![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 243 to 267 of 412. Go back in thread:
Posted by zenhussy on March 21, 2006, at 16:57:27
In reply to Thank you, Zen!, posted by ClearSkies on March 21, 2006, at 16:51:39
golly! this is news? based on time spent participating here and friendships forged we'd guess you and other longer time babblers would be able to see clear patterns of the doc's admin policies. our presentation was only to show yet another example of Dr. Bob giving ample chances and opportunities for a member to fall within the "current FAQ guidelines of civility".
we're sure there are years of similar types of threads from different posters showing the same admin actions of PBC, PRT, then blocking.
we don't have the link currently but Dr. Bob himself has said something to the effect of previous history has a major effect on how he bases his decisions.
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 21, 2006, at 17:00:59
In reply to Re: blocked for 6 weeks » Dr. Bob, posted by SLS on March 21, 2006, at 15:53:00
> What ever happened to
> The one-week cooling off blocks you were talking about? It seems that this would be a good time to see if that works.
>
> AuntieMelIt might or might not, let's discuss it with the other deputies.
> > her uncivil comments
>
> I don't know why this phrase deserved to be judged uncivil. Isn't it a mirror image of what you say to others here all the time
>
> - ScottIt is, but my role here is administrative.
Bob
Posted by SLS on March 21, 2006, at 17:03:19
In reply to Re: blocked for 6 weeks » Dr. Bob, posted by SLS on March 21, 2006, at 15:53:00
Perhaps to deem one's words to be uncivil is to imply that one's intent was to be uncivil?
Is it the judging of intent that is the key to understanding this sanction?
Gotta think about this one some more.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on March 21, 2006, at 17:23:42
In reply to Re: blocked for 6 weeks » SLS, posted by SLS on March 21, 2006, at 17:03:19
I'm really not trying to be a wise guy. I'm just trying to dissect this thing so as to understand and perhaps demonstrate the concept of civility as it is practiced here. I'm not looking to imply that there is a paradox.
I think I can understand:
"her uncivil comments"
> Perhaps to deem one's words to be uncivil is to imply that one's intent was to be uncivil?
>
> Is it the judging of intent that is the key to understanding this sanction?I guess to judge that one's intent is to be uncivil is to imply that the person is himself uncivil - an uncivil person. To call someone uncivil is to put them down.
> Gotta think about this one some more.
I think I got the idea.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on March 21, 2006, at 17:26:16
In reply to Re: blocked for 6 weeks » SLS, posted by SLS on March 21, 2006, at 17:03:19
Sorry...
- Scott
Posted by AuntieMel on March 21, 2006, at 17:27:55
In reply to Re: blocks, posted by Dr. Bob on March 21, 2006, at 17:00:59
Good idea. I've just started that.
>> What ever happened to
>> The one-week cooling off blocks you were talking about? It seems that this would be a good time to see if that works.
>>
>> AuntieMel>It might or might not, let's discuss it with the >other deputies.
Posted by AuntieMel on March 21, 2006, at 17:29:31
In reply to Thank you, Zen!, posted by ClearSkies on March 21, 2006, at 16:51:39
Posted by SLS on March 21, 2006, at 17:31:27
In reply to Re: blocks » Dr. Bob, posted by AuntieMel on March 21, 2006, at 17:27:55
>> The one-week cooling off blocks...
What's that?
- Scott
Posted by gardenergirl on March 21, 2006, at 17:35:51
In reply to Re: blocked for 6 weeks » SLS, posted by SLS on March 21, 2006, at 17:23:42
> > Perhaps to deem one's words to be uncivil is to imply that one's intent was to be uncivil?Since intent is difficult if not impossible to determine, I think rather, calling a post or a poster's actions uncivil could be akin to accusing the person of incivility. And since we are not to post anything that could lead to a person feeling accused (among other things), I think that's the phrase is not considered acceptable.
That's my take on it at least. Of course when I go on and on in other contexts about how one's words and behavior are separate from someone else's reactions, perceptions, interpretations, and feelings about them, I realize I'm talking out of both sides of my mouth.
I hate when that happens.
gg
Posted by Gabbix2 on March 21, 2006, at 17:56:23
In reply to Calling something or someone uncivil » SLS, posted by gardenergirl on March 21, 2006, at 17:35:51
Also, I don't remember Emmy accusing anyone of felonious criminal behaviour.
Maybe that's part of the reason? Was it the reinterpretation of what she actually said that made it uncivil?I really don't know, but I'm sure I'd remember that.
If I'm wrong I'm sure someone will let me know : )
Posted by gardenergirl on March 21, 2006, at 18:11:28
In reply to Re: Calling something or someone uncivil » gardenergirl, posted by Gabbix2 on March 21, 2006, at 17:56:23
> Also, I don't remember Emmy accusing anyone of felonious criminal behaviour.
I don't remember that, either. I'd have to go back and read that thread again. Not quite up to that tonight.
gg
Posted by Gabbix2 on March 21, 2006, at 18:14:49
In reply to Re: Calling something or someone uncivil » Gabbix2, posted by gardenergirl on March 21, 2006, at 18:11:28
Yeah, that's funny I almost put at the bottom of my post "But I'm *not* going to go through that thread right now"
Posted by henrietta on March 21, 2006, at 19:37:17
In reply to Re: blocks, posted by Dr. Bob on March 21, 2006, at 17:00:59
Surely you know your role here isn't simply "administrative". You are modeling behavior, judging behavior, and attempting to direct behavior into patterns YOU deem positive,
"healthy", or just plain less troublesome. (Others may disagree with what constitutes healthy or positive behavior.) You model labeling behavior, then punish others for labeling behavior. Doesn't that ever give you pause? Ever? Even in the dark hours of the night? It would certainly cause many a sleepless night for me, and I'm not even playing god to hundreds of vulnerable people. But that's just me. Your mileage may vary.
Posted by henrietta on March 21, 2006, at 20:12:44
In reply to Re: blocks » Dr. Bob, posted by henrietta on March 21, 2006, at 19:37:17
I forgot to mention that it feels to me that what you do NOT model is sensitive behavior. Where I come from, if a person is honestly trying to communicate something that is important to him/her, the response "live and learn", for example, is felt as being extremely dismissive and insensitive. Short one-liners to heart-felt
communications are widely perceived to be dismissive and insensitive. I can't tell you how often I've felt kicked in the stomach by your responses to other posters---and I do mean this absolutely sincerely. OTHER POSTERS. Nothing personal. I've had no personal stake in these exchanges. I've merely been a witness, but I've felt deeply hurt and angry. I don't know. I just feel you really need to sit down in a deep place and question yourself.
Posted by ClearSkies on March 21, 2006, at 21:14:30
In reply to Re: Please stay cool, Clear and Zen! (nm), posted by AuntieMel on March 21, 2006, at 17:29:31
Posted by special_k on March 21, 2006, at 23:41:51
In reply to Re: blocks » Dr. Bob, posted by henrietta on March 21, 2006, at 19:37:17
hy hen :-)
i think... it is a hard one...
I think... Other 'experts' do have different ideas re civility. Kali Munroe, for instance... And her coming close to being dubbed 'uncivil' when she was here as a guest expert on conflict resolution (spot the irony). I think it is right to say that Dr Bob has something of a fairly idiosyncratic notion of civility... And he might well be stricter than most. But then in terms of the comments people make... Do you think it is fair to say that this board is safer than others in the sense that accusing comments, judging comments, hurtful comments, hateful comments, sarcastic comments are less likely to go unremarked or without consequences.
I mean... Some people might prefer that. But then when someone directs those things our way it can be harder to take...
Maybe the issue is that... He is a little too idiosyncratic / strict with the civility rules?
I might be inclined to agree...
> and attempting to direct behavior into patterns YOU deem positive,
> "healthy", or just plain less troublesome. (Others may disagree with what constitutes healthy or positive behavior.)Yeah...
> You model labeling behavior, then punish others for labeling behavior.
Well... I'm not so sure that works...
Consider a case where someone says (and I'll use me as an example)
you are a bitch special_k and i wish you would just f*ck off.
do you think there should be consequences for someone saying that to me?
if so... then maybe the problem isn't so much the 'uncivil' judgements... the blockings... so much as it is the 'borderline cases' of incivility... and the severity of the blockings...
so...
how does the one week cool off block work?
if the moderators have sympathy???
Posted by henrietta on March 22, 2006, at 2:21:15
In reply to Re: blocks, posted by special_k on March 21, 2006, at 23:41:51
Hi, Special.
It's late, I won't make much sense. Yes, I think it's more about the borderline cases and the severity of blocks. And a lot of other stuff
I haven't the wherewithal to go into at this time of night. (I really should be asleep. Other things on my mind, real life things.) Oh, I can't think....
Just wanted to say hi since I probably won't be able to check back in for a while. I'll be away. I hope you're well, or as well as possible.
You're in my thoughts.
hen
Posted by special_k on March 22, 2006, at 3:09:58
In reply to Re: blocks » special_k, posted by henrietta on March 22, 2006, at 2:21:15
Hey. I'll catch up with you when you get back :-)
Yeah it is hard...
Posted by AuntieMel on March 22, 2006, at 8:05:47
In reply to Re: Calling something or someone uncivil » Gabbix2, posted by gardenergirl on March 21, 2006, at 18:11:28
It was a long time ago, and it wasn't Emmy
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20031120/msgs/297882.html
Posted by verne on March 22, 2006, at 8:53:45
In reply to Re: Calling something or someone uncivil » gardenergirl, posted by AuntieMel on March 22, 2006, at 8:05:47
Looking back at past threads that led to blocks I usually find an escalating debate at the heart of the problem. I'm not sure a support site for mental illness is the place to argue anything anyway.
I don't care if someone says, "Water runs uphill". Why would I need to fix their wagon and prove them wrong? Rather than argue with them about what they experience, I can share my own, more ordinary, downhill water experience with them.
Who feels better after even the most successful of debates? Everyone walks away wounded. There's a place to fix the world and a place to fix ourselves.
Rather than disagree, we can compare notes. The world as I know it, where water runs downhill, won't end if someone on the planet thinks otherwise.
Verne
Posted by gardenergirl on March 22, 2006, at 9:12:31
In reply to Re: Calling something or someone uncivil » gardenergirl, posted by AuntieMel on March 22, 2006, at 8:05:47
Posted by muffled on March 22, 2006, at 11:05:57
In reply to Re: ample warnings and chances given » ClearSkies, posted by zenhussy on March 21, 2006, at 16:45:19
Posted by Tabitha on March 22, 2006, at 11:18:41
In reply to When Fixing Wagons or the World, posted by verne on March 22, 2006, at 8:53:45
> Rather than disagree, we can compare notes. The world as I know it, where water runs downhill, won't end if someone on the planet thinks otherwise.
>Thanks for that, Verne. I really need to put that into practice.
Posted by 10derHeart on March 22, 2006, at 12:36:31
In reply to When Fixing Wagons or the World, posted by verne on March 22, 2006, at 8:53:45
Verne,
This is one of the wisest, most helpful posts I've ever read, any where, any time. I can't thank you enough for articulating these ideas here.
Really.
You are the best. So glad to see you posting!
:-)
Posted by TofuEmmy on March 22, 2006, at 19:11:42
In reply to Re: Calling something or someone uncivil » gardenergirl, posted by AuntieMel on March 22, 2006, at 8:05:47
> It was a long time ago, and it wasn't Emmy
>Holy tamale. Correct. I never accused anyone of "felonious criminal behaviour" or anything markedly close to that. I am not sure who suggested it. Sure gives some insight to my fine reputation here tho! ;-)
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.