Psycho-Babble Administration Thread 384533

Shown: posts 130 to 154 of 154. Go back in thread:

 

Re: To Dr. Bob--dr. bob

Posted by alesta on September 4, 2004, at 10:27:53

In reply to Re: To Dr. Bob » alesta, posted by AuntieMel on September 4, 2004, at 0:00:46

> Alas, I think that an email request from chemist to Dr. Bob requesting a reduction is required.
>
> But a little birdy has told me that he is considering it (requesting, that is)

dr. bob, if this is the answer, then please disregard my question below (under the "being compassionate" thread, i think)

amy :)

 

Re: Admin Babblers

Posted by Cressida on September 4, 2004, at 22:17:51

In reply to Re: To Dr. Bob--dr. bob, posted by alesta on September 4, 2004, at 10:27:53

I didn't know there was a forum devoted to administrative issues. My visits to Dr. Bob's site are usually brief. Sometimes, however, I squander an entire night by replying to just a few posts.

(1) I think that chemist was subtle with his use of sarcasm. Perhaps it was unintentional. Nevertheless, I will refrain from suggesting any resolution because I am unfamiliar with site policy.

(2) Yes, other babblers were probably much more deserving of being blocked than the babbler in question.

(3) One month does not translate to a permanent block. Psycho-Babblers should neither distress themselves with catastrophic thoughts nor sweat the small stuff.

(4) chemist is an adult. He will be fine.

-Cressida

-------------------------------------------

Dr. Bob, I want to thank you for this web site. It is an invaluable source of support and information.

 

Re: One More Post...

Posted by Cressida on September 4, 2004, at 22:40:39

In reply to Re: To Dr. Bob--dr. bob, posted by alesta on September 4, 2004, at 10:27:53

Psycho-Babble Administration and inflamatory debates are probably mutually exclusive. Imagine that this area is Dr. Bob's official web-office. What would happen if you began yelling, hurling insults, or making conspicuously sarcastic remarks in a doctor's office?

I don't know, just a thought...Cheers.

 

Your post should be added to rubric at top of page » Cressida

Posted by Jonathan on September 5, 2004, at 0:58:28

In reply to Re: One More Post..., posted by Cressida on September 4, 2004, at 22:40:39

> Psycho-Babble Administration and inflamatory debates are probably mutually exclusive. Imagine that this area is Dr. Bob's official web-office.

It sometimes feels more like Dr. Bob's war room!

> What would happen if you began yelling, hurling insults, or making conspicuously sarcastic remarks in a doctor's office?

An alternative for the top of the page might be a quote from President Muffley (Peter Sellers) in Kubrick's film "Dr Strangelove":

"You can't fight here: this is the War Room."

 

Re: block reduced by week » chemist

Posted by Dr. Bob on September 7, 2004, at 4:20:51

In reply to Re: To Dr. Bob » alesta, posted by AuntieMel on September 4, 2004, at 0:00:46

> I think that an email request from chemist to Dr. Bob requesting a reduction is required.
>
> But a little birdy has told me that he is considering it (requesting, that is)

OK, I've reconsidered and reduced his block by a week. I hope this goes well,

Bob

 

:-) (nm) » Dr. Bob

Posted by Dinah on September 7, 2004, at 7:57:16

In reply to Re: block reduced by week » chemist, posted by Dr. Bob on September 7, 2004, at 4:20:51

 

Re: block reduced by week » Dr. Bob

Posted by Larry Hoover on September 7, 2004, at 7:58:52

In reply to Re: block reduced by week » chemist, posted by Dr. Bob on September 7, 2004, at 4:20:51

> OK, I've reconsidered and reduced his block by a week. I hope this goes well,
>
> Bob

Bless you!

One further question....is that reduced number the new "floor" for subsequent blocks (heaven forbid)?

Lar

 

That's good news. (nm)

Posted by gardenergirl on September 7, 2004, at 15:41:52

In reply to Re: block reduced by week » chemist, posted by Dr. Bob on September 7, 2004, at 4:20:51

 

Re: :-) Ditto (nm)

Posted by partlycloudy on September 7, 2004, at 16:53:37

In reply to :-) (nm) » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on September 7, 2004, at 7:57:16

 

Re: Thank you Dr. Bob (nm)

Posted by AuntieMel on September 7, 2004, at 16:58:58

In reply to Re: block reduced by week » chemist, posted by Dr. Bob on September 7, 2004, at 4:20:51

 

Re: subsequent blocks (heaven forbid)

Posted by Dr. Bob on September 7, 2004, at 22:25:45

In reply to Re: block reduced by week » Dr. Bob, posted by Larry Hoover on September 7, 2004, at 7:58:52

> One further question....is that reduced number the new "floor" for subsequent blocks (heaven forbid)?

Sorry, but I think it should remain the unreduced number.

Bob

 

I guess my ban is over

Posted by TomG on September 8, 2004, at 0:09:18

In reply to Re: subsequent blocks (heaven forbid), posted by Dr. Bob on September 7, 2004, at 22:25:45

In all honesty I was trying to provide some humor by my comment that got me banned in this thread. However, I guess someone that is unstable might recieve this in the wrong way.

Without stirring up more trouble would it be too much to ask what chemist did to get his previous bans?

Geodon still ROCKS!

 

Re: I guess my ban is over » TomG

Posted by gardenergirl on September 8, 2004, at 11:03:49

In reply to I guess my ban is over, posted by TomG on September 8, 2004, at 0:09:18

Hi TomG,
I just wanted to ask about your use of the word "unstable" in your post. Would you please explain what you meant by that? And I'm curious about how someone who might receive a post the wrong way might be "unstable"?

Regards,
gg

 

Re: gg asked a good question » TomG

Posted by AuntieMel on September 8, 2004, at 11:54:45

In reply to I guess my ban is over, posted by TomG on September 8, 2004, at 0:09:18

I am curious, too. I just reread it, and I can see where Dr. Bob is coming from.

To add a corrolary to GG's question - does it follow that everyone taking it wrong is unstable?

I have heard over and over that - on the net where everyone *doesn't* know everyone - the way something is intended is quite often not how it gets percieved on the other end.

 

Re: I guess my ban is over » gardenergirl

Posted by TomG on September 8, 2004, at 15:55:12

In reply to Re: I guess my ban is over » TomG, posted by gardenergirl on September 8, 2004, at 11:03:49

> Hi TomG,
> I just wanted to ask about your use of the word "unstable" in your post. Would you please explain what you meant by that? And I'm curious about how someone who might receive a post the wrong way might be "unstable"?
>
> Regards,
> gg

Having a heightened sensitivity to percieved slights I would consider being unstable, because I don't think it is balanced to have that feeling. It is a feature of atypical depression. Although I have never been diagnosed with atypical depression but rather simple schizophrenia I have felt this particular symptom of atypical depression. So, do I have co-morbid atypical depression? I doubt it. So, I think its possible for anyone, atypical depression or no atypical depression, to feel this unrealistic perception of slight. Its up to chemist to say whether he did or did not feel rejected by my comment or whether he may be suffering from atypical depression. Again, I say that my commnent was meant to be a joke and not a rejection of him. My usage of "unstable" here relates to this particular symptom of atypical depression.

Geodon is THE MAN!

 

Re: I guess my ban is over » TomG

Posted by gardenergirl on September 8, 2004, at 16:04:10

In reply to Re: I guess my ban is over » gardenergirl, posted by TomG on September 8, 2004, at 15:55:12

hmmm, interesting...my diagnosis is atypical depression. So if I am following your explanation correctly, then if I perceive any slight, I am "unstable"? If that is what you are saying, I'm offended. And I believe it is the use of such words that perpetuate the stigma of mental illness, and thus, I object to such use.
gg

 

Re: I guess my ban is over » TomG

Posted by AuntieMel on September 8, 2004, at 16:11:42

In reply to Re: I guess my ban is over » gardenergirl, posted by TomG on September 8, 2004, at 15:55:12

I have typical depression, and I can assure you being sensitive to slights isn't only a "feature" of atypical. I have some pretty bad times, but I don't think that I am unstable either.

Heck. I know people with NO mental illness that are sensitive to slights.

 

Re: I guess my ban is over » AuntieMel

Posted by TomG on September 8, 2004, at 17:50:20

In reply to Re: I guess my ban is over » TomG, posted by AuntieMel on September 8, 2004, at 16:11:42

> I have typical depression, and I can assure you being sensitive to slights isn't only a "feature" of atypical. I have some pretty bad times, but I don't think that I am unstable either.
>
> Heck. I know people with NO mental illness that are sensitive to slights.


"So, I think its possible for anyone, atypical depression or no atypical depression, to feel this unrealistic perception of slight."


I wrote the above (what you just said) in my post.


Geodon,OH YEAH!

 

Re: I guess my ban is over » gardenergirl

Posted by TomG on September 8, 2004, at 18:16:41

In reply to Re: I guess my ban is over » TomG, posted by gardenergirl on September 8, 2004, at 16:04:10

> hmmm, interesting...my diagnosis is atypical depression. So if I am following your explanation correctly, then if I perceive any slight, I am "unstable"? If that is what you are saying, I'm offended. And I believe it is the use of such words that perpetuate the stigma of mental illness, and thus, I object to such use.
> gg


Only if you have a heightened sensitivity to the perception I would consider that unstable and unrealistic. Just because you regard it as such doesn't mean the rejection was ligitimate and intended to mean harm. You would have to ask the person who you felt rejected by just exactly what they meant.

I wouldn't consider people who are constantly sensitive to to what they *think* is rejection to posess stability by definition in that one particualar area.

I can't change my original post but if you would like to substitute the word "atypically depressed" for "unstable" that would be O.K. as well.

Surely someone must know why chemist was banned previously?

Geodon, Could IT Get Any Better?

 

Re: I guess my ban is over

Posted by gardenergirl on September 8, 2004, at 20:08:59

In reply to Re: I guess my ban is over » gardenergirl, posted by TomG on September 8, 2004, at 18:16:41

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree about whether being sensitive is being unstable. I, for one treasure my sensitivity despite the pain it can sometimes cause. And I don't view it as something unstable about me. In actuality, it's a very stable part of who I am.

Regarding chemist's block:

> let me be sure i understand you correctly: there are certain foods and vitamins i can take that will enhance my self-esteem? i am always interested in bettering myself, and if you can provide the appropriate references/etc. that bolsters your claim, i will be in your debt...
>
> chemist
Please don't be sarcastic, jump to conclusions about others, or post anything that could lead them to feel accused or put down. I've asked you to be civil before, so now I'm going to block you from posting. For 4 weeks,…

It seems fairly obvious to me that Dr. Bob thought Chemist was being sarcastic with the above, despite his statement later that he was being sincere. This was part of the same post from Dr. Bob that included your block.

http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20040717/msgs/384580.html

Regards,
gg

 

Re: I guess my ban is over » gardenergirl

Posted by TomG on September 8, 2004, at 20:15:25

In reply to Re: I guess my ban is over, posted by gardenergirl on September 8, 2004, at 20:08:59

> Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree about whether being sensitive is being unstable. I, for one treasure my sensitivity despite the pain it can sometimes cause. And I don't view it as something unstable about me. In actuality, it's a very stable part of who I am.
>
> Regarding chemist's block:
>
> > let me be sure i understand you correctly: there are certain foods and vitamins i can take that will enhance my self-esteem? i am always interested in bettering myself, and if you can provide the appropriate references/etc. that bolsters your claim, i will be in your debt...
> >
> > chemist
> Please don't be sarcastic, jump to conclusions about others, or post anything that could lead them to feel accused or put down. I've asked you to be civil before, so now I'm going to block you from posting. For 4 weeks,…
>
> It seems fairly obvious to me that Dr. Bob thought Chemist was being sarcastic with the above, despite his statement later that he was being sincere. This was part of the same post from Dr. Bob that included your block.
>
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20040717/msgs/384580.html
>
> Regards,
> gg


I am referring as to why chemist was banned before all this started.

We got banned one week and chemist got a four weeker. He was banned three times for some reason before this thread for unknown reasons. I guess this is the reason why he recieved a harsher ban. Do you know the reasons why he was banned in other threads?

 

Re: I guess my ban is over

Posted by gardenergirl on September 8, 2004, at 20:27:17

In reply to Re: I guess my ban is over » gardenergirl, posted by TomG on September 8, 2004, at 20:15:25

Sorry, that part I don't remember. You could check the archives or try a Google search.
gg

 

Re: I guess my ban is over » TomG

Posted by AuntieMel on September 9, 2004, at 10:57:55

In reply to Re: I guess my ban is over » gardenergirl, posted by TomG on September 8, 2004, at 20:15:25

I don't remember either, but if I did, it seems to me that if I related that it would feel like I was gossiping.

Is there a reason you want to know?

 

Re: I guess my ban is over » AuntieMel

Posted by TomG on September 9, 2004, at 12:24:42

In reply to Re: I guess my ban is over » TomG, posted by AuntieMel on September 9, 2004, at 10:57:55

> I don't remember either, but if I did, it seems to me that if I related that it would feel like I was gossiping.
>
> Is there a reason you want to know?


If it was sarcasm that got him banned in the other threads I want to see in what context it was, because there is such an argument here over the validity of his ban. Possibly the sarcasm in the other threads isn't as cryptic as some here think it is in this thread.

KING GEODON!

 

Re: sarcasm, doubling, and positive results

Posted by AMD on March 23, 2005, at 17:15:38

In reply to Re: sarcasm, doubling, and positive results, posted by Dr. Bob on August 31, 2004, at 13:20:50

This is old, but the fact chemist got blocked from the comment above is completely out of control. Why is everyone so sensitive? It's a message board. Harden your skins, folks.


This is the end of the thread.


Show another thread

URL of post in thread:


Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ


[dr. bob] 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.