![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 36. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by jerrympls on March 13, 2005, at 14:59:14
In reply to Re: blocked for week » zuzu80, posted by Dr. Bob on March 12, 2005, at 14:55:33
> > You idiot.
>
> Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down. I've asked you to be civil before, so I'm going to block you from posting for a week now.
>
> 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#civil
>
> Follow-ups regarding these issues should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Administration. They, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
>
> Thanks,
>
> BobDr Bob - this extremely offensive post one bought the poster a week? With all due respect - Chemist was banned for 8 weeks for a much much much less offensive (if that) post. I'm unclear as to why you give some people a week sentence and some 2 months. Where can I find more info abou this??
Many thanks!
Jerry :-)
Posted by alexandra_k on March 13, 2005, at 14:59:14
In reply to Re: blocked for week » Dr. Bob, posted by jerrympls on March 13, 2005, at 1:18:36
> Dr Bob - this extremely offensive post one bought the poster a week? With all due respect - Chemist was banned for 8 weeks for a much much much less offensive (if that) post. I'm unclear as to why you give some people a week sentence and some 2 months. Where can I find more info abou this??
From the FAQ:
>If I see a problem with something someone posts, I usually try to explain what it is I see as the problem. If it's the first time for them, I usually just ask them please to be more careful. If I've already done that, I may block them from posting for a period of time. How long? Usually I start with a week and double it each subsequent time. If the post is uncivil toward a particular individual or group, I may triple it instead.
So there is a 2X system for some infractions...
And a 3X system for infractions toward other posters. That can compound for subsequent infractions so you get 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64 weeks etc (on the 2X system)Currently the upper limit on the length of blocks is 12 months.
If you think either of these policies is too harsh (either the 2X / 3X system or the cap on 12 months) then please join in the discussion over on admin.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050219/msgs/470440.html
You will need to go back to a bit earlier in the thread to be able to follow it...
I have suggested the 2X / 3X system be replaced by a 1 / 2 system. And / or that the length of blocks be capped at somewhere between 8-12 weeks.
Have a nice day :-)
Posted by alexandra_k on March 13, 2005, at 14:59:14
In reply to Re: blocking system » jerrympls, posted by alexandra_k on March 13, 2005, at 13:08:44
Posted by KaraS on March 13, 2005, at 14:59:14
In reply to Re: blocking system » jerrympls, posted by alexandra_k on March 13, 2005, at 13:08:44
> > Dr Bob - this extremely offensive post one bought the poster a week? With all due respect - Chemist was banned for 8 weeks for a much much much less offensive (if that) post. I'm unclear as to why you give some people a week sentence and some 2 months. Where can I find more info abou this??
>
> From the FAQ:
>
> >If I see a problem with something someone posts, I usually try to explain what it is I see as the problem. If it's the first time for them, I usually just ask them please to be more careful. If I've already done that, I may block them from posting for a period of time. How long? Usually I start with a week and double it each subsequent time. If the post is uncivil toward a particular individual or group, I may triple it instead.
>
> So there is a 2X system for some infractions...
> And a 3X system for infractions toward other posters. That can compound for subsequent infractions so you get 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64 weeks etc (on the 2X system)
>
> Currently the upper limit on the length of blocks is 12 months.
>
> If you think either of these policies is too harsh (either the 2X / 3X system or the cap on 12 months) then please join in the discussion over on admin.
>
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050219/msgs/470440.html
>
> You will need to go back to a bit earlier in the thread to be able to follow it...
>
> I have suggested the 2X / 3X system be replaced by a 1 / 2 system. And / or that the length of blocks be capped at somewhere between 8-12 weeks.
>
> Have a nice day :-)
I don't know why Dr. Bob didn't take the opportunity in this case to double or triple the 1 week first block for this particular poster. That post was the most vicious and cruel (and completely unprovoked) attack I've ever seen here at Babble.
Posted by alexandra_k on March 13, 2005, at 15:00:16
In reply to Re: blocking system » alexandra_k, posted by KaraS on March 13, 2005, at 14:29:24
> I don't know why Dr. Bob didn't take the opportunity in this case to double or triple the 1 week first block for this particular poster. That post was the most vicious and cruel (and completely unprovoked) attack I've ever seen here at Babble.
First blocks are for 1 week.
Second blocks are either for 2 weeks or 3 weeks depending on whether they are aimed at another poster / group of posters or not.
It isn't till the second block that the 2X or 3X system kicks in.PS. I'd maybe be a bit careful about calling it a 'vicious and cruel... attack'. Remember responses to that post must themselves be civil...
Posted by alexandra_k on March 13, 2005, at 15:06:00
In reply to Re: blocking system » jerrympls, posted by alexandra_k on March 13, 2005, at 13:08:44
Posted by gardenergirl on March 13, 2005, at 15:43:21
In reply to Re: blocking system » alexandra_k, posted by KaraS on March 13, 2005, at 14:29:24
eeks, now that I read the whole post, I see what y'all mean.
gg
Posted by alexandra_k on March 13, 2005, at 16:42:54
In reply to Re: blocking system » KaraS, posted by gardenergirl on March 13, 2005, at 15:43:21
Posted by KaraS on March 13, 2005, at 19:04:18
In reply to Re: blocking system » KaraS, posted by alexandra_k on March 13, 2005, at 15:00:16
> > I don't know why Dr. Bob didn't take the opportunity in this case to double or triple the 1 week first block for this particular poster. That post was the most vicious and cruel (and completely unprovoked) attack I've ever seen here at Babble.
>
> First blocks are for 1 week.
> Second blocks are either for 2 weeks or 3 weeks depending on whether they are aimed at another poster / group of posters or not.
> It isn't till the second block that the 2X or 3X system kicks in.
>
> PS. I'd maybe be a bit careful about calling it a 'vicious and cruel... attack'. Remember responses to that post must themselves be civil...
Thanks Alex,
I considered the wording when I posted that message. I could think of no other way to convey the extent of my reaction to that upsetting post. I think this is another case where flexibility in the rules is needed. One week is not enough here!!!
OTOH, when blocks are automatically doubled and tripled for what seems to me are minor offenses (certainly relative to this post we've been discussing), it just doesn't make any sense. From what I've read here lately, Dr. Bob has been more flexible in these kinds of situations lately. That's definitely a good thing. Now I think that we need some flexibility on the other end.
Kara
Posted by alexandra_k on March 13, 2005, at 19:28:53
In reply to Re: blocking system » alexandra_k, posted by KaraS on March 13, 2005, at 19:04:18
>I think this is another case where flexibility in the rules is needed. One week is not enough here!!!
Yeah. I tend to agree. I thought it might be considred 'grossly offensive' in which case a more severe block may be warranted.
> OTOH, when blocks are automatically doubled and tripled for what seems to me are minor offenses (certainly relative to this post we've been discussing), it just doesn't make any sense.I think the idea is that people should come to learn the rules and what is and is not acceptable. Repeated infractions compound the consequences because they weren't severe enough to result in them having learned better.
>From what I've read here lately, Dr. Bob has been more flexible in these kinds of situations lately. That's definitely a good thing. Now I think that we need some flexibility on the other end.
Yup. I tend to agree...
However I would still like the block length changed. And IMO that would make the most sense in conjunction with the +1 or +2 system. Posts that are considered 'grossly offensive' could be dealt with differently...
Posted by 10derHeart on March 14, 2005, at 19:53:24
In reply to Re: doesn't that count as 'grossly offensive'?? (nm), posted by alexandra_k on March 13, 2005, at 16:42:54
Yes, I thought so. I can't really describe my feelings when I read that post.
Sickened and sad would be a start... yuk.
Posted by AMD on March 23, 2005, at 17:02:25
In reply to Re: sorry - +1 / +2 (week) system :-) (nm), posted by alexandra_k on March 13, 2005, at 15:06:00
Why was chemist blocked??
Posted by TofuEmmy on March 23, 2005, at 21:44:18
In reply to Re: sorry - +1 / +2 (week) system :-), posted by AMD on March 23, 2005, at 17:02:25
Chemist is not currently blocked. He's just not posting. I believe he is hibernating. Perhaps we'll see him poke his nose up in the spring. Hide the salmon.
em
Posted by AuntieMel on March 25, 2005, at 9:12:05
In reply to Re: sorry - +1 / +2 (week) system :-) » AMD, posted by TofuEmmy on March 23, 2005, at 21:44:18
Posted by chemist on March 28, 2005, at 12:16:36
In reply to Re: sorry - +1 / +2 (week) system :-) » AMD, posted by TofuEmmy on March 23, 2005, at 21:44:18
> Chemist is not currently blocked. He's just not posting. I believe he is hibernating. Perhaps we'll see him poke his nose up in the spring. Hide the salmon.
>
> emhello there, bane of your collective existence here...i was unaware that parole had, once again, been granted...
and what greater honor than to be the subject of a thread on the meds board with the very civil topic line ``Re: What Did He Do This Time?''
i recall a doonesbury comic from long ago - and i am not certain the origin of the following, yet from the funnies i did glean it - when one character stated to another that ``the only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about.''
all the best, chemist
Posted by alexandra_k on March 28, 2005, at 15:28:13
In reply to peek-a-boo » TofuEmmy, posted by chemist on March 28, 2005, at 12:16:36
Posted by TofuEmmy on March 28, 2005, at 18:27:19
In reply to peek-a-boo » TofuEmmy, posted by chemist on March 28, 2005, at 12:16:36
Hey you loon. Lovely to see you here. I had apparently lost track of your many transgressions. Do you think you could manage to stay unblocked for, let's say...a week? Shall we start wagering in a Chemist's Next Block Pool? ;-)
Your Leather Auntie
Posted by paulbwell on March 31, 2005, at 18:09:08
In reply to peek-a-boo » TofuEmmy, posted by chemist on March 28, 2005, at 12:16:36
Come on over back to PB Main meds Board, there are several who wish to receive your advice.
Cheers
Posted by chemist on March 31, 2005, at 18:15:56
In reply to Chemist! Read, posted by paulbwell on March 31, 2005, at 18:09:08
> Come on over back to PB Main meds Board, there are several who wish to receive your advice.
>
> Cheershello there, apologies....on another note, i lost your email address in real life, mine has not changed....be well, chemist
Posted by Jai Narayan on March 31, 2005, at 19:08:16
In reply to peek-a-boo » TofuEmmy, posted by chemist on March 28, 2005, at 12:16:36
I am so glad you came back to babble.
Ja*
Posted by chemist on April 1, 2005, at 2:48:00
In reply to welcome back chemist...:), posted by Jai Narayan on March 31, 2005, at 19:08:16
> I am so glad you came back to babble.
> Ja*hello there, many thanks for the welcome back! be well, chemist
Posted by chemist on April 1, 2005, at 2:49:35
In reply to Re: peek-a-boo » chemist, posted by TofuEmmy on March 28, 2005, at 18:27:19
> Hey you loon. Lovely to see you here. I had apparently lost track of your many transgressions. Do you think you could manage to stay unblocked for, let's say...a week? Shall we start wagering in a Chemist's Next Block Pool? ;-)
>
> Your Leather Auntiehello there, auntie tofu! i have been unblocked for over a week, largely because i was unaware that my block was in fact over....but i will try...best, chemist
Posted by Larry Hoover on April 1, 2005, at 17:13:12
In reply to Re: peek-a-boo » TofuEmmy, posted by chemist on April 1, 2005, at 2:49:35
> hello there, auntie tofu! i have been unblocked for over a week, largely because i was unaware that my block was in fact over....but i will try...best, chemist
I ain't your auntie tofu, but I missed you fotu.
I think blocks should be given *with an expiry date*. Just saying eight weeks (or whatever) is different than saying "until 8 p.m. March 21".
Lar
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 2, 2005, at 20:34:52
In reply to Re: block expiry date » chemist, posted by Larry Hoover on April 1, 2005, at 17:13:12
> I think blocks should be given *with an expiry date*. Just saying eight weeks (or whatever) is different than saying "until 8 p.m. March 21".
The date of my post + the duration = the expiry date?
Bob
Posted by Larry Hoover on April 2, 2005, at 22:19:41
In reply to Re: block expiry date, posted by Dr. Bob on April 2, 2005, at 20:34:52
> > I think blocks should be given *with an expiry date*. Just saying eight weeks (or whatever) is different than saying "until 8 p.m. March 21".
>
> The date of my post + the duration = the expiry date?
>
> BobI think a more explicit date is going to be easier to remember, both for the blocked, and for the friends of the blocked. Yes, it's easy math, but explicit would be cool.
Lar
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.