![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 96 to 120 of 225. Go back in thread:
Posted by SLS on July 13, 2013, at 15:45:22
In reply to Re: the big picture, posted by Twinleaf on July 13, 2013, at 15:24:43
> I either solve the stressful aspects or, if I am unable to do that, I eliminate it from my life. Much as I love and appreciate Babble, I will do the same here if the board continues to be unmoderated.
I would be very, very unhappy were this to occur.
I hold you in high esteem, and always look forward to reading your posts. You are a great asset to the Psycho-Babble community. You are a great resource for me personally.
Community. What a nice word. I guess there will always be people posting on these boards, but the sense of community may suffer for your absence, nevertheless.
- Scott
Posted by gardenergirl on July 13, 2013, at 17:58:35
In reply to Re: The big picture » Lou PIlder, posted by SLS on July 13, 2013, at 14:42:01
Where's the retweet button? I would so retweet this. :)
>
> Is it your accusation that because your notifications to the administrator of this tiny website are to be left outstanding, infanticide, genocide, slavery, segregation, and discrimination will result?
>
> What is it that Dr. Bob is doing to promote genocide?
>
> Scapegoat?
>
> I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting antisemitism would be in the community's best interests. I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting infanticide would be in the community's best interests. I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting genocide would be in the community's best interests. I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting slavery would be in the community's best interests. I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting segregation would be in the community's best interests. I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting discrimination would be in the community's best interests.
>
>
> - Scott
Posted by Twinleaf on July 13, 2013, at 19:19:56
In reply to Re: the big picture » Twinleaf, posted by SLS on July 13, 2013, at 15:45:22
Oh, thank you, Scott - you are such a sweetheart! I feel the same way about you, and always read your posts with interest and appreciation. In my imagination, I think of you finally finding the complete treatment you need ( perhaps a form of deep tmi), and telling us that you are working and having a satisfying personal life. I don't know why exactly, but I feel very certain that you will find the way.
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 16, 2013, at 12:54:04
In reply to Re: The big picture, posted by gardenergirl on July 13, 2013, at 17:58:35
> If Lou can compare your statements in a post to those outrageous, horrible things and instead of being reminded this is (**was** now, obviously) a civil place, you engage in more philosophizing and other ^&%$%, just imagine what Lou will feel free to say to me and other ordinary posters.
>
> Pressure? Is it pressure when I ask the police to ticket people driving fast down a densely populated cul-de-sac where many children play, because they may hit someone? Harm, maim, or worse?
>
> It is not okay, for me, that you elect abdication.
>
> 10derheartYou're not a child. You could elect not to be hit. If you feel hurt reading what someone writes, you could stop reading what they write. What if you and Phillipa tried to help each other do that?
--
> > You see, the argument that it {will be} good for the community as a whole is the same argument to justify infanticide...
>
> Is it your accusation that because your notifications to the administrator of this tiny website are to be left outstanding, infanticide, genocide, slavery, segregation, and discrimination will result?
>
> - ScottThat's a good point. Is there evidence of infanticide, genocide, slavery, segregation, discrimination -- or maiming -- here now? Or anxiety that there will be in the future?
--
> You say you are willing to moderate. But not really. Not really.
>
> 10derheart> Respectfully, Dr.Bob, if you say you are going to moderate, then our community does expect you to do so, in whatever way currently seems best to you.
>
> TwinleafI'm moderating in the sense of "presiding over". When I'm notified of posts, I'm enforcing existing rules and responding either on the board or to the posters who notified me. One exception is that I think right now it may be good for this community as a whole, and for me, to leave some of Lou's notifications outstanding.
I'm also moderating in the sense of "lessening the intensity or extremeness of".
--
> Where's the retweet button? I would so retweet this. :)
>
> gardenergirlI'm glad you brought that up. :-)
3/4 of the posters on this thread have elected to disable the Facebook and Twitter buttons. I see that as voting to limit the visibility of Babble. Maybe I understand that better now. If Babble is a tiny cul-de-sac, then it may be more like a refuge.
Bob
Posted by Dinah on July 16, 2013, at 21:41:38
In reply to Re: a refuge, posted by Dr. Bob on July 16, 2013, at 12:54:04
> You're not a child. You could elect not to be hit. If you feel hurt reading what someone writes, you could stop reading what they write. What if you and Phillipa tried to help each other do that?
OMG
I'd better the h*ll quit reading *your* posts.
Posted by 10derheart on July 16, 2013, at 21:45:37
In reply to Re: a refuge, posted by Dr. Bob on July 16, 2013, at 12:54:04
>>When I'm notified of posts, I'm enforcing existing rules
Not true. Twist it, turn in anyway you like, I'm not wrong. You are allowing posts that could lead others to feel accused or put down, routinely, especially if Lou is the author.
And telling me I'm not a child.... {ugh} You utterly missed the point - on purpose, perhaps.
You know, Dr. Bob, I'm thinking this is just one big joke to you, where you eagerly await another post so you can play semantic gymnastics with it. I could have picked **any** example of boundaries that are akin to violations of traffic laws, which as I said, and will say for the final time here, are precisely the same analogies you used to use to challenge those who did not understand the need for civility rules.
In fact, if you are following the rules, you will enforce the rules on this post since I am not trying to be civil and have certainly accused you of negative things.
I'll be sure it gets reported.
Posted by 10derheart on July 16, 2013, at 21:50:48
In reply to Re: a refuge » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on July 16, 2013, at 21:41:38
Gosh, how much more I **love** your response to him than my namby pamby one.
Succinct, authentic and right to the heart of the matter.
Why I bother with any manner of communication, I'll never know...
Posted by 10derheart on July 16, 2013, at 22:01:23
In reply to Re: a refuge, posted by Dr. Bob on July 16, 2013, at 12:54:04
>>If Babble is a tiny cul-de-sac
Stop it. That is not what I meant and you know it.
Posted by gardenergirl on July 16, 2013, at 22:17:29
In reply to Re: a refuge » Dinah, posted by 10derheart on July 16, 2013, at 21:50:48
I had a similar response, but didn't muster up a reply, because I don't really feel like I have a dog in this fight anymore. Except that I get mad when people I love and respect are hurt.
Standing with you.
Posted by gardenergirl on July 16, 2013, at 22:31:16
In reply to Re: a refuge, posted by Dr. Bob on July 16, 2013, at 12:54:04
It was a metaphor. I guess I could have just reposted Scott's words with a smiley emoticon. But I would never conflate my Facebook and Babble identities. Nor would I create a fake Facebook identity, against their site guidelines, to promote this site.
Sigh, it's not a vote to limit the visibility of Babble, it's a vote NOT TO COMPROMISE MY PRIVACY. I am stunned that anyone would endorse that. And promoting your site, the one you have left to languish, is neither my job nor hobby.
> > Where's the retweet button? I would so retweet this. :)
> >
> > gardenergirl
>
> I'm glad you brought that up. :-)
>
> 3/4 of the posters on this thread have elected to disable the Facebook and Twitter buttons. I see that as voting to limit the visibility of Babble. Maybe I understand that better now. If Babble is a tiny cul-de-sac, then it may be more like a refuge.
>
> Bob
Posted by SLS on July 16, 2013, at 22:45:11
In reply to Re: a refuge » Dr. Bob, posted by gardenergirl on July 16, 2013, at 22:31:16
I'm very sad right now.
- Scott
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 16, 2013, at 23:00:32
In reply to Re: a refuge )Dinah » 10derheart, posted by gardenergirl on July 16, 2013, at 22:17:29
> Not true. Twist it, turn in anyway you like, I'm not wrong.
>
> You know, Dr. Bob, I'm thinking this is just one big joke to you, where you eagerly await another post so you can play semantic gymnastics with it. I could have picked **any** example of boundaries that are akin to violations of traffic laws, which as I said, and will say for the final time here, are precisely the same analogies you used to use to challenge those who did not understand the need for civility rules.That was the old model. Posters depended on the administration to use its power to define and enforce boundaries to make this a refuge.
> OMG
>
> I'd better the h*ll quit reading *your* posts.
>
> Dinah> Gosh, how much more I **love** your response to him than my namby pamby one.
>
> Succinct, authentic and right to the heart of the matter.
>
> Why I bother with any manner of communication, I'll never know...
>
> 10derheart> I had a similar response, but didn't muster up a reply, because I don't really feel like I have a dog in this fight anymore. Except that I get mad when people I love and respect are hurt.
>
> Standing with you.
>
> gardenergirlAnd that's the new model. Sometimes problems can't be made to go away, but posters can support each other, learn ways to cope, and find the energy to persevere.
You guys are still a good team. :-)
Bob
Posted by Dinah on July 16, 2013, at 23:26:29
In reply to Re: a refuge, posted by Dr. Bob on July 16, 2013, at 23:00:32
Posted by Phillipa on July 16, 2013, at 23:37:56
In reply to Re: a refuge, posted by Dr. Bob on July 16, 2013, at 23:00:32
Dr Bob I don't feel it's you posting these posts the language isn't the same. Stolen identity? Something doesn't smell right. Phillipa
Posted by 10derheart on July 17, 2013, at 1:15:41
In reply to Re: a refuge, posted by Phillipa on July 16, 2013, at 23:37:56
...trust me. I can tell by my flashbacks :-(
The irony is that supposedly something's a "new model" here when in reality it's the same old, same old...
To hell with it.
Posted by 10derheart on July 17, 2013, at 1:18:26
In reply to **** *** (nm) » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on July 16, 2013, at 23:26:29
Posted by SLS on July 17, 2013, at 7:02:21
In reply to **** *** (nm) » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on July 16, 2013, at 23:26:29
I can hardly believe that it has come to this.
:-(
I wish I could wake up to a different reality.
Who's smiling now?
- Scott
Posted by Twinleaf on July 17, 2013, at 10:01:37
In reply to Re: a refuge, posted by Dr. Bob on July 16, 2013, at 23:00:32
It is extremely painful and distressing to read these exchanges. In my view, you are doing two things which are enraging and infuriating everyone. The first is that you do not acknowledge everyone's concerns over Lou's breaking of the civility rules. The second is that you do not appear to respect and understand what posters are trying to communicate to you. You almost invariably change the meaning into something else - something that suits your own purposes but which ruins any attempts at real communication. This is especially striking with your former deputies; they are very understandably frustrated and enraged by your doing this to them repeatedly.
No-one is saying that you have to agree with a particular view , just that there are posters still trying to communicate honestly with you, and I do not see in your replies any respect or acknowledgement of their views. It's as if you were "wiping them out" as human beings every time. Your answers to them make ME furious even though I am not part of all the exchanges.
We do expect an administrator with good communication skills - one who can understand a wide range of views and who can treat the members of the community with respect and understanding. The most painful aspect of all this is that we are finding out that we may not have an administrator who possesses those understandings or skills. If you could demonstrate them to us, it would go a long way towards easing the anger and stress we have now.
Posted by Moishe Pipik on July 18, 2013, at 16:01:50
In reply to Re: a refuge(e) board, posted by Dr. Bob on July 4, 2013, at 18:09:15
LMFAO
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 20, 2013, at 3:17:51
In reply to Re: a refuge » Dr. Bob, posted by Twinleaf on July 17, 2013, at 10:01:37
> It is extremely painful and distressing to read these exchanges. In my view, you are doing two things which are enraging and infuriating everyone. The first is that you do not acknowledge everyone's concerns over Lou's breaking of the civility rules. The second is that you do not appear to respect and understand what posters are trying to communicate to you.
What I hear some posters saying is that:
1a. Lou isn't being civil.
1b. Which is driving posters away from Babble, and from treatment, both of which might help them.
2. So I should enforce the civility rules.
I value civility and agree that both Babble and treatment can help people.
How was that?
Bob
Posted by Twinleaf on July 20, 2013, at 6:40:21
In reply to Re: a refuge, posted by Dr. Bob on July 20, 2013, at 3:17:51
That seems just fine. You are respectfully acknowledging our views. As to the further step of giving Lou PBCs or even a short block, I can support you doing that intermittently, as the volume and repetitiveness of doing it every time would be overwhelming.
Just be thing further - could you use that simple, respectful acknowledgement in your communications on other topics, especially with your former deputies?
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 23, 2013, at 20:38:00
In reply to Re: a refuge » Dr. Bob, posted by Twinleaf on July 20, 2013, at 6:40:21
> could you use that simple, respectful acknowledgement in your communications on other topics, especially with your former deputies?
I try to be open to suggestions. I'm glad you were able to be clear and direct about what you wanted.
Bob
Posted by 10derheart on July 24, 2013, at 1:12:06
In reply to Re: a refuge, posted by Dr. Bob on July 23, 2013, at 20:38:00
Translation: No.
Thanks, Twinleaf, for your efforts. But sometimes spit and wind and brick walls are reality...
Posted by Lou Pilder on August 3, 2013, at 8:25:24
In reply to Re: a refuge, posted by Dr. Bob on July 16, 2013, at 12:54:04
> > If Lou can compare your statements in a post to those outrageous, horrible things and instead of being reminded this is (**was** now, obviously) a civil place, you engage in more philosophizing and other ^&%$%, just imagine what Lou will feel free to say to me and other ordinary posters.
> >
> > Pressure? Is it pressure when I ask the police to ticket people driving fast down a densely populated cul-de-sac where many children play, because they may hit someone? Harm, maim, or worse?
> >
> > It is not okay, for me, that you elect abdication.
> >
> > 10derheart
>
> You're not a child. You could elect not to be hit. If you feel hurt reading what someone writes, you could stop reading what they write. What if you and Phillipa tried to help each other do that?
>
> --
>
> > > You see, the argument that it {will be} good for the community as a whole is the same argument to justify infanticide...
> >
> > Is it your accusation that because your notifications to the administrator of this tiny website are to be left outstanding, infanticide, genocide, slavery, segregation, and discrimination will result?
> >
> > - Scott
>
> That's a good point. Is there evidence of infanticide, genocide, slavery, segregation, discrimination -- or maiming -- here now? Or anxiety that there will be in the future?
>
> --
>
> > You say you are willing to moderate. But not really. Not really.
> >
> > 10derheart
>
> > Respectfully, Dr.Bob, if you say you are going to moderate, then our community does expect you to do so, in whatever way currently seems best to you.
> >
> > Twinleaf
>
> I'm moderating in the sense of "presiding over". When I'm notified of posts, I'm enforcing existing rules and responding either on the board or to the posters who notified me. One exception is that I think right now it may be good for this community as a whole, and for me, to leave some of Lou's notifications outstanding.
>
> I'm also moderating in the sense of "lessening the intensity or extremeness of".
>
> --
>
> > Where's the retweet button? I would so retweet this. :)
> >
> > gardenergirl
>
> I'm glad you brought that up. :-)
>
> 3/4 of the posters on this thread have elected to disable the Facebook and Twitter buttons. I see that as voting to limit the visibility of Babble. Maybe I understand that better now. If Babble is a tiny cul-de-sac, then it may be more like a refuge.
>
> BobMr Hsiung,
In reading what you have posted here, I see:
A.[...is there evidence of discrimination...?]
This is in the line that starts with,[That's a good point]
B.[...When I am notified of posts I'm enforcing existing rules and responding either on the board or to the posters that notified me...]
C. [... One exception is that I think right now it may be good for this community as a whole, and for me, to leave some of Lou's notifications outstanding...].
This brings up the following concerns that I have in regards to what you have posted here about me. If you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly. In a previous post by you in this thread, you stated that discrimination along with genocide and such is an {abuse of power}.
A. If by you leaving some of my notifications outstanding, does that or does that not constitute discrimination by you in your moderation here? If not, why not?
B. If the leaving of any of my notifications outstanding is discrimination by you here, is that then an abuse of power by you?
C. If you claim that you are doing what will be good for this community as a whole and for yourself to leave some of my notification outstanding, then does that in your thinking override an {abuse of power}, if you agree that by you doing that discrimination results?
D. Then if you agree that you can discriminate, if you agree that by leaving some of my notifications outstanding constitutes discrimination, which you state is an abuse of power, on the basis that the discrimination will be good for this community as a whole and for you, then in your thinking could not a state commit genocide if they claim that by doing so their state will be better, or good for their state as a whole, or even for the leader? And would that also go for infanticide, slavery, segregation and such in your thinking?
E. What "good" will come to this community or to you by you leaving some of my notifications outstanding?
Lou Pilder
Posted by Lou Pilder on August 17, 2013, at 10:09:21
In reply to Lou's request to Mr Hsiung-discrim » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on August 3, 2013, at 8:25:24
> > > If Lou can compare your statements in a post to those outrageous, horrible things and instead of being reminded this is (**was** now, obviously) a civil place, you engage in more philosophizing and other ^&%$%, just imagine what Lou will feel free to say to me and other ordinary posters.
> > >
> > > Pressure? Is it pressure when I ask the police to ticket people driving fast down a densely populated cul-de-sac where many children play, because they may hit someone? Harm, maim, or worse?
> > >
> > > It is not okay, for me, that you elect abdication.
> > >
> > > 10derheart
> >
> > You're not a child. You could elect not to be hit. If you feel hurt reading what someone writes, you could stop reading what they write. What if you and Phillipa tried to help each other do that?
> >
> > --
> >
> > > > You see, the argument that it {will be} good for the community as a whole is the same argument to justify infanticide...
> > >
> > > Is it your accusation that because your notifications to the administrator of this tiny website are to be left outstanding, infanticide, genocide, slavery, segregation, and discrimination will result?
> > >
> > > - Scott
> >
> > That's a good point. Is there evidence of infanticide, genocide, slavery, segregation, discrimination -- or maiming -- here now? Or anxiety that there will be in the future?
> >
> > --
> >
> > > You say you are willing to moderate. But not really. Not really.
> > >
> > > 10derheart
> >
> > > Respectfully, Dr.Bob, if you say you are going to moderate, then our community does expect you to do so, in whatever way currently seems best to you.
> > >
> > > Twinleaf
> >
> > I'm moderating in the sense of "presiding over". When I'm notified of posts, I'm enforcing existing rules and responding either on the board or to the posters who notified me. One exception is that I think right now it may be good for this community as a whole, and for me, to leave some of Lou's notifications outstanding.
> >
> > I'm also moderating in the sense of "lessening the intensity or extremeness of".
> >
> > --
> >
> > > Where's the retweet button? I would so retweet this. :)
> > >
> > > gardenergirl
> >
> > I'm glad you brought that up. :-)
> >
> > 3/4 of the posters on this thread have elected to disable the Facebook and Twitter buttons. I see that as voting to limit the visibility of Babble. Maybe I understand that better now. If Babble is a tiny cul-de-sac, then it may be more like a refuge.
> >
> > Bob
>
> Mr Hsiung,
> In reading what you have posted here, I see:
> A.[...is there evidence of discrimination...?]
> This is in the line that starts with,[That's a good point]
> B.[...When I am notified of posts I'm enforcing existing rules and responding either on the board or to the posters that notified me...]
> C. [... One exception is that I think right now it may be good for this community as a whole, and for me, to leave some of Lou's notifications outstanding...].
> This brings up the following concerns that I have in regards to what you have posted here about me. If you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly. In a previous post by you in this thread, you stated that discrimination along with genocide and such is an {abuse of power}.
> A. If by you leaving some of my notifications outstanding, does that or does that not constitute discrimination by you in your moderation here? If not, why not?
> B. If the leaving of any of my notifications outstanding is discrimination by you here, is that then an abuse of power by you?
> C. If you claim that you are doing what will be good for this community as a whole and for yourself to leave some of my notification outstanding, then does that in your thinking override an {abuse of power}, if you agree that by you doing that discrimination results?
> D. Then if you agree that you can discriminate, if you agree that by leaving some of my notifications outstanding constitutes discrimination, which you state is an abuse of power, on the basis that the discrimination will be good for this community as a whole and for you, then in your thinking could not a state commit genocide if they claim that by doing so their state will be better, or good for their state as a whole, or even for the leader? And would that also go for infanticide, slavery, segregation and such in your thinking?
> E. What "good" will come to this community or to you by you leaving some of my notifications outstanding?
> Lou PilderMr Hsiung,
Now you say that you will have a community that has a procedure for members to follow that alerts you to what a member using the notification procedure could consider a harmful statement and you say that you will attend to those according to your terms of service here. But then you stipulate that there could be alerts to you by me and that you have the option of attending to those alerts by me to you or not, which members here do not have what type of alerts that you are saying that you have the option to attend to them or not. You agree that this has historical parallels including slavery, genocide, discrimination, segregation, infanticide and such being an abuse of power and resulting in millions of deaths.
My overriding concern here now is that I am awaiting your reply to requests by me in this thread that could clarify what your thinking here is about your "exception" in relation to you giving yourself the option of attending to my notifications to you or not, which I consider to be included in the generally accepted meaning of discrimination. This option that you give yourself, IMHHHHHO, could cause the deaths of members and readers here. This is all because I have already told you that hate could be promulgated here if it is thought to be supportive and readers could think that what is allowed to stand is supportive by the nature that you state that support takes precedence and one match could start a forest fire. The fire of hate could spread way beyond this forum and I agree with you that the fire should not be given any time to spread and be acted on without waiting, and you do say that you do not wait.
The ability of members to see through what you are doing here, by you giving yourself the option of treating my notifications differently than other members here, varies in a wide range of individual differences. Some may think that you are justified in treating my notifications differently on the basis that they trust you in that it will be good for you and/or the community as a whole for you to do so. But if deaths happen as a result of your policy to treat my notifications differently, how could that be good for you or this community as a whole, if the phrase, "will be good for this community as a whole" is not understood by some members as to the historical parallels that have shown that discrimination, if you agree that what you are allowing yourself to do in relation to my notifications constitutes discrimination, was not good for communities as a whole?
And could not I become a victim of violence if you treat my notifications differently and leave (redacted by respondent) to me to stand so that there could be some readers swayed to think that you are doing what will be good for you and/or the community as a whole, and that overrides what is wrong to be right? You see, when you use the ancient thinking that there is no right or wrong, but only what will be good for the community as a whole, then that type of ancient thinking justified in the minds of those that committed infanticide, genocide, slavery, discrimination and such to be allowed, for they made the people think that had their children murdered that they were doing good by allowing their child to have their life taken by the state. But what if later the state was conquered and then what happened to those that claimed that they were doing good? The parents now see that the deaths of their child did not pay off, as the leader claimed. They gambled with the lives of the the children and lost. I do not want you to gamble with my life, my friend. I do not want you to have the option to treat my notifications to you differently than other members here. I do not want to be a victim of violence and hate that has the potential, IMHHHHO, to be promulgated here by you by you making the provision in your terms of service for you to discriminate against me here by not responding to my notifications to you as you say you will do to the other members here. I do not want to be stigmatized by you as IMHHHHHHHHO stigmatization could occur to me as a result of having a what I consider to be a discriminatory policy that the effects from such a policy could IMO extend way beyond this forum. I do not want others to think that I am being used as a scapegoat by you or anyone else for their real or imagined concerns, for your policy that allows you the option to not respond to notifications by me to you could have the potential IMO for some readers to see that, for another poster here posted to that concern.
Be advised that by members seeing years of outstanding notifications/requests from me to you remain outstanding, that they could have the potential to see what is the content that you are meaning to be allowed to stand by the nature that those are the ones that you could be choosing to stand by not responding to my notifications to you. And that could lead to IMO the justifying of hate in the minds of some readers here, for you state that there are even readers that are less-confident people and so could there not be readers that have minds that could be swayed to entertain hatred toward me, and hatred toward the Jews by the nature that statements that promote hatred toward the Jews are allowed to stand here by you? If not, why not?
You prevent me from educating readers here about how hate historically has been promulgated by the state. That prohibition, IMHHHHHHHHO, could lead to the readers here thinking that they can justify hate if it will be good for them, for you say that by you not responding to some of m notifications it could be good for you. I say that as I see the historical record, it shows otherwise.
Lou Pilder
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.