![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 26 to 50 of 89. Go back in thread:
Posted by fayeroe on January 31, 2009, at 10:01:13
In reply to Re: Please contact Dr. Bob, posted by SlugSlimersSoSlided on January 31, 2009, at 4:48:07
It is Bob's wishes that we handle Babble ourselves. At least that is how I understand his mumbo-jumbo about not having one deputy for each board. I interpet that to mean that Bob is has washed his hands of us and go on to a place where the grass is greener.
WE have two (2) ? active deputies. I can see how hard that is and how the non-action of Bob adds to their work.I'm going to use the Politics Board as an example because it is where my "homies" hang out. Or is that "homeys"? :-) Anyway, there was a time when I would turn my computer on and go directly to the board. There would be two or three posts and we would all chime in and end up having a great time with one another. Speaking for myself, I knew what I could and couldn't talk about. A PBC was a rare bird on the politics board.
It is a given that we spend most of our time discussing the administration of the United States. 1. Iraq and Afghanistan. 2. Hurricanes. 3. Economy.
Discussing Australia right now is timely. There has been a change in government and Sigismund has been a great source of information from"down under".
We know what is off limits. We don't criticize someone else's country and we don't scream. :-) For the most part, we play peacefully in the international sandbox. We are learning from one another. I love it.
Life (politics board) was good.
We hit a bump in the road a few months back. Personal choices were criticized. Policies of governments were criticized. Naturally, feelings were hurt and tempers flared
No one answered our "button pushing". As I recall this may have gone on about 3 weeks. Good people left Babble. (The heart of the board got smaller.) And yes, I know that I've posted about this before but it works into the board issue again.
Suddenly folks got reined in. Some blocks and several PBCs were issued. It seemed clear to me then that administration knew "what we couldn't do".
Topher made a very good point yesterday concerning freedom to have civil discussions. AT least that is the "gist" of his post. I'm old and I slept last night. Freedom of speech?
Why can we not discuss different issues in politics and remain civil? Except for issues concerning choices, we've always been "civilly successful". :-) Not criticizing someone's choices works on every board here.
As a followup I wanted to know what can we talk about on the politics board. When all hell broke loose over there, administration sure knew what to do. I believe that if it is known by the deputies what we can't do..then it stands to reason that they know what we can do.
No one on politics would respond as a poster did when I started a thread about Buspar.(medications) I was told that Buspar is useless and it is a sugar pill. If I said "the Secretary of State is uselss and wears pantsuits"....That would get a PBC on politics. But I've seen that type posting again and again on the medication board and I just shrugged and went on.
Dinah can't run the site. Bob won't run the site. Poster's can't run the site.
What to do?
Nothing.. but pray that the "big bad wolf" doesn't huff and puff and blow our house down.
Contact Bob.
(1. Politics. (used with a sing. verb)
a. The art or science of government or governing, especially the governing of a political entity, such as a nation, and the administration and control of its internal and external affairs.) Online dictionaryThis is Fayeroe and I approved this message even though I have had only one cup of coffee this morning.
Posted by SLS on January 31, 2009, at 10:38:37
In reply to Please contact Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on January 30, 2009, at 16:57:18
> It's his board. I'm just doing my best to follow his policies.
Are we having fun yet?
:-)
(((((Dinah)))))
You do indeed fill your role well.
Sometimes I feel that you have been given "Mission Impossible". Dr. Bob assigning duties is the tape recorder. "Your mission, should you decide to accept it..." "This tape will self-destruct in 5 seconds." Then Dr. Bob disappears...
- Scott
Posted by Toph on January 31, 2009, at 11:48:32
In reply to Re:comparing » Toph, posted by AuntieMel on January 30, 2009, at 18:24:45
Hi Mel, my point was that the poster was punished not for comparing PEOPLE but invasion decisions. It might be always uncivil to compare someone to Hitler (though I would disagree), but it certainly is not uncivil to compare certain POLICIES of torture, for example.
Toph
Posted by Dinah on January 31, 2009, at 12:02:27
In reply to Re: Please contact Dr. Bob » Dinah, posted by SLS on January 31, 2009, at 10:38:37
Well.... Not so much really. :)
I've made no secret of disliking the evolution of the role of deputy. Dr. Bob prefers to take an off board supervisor role for the most part now, which leaves us in the position he used to occupy. It was a useful position. But I sure don't like to occupy it.
Posted by Dinah on January 31, 2009, at 12:11:41
In reply to Re: Please contact Dr. Bob..., posted by fayeroe on January 31, 2009, at 10:01:13
When the bump in the road was hit a few months back, there was a lot of criticism for the lax supervision of the Politics Board. Deputies had always been unsure of Dr. Bob's polition on Politics Board matters, and had deferred notifications mainly to him. I agreed with poster criticism and committed myself to trying to understand Dr. Bob's wishes and to providing more supervision there.
Dr. Bob has chosen to put limitations on Politics Board posting. Those limitations will be enforced, to the best of my ability, in an evenhanded manner. Supporters of Bush, as one example, are not well represented on the Politics board. However, they will receive the same consideration from Administration as supporters of Obama. This is just one example.
I know Politics board posters are unhappy. I'm not happy either. But if I'm going to administrate there, I'm going to administrate there in a way that I believe to be in accordance with site guidelines.
Posted by Dinah on January 31, 2009, at 12:13:01
In reply to Re: Please contact Dr. Bob » Dinah, posted by SLS on January 31, 2009, at 10:38:37
And I nearly forgot to say the main thing that was in my mind!
Thank you, Scott.
Posted by Sigismund on January 31, 2009, at 14:54:02
In reply to Re: Please contact Dr. Bob..., posted by Dinah on January 31, 2009, at 12:11:41
>I know Politics board posters are unhappy.
Adjectives and adverbs are best avoided anyway.
Posted by fayeroe on January 31, 2009, at 15:30:13
In reply to Re: Please contact Dr. Bob..., posted by Dinah on January 31, 2009, at 12:11:41
Your solution to the "unhappiness" on the Politics Board worked and I can't think of another issue that caused your having to be involved there.
That episode wasn't caused by the regulars on the board. I feel that we're being punished for something that we didn't do.
Has Bob identified anymore "uncivil posts"? It would be nice if he took this off of the deputies and posted directly to the board.
What are the limitations that he has put on the board now? I'm still asking what we can do? We know what we can't do.
Thanks, Pat
Posted by Dinah on January 31, 2009, at 17:21:59
In reply to Re: Please contact Dr. Bob... » Dinah, posted by fayeroe on January 31, 2009, at 15:30:13
Dr. Bob is not going to administer that board and Faith himself. We asked many times. He would like to do it, I think. But in practice he has not had the time resources available to do it. He has, however, made himself available to supervise us, try to train us in his wishes on Politics board matters, etc. And he is also available for poster feedback about deputy decisions. The best way to reach him is by email, I'm afraid.
I've made my own position as clear as I can. Since I agreed to administrate there, I will apply Dr. Bob's civility guidelines to the best of my ability to everyone. I realize that Dr. Bob and I may not always agree on individual interpretations, and it is his board and it is his job to supervise me and inform me if I am not interpreting things the way he would prefer.
I don't feel I'll able to be any more helpful than I've already been on this topic. Perhaps one of the deputies or Dr. Bob could explain things better than I have.
Posted by Dinah on January 31, 2009, at 17:26:14
In reply to Re: Please contact Dr. Bob..., posted by Sigismund on January 31, 2009, at 14:54:02
Good point.
I don't of course *know* that Politics board posters are unhappy.
Posted by Partlycloudy on February 2, 2009, at 15:19:58
In reply to Re: Please contact Dr. Bob... » Sigismund, posted by Dinah on January 31, 2009, at 17:26:14
> Good point.
>
> I don't of course *know* that Politics board posters are unhappy.
>
>I think that the Politics board does not function in a usable manner and won't post on it. I am one of the unhappy ones.
Rose coloured glasses and all that.pc
Posted by Sigismund on February 2, 2009, at 19:38:48
In reply to Re: Please contact Dr. Bob... » Dinah, posted by Partlycloudy on February 2, 2009, at 15:19:58
>I think that the Politics board does not function in a usable manner
With our previous administrations it was easy enough.
All I had to do to make my point clear was to quote them or describe their actions accurately using only nouns and verbs.This is an abnormal way of communicating, of course.
Posted by Sigismund on February 2, 2009, at 19:39:59
In reply to Re: Please contact Dr. Bob... » Partlycloudy, posted by Sigismund on February 2, 2009, at 19:38:48
>using only nouns and verbs.
Well, there would have been a few other parts of speech in there.
Posted by Toph on February 2, 2009, at 23:16:09
In reply to Re: Please contact Dr. Bob... » Sigismund, posted by Sigismund on February 2, 2009, at 19:39:59
> >using only nouns and verbs.
>
> Well, there would have been a few other parts of speech in there.Promised WMDs.
Invaded Iraq.
Killed people.
Tortured People.
Denied rights.
Surveilled citizens.
Lost respect.
Borrowed money.
Ruined economy.
Desired change.
Posted by Deputy 10derHeart on February 3, 2009, at 12:46:36
In reply to Re: Politicspeak » Sigismund, posted by Toph on February 2, 2009, at 23:16:09
> Tortured People.
> Ruined economy.Please respect the views of others (such as supporters of previous administrations) even if you think they are wrong, by not posting things that could lead them to feel put down.
If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civilFollow ups regarding these issues should be directed to Admin, and should of course, be civil. Dr. Bob is always free to override deputy decisions. His email is on the bottom of each page. Please feel free to email him if you believe this decision was made in error.
--10derHeart, acting as deputy for Dr. Bob
Posted by Partlycloudy on February 3, 2009, at 13:33:45
In reply to Please be civil » Toph, posted by Deputy 10derHeart on February 3, 2009, at 12:46:36
This is the core of the problem: expressing an opinion (perhaps even popularly held, given the last election results) versus stating a fact. Nowhere did the poster say that they were stating a fact - it was merely their opinion; and although that works on other boards, it doesn't fly on Politics. There is no room for an individual's opinion - unless it's a positive one.
We might as well call the board Pollyanna Politics. It's not a place for discussion so much as a place for saying, "my sky is blue, what colour is yours?" (and the only possible reply would be, "well my sky is a splendid shade of green. Enjoy your blue sky.")
On the other hand, this is a mental health forum.
Posted by fayeroe on February 3, 2009, at 13:50:52
In reply to Re: Please be civil » Deputy 10derHeart, posted by Partlycloudy on February 3, 2009, at 13:33:45
Posted by SLS on February 3, 2009, at 14:22:13
In reply to Re: Please be civil » Deputy 10derHeart, posted by Partlycloudy on February 3, 2009, at 13:33:45
I pretty much stay away from the politics board because it is the nature of politics to elicit strong passions that are adversarial.
Could it be that the words "ruined" and "tortured" that are the problems? They are judgmental to some degree.
What if one were to say that the GDP declined by xx% during the Bush administration? Or. Water-boarding was a method of intelligence-gathering employed during the Bush administration.
Just curious.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on February 3, 2009, at 14:25:30
In reply to Re: Please be civil, posted by SLS on February 3, 2009, at 14:22:13
I'm sorry. Never mind. I think I'm just looking for trouble.
- Scott
> I pretty much stay away from the politics board because it is the nature of politics to elicit strong passions that are adversarial.
>
> Could it be that the words "ruined" and "tortured" that are the problems? They are judgmental to some degree.
>
> What if one were to say that the GDP declined by xx% during the Bush administration? Or. Water-boarding was a method of intelligence-gathering employed during the Bush administration.
>
> Just curious.
>
>
> - Scott
Posted by Toph on February 3, 2009, at 14:29:31
In reply to Please be civil » Toph, posted by Deputy 10derHeart on February 3, 2009, at 12:46:36
I apologize PC to supporters of torture and recession that I may have offended.
I was testing Sig's comment, but evidently using only nouns, verbs and facts does not prevent uncivil observations here.
It is interesting to me how stringing a few nouns and verbs together can be so unequivicably identifying as to which administration I may have been referring.
Posted by Deputy 10derHeart on February 3, 2009, at 19:12:35
In reply to Re: Please be civil » Deputy 10derHeart, posted by Partlycloudy on February 3, 2009, at 13:33:45
>- it was merely their opinion; and although that works on other boards, it doesn't fly on Politics. There is no room for an individual's opinion - unless it's a positive one.
I don't see that difference. I'm unsure how that "works on other boards." It's never been civil to state negative opinions *or* facts, if stating either could lead others to feel accused or put down, or be insensitive to others' feelings, as other posters may support, love, employ, utilize, champion, give money to, work for or with, have voted for (and so on) the person, group, idea, etc. posted about.
For example, it's uncivil to post, let's say on Psychology, "In my opinion, psychodynamic psychotherapy is stupid and a waste of time and money. Why do you people allow these quacks to torture you?" Or to post - on any board - "In my opinion, organized religion, especially [insert your group of choice], is dangerous, ruins minds and threatens freedom in our time." Writers of such posts may see their own statements as facts OR opinions - but it doesn't matter re: civility.
I am trying to see where others see the difference, so we might have more understanding and a productive discussion here. It's really hard for me, and that's frustrating. Considering how passionately people do feel about political views, candidates and ideologies, it seems standing by the civility guidelines there is particularly vital to Dr. Bob's wish for support and education in the whole community. It *is* difficult to balance civility and free speech - no doubt about that, but I don't think impossible.
Of course, if the objection is that civility *should* be different (more relaxed?) on the Politics Board, that some here would prefer that, that's another thing entirely.
Posted by Deputy 10derHeart on February 3, 2009, at 19:16:40
In reply to Re: Please be civil, posted by SLS on February 3, 2009, at 14:22:13
> I pretty much stay away from the politics board because it is the nature of politics to elicit strong passions that are adversarial.
Yes, I understand that. I wish it could be different, but....
> Could it be that the words "ruined" and "tortured" that are the problems? They are judgmental to some degree.
That's how I read those statements, yes.
>
> What if one were to say that the GDP declined by xx% during the Bush administration? Or. Water-boarding was a method of intelligence-gathering employed during the Bush administration.Those both sound fine to me.
> Just curious.I'm glad. And I wish you weren't sorry - you expressed the concept better than my long-winded blatherings ever do.
Posted by Deputy 10derHeart on February 3, 2009, at 19:34:39
In reply to Who was he talking about? (nm), posted by fayeroe on February 3, 2009, at 13:50:52
Well, the best thing to do is to ask Toph, for sure.
(Toph, I'm sorry to be talking about you as if you're not here - I hate that - but I did want to find a way to answer Pat's question. Please feel free to straighten me out on anything I've assumed incorrectly, etc.)
I thought it was reasonable to see Toph's post as a response to Sigismund's comments on "previous administrations," as part of that post was quoted at the start.
Most of the list of phrases posted are commonly associated with negative descriptions of the administration, or policies, of former President G.W. Bush. When I asked that those sort of comments not be posted, posters who supported him and his administration, as well as *any* other administrations before Preident Obama's, are the individuals I was thinking could feel put down.
Reasonable people can disagree and misinterpret, and that includes deputies. But, as Dinah has posted recently, we are trying to administrate regarding Politics-related posts as evenhandedly as possible, in accordance with Dr. Bob's wishes, and with an eye toward support and education.
Posted by Deputy 10derHeart on February 3, 2009, at 19:55:14
In reply to Re: Please be civil » Deputy 10derHeart, posted by Toph on February 3, 2009, at 14:29:31
> It is interesting to me how stringing a few nouns and verbs together can be so unequivicably identifying as to which administration I may have been referring.
It doesn't matter which administration you meant. I don't think I specified in my post...? I can't be 100% *sure* unless you specifically say, but that could be uncivil so I'm not recommending posting that! If another poster had mentioned (or begun a thought) "With this new (current) administration..." and you or anyone responded with similar negative phrases (perhaps in the future tense) - that would also be uncivil.
The focus of my request to be civil was avoiding negative characterizations about any administrations - to increase respect and sensitivity for differing views. That's all.
Of course, I know I am likely completely missing your point :-)
-- 10der
Posted by Toph on February 3, 2009, at 22:00:41
In reply to which administration(s) » Toph, posted by Deputy 10derHeart on February 3, 2009, at 19:55:14
I was merely trying to experiment with Sig's suggested style.
> Tortured People.
> Ruined economy.
I should have said...
Tortured Mohammed al-Qahtani.*
Oversaw collapse.*according to senior US official Susan Crawford
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.