Psycho-Babble Administration | about the operation of this site | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Re: poster-initiated boards Dr. Bob

Posted by jane d on February 8, 2004, at 15:12:23

In reply to Re: poster-initiated boards, posted by Dr. Bob on January 18, 2004, at 17:09:35

> Is it better if there are "teams" but they're just not made public?

Yes. But I'll get back to that later.

> Hmm, what about a board expressly for newcomers?

What's wrong with someone saying "I'm new" on a thread on social and having a couple of other people come back with "I'm new too".

> > It's too bad the PB year boards didn't take off for the 2001 group, because that's sort of a way to get people together who have something in common.
> I'm not sure what happened with 2001. Maybe they didn't really feel like a cohort?

Well there was enough group feeling to carry out an unofficial boycott of the board. Perhaps you are right and we just hadn't been around long enough at that time to form into a distinct group but I'd like to think it was because we potential members of the class of 2001 were not that far away from being newcomers ourselves. We remembered being welcomed (well at least allowed in to play) by the original posters and felt a little queasy about slamming the door shut behind us.

> > And, I assume, if a PIB is created, there would be no reason newbies couldn't be added if they have a sponsor or the group votes 'yes.'

For me the question that jumps out at me is why do this under the auspices of babble at all. The truth is groups like this already exist and new ones can be created at will. I belong to one such unofficial group that formed years ago in the chat room of open and then migrated to IM. And I know that some of those people are in touch with other groups whose members are involved with still others and on and on. And if you read enough posts you do see that many people have off board contacts. These are private groups in a way. They aren't totally closed but as with groups of old friends in real life they aren't totally open either. I don't think they are meant to be a secret. In fact I remember that you were once invited to a virtual cup of coffee by one (which you never accepted so far as I know). But they aren't flaunted in anybody's face on babble. It's just not polite to hold conversations in front of other people when they aren't allowed to join in. Private conversations should be held privately. Otherwise it's like going to a party and refusing to speak to half the people there. When something is said at the party (ie babble) then everyone should be allowed to wander by and mingle in. And up to now they have been. It's a very nice party complete with some gracious senior hosts who show up in time to help the socially inept into the conversations until they can fend for themselves. Why wreck that?





Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post

Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.


Start a new thread

Google www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Administration | Framed

poster:jane d thread:300134