy sometimes. More deputies would help. PartlyCloudy did consider returning, which I appreciated. Is it a job that would appeal to either of you?I'm not sure if you're including me in the 'either of you,' but on the chance I was included, I would like to respond. Although I think it was worth the ole college try, I don't think the Deputy experiment turned out to work very well for you, for the community, or for the deputies.
As for serving in that position, I would not be able to act as an enforcer of a system that I believe is doing more harm than good. I realize that at the moment, it's all we've got.. but I think it is so imperative that the system be modified without delay.. that I fear participation would serve to just prolong a broken system. It needs to be addressed. You can't be everywhere. And forum crisis can't be scheduled to coincide with your availability. An overhaul of the method of implementing the civility guidelines is an urgent matter that deserves your time and focus.
> Of course there would be less need for administrators if posters helped each other stay civil.This phrase has been historically provocative. It pushes on sore spots. I'm curious about why you used it? It has not worked in the past. I'd also like to call attention to the issue that there is NO clear and established structure or process for 'posters to help each other stay civil.' It might be a little like telling a 16 y/o to be sure and drive safely as you hand them the keys for the first time, without having ever taken them through a driver's ed course that includes on-the-road training.
I'd also like to suggest that there would be less need for administrators if you would invest the time and effort to work with folks here who want to help create a better system for upholding your civility guidelines.. or maybe there would be less need for administrators if the civility threshhold wasn't so impossibly low... or maybe there'd be less need for administrators if the blocking procedures had not caused so much injury to the whole community over such a long period of time.
I appreciate your presence and it appearing that you might be interested in modifying current methods. However, I think it is imperative that you engage in a meaningful way in reworking the current system. Otherwise, I for one will stop investing my time.
Solstice
Posted by PartlyCloudy on November 28, 2010, at 8:40:40
In reply to Re: Timing of enforcement - Call for Deputies » Dr. Bob, posted by Solstice on November 27, 2010, at 23:47:20
> > I wish I could be here all the time. Well, I wish the board could be moderated all the time. :-)
> >
> > I do get too busy sometimes. More deputies would help. PartlyCloudy did consider returning, which I appreciated. Is it a job that would appeal to either of you?
>
>
>
> I'm not sure if you're including me in the 'either of you,' but on the chance I was included, I would like to respond. Although I think it was worth the ole college try, I don't think the Deputy experiment turned out to work very well for you, for the community, or for the deputies.
>
> As for serving in that position, I would not be able to act as an enforcer of a system that I believe is doing more harm than good. I realize that at the moment, it's all we've got.. but I think it is so imperative that the system be modified without delay.. that I fear participation would serve to just prolong a broken system. It needs to be addressed. You can't be everywhere. And forum crisis can't be scheduled to coincide with your availability. An overhaul of the method of implementing the civility guidelines is an urgent matter that deserves your time and focus.
>
>
>
>
> > Of course there would be less need for administrators if posters helped each other stay civil.
>
> This phrase has been historically provocative. It pushes on sore spots. I'm curious about why you used it? It has not worked in the past. I'd also like to call attention to the issue that there is NO clear and established structure or process for 'posters to help each other stay civil.' It might be a little like telling a 16 y/o to be sure and drive safely as you hand them the keys for the first time, without having ever taken them through a driver's ed course that includes on-the-road training.
>
> I'd also like to suggest that there would be less need for administrators if you would invest the time and effort to work with folks here who want to help create a better system for upholding your civility guidelines.. or maybe there would be less need for administrators if the civility threshhold wasn't so impossibly low... or maybe there'd be less need for administrators if the blocking procedures had not caused so much injury to the whole community over such a long period of time.
>
> I appreciate your presence and it appearing that you might be interested in modifying current methods. However, I think it is imperative that you engage in a meaningful way in reworking the current system. Otherwise, I for one will stop investing my time.
>
> Solstice
>
>You know, I was a deputy - for a VERY short time. And I considered becoming one again. Unfortunately, I am not able to agree to the current guidelines for deputies as Dr Bob has them set up.
Yes, indeed, there is an elephant in the room. I am not going to name it, as it is not my place to do so - it's the administration's as they created it. If this elephant saw fit to leave the room and say, join the other elephants in their preserve in the African continent, India, or wherever else they have been corralled to live together, then perhaps there might be more active deputies.
I see emotionally charged situations escalate in intensity and feel badly that intervention does not happen. I don't feel that I have much power to have any influence over these occurrences as I don't often know the parties involved - at least one of the them will be a stranger (mostly) to me. Who am I to tell them what to do or how to behave? I have tried to interject myself in at least one thread that had been going awry in an attempt to wrest it back into civility and felt that I was not welcome in my comments.
And so I keep quiet and in the background. It's not my place to correct what I see going on.
PartlyCloudy
Posted by twinleaf on November 28, 2010, at 10:26:56
In reply to Re: Timing of enforcement - Call for Deputies » Solstice, posted by PartlyCloudy on November 28, 2010, at 8:40:40
Sadly, PC, if everyone remains silent about existing, harmful problems, our forum will die. We have valued it so much, particularly as it was several years ago, that many of us have risked our presence here by identifying what seemed to be problem areas, and suggesting very moderate, flexible changes.
Until now, Bob has not shown any interest in our ideas. I routinely felt punished for speaking up. Recently, I was about to be blocked for a year for using the word "outlandish". It was impossible for me to avoid coming to the conclusion that I was being silenced. I considered this extremely inappropriate in a mental health forum- and very stressful for me if I continued as an active poster.
Now, however, I note that Solstice has put forth an excellent set of suggestions, all tending torwards moderation, co-operation and flexibility, and that Bob has responded with interest. She has identified several very important things - that the punitive and inevitably uneven application of civility rules and blocks creates an elevated level of stress in our community. This is so important to recognize, and, even more, to correct. The other very important point is that any solutions need to seem like good ones to both Bob and the posters. None of us want Bob to do anything that is not an excellent idea in his own eyes. But we would like to have a say about what is helpful to us, also. We know, much better than Bob could, what makes us feel safe, stress-free, communicative and verbally expressive.
I was very excited to see Solstice's post, and even more, that Bob has responded,. I do hope Bob will continue his dialogue with her and all the others who care about Babble, and that they will work out the needed changes together within a reasonable period of time.
Posted by Solstice on November 28, 2010, at 10:35:11
In reply to Re: Timing of enforcement - Call for Deputies » Solstice, posted by PartlyCloudy on November 28, 2010, at 8:40:40
> You know, I was a deputy - for a VERY short time. And I considered becoming one again. Unfortunately, I am not able to agree to the current guidelines for deputies as Dr Bob has them set up.
>
> Yes, indeed, there is an elephant in the room. I am not going to name it, as it is not my place to do so - it's the administration's as they created it. If this elephant saw fit to leave the room and say, join the other elephants in their preserve in the African continent, India, or wherever else they have been corralled to live together, then perhaps there might be more active deputies.
>
> I see emotionally charged situations escalate in intensity and feel badly that intervention does not happen. I don't feel that I have much power to have any influence over these occurrences as I don't often know the parties involved - at least one of the them will be a stranger (mostly) to me. Who am I to tell them what to do or how to behave? I have tried to interject myself in at least one thread that had been going awry in an attempt to wrest it back into civility and felt that I was not welcome in my comments.
>
> And so I keep quiet and in the background. It's not my place to correct what I see going on.
>
> PartlyCloudy
Hi PC.. and everyone else!Those of you who have served as deputies know much more about how it plays out in reality than I could ever know. What I know is only what I've learned by reading the boards over a long period of time. I also realize that there is probably more to what's going on than what I, as a reader, am able to see.
When you speak of 'elephant,' I'm not sure if you're talking about a policy, a chronic forum problem, or a person. If I were going to name an elephant that I'd like to see disappear, I would cite the very real possibilty that Bob may resist engaging in a revamping of the current system. Resist being decisive. I'm concerned about a comment he made yesterday cautioning that changes would likely take a long time, and he stated his preference for that. It has already taken a loooong time. Based on the high number of members who were not prone to blocks who have left in (civil) protest, the consistent and long-standing pleas from members for action, the swell of highly-respected balanced members (Scott, for example) who have offered their input, and the amount of forum time, space & energy devoted to discussion of these issues... I think the forum is on life-support. I hate to think that Bob might not recognize it. It will take something dramatic to revive this thing. Kidneys are our heroes.. they are crucial to the functioning of our most important systems.. our heart.. the cleansing of our blood.. the elimination of waste.. maintaining the balance of our complex system of electrolytes. Kidneys produce the hormone that generates the production of red blood cells - which carry the oxygen we cannot live without. They produce the hormone that reglates our blood pressure - which affects everything. The administrative moderation of the forum is like the kidneys of our body. We don't need a new administrator, but we do need a kidney transplant.. a new and healthier moderation system. If kidneys are breaking down, they can withhold releasing something becoming toxic to us, and they can release too much of what we need to survive.
There are two changes that, without making any changes to the civility requirements, I think could breathe new life into the forum. Please note that these are NOT my ideas! 1) Grant a one-time wholesale amnesty to everyone currently blocked. It could include a disclaimer that this action should NOT be interpreted to mean that the actions that got those posters blocked are now permissible; and 2) adopt a single short blocking time-frame that is applied to every single incident of incivility. No attempts will be made to measure severity or debate validity. If it's 2 weeks, and a blocked poster comes back after their 2-week block and is still angry and becomes uncivil again.. then it's another 2 weeks. This would provide those who are struggling to figure it out multiple opportunities to learn and practice these important skills (much better than months-long blocks). It would also make it much less of a big deal if someone is blocked for those lower-threshhold incivilities. It wouldn't be worth arguing about if someone has to sit in the corner for only 2 weeks.
I need to call attention to something important, though. If Bob agrees to amnesty and very short blocks, he will not be able to maintain it on his own... especially initially. There will likely be an influx of blocked members who may still be hurt and angry - who may want to talk about how they were affected by it. This should be considered an inevitable part of this kind of transition. However, I think it will necessitate a reasonably well-organized group of Civility Buddies, and likely some deputies. I think Dinah is well-equipped to respond to the probable higher need for Civility Buddies. I'm more worried about the likely need for some deputies to help Bob monitor civility. Perhaps an amnesty will only result in joyous reunions with posters who have been missed. But amnesty and short blocks could also mean that, especially initially, there may be a number of people who are frequent fliers of the short-block system as they find their footing. I think it will be imperative to the success of the transition that Bob sees that his civility guidelines are not compromised. It will take deputies to protect that. Perhaps deputies would issue more PBC's (especially for the lower-threshhold incivilities), and would issue blocks only when the incivility is clear. I think Bob would (reasonably) be much more reluctant to make these changes if he does not have help. I think his first priority is maintaining civility. Help from a healthy supply of deputies may be essential to implementing shorter blocks. I also think that there have been a good number of suggestions that the way PBC's are worded needs to be redone. Perhaps Dinah would help reword PBC's to make them more likely to encourage the response they are intended to encourage?
I think that what this forum needs more than anything right now (urgently), is to experience administrative mercy, and to see the forum owner willing to make a decisive and dramatic change in the punishment formulas currently used. The Civility Guidelines can stay exactly the same as they are now. Regardless of the threshhold, there will always be some who see the threshhold as too low, and some that see it as too high. So if Bob likes it where it is, then that doesn't have to change. That said, it will be impossible for me to understand why Bob would be unwilling to change the punishment formula used, especially considering the amount of support for change coming from active forum members who are among the most balanced. The arguments in favor of dramatic reduction in block time are well-thought out, well-reasoned, balanced. These are folks who support moderation, even tight moderation. They just reasonably (an civily) petition for a blocking system that is less destructive.
So in my perhaps-not-so-humble view, Bob's lack of decisive engagement and action is the elephant that needs to disappear.
Solstice
Posted by Solstice on November 28, 2010, at 11:45:50
In reply to our roles..., posted by twinleaf on November 28, 2010, at 10:26:56
First, Twinleaf.. your support and encouragement speaks to your grace..
> Sadly, PC, if everyone remains silent about existing, harmful problems, our forum will die. We have valued it so much, particularly as it was several years ago, that many of us have risked our presence here by identifying what seemed to be problem areas, and suggesting very moderate, flexible changes.
>
> Until now, Bob has not shown any interest in our ideas. I routinely felt punished for speaking up. Recently, I was about to be blocked for a year for using the word "outlandish". It was impossible for me to avoid coming to the conclusion that I was being silenced. I considered this extremely inappropriate in a mental health forum- and very stressful for me if I continued as an active poster.I have witnessed the history of the things of which you speak.
> Now, however, I note that Solstice has put forth an excellent set of suggestions, all tending torwards moderation, co-operation and flexibility,Please know that I have merely pulled together the ideas and suggestions birthed by the wisdom of this community, through the collective pain the community has experienced. These are not my ideas. I am just very good at pulling all of these ideas together and constructing the various pieces of them in a way that is executable. I have a well-developed ability to put together 'systems,' and I am very good at troubleshooting and problem-solving. Sometimes that organizational capacity brings me attention I don't necessarily merit.
> and that Bob has responded with interest.I have seen Bob respond with interest a number of times over the years. I've even seen him make modifications. Case in point is the concession he made to give people time to apologize or rephrase. He wasn't responding to me when he instituted that change. He was responding to the heartbeat of this community, which I think he care a great deal about. I just think that this is a very large community, and it's not humanly possible for him to read all the posts. It might be somewhat like the difference between a highly attentive mother of two children who are spaced 6 years apart (one mature and independent, and one placing higher demands).. and the Mother Goose nursery rhyme:
"There was an old woman
who lived in a shoe,
She had so many children
she didn't know what to do;
She gave them some broth
without any bread;
She whipped them all soundly
and put them to bed."I don't think any interest on Bob's part is because it's *me* - or because I'm a 'new' poster - or because I have any new or better ideas. I think he's responding adminstratively to a system that has been constructed for him - that outlines protection of his objectives - and I think he's responding based on his genuine desire for the forum to remain viable and helpful to the community it serves.
> She has identified several very important things - that the punitive and inevitably uneven application of civility rules and blocks creates an elevated level of stress in our community. This is so important to recognize, and, even more, to correct.Thank you so much, Twinleaf, for your succinct summary of that point. I think the community has been struggling to convey this to Bob for a long time, but I am not certain it's been easy for him to 'see.' I don't think his difficulty 'seeing' it speaks to whether he cares about the community.. I think it just speaks to the nature of his role preventing him from experiencing the dynamics of it (punitive & unequal) like it's experienced by the community. It's a little like requiring someone to spend their whole life in a darkened room, then expecting them to explain how they are affected by the colors of a rainbow :-)
> The other very important point is that any solutions need to seem like good ones to both Bob and the posters. None of us want Bob to do anything that is not an excellent idea in his own eyes.Another succinct summary! I wish I was good at summarizing. I think my difficulty with wordiness is one of those other-side-of-the-coin things. This particular deficiency of mine seems to be an inherent feature of highly visual-thinkers. I am good at constructing systems because my mind comphrehends only in 'wholes,' I am unable to 'see' individual pieces of anything if they are separated from each other. Separated components are anxiety provoking for me. The drawback of being a visual thinker is that I have a great deal of trouble knowing where to start when trying to explain what I 'see' with respect to a 'system.' Thus.. the appearance of meandering around. It can look aimless to those who are highly linear.. but if you can hang in there with me, the system will eventually be clear. That's where I get to enjoy the gratitude I feel as folks can summarize and put the concept I have into a more linear (and succinct) order that is more understandable to most other folks. I have found that my well-being, and my most productive level of functioning, best takes place in conjunction with and in the context of relationships with others of different giftings - the wider the variety, the better. I can be rendered pretty useless solo.. so I sustain a living, breathing gratitude and respecxt for others.
> I was very excited to see Solstice's post, and even more, that Bob has responded,. I do hope Bob will continue his dialogue with her and all the others who care about Babble, and that they will work out the needed changes together within a reasonable period of time.Again, Twinleaf.. I am humbled by and grateful for your support. But I am not doing this alone. I didn't come up with these ideas. Maybe I am better viewed as being someone holding (the pieces don't fall through my fingers) and presenting Bob with the gift of our composite.
And finally... I am also acutely aware of the urgency for change. Overnight changes would not be reasonable.. but Bob's decisive engagement and clear (and quick) movement toward reshaping the current system is imperative.
Solstice
Posted by twinleaf on November 28, 2010, at 13:12:35
In reply to Re: our roles..., posted by Solstice on November 28, 2010, at 11:45:50
When I was making suggestions about shorter blocks and simpler standards for PCB's here, I would start out feeling somewhat hopeful, or, at any rate, pleased that I had gathered my thoughts and written them down.
However, the experience of never having my thoughts acknowledged become more and more difficult to bear over time. I did not expect agreement, or any action without many other views being expressed, and much discussion taking place.. Rather, just a simple, "thanks for letting me know your ideas.. which could have subsequently been shortened to "thanks".
The silence, (in addition to the extremely long blocks I was getting) gradually changed my original relaxed, friendly relationship with Bob into one marked by tension and uncertainty. The fact that my posts about Babble were never acknowledged felt like passive aggressive acts to me, adding to my sense of being mistreated.
I am mentioning this because it's likely that Bob may neglect to respond in a timely manner this time, too. I am hoping people will learn from my reactions, and won't lose their cool the way I did!
Posted by PartlyCloudy on November 28, 2010, at 14:44:21
In reply to Re: Timing of enforcement - Call for Deputies » PartlyCloudy, posted by Solstice on November 28, 2010, at 10:35:11
My elephant could be called a policy, I guess.
You speak soundly and solidly for the changes I also wish to see.
pc
Posted by twinleaf on November 28, 2010, at 16:08:46
In reply to Re: our roles..., posted by Solstice on November 28, 2010, at 11:45:50
It's true that the ideas about blocks and civility aren't exactly new, and, really, how complicated can they be, but I think that you are bringing something really valuable. You are taking it as a given that it should be "win-win" each step of the way. Up until now, we kept hearing, and posting ourselves, "it's Bob's site; he can do what he likes, or "if you don't like the rules, don't post here.".You are saying that it's OURS, and that the feelings and wishes of everyone are important. And I think you are being heard - at least a little. You also identified the role that community stress plays in the amount and nature of posting. While I think we all sort of sensed that, it's very helpfto have it identified more clearly. It is probably the single most important reason for the marked decline in posting volume.
I think I'm seeing some subtle change here already. In particular, Bob is responding to some, though not all, of the posts directed to him. No matter how brief, responses can convey his recognition and respect - vital elements in all successful communities.
It is going to be the times when Bob does not respond which will be challenging. It isn't easy to avoid feeling ignored or even insulted when this happens. Because it has been his habitual way of dealing with difficult issues here, it will probably take time to work through. But if you can stick to your great way of doing things, I think you can help make a wonderful difference here.
Having had a terrific Thanksgiving with our son, daughter-in-law and entrancing 2-year old grandson, my husband and I are going to slip off now to a neighborhood Vietnamese restaurant for Pho. He assures me that a bowl of Pho will instantly erase any prior dietary lapses!
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 29, 2010, at 1:15:02
In reply to our roles..., posted by twinleaf on November 28, 2010, at 10:26:56
> > Of course there would be less need for administrators if posters helped each other stay civil.
>
> This phrase has been historically provocative. It pushes on sore spots. I'm curious about why you used it? It has not worked in the past.Sometimes sore spots need to be massaged to be loosened up. :-)
> there is NO clear and established structure or process for 'posters to help each other stay civil.'
>
> SolsticeNo, but (1) there's been discussion of possible ways and (2) there's no clear and established structure or process for posters to support each other in general, either, and still they do it, and do it well.
--
> Recently, I was about to be blocked for a year for using the word "outlandish". It was impossible for me to avoid coming to the conclusion that I was being silenced.
You would've been blocked for posting something that could've led someone to feel accused of being outlandish, which wasn't supportive. But it would've been for a year not because of that one action, but because of a pattern of actions.
You're not silenced. You're posting. An uncivil part of you may be silenced. That I'd happy to accept responsibility for.
> any solutions need to seem like good ones to both Bob and the posters. None of us want Bob to do anything that is not an excellent idea in his own eyes. But we would like to have a say about what is helpful to us, also.
>
> twinleafThanks for highlighting the need to work together,
Bob
Posted by muffled on November 29, 2010, at 9:17:37
In reply to Re: sore spots, posted by Dr. Bob on November 29, 2010, at 1:15:02
"You're not silenced. You're posting. An uncivil part of you may be silenced. That I'd happy to accept responsibility for."
:( The most hurt parts inside are not necessarily 'civil' at all times. Some are angry, some are so hurt.
I am NOT supposed to 'silence' them :( I am supposed to nurture them and listen to them. THAT is support.
Friends IRL who are supportive will allow for occasional incivility when the pain bleeds.
Here, at the slightest hint...blocked, warned etc.
Then the shame comes, the 'I am bad'. Then the shrivelling retreat :(
ALOT of people have 'histories', and that is why they seek support. I had thot this was a support site. But its not, only within the very strictest paramenters.
But we are HUMAN Bob, we are hurting, we WILL screw up.
Do we need such harshness as there is here??? No.
Thats why I am not here much.
I keep hoping you will come to understand....
Posted by Solstice on November 29, 2010, at 14:36:37
In reply to Re: sore spots, posted by Dr. Bob on November 29, 2010, at 1:15:02
> > > Of course there would be less need for administrators if posters helped each other stay civil.
> >
> > This phrase has been historically provocative. It pushes on sore spots. I'm curious about why you used it? It has not worked in the past.
>
> Sometimes sore spots need to be massaged to be loosened up. :-)
>
> Bob
True.. but I'm wondering if it feels like a therapeutic 'massage' when the massaging is done by the one perceived as having inflicted the injury in the first place? Maybe in that case - rather than it being a massage.. it feels more like another assault? Perceptions do count - even if not always 100% accurate. Maybe to avoid unnecessary inflammation, any massaging of sore spots is better left to others.. or left alone to heal on its own. I think this might be an example of the insensitivity to the community that Muffled referred to. Without cultivating an attuned sensitivity to the community, you might be walking into a china closet.. and end up (unknowingly) behaving like a haphazard bull... causing unnecessary damage and further injury.Please give the point I'm trying to make some self-reflective contemplation.
Solstice
Posted by Solstice on November 29, 2010, at 15:13:29
In reply to Re: sore spots, posted by muffled on November 29, 2010, at 9:17:37
Muffled.. I (for one) am so glad you (all of you :) are here, and are posting.
> "You're not silenced. You're posting. An uncivil part of you may be silenced. That I'd happy to accept responsibility for."
>
> :( The most hurt parts inside are not necessarily 'civil' at all times. Some are angry, some are so hurt.I want you to know that I genuinely understand this. You may have some parts that, when in the forefront, are much more easily triggered than other parts... and much less equipped to manage strongly felt responses to the triggers.
> I am NOT supposed to 'silence' them :( I am supposed to nurture them and listen to them. THAT is support.You must have an amazing therapist. I'm so glad you don't 'silence' those parts. You do need to care for them and listen to them. They need the better functioning parts of yourself to pay attention to their needs, to advocate on their behalf. Sometimes they might also need your better functioning parts to blanket them with a protective embrace when they are feeling triggered. Not silence them, but maybe by taking those angry, hurt parts to a Civility Buddy that can help you sort through the needs of those hurt and angry parts. I wonder if the 'whole' of you will grow more satisfyingly integrated if the better functioning parts take the angry, hurting parts (when triggered here) to a one-on-one relationship with a Civility Buddy, an IRL friend, or even your therapist, to ensure that their voices are heard - that their pain is acknowledged, and that they are compassionately accepted as very wounded parts who may at times run unexpectedly amok. This would be a way of protecting those parts from suffering even more injury by the collective Muffled being blocked just because a wounded part had trouble figuring out how to make her/himself heard in a way that complied with Babble's civility guidelines.
I can see why things often feel harsh here. They have been harsh. But I do think Bob is genuinely working hard at this time to come up with a way to make it less harsh, but still keep the site safe enough for everyone.. including others with parts. His proposal for a Council that would be able to reduce blocks might solve the problem of your hurting, angry parts sometimes getting uncivil. His Council idea means that Council would cut down on blocks for low-threshhold incivility.
Because of your parts, you might feel at special risk for blocks.. no wonder you feel so conflicted about this place. I don't want you (any of you) to go away. The poetic parts of you (especially) have riveted me to the edge of my seat. I'm hoping that between your better functioning parts stepping in to protect your very wounded parts by taking them to be heard by a Civility Buddy, and a Council having more control over block length... I'm hoping all of your parts will feel safe enough to stay.
Solstice
Posted by sigismund on November 30, 2010, at 1:45:47
In reply to Re: sore spots, posted by muffled on November 29, 2010, at 9:17:37
>Friends IRL who are supportive will allow for occasional incivility
Of course they do.
Ordinary people do that all the time for each other.
Posted by Dr. Bob on December 2, 2010, at 17:37:16
In reply to Re: sore spots, posted by muffled on November 29, 2010, at 9:17:37
> > You're not silenced. You're posting. An uncivil part of you may be silenced. That I'd happy to accept responsibility for.
>
> :( The most hurt parts inside are not necessarily 'civil' at all times. Some are angry, some are so hurt.
> I am NOT supposed to 'silence' them :( I am supposed to nurture them and listen to them. THAT is support.
> Friends IRL who are supportive will allow for occasional incivility when the pain bleeds.
> Here, at the slightest hint...blocked, warned etc.
> Then the shame comes, the 'I am bad'. Then the shrivelling retreat :("Silenced" wasn't my word. What I had in mind was:
> > parts shouldn't hurt the body
> > Babble = the bodyBeing kept from doing something can feel like being silenced. But angry and hurt parts need to be kept from hurting the body. Parts need to learn how to express themselves in ways that don't hurt the body.
Speaking of shame:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20100714/msgs/958778.html
Bob
Posted by floatingbridge on December 8, 2010, at 16:47:19
In reply to Re: sore spots, posted by sigismund on November 30, 2010, at 1:45:47
Solstice and other thread participants,
(I say Solstice because you/she responded directly to me.)
When I started this thread, I neglected to subscribe to updates, so I just read it through now.
If anyone cares to field a question for me, what are the green lighted changes being put into place? Are any in a maybe status? What's out of consideration?
A babblemail would do. Or a post here; I'm subscribing now :)
After being triggered awhile back by some threads, I really lost a hold of any positivity. I also need a PB vacation. However, I still kept thinking about my online friends here.
Thank to anyone giving me a brief outline :)
fb
Posted by Solstice on December 8, 2010, at 17:15:55
In reply to request from a thread participant...?, posted by floatingbridge on December 8, 2010, at 16:47:19
> Thank to anyone giving me a brief outline :)
Hey FB..
There's a lot out there... but my understanding is:
1. Bob made a proposal for an Elder's Council that would have the ability to shorten blocks - which would address your (and many others') concern/s about their length. There would be a minimum block length. The blocked poster would be responsible for contacting Council and asking them to vote. The blocks could be released by Council(after the minimum time requirement) with or without conditions (i.e., having posts screened, working with a Civility Buddy, etc.) They would not have to clear their decisions with Bob.
2. Bob wants Council members to be nominated and elected by the community. That has been a sticking point. So far, those who have checked in on it have generally said that they do not want to 'run' for a Council position - it's too political for the taste of many. Competing for votes and the idea of running and not being elected (chosen) have been cited as specific problem. I suggested an alternative (to elections) of the community nominating and Bob 'confirming' could resolve those concerns - but that idea hasn't seemed to generate any interest.
3. Civility Buddies would continue to be and function as they have been - voluntary CB's who are willing to assist those who ask off-forum for assistance in ensuring before submittal that their post doesn't violate civility guidelines, or getting assistance in understanding the guidelines. Dinah has gathered a group of volunteers.
4. Bob has scheduled a 'chat' to discuss the Council Proposal tomorrow at 9:30pm CT.
I think I got that 'bout right :-) If anyone sees something I got wrong - please correct it!
Solstice
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.