![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 10 to 34 of 48. Go back in thread:
Posted by Karen_kay on February 16, 2004, at 12:08:25
In reply to Re: Inappropriate User Name » Phil, posted by EmmyS on February 16, 2004, at 10:18:43
Emmy, I wholeheartedly agree with your concept that people are not evil. I truly believe all people are good, or have some good in them. My friends say I'm naive. I like to think I'm optimistic :) I'm glad to see someone else shares in that view.... It's nice to know. Thank you for showing me that I'm not alone in believing this. Thanks you so very much. I've been given even more hope :)
Posted by Dr. Bob on February 17, 2004, at 13:12:05
In reply to Re: Inappropriate User Name » EmmyS, posted by Phil on February 15, 2004, at 20:03:20
> This guy has got to go!
>
> terrics> Out of all the words in this or other languages he could have posted under, look at what he chose.
> I find it despicable and sick.
>
> PhilBe aware that there may be posters (sometimes referred to online as "trolls") who try to start arguments and upset others. Of course, not everyone who starts an argument or upsets someone else *intends* to do so. What can be done about trolls? Especially in these situations, it may be best just not to respond. If you do, please be civil. If you want to encourage others not to respond, one civil way to do that is to post something like:
> Different points of view are fine, but sometimes discussions just lead to discord and it may be best just not to respond. One source of more information is: http://members.aol.com/intwg/trolls.htm.
If you have any questions about this or comments about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways to express yourself, please see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
or post a follow-up here. Thanks,
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on February 19, 2004, at 22:01:32
In reply to Re: please be civil » terrics » Phil, posted by Dr. Bob on February 17, 2004, at 13:12:05
Maybe the guy is Jewish, depressed and suicidal and chose the username ironically. Shame nobody tried to find out.
Posted by karen_kay on February 19, 2004, at 23:22:51
In reply to Re: please be civil, posted by alexandra_k on February 19, 2004, at 22:01:32
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20040211/msgs/313125.html
People did try to help. I can't speak on the matter, or I'll get blocked. But, *I* found the handle to be offensive. Maybe you are right and that's the case, but why stir emotions in people who could potentially help you?
Posted by alexandra_k on February 20, 2004, at 15:47:35
In reply to Re: please be civil » alexandra_k, posted by karen_kay on February 19, 2004, at 23:22:51
>but why stir emotions in people who could potentially help you?My thought was that he may not have intended it to be taken that way. He seemed genuine to me with respect to the content of his post. I just thought that a posting saying how it had been interpreted and a polite request to change usernames may have been more appropriate and supportive if in fact it was unintentionally offensive.
Too late now.
I hope he did intend it to be offensive because if not he is probably beating himself up most severely...
Posted by GabbiX2 on February 20, 2004, at 16:17:58
In reply to Re: please be civil, posted by alexandra_k on February 20, 2004, at 15:47:35
I really doubt that he's so sensitive to people's reactions that he's beating himself up now. If that were the case he probably would not have phrased his post in the way he did.
He mentioned he's been suffering from depression for 20 years now.
That's old enough for an acutely sensitive person to asess how things were likely to go.
Posted by Dr. Bob on February 22, 2004, at 4:40:12
In reply to Re: please be civil » alexandra_k, posted by karen_kay on February 19, 2004, at 23:22:51
> *I* found the handle to be offensive.
Keeping in mind that the idea here is not to post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down, could you please rephrase that? Maybe after taking a look at the section on I-statements in the FAQ?
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by Karen_kay on February 29, 2004, at 20:40:25
In reply to Re: please be civil » karen_kay, posted by Dr. Bob on February 22, 2004, at 4:40:12
Sorry Dr. Bob, not being argumentative, but I'm not quite sure how to rephrase that so as to say how I felt about it without insulting or making the person feel put down. I could sit here for an hour and try to rephrase, or I could give some half-a** attempt at another statement, only to be returned with a "Please Rephrase this" comment by you. So, I won't do either.
Posted by NikkiT2 on March 1, 2004, at 13:58:43
In reply to Re: please be civil » Dr. Bob, posted by Karen_kay on February 29, 2004, at 20:40:25
When I was in a similar quandry I emailed Dr Bob and discussed with him that way what might be an appropriate re-phrase.. I explained how I felt, and he suggested how I could reply without me going back on my feelings.
Nikki
Posted by Karen_kay on March 1, 2004, at 16:15:41
In reply to Re: please be civil » Karen_kay, posted by NikkiT2 on March 1, 2004, at 13:58:43
Thanks for the advice. I choose not to accept it, and will take a block for it. My feelings were hurt and I responded. Not out of anger, but out of truthfulness. There's no reason for me to look things up and try to rephrase something as simple as expressing an opinion or emotion. I'd rather be blocked than take it back. And I feel I've done nothing wrong in this matter. Not trying to be difficult, just saying I'm not going to play a cat and mouse game and try to think of ways to rephrase my feelings on the matter. I was offended and still am. I stick with that phrase and will not change it. If it were something else, I would happily abide by the rules and regulations. I just don't see the point in trying to reword something that will have the exact same meaning as what I said in the first place. I took a look at the link Bob provided and understand completely how I could reword the phrase, so as to prevent someone from feeling put down. But, I felt put down and will not try to apologize for what I said. I will use the link in the future and try to word things in a different manner, but on this one I stay with what I said. Sorry, I won't compromise my integrity on this one. I'd rather be blocked. But, thank you for the help. I honestly appreciate it and will consider that if this happens in the future. honestly, I'm not trying to be difficult, but I'm rather blunt and prefer to keep it that way. Saying something in a different way will not change the meaning. I'm just not into censoring my feelings, what little I have....
Posted by gabbix2 on March 1, 2004, at 19:32:47
In reply to Re: please be civil » NikkiT2, posted by Karen_kay on March 1, 2004, at 16:15:41
I admire you for keeping your integrity.
I think we've had to give up too much of ourselves already. The right to say "I'm offended" doesn't seem much to ask.These rules can be an Orwellian nightmare
at times like this.
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 3, 2004, at 0:48:09
In reply to Re: please be civil » NikkiT2, posted by Karen_kay on March 1, 2004, at 16:15:41
> Thanks for the advice. I choose not to accept it, and will take a block for it.
OK, if that's your preference...
Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 3, 2004, at 0:52:14
In reply to Karen » Karen_kay, posted by gabbix2 on March 1, 2004, at 19:32:47
> The right to say "I'm offended" doesn't seem much to ask.
That's a nice I-statement, it's fine to say it. :-)
Bob
Posted by gabbix2 on March 3, 2004, at 10:27:15
In reply to Re: Orwellian nightmare, posted by Dr. Bob on March 3, 2004, at 0:52:14
That only underscores my point.
Posted by kid47 on March 3, 2004, at 12:06:26
In reply to Re: Orwellian nightmare, posted by Dr. Bob on March 3, 2004, at 0:52:14
> > The right to say "I'm offended" doesn't seem much to ask.
>
> That's a nice I-statement, it's fine to say it. :-)
>
> Bob>>*I* found the handle to be offensive.
I don't usually post to matters concerning "blocks, PBC's, etc. I find this alleged transgression involving civility "guidlines" to be incomprehensible. The vague and capricious nature of these "guidlines" and their enforcement makes it extremely difficult to express meaningful thoughts and feelings; this to a group with many who already have difficulty expressing themselves. I think most of us try our best to adhere to what I would call a very....."fluid" civility policy. I do find myself on occasion questioning the motives behind the interpretation and enforcement of perceived civility breaches. I understand for any community to exist, there must be some type of protocol established. Possibly there are some of us here who need instruction and supervision on "civil" communication. But there are instances, and this qualifies, when for the life of me, I can't figure out what possible *positive* motivation is behind a decision to block someone from posting. I am not going to rehash the facts of this particular incident. They speak for themselves. I would ask that some rational explanation of how the above posts are mutually exclusive when they appear to me to be expressing identical sentiments. In the past, responses to similar requests have run the gambit from reasonable to feeling dismissive. An attitude of "well, it's my ball and if you don't like the rules go play somewhere else", no matter how "thoughtfully" worded feels to me childish and demeaning. The admission of imperfection in the system does not necessarily justify the imperfection. It would be GREAT if once or twice a year the administration here would just publicly state, "I've reconsidered" with regards to a block. If the administrations concerns are as forthright and altruistic as I believe they are, and not about taking the opportunity to merely demonstrate control and arbitrarily force compliance, this particular instance presents a perfect opportunity to portray that. Many of us, especially those with mental disorders, perceive a stinging sense of unfairness in our world. Wouldn't it be nice if occasionally we were allowed to feel some measure of recourse?!?
These are my thoughts, feelings and perceptions only and are not intended to put anyone down or pressure them in any way. If anyone feels put down, pressured, offended, tortured, assaulted, deceived, hurt, ripped-off, humiliated, slighted, smited, decalcified, clarified, homogenized or is just plain upset by anything I've said here, I am truly
sorry.kid
Posted by Jai Narayan on March 3, 2004, at 19:20:13
In reply to Re: blocked for week » Karen_kay, posted by Dr. Bob on March 3, 2004, at 0:48:09
Oh Karen Kay....I hope you will e-mail me...I miss you.
I am so sorry Karen....
Dr. Bob has the last say in blocking, it's his site, he makes the rules, we just have to live with them and respect them.
I hope you come back to psycho babble.
we are waiting for you.
Posted by gardenergirl on March 3, 2004, at 20:08:02
In reply to Re: blocked for week, posted by Jai Narayan on March 3, 2004, at 19:20:13
KK,
It's just a matter of wording. What you said expressed your sentiments and clearly indicated that it was your reaction. Your reaction is your truth. Anyone who feels put down by that must be operating from their own issues and not your truth. Rephrasing would just be a semantic argument, and I know my time and yours is better spent being suppotive.I'll miss you and look forward to your return!
gg
Posted by gabbix2 on March 3, 2004, at 20:22:06
In reply to It's just semantics, KK, posted by gardenergirl on March 3, 2004, at 20:08:02
Amen!
Posted by mair on March 3, 2004, at 22:39:08
In reply to It's just semantics, KK, posted by gardenergirl on March 3, 2004, at 20:08:02
Posted by mair on March 3, 2004, at 22:41:00
In reply to Re: Orwellian nightmare, posted by Dr. Bob on March 3, 2004, at 0:52:14
Please tell us how you think the statements are different.
Posted by Elle2021 on March 4, 2004, at 0:13:37
In reply to It's just semantics, KK, posted by gardenergirl on March 3, 2004, at 20:08:02
Posted by Dinah on March 4, 2004, at 1:09:38
In reply to Re: Orwellian nightmare » Dr. Bob, posted by mair on March 3, 2004, at 22:41:00
(in honor of the book of rules in one of my son's favorite shows, The Fairly Oddparents)
I am in a quandary here.
On the one hand, I have long watched Dr. Bob's admin actions with interest and while I'm occasionally surprised in both directions, I usually see a general method to his madness (so to speak). I think there are some rules that aren't included in the FAQ's but that are applied relatively consistently and explain some of the apparent inconstencies in moderating.
On the other hand, I'd feel like a b*ttinsky know-it-all if I presumed that I was correct in my observations and shared them. Not that I don't trust Dr. Bob to correct me if I'm incorrect. But I'm just afraid that such an attempt on my part would be... offensive. And unwelcome. And again, possibly incorrect, since they're based on observation and not on any actual concrete knowledge.
Posted by Dinah on March 4, 2004, at 1:52:57
In reply to Re: Da Rules, posted by Dinah on March 4, 2004, at 1:09:38
I'm trying to learn discretion in my old age, but obviously don't yet have the hang of it. :(
Posted by All Done on March 4, 2004, at 1:54:13
In reply to Re: blocked for week, posted by Jai Narayan on March 3, 2004, at 19:20:13
> From Jai
[Dr. Bob] makes the rules, we just have to live with them and respect them.
Karen,I'm just proud of you for respecting *yourself* enough to know what you needed to do regardless of the rules.
See you in a week, sweetie!
All Done
Posted by gardenergirl on March 4, 2004, at 7:05:39
In reply to Re: Ignore above post please, posted by Dinah on March 4, 2004, at 1:52:57
I don't know, Dinah. I think your observations would be welcome. It sounds like you have a lot of data to base them on, and I trust your judgement.
gg
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.