![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 43 to 67 of 110. Go back in thread:
Posted by Fallen4MyT on January 7, 2007, at 0:19:16
In reply to Re: cap on Name changes, posted by Dr. Bob on January 6, 2007, at 4:30:28
3 Is fine so is 5. I wonder and feel that no matter what number you choose some will have issues with it and some won't.
You could pick a number out of a hat.
I do like your reasoning on so many other things having a 3 figure to them thus it may be easier to remember for posters. I, myself would be more in favor of 3 times a year but 3 times ever could work.
I do not personally see if someone chose a name they were not fond of later how this rule could harm them in that they would be able to adjust it to one they like within 3 attempts. If someone were stalked I can see an exception made time number 4.
Some change their names MANY MANY times within a year ( I cannot post who as that may lead someone to feel put down and accused).. but I have seen this. They make it clear they are NOT being stalked, their family has NOT FOUND them....they answer to their real name...so why would someone change their name so often? I feel those types of name changes are the issue here. I wonder if it's a lot of busy work for you Dr Bob...do you think it COULD BE attention seeking?
Some sites do NOT allow you to change your name at all ...it's a rare exception to be able to do that.I can see why.
> > > 3 total would be easier for the server...
> >
> > Three total...ever?
>
> Well, 3 starting from whenever the policy takes effect?
>
> > I'm still curious as to your reasoning behind picking three. Is it as everyone else has said? You just like the number?
>
> It was Gabbi's suggestion. :-) Would 5 be better? 3 might be easier to remember, since other policies use 3...
>
> > I'm wondering though, if this is still a decision that's up for discussion.
>
> It's still up for discussion. Everything's always up for discussion. :-)
>
> Bob
Posted by Fallen4MyT on January 7, 2007, at 0:20:29
In reply to Re: cap on Name changes » Dr. Bob, posted by gardenergirl on January 3, 2007, at 9:35:52
I like this idea GG
> > > I think people are entitled to a fresh start, or two, or three.
> >
> > I like 3, too, would that be a reasonable cap?
> >
> > Bob
>
> You really like that number, eh?
>
> If you set a cap, I think that folks ought to be able to email you to request another change for special circumstances if they go over the cap. I don't know what those special circumstances might be, but I think you could decide on a reasonable solution if that comes up. I would have no problem with that remaining between you and the poster.
>
> gg
>
Posted by Dinah on January 7, 2007, at 8:54:59
In reply to Dinah!, posted by ClearSkies on January 7, 2007, at 0:01:26
Posted by karen_kay on January 7, 2007, at 13:40:25
In reply to Re: cap on Name changes » Dr. Bob, posted by Fallen4MyT on January 7, 2007, at 0:19:16
i've never changed my name. i'd think if someone wants attention, they'd get more by retaining their name. lord knows the poor newbies get so little attention. how bout suggestions for that? how to make the newbies feel even more welcome (and please don't let it involved compromising photos. never again!)
Posted by karen_kay on January 7, 2007, at 13:46:44
In reply to from the most attention seeking person EVER! » Fallen4MyT, posted by karen_kay on January 7, 2007, at 13:40:25
i was referring to myself as the most attention seeking person ever, not you fallen. sorry if that was confusing. see, i need attention so much that i have to say it 2 times!!!!
Posted by Fallen4MyT on January 7, 2007, at 14:15:11
In reply to from the most attention seeking person EVER! » Fallen4MyT, posted by karen_kay on January 7, 2007, at 13:40:25
They would have 3 times to change it. I did not ask you on the attention seeking..I asked Dr Bob because he is a doctor.
New people can amd may very well feel very welcome knowing they can change their name...3 times. Some sites allow NO CHANGE
Myself I am not an attention seeker and have never posted anything I would regret.
> i've never changed my name. i'd think if someone wants attention, they'd get more by retaining their name. lord knows the poor newbies get so little attention. how bout suggestions for that? how to make the newbies feel even more welcome (and please don't let it involved compromising photos. never again!)
Posted by Fallen4MyT on January 7, 2007, at 14:20:41
In reply to whoa! » karen_kay, posted by karen_kay on January 7, 2007, at 13:46:44
Oddly, I understood that was what you meant KK ..Though perhaps you should have clarified that in the *subject line* so those who do not open the threads will see I AM NOT the attention seeker in question. I hope Dr Bob takes a look at how one would feel with that title above. I would feel less put down if you did a clarification in the subject line. As it stands *I feel put down* should someone only look at the title.
Posted by notfred on January 7, 2007, at 17:46:28
In reply to Re: cap on Name changes » Dr. Bob, posted by Fallen4MyT on January 7, 2007, at 0:19:16
" I wonder if it's a lot of busy work for you Dr Bob..."
Adding a limit will mean more work. Records to keep and appeals to deal with, this would be ongoing. Initial coding and testing.
I can't see an effective way to track this, it is so easy to register with a new e-mail account from a different IP.
This seems a bad solution seeking a problem that is not a big deal to many here. have we heard from folks that change frequently ? Best not to assume their reasons for changing frequently. Or at the least not to assume the negative, unless there is evidence otherwise.
Posted by Honore on January 7, 2007, at 18:44:05
In reply to Re: cap on Name changes, posted by notfred on January 7, 2007, at 17:46:28
At the moment, all I can say on this issue is that if there's a cap in the range of three or five, I personally will be very uncomfortable with it.
I find it hard to find names in general and I don't particularly feel as if I fit my current name, or my prior name (I've changed once in six months, for reasons that I think were useful)-- and the fit becomes more awkward over time.
If it is easy to find new IP addresses, I guess I could investigate that if it becomes an issue, but I still don't understand the problem.
If people are shedding names like skins every other day here, I haven't noticed it, even though I've visited this site a lot and read a lot.
So if the change is about to take place, I hope someone notifies me beforehand, so that I can spend time trying to come up with a name that has some chance of feeling like me for the foreseeable future, instead of one that's provisional and impulsive, and was chosen because it is hard to find a name-- and it seemed good enough for a time.
Honore
Posted by gardenergirl on January 7, 2007, at 19:03:29
In reply to Re: cap on Name changes, posted by notfred on January 7, 2007, at 17:46:28
> Best not to assume their reasons for changing frequently. Or at the least not to assume the negative, unless there is evidence otherwise.
I think that's a wise suggestion, notfred. (Speaking of names, yours reminds my monkey brain of "Not Dead Fred" from Monty Python's Spam A Lot". He's one of my favorite characters. :)
Even in the event that someone's reasons for changing may be related to something that could be called "negative" or "maladaptive" or some other descriptor, I'm finding it hard to understand how that could be perceived as a problem to the extent that it requires a rule limiting it.
I'm not in favor of implementing this idea as a rule.
gg responding as both a poster and as a deputy
Posted by Fallen4MyT on January 7, 2007, at 19:20:06
In reply to Re: cap on Name changes, posted by notfred on January 7, 2007, at 17:46:28
I myself am not assuming. I do not know who may be assuming. I feel some may be assuming that names are changed for valid reason only. I asked Dr Bob a question as to what HE feels could be the reason SOME posters change names *so often* based on reasons that MAY have given to him. I cannot say if it will be more work or less. I think though I do NOT KNOW Dr Bob may see this name change rule has potential.
Some of us may just disagree and that is OK...I for one am for the cap and have been reading the site and a member for many years though some of you may not have seen a lot of posts made by me.
For me I cannot imagine having any name that would make it hard for me to post seeking or giving support. But that is my feeling and opinion. I guess if I did mess up I would find that in 3 attempts I could achieve a name that would allow me to be supportive as well as give support.
> " I wonder if it's a lot of busy work for you Dr Bob..."
>
> Adding a limit will mean more work. Records to keep and appeals to deal with, this would be ongoing. Initial coding and testing.
>
> I can't see an effective way to track this, it is so easy to register with a new e-mail account from a different IP.
>
> This seems a bad solution seeking a problem that is not a big deal to many here. have we heard from folks that change frequently ? Best not to assume their reasons for changing frequently. Or at the least not to assume the negative, unless there is evidence otherwise.
Posted by gardenergirl on January 7, 2007, at 19:38:30
In reply to Re: cap on Name changes » notfred, posted by Fallen4MyT on January 7, 2007, at 19:20:06
> I myself am not assuming. I do not know who may be assuming. I feel some may be assuming that names are changed for valid reason only.
How do you determine what's valid and what's not?
gg
Posted by Fallen4MyT on January 7, 2007, at 19:43:44
In reply to from the most attention seeking person EVER! » Fallen4MyT, posted by karen_kay on January 7, 2007, at 13:40:25
These are good ideas but they have nothing to do with this topic. I use to be a greeter on the newbie board. Maybe, being you have ideas on this you could start your own thread ON THAT topic? Many may have ideas to help them. I tend to stick to topics when I am in a thread on X I talk about X
> i've never changed my name. i'd think if someone wants attention, they'd get more by retaining their name. lord knows the poor newbies get so little attention. how bout suggestions for that? how to make the newbies feel even more welcome (and please don't let it involved compromising photos. never again!)
Posted by Fallen4MyT on January 7, 2007, at 19:56:46
In reply to Re: cap on Name changes » Fallen4MyT, posted by gardenergirl on January 7, 2007, at 19:38:30
> > I myself am not assuming. I do not know who may be assuming. I feel some may be assuming that names are changed for valid reason only.
>
> How do you determine what's valid and what's not?
>
> gg
GG I did not state I have determined one way or another I said MAY have...that leaves it open to the reader. I feel there may be valid reasons and their may be not so valid reasons. I FEEL also that a few name changes a year could cover most to all mistakes one could make in picking a message board name. I am not a black and white thinker that is why I have looked at this from all sides and feel a few name changes could be helpful and too many could lead someone to avoid working on the issues that create within them a need for a name change.
Posted by karen_kay on January 7, 2007, at 20:05:18
In reply to Re: whoa! » karen_kay, posted by Fallen4MyT on January 7, 2007, at 14:20:41
sorry, is that better?
and lucky you to have never regretted posting anything. i'm already starting to regret anything i've written on this thread.
Posted by Fallen4MyT on January 7, 2007, at 20:11:17
In reply to FALLEN is not attention seeking » Fallen4MyT, posted by karen_kay on January 7, 2007, at 20:05:18
Thank you KK I appreciate this...I am sorry you feel regret over some posting. I tend to take a moment before I speak or write so that I do not regret what I say or even do in my off line life. I am not robotic by any means lol but I think I tend to think ahead on how things could impact someone else..as well as myself. There are times I would love to say or do things but I know if I did it would come back and bite me. Though I have a vivid imagination and that may help me keep my impulses in check.
> sorry, is that better?
>
> and lucky you to have never regretted posting anything. i'm already starting to regret anything i've written on this thread.
Posted by notfred on January 7, 2007, at 21:06:08
In reply to Re: from the most attention seeking person EVER! » karen_kay, posted by Fallen4MyT on January 7, 2007, at 14:15:11
".I asked Dr Bob because he is a doctor. "
Where was this covered in medical school ?
Somewhat of a tangent but I think this is a problem on this site. People treat and expect Dr. Bob to act here as a medical doc. Despite Dr Bob making this clear. Not to mention the medical ethics issues.Dr Bob is the ***moderator*** and ***owner*** of this board. I would think the moderator and/or owner would have an informed opinion on name change limits. I cannot see how a medical doc would.
Posted by Fallen4MyT on January 7, 2007, at 21:26:07
In reply to Re: from the most attention seeking person EVER!, posted by notfred on January 7, 2007, at 21:06:08
I know who and what Dr Bob does and that he owns the site I have been a member for MANY years. However, I do know he is still a doctor and reads the posts and emails sent to him (we do not read his emails, babble mail etc) thus I asked him that ONE question. I also asked for opinions on caps by ALL but that ONE question I asked of Dr Bob and he is free not to reply.
> ".I asked Dr Bob because he is a doctor. "
>
>
> Where was this covered in medical school ?
> Somewhat of a tangent but I think this is a problem on this site. People treat and expect Dr. Bob to act here as a medical doc. Despite Dr Bob making this clear. Not to mention the medical ethics issues.
>
> Dr Bob is the ***moderator*** and ***owner*** of this board. I would think the moderator and/or owner would have an informed opinion on name change limits. I cannot see how a medical doc would.
>
Posted by gardenergirl on January 8, 2007, at 11:13:45
In reply to Re: cap on Name changes, posted by Fallen4MyT on January 7, 2007, at 19:56:46
> > > I myself am not assuming. I do not know who may be assuming. I feel some may be assuming that names are changed for valid reason only.
> >
> > How do you determine what's valid and what's not?
> >
> > gg
>
>
> GG I did not state I have determined one way or another I said MAY have...Actually, you said you didn't know who *may* be *assuming*. Your use of "may" in this case is not modifying "valid". Hence, my question.
> I feel there may be valid reasons and their may be not so valid reasons.
Again, then, what determines what's a "valid" reason and what's a "not so valid" reason?
>...and too many could lead someone to avoid working on the issues that create within them a need for a name change.
Similarly, how is someone else's alleged "issue that creates within them a need for a name change" a problem for anyone else? Who are we to decide that rules should be made to help others address their "issues"? Or that someone else should address their own "issues" at all?
I'm uncomfortable with this line of reasoning as justification of a new rule change.
gg
Posted by GGGabbi on January 8, 2007, at 18:33:45
In reply to Re: cap on Name changes » notfred, posted by gardenergirl on January 7, 2007, at 19:03:29
Three wasn't actually a suggestion.
I was using it as meaning more than a couple not a final number.
Posted by Fallen4MyT on January 8, 2007, at 19:23:58
In reply to Re: cap on Name changes » Fallen4MyT, posted by gardenergirl on January 8, 2007, at 11:13:45
> > > > I myself am not assuming. I do not know who may be assuming. I feel some may be assuming that names are changed for valid reason only.
> > >
> > > How do you determine what's valid and what's not?
> > >
> > > gg
> >
> >
> > GG I did not state I have determined one way or another I said MAY have...
>
> Actually, you said you didn't know who *may* be *assuming*. Your use of "may" in this case is not modifying "valid". Hence, my question.
>
> > I feel there may be valid reasons and their may be not so valid reasons.
>
> Again, then, what determines what's a "valid" reason and what's a "not so valid" reason?
>
> >...and too many could lead someone to avoid working on the issues that create within them a need for a name change.
>
> Similarly, how is someone else's alleged "issue that creates within them a need for a name change" a problem for anyone else? Who are we to decide that rules should be made to help others address their "issues"? Or that someone else should address their own "issues" at all?
>
> I'm uncomfortable with this line of reasoning as justification of a new rule change.
>
> gg
>
>
>One could wonder who are we to reason there isn't a need for a cap! WE have all had a say in many rules on here..who are we to say on anything in here at all really? How is this suggestion any different? Dr Bob has stated he is open to the subject. I feel that is enough reason to consider it.
It's Dr Bob's site and his call. I will not debate nor argue as that would not be civil and I am bound by the rules.
I am stating my feelings and opinions as well as beliefs. I understand some do not agree you being one GG
Posted by gardenergirl on January 8, 2007, at 20:39:00
In reply to Re: cap on Name changes » gardenergirl, posted by Fallen4MyT on January 8, 2007, at 19:23:58
It's really a simple question, Fallen. You've referenced "valid" name changes versus "not so valid" name changes. I would like to know from you or from anyone what that means. I never knew there were "valid" name changes and "not so valid" name changes. I just thought there were name changes. So I'm sure you can understand my confusion.
gg
Posted by Fallen4MyT on January 8, 2007, at 20:59:08
In reply to Re: cap on Name changes » Fallen4MyT, posted by gardenergirl on January 8, 2007, at 20:39:00
> It's really a simple question, Fallen. You've referenced "valid" name changes versus "not so valid" name changes. I would like to know from you or from anyone what that means. I never knew there were "valid" name changes and "not so valid" name changes. I just thought there were name changes. So I'm sure you can understand my confusion.
>
> ggNo to be very honest I don't understand your (as you state) confusion but that is O.K it may just be a sematics issue. Wow in all the years I have been a member on here I have never heard from you this much. You may babblemail me if you wish but on this I feel we are just going in circles and both still and will feel as we do. That is really O.K we do not have to agree.
Posted by notfred on January 8, 2007, at 23:38:23
In reply to Re: cap on Name changes » gardenergirl, posted by Fallen4MyT on January 8, 2007, at 19:23:58
I agree with gardenergirl's points. I would also point out that debate is civil. That is the point;
it is a debate and not an argument.If it is not broken, do not fix it. No one has brought forth a hard case where this has been a problem.
Posted by Fallen4MyT on January 9, 2007, at 0:26:31
In reply to Re: cap on Name changes, posted by notfred on January 8, 2007, at 23:38:23
> I agree with gardenergirl's points. I would also point out that debate is civil. That is the point;
> it is a debate and not an argument.
>
> If it is not broken, do not fix it. No one has brought forth a hard case where this has been a problem.
Dr Bob stated above he too has wondered on caps. Could he too feel it is broken?
I believe and feel it IS broken....and....I have stated why..to the best of my ability within the PB guildlines.I have not seen much said on why someone would need to change their name 1000 times a year.
I didn't say debate is not civil it can be. I am just not one to go in circles. I never have been *on this site*.
Well OK once I did way back. I stood up against private gated communities. I left (did not post) in protest and left for wow maybe 2 years or so. I did this NOT because I thought it would change Dr Bob's mind but because I felt if they did it I would not feel comfortable excluding some members from some rooms. I felt and feel it is much worse than a block. I could not be happy knowing orange people could not join with the purple people
I have very strong views and respect all viewpoints ...with that I hope others will respect mine
I came back when I was told the gated communities did not happen and only because of that.
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.