Psycho-Babble Administration Thread 432113

Shown: posts 1 to 15 of 15. This is the beginning of the thread.

 

Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung and Dinah-Gdoferth

Posted by Lou Pilder on December 20, 2004, at 15:40:34

Dr. Hsiung and Dinah,
I am not requesting that you make a determination as to the acceptability or not in relation to the guidlines of the forum, for the post in question is left on the board without any administrative notation and others here have posted that they think that if a post has no admionistrative notation, that it is acceptable. Regardless if the post is acceptable or not, I am requesting that it be deleted.
The poster writes,[...Jesus is the God of this earth...].
Lou Pilder
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faith/20041120/msgs/431234.html

 

Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung and Dinah-~suprt?

Posted by Lou Pilder on December 20, 2004, at 15:59:54

In reply to Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung and Dinah-Gdoferth, posted by Lou Pilder on December 20, 2004, at 15:40:34

Dr. Hsiung and Dinah,
There are many reasons that I have to request that the post be deleted. The opening paragraph of the post writes,[..Lou, ...don't read this...hurt your feelings ..feel put down...].
Yes, I do feel put down when I read the post. And if I feel put down, then I believe that there is the potential for others to feel put down also. And this forum's mission is stated as to be for support, so I feel that the post, which has no administartaive notation toward it, could have the potential for others to think,IMO, that the administration is endorsing what the post writes.
The guidlines for the faith board write that you can post but [..not to put down those of other faiths...]. Is writing ,[...Jesus is the God of this earth...]supportive to jews that do not think so? Or to other faiths that do not think that Jesus is the God of this earth?
Lou PIlder

 

Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung and Dinah-~suprt?

Posted by malthus on December 20, 2004, at 17:10:08

In reply to Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung and Dinah-~suprt?, posted by Lou Pilder on December 20, 2004, at 15:59:54

Lou:

You wrote:
<<Is writing ,[...Jesus is the God of this earth...]supportive to jews that do not think so? Or to other faiths that do not think that Jesus is the God of this earth?>>

In your own post you have done what you are complaining about. You are saying that you do NOT believe that Jesus is the God of this earth (I'm aware from your other posts that you are jewish.) Couldn't a Christian (using your logic) feel unsupported by the fact that you do not think Jesus is the God of this earth? Do you think your own post which I have quoted from above be deleted as well?

 

Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung and Dinah-~suprt? » malthus

Posted by Gabbix2 on December 20, 2004, at 19:20:27

In reply to Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung and Dinah-~suprt?, posted by malthus on December 20, 2004, at 17:10:08

I think there is a marked difference between saying "I think" or believe something to be true, as Lou did, and stating a belief to be fact, as did the post in question.

 

Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung and Dinah-~suprt?

Posted by malthus on December 20, 2004, at 19:59:57

In reply to Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung and Dinah-~suprt? » malthus, posted by Gabbix2 on December 20, 2004, at 19:20:27

>> I think there is a marked difference between saying "I think" or believe something to be true, as Lou did, and stating a belief to be fact, as did the post in question.>>

Why not just say then that he disagrees with the writer saying that his/her religious "beliefs" are "facts" and should therefore be administratively deleted without adding that he "thinks" or "believes" differently in his religion (or any other.) By mentioning that jews don't "believe" or "think" that Jesus is God, he runs the risk of offending someone as well.

P.S. I'm not offended by either position. Are you?

 

Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung and Dinah-~suprt? » malthus

Posted by Gabbix2 on December 20, 2004, at 20:23:20

In reply to Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung and Dinah-~suprt?, posted by malthus on December 20, 2004, at 19:59:57

>> Why not just say then that he disagrees with the writer saying that his/her religious "beliefs" are "facts" and should therefore be administratively deleted without adding that he "thinks" or "believes" differently in his religion (or any other.)

Well there are many different ways it could be said but he's not me, so he'll express his feelings in his Lou way, nobody elses, just as I express myself in my Gabbi way. I wouldn't expect otherwise. And by saying that he didn't believe "Jesus is lord" to be true, he also included the possibility that people of beliefs other than his own may have been offended by that statement, that is perfectly in sync with the spirit of the Faith board, which is to be supportive of all beliefs.

> By mentioning that jews don't "believe" or "think" that Jesus is God, he runs the risk of offending someone as well.

Not really, most people who post on Faith are aware that there are religions that don't consider Jesus to be God, however even if it did offend, to not be allowed to say what one's religious beliefs are on a mult-faith board would be ludicrous, and this was something meant to be applicable in the context of the Faith board, and the Faith Board guidelines.

> P.S. I'm not offended by either position. Are you?

Yes I do get offended when people state their belief as being the only truth, However, what goes on on the faith board doesn't really get to me, but to some it's very important.

 

Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung and Dinah-~suprt?

Posted by malthus on December 20, 2004, at 21:09:51

In reply to Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung and Dinah-~suprt? » malthus, posted by Gabbix2 on December 20, 2004, at 20:23:20

>> Well there are many different ways it could be said but he's not me, so he'll express his feelings in his Lou way, nobody elses, just as I express myself in my Gabbi way. I wouldn't expect otherwise. >>

Ouch.

<<And by saying that he didn't believe "Jesus is lord" to be true, he also included the possibility that people of beliefs other than his own may have been offended by that statement, that is perfectly in sync with the spirit of the Faith board, which is to be supportive of all beliefs.>>

Requesting that a post be deleted is not at all supportive of the person who wrote it and their beliefs (unless it's along the lines of Hermann Munster or Daniella Red, which this post clearly was not.)

> By mentioning that jews don't "believe" or "think" that Jesus is God, he runs the risk of offending someone as well.

What are your thoughts on why the poster asked Lou not to read the post initially?


> Not really, most people who post on Faith are aware that there are religions that don't consider Jesus to be God, however even if it did offend, to not be allowed to say what one's religious beliefs are on a mult-faith board would be ludicrous,>>

I agree wholeheartedly.

<<and this was something meant to be applicable in the context of the Faith board, and the Faith Board guidelines.>>

I disagree.

> P.S. I'm not offended by either position. Are you?
>
>> Yes I do get offended when people state their belief as being the only truth, However, what goes on on the faith board doesn't really get to me, but to some it's very important.>>

I don't believe that the original poster stated that his/her belief was the only truth.

It will be interesting to see whether or not Dr. Bob will decide to delete the original post.

 

Lou offers some clarification-grosoff

Posted by Lou Pilder on December 20, 2004, at 21:48:00

In reply to Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung and Dinah-~suprt?, posted by malthus on December 20, 2004, at 21:09:51

One of the aspects of this discussion centers around whether the post belongs in the catagory of a post that could be deleted.
The FAQ writes that grossly offensive posts can be deleted. The question at hand here ,then, is :[...is the post grossly offensive...]?
Now it has been mentioned that Munster's post and Danellia's post could be in that catagory.
Then what is the board's definition of "grossly offensive"? If Munster's and Daniella's posts are suggested to fall in that catagory, then could not the post in question also be considered to also fall in that catagory?
A statement in question that writes,[..Jesus is {the} God of this earth...],I think is diffenent than,[...Jesus is {a} God of this earth...].
Lou

 

Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung and Dinah-~suprt? » malthus

Posted by Gabbix2 on December 20, 2004, at 21:50:06

In reply to Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung and Dinah-~suprt?, posted by malthus on December 20, 2004, at 21:09:51

>
> Requesting that a post be deleted is not at all supportive of the person who wrote it and their beliefs (unless it's along the lines of Hermann Munster or Daniella Red, which this post clearly was not.)

No, and perhaps I myself would not ask for it's deletion. However I think it's semantics whether or not asking that a post which has flouted the guidelines of the Faith board be deleted or asking that it recieve a P.B.C. or a Please rephrase. I'm sure Lou feels that by requesting this he is being supportive of those who do not have the same beliefs, at the risk of appearing unsupportive to one poster. It's not an unusual circumstance at Babble it just depends on what you find deeply offensive, and that's individual. Obviously the poster was aware it
Lou would take exception to what was said or they would not have advised him not to read it, I personally don't find that acceptable either, and it offends me, it reminds me too much of high school and whispering behind someone's back.

> > By mentioning that jews don't "believe" or "think" that Jesus is God, he runs the risk of offending someone as well.
>
> What are your thoughts on why the poster asked Lou not to read the post initially?

>I don't want to get into conjecture.
>
>
> > Not really, most people who post on Faith are aware that there are religions that don't consider Jesus to be God, however even if it did offend, to not be allowed to say what one's religious beliefs are on a mult-faith board would be ludicrous,>>
>
> I agree wholeheartedly.
>
> <<and this was something meant to be applicable in the context of the Faith board, and the Faith Board guidelines.>>
>
> I disagree.

It happened on the faithboard,
I'm not sure how it could be seen as not being applicable.

However here is a quote from Lou's Original request just in case [The guidlines for the faith board write that you can post but [..not to put down those of other faiths...]


> > P.S. I'm not offended by either position. Are you?
> >
> >> Yes I do get offended when people state their belief as being the only truth, However, what goes on on the faith board doesn't really get to me, but to some it's very important.>>
>
> I don't believe that the original poster stated that his/her belief was the only truth.

Well I don't think you've read that many posts on the faith board then! In this case however That it was the truth was implied by it's form. It was phrased as a statement "Jesus is Lord" .
Adding anything else would have been redundant.
Dr Bob has in the past advised posters to be supportive of other faiths by saying such things rephrased such as "People of my faith believe that Jesus is Lord"

> It will be interesting to see whether or not Dr. Bob will decide to delete the original post.

Dr. Bob doesn't delete posts.

This is my last post on this topic.
I'm not really into the Faith board, I had originally intended to support Lou what I'd seen as a huge difference in a manner of phrasing things. The difference was at one time crucial to Dr. Bob's guidelines of the Faith board too, perhaps he's being more lax this week. I don't know.


 

Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung and Dinah-~suprt?

Posted by Fallen4MyT on December 20, 2004, at 21:56:48

In reply to Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung and Dinah-~suprt? » malthus, posted by Gabbix2 on December 20, 2004, at 21:50:06

The problem I have with the post was whomever the poster was and I really do not know used Lou's name and to me that singles him out. I would feel badly if someone had a thread or post saying Fallen do not read this you won't like ir.....

 

Re: Lou offers some clarification-grosoff

Posted by malthus on December 20, 2004, at 22:01:06

In reply to Lou offers some clarification-grosoff, posted by Lou Pilder on December 20, 2004, at 21:48:00

> One of the aspects of this discussion centers around whether the post belongs in the catagory of a post that could be deleted.
> The FAQ writes that grossly offensive posts can be deleted. The question at hand here ,then, is :[...is the post grossly offensive...]?
>> Now it has been mentioned that Munster's post and Danellia's post could be in that catagory.

> Then what is the board's definition of "grossly offensive"? If Munster's and Daniella's posts are suggested to fall in that catagory, then could not the post in question also be considered to also fall in that catagory?

What similarities do you see between the Hermann Munster posts and the Daniella Red posts alongside the original MKB post? As I recall Hermann Munster was telling depressed people to kill themselves and Daniella Red said she was going to have mind control over us.

> A statement in question that writes,[..Jesus is {the} God of this earth...],I think is diffenent than,[...Jesus is {a} God of this earth...].

Are you saying that "Jesus is {the} God of this earth" in the above statement falls into the category of grossly offensive?

 

Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung and Dinah-~suprt?

Posted by malthus on December 20, 2004, at 22:45:01

In reply to Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung and Dinah-~suprt? » malthus, posted by Gabbix2 on December 20, 2004, at 21:50:06

>> Lou would take exception to what was said or they would not have advised him not to read it,

I would not have singled Lou out like that. I would have put something like "Triggering" in the memo line.

<<I personally don't find that acceptable either, and it offends me, it reminds me too much of high school and whispering behind someone's back.>>

Yes, that whole exclusive-group-of-friends thing can be really hurtful.

 

Lou offers clarification-depndonstandrd

Posted by Lou Pilder on December 20, 2004, at 23:38:48

In reply to Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung and Dinah-~suprt?, posted by malthus on December 20, 2004, at 22:45:01

The question is ,[...what is grossly offensive...]?
There is a test in communities to see if something is or is not and the test is variable as to the local. I have not seen the question here to have been been defined as to what the test is {in this community} to make that determination. Then does the post have to be grossly offensive to many or just one poster?
The aspects of the post in question are more than one aspect because of the opening telling me not to read it because I will feel put down etc....I feel very sad when I read that and would like not to have to see my name in such a statement and feel more comfortable here if the post was removed.
I feel that that is one aspect of a test for gross offensivness, but others,may not see it that way.
Another aspect is the statement that Jesus is the God of this earth. The guidlines for the faith board mention that statements like that could be felt to mean by others that their God , that is not Jesus, is not the God of this earth and hence could feel put down. And for the forum to allow a statement that says that one God is the God of this earth could mean that the forum endorses that and then could have the potential to mean that all the other Gods are less than Jesus, in this case, and others could feel demeaned. I feel very sad when I read the statement in question because I was told ahead of time not to read it. I would feel safer here if that post was taken off the board so that others could not have the potential to do the same.
Is the post in question grosssy offensive? It depends. It depends on a standard to be set so that a statement can be measured by that standard.
Lou

 

Lou's reminder to the administration-whnmhsch

Posted by Lou Pilder on January 31, 2011, at 21:54:19

In reply to Lou offers clarification-depndonstandrd, posted by Lou Pilder on December 20, 2004, at 23:38:48

Mr. Hsiung and his deputy,
In the thread here, my concern is outstanding.
Lou Pilder

 

Lou's reminder to the reminder to the admin

Posted by Lou Pilder on January 7, 2012, at 18:10:15

In reply to Lou's reminder to the administration-whnmhsch, posted by Lou Pilder on January 31, 2011, at 21:54:19

> Mr. Hsiung and his deputy,
> In the thread here, my concern is outstanding.
> Lou Pilder

Mr Hsiung and his deputy,
In regards to your policy to keep reminding you, the above.
Lou Pilder


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.