Psycho-Babble Administration Thread 592100

Shown: posts 4 to 28 of 28. Go back in thread:

 

Re: Toronto publicity issues

Posted by gardenergirl on December 26, 2005, at 16:38:31

In reply to Re: Toronto publicity issues, posted by jamestheyonger on December 26, 2005, at 16:13:02

If I come to Toronto, I don't plan to participate in the ApA presentation. I would, however, like to join fellow Babblers in social activities, as we did in Chicago.

Those activities were kept fairly private via making arrangements via a private listserv for participants. I felt reasonably secure with that system and recommend its use again.

gg

 

hotel security » jamestheyonger

Posted by pseudoname on December 26, 2005, at 19:28:20

In reply to Re: Toronto publicity issues, posted by jamestheyonger on December 26, 2005, at 16:13:02

> Professional conferences generally have security that can deal with problems such as these.

Maybe psychiatric meetings have different arrangments, but at the professional conferences I've been to, nothing prevents an unregistered person from entering the back of a small workshop after it has begun. And nothing would prevent anyone from standing in the hallways around the meeting rooms snapping pictures; in fact this goes on.

Hotel security people could help if an unregistered person got very disruptive in a meeting; he/she could be physically removed if someone from the meeting went & got security personnel. By that time, the situation has already gone way too far.

 

Re: hotel security

Posted by jamestheyonger on December 26, 2005, at 19:58:24

In reply to hotel security » jamestheyonger, posted by pseudoname on December 26, 2005, at 19:28:20

"maybe psychiatric meetings have different arrangments, but at the professional conferences I've been to, nothing prevents an unregistered person from entering the back of a small workshop after it has begun. And nothing would prevent anyone from standing in the hallways around the meeting rooms snapping pictures; in fact this goes on.
>
> Hotel security people could help if an unregistered person got very disruptive in a meeting; he/she could be physically removed if someone from the meeting went & got security personnel. By that time, the situation has already gone way too far."

Well, if you do not feel safe, then you have the option of not attending.

 

Re: hotel security » jamestheyonger

Posted by Gabbix2 on December 26, 2005, at 22:56:52

In reply to Re: hotel security, posted by jamestheyonger on December 26, 2005, at 19:58:24

> Well, if you do not feel safe, then you have the option of not attending.


Duh...

However a perfectly acceptable option is discussing things on admin in order to establish what can be done, or is being done to make those who wish to participate feel safer.


 

Re: hotel security

Posted by jamestheyonger on December 26, 2005, at 23:12:33

In reply to Re: hotel security » jamestheyonger, posted by Gabbix2 on December 26, 2005, at 22:56:52

> > Well, if you do not feel safe, then you have the option of not attending.
>
>
> Duh...
>
> However a perfectly acceptable option is discussing things on admin in order to establish what can be done, or is being done to make those who wish to participate feel safer.
>
>
>

Well, do you have any suggestions ? The poster mentioned some things about the slight chance of this happening:

"Babble that he/she would take significant time & money and (probably) fly to a (probably) foreign city and even risk police involvement"

I mentioned that there is security to deal with disruptions.

I think I saw this issue discussed before, and several came to the same conclusion I did.

 

Re: Toronto publicity issues

Posted by Deneb on December 27, 2005, at 2:02:11

In reply to Toronto publicity issues, posted by pseudoname on December 25, 2005, at 15:22:52

I think we should know if there have been any specific threats. Have there been any threats of protest Dr. Bob?

I will still go even if there have been threats. I think people will be good. I'm more afraid of the actual presenting.

Deneb

 

Re: hotel security » jamestheyonger

Posted by LegWarmers on December 27, 2005, at 12:19:18

In reply to Re: hotel security, posted by jamestheyonger on December 26, 2005, at 23:12:33

> > > Well, if you do not feel safe, then you have the option of not attending.
> >
> >
> > Duh...
> >
> > However a perfectly acceptable option is discussing things on admin in order to establish what can be done, or is being done to make those who wish to participate feel safer.
> >
> >
> >
>
> Well, do you have any suggestions ? The poster mentioned some things about the slight chance of this happening:
>
> "Babble that he/she would take significant time & money and (probably) fly to a (probably) foreign city and even risk police involvement"
>
> I mentioned that there is security to deal with disruptions.
>
> I think I saw this issue discussed before, and several came to the same conclusion I did.
>
>


I think this should be of concern to posters. My suggestion might be to refrain from posting too many more details about time and place and keep it off the boards some how. Maybe when the posters who know for sure they are attending can set something up off the boards. I also agree that the chances of this happening are slight to none but why set yourself up for something when that can be avoided.

 

Re: hotel security » jamestheyonger

Posted by Gabbix2 on December 27, 2005, at 15:35:44

In reply to Re: hotel security, posted by jamestheyonger on December 26, 2005, at 23:12:33

> > > Well, if you do not feel safe, then you have the option of not attending.
> >
> >
> > Duh...
> >
> Well, do you have any suggestions ? The poster mentioned some things about the slight chance of this happening:


Nope. I'm not attending, nor do I have any familiarity or concerns with security issues.
You may not have meant it to sound this way, but socially, stating the obvious, as in "If you are concerned for your safety you have the option of not attending" is usually intended to dismiss people.

 

Re: Toronto publicity issues

Posted by Dr. Bob on December 27, 2005, at 19:18:13

In reply to Re: Toronto publicity issues, posted by Deneb on December 27, 2005, at 2:02:11

> I think we should know if there have been any specific threats. Have there been any threats of protest Dr. Bob?

No threats. But lots of anxiety...

Bob

 

Re: Toronto publicity issues » pseudoname

Posted by thuso on December 27, 2005, at 19:31:02

In reply to Toronto publicity issues, posted by pseudoname on December 25, 2005, at 15:22:52

I wouldn't be too worried. Personally, I would rather something happen to me there than randomly on the street. I think with all the MD's there, you're much better off! ;-)

And I would probably hesitate posting something that could cause undue anxiety on those who are planning to go. Some of them are already anxious enough (and excited at the same time).

There are a million "what if's" we can bring up. I'm going to try and stay as far away from that as I can. I'm a world-class athlete at the "what if" game! :-P hahaha!

 

anxiety vs hostility » Dr. Bob

Posted by pseudoname on December 27, 2005, at 19:41:20

In reply to Re: Toronto publicity issues, posted by Dr. Bob on December 27, 2005, at 19:18:13

> > Have there been any threats of protest Dr. Bob?
> No threats. But lots of anxiety...

Seeing lots of HOSTILITY was the reason I raised the issue.

I read some things that a few of Dr Bob's most vitriolic Web critics have written, and it made me pause. If there are very many more people out there with intense resentment toward Bob (and toward other Babblers, who are sometimes mentioned by name), and if there are a few "Babble-opponents" who are energetic & active and have enduring grudges, then I think the chances increase that at least one hostile person may want to show up at the APA to embarass Dr Bob's "supporters".

Dr Bob:
   I don't think this should be waved away as simply "anxiety". It is information, and YOU told me it made sense to discuss it. Was that so you could glibly dismiss it?!

 

Re: anxiety vs hostility

Posted by Deneb on December 27, 2005, at 19:50:29

In reply to anxiety vs hostility » Dr. Bob, posted by pseudoname on December 27, 2005, at 19:41:20

>I think the chances increase that at least one hostile person may want to show up at the APA to embarass Dr Bob's "supporters".

I don't see myself as going to "support" Dr. Bob or this site. I have good and bad things to say about Psycho-Babble.

Deneb

 

Re: anxiety vs hostility » Deneb

Posted by pseudoname on December 27, 2005, at 20:06:26

In reply to Re: anxiety vs hostility, posted by Deneb on December 27, 2005, at 19:50:29

> >I think the chances increase that at least one hostile person may want to show up at the APA to embarass Dr Bob's "supporters".
> I don't see myself as going to "support" Dr. Bob or this site. I have good and bad things to say about Psycho-Babble.

Absolutely!

I put it in quotation marks for that very reason.

I think a person who deeply resented Dr Bob and was going to disrupt a presentation (or whatever) would probably see any Babblers there as supporting Dr. Bob. For comparison, other people saw the creation of the Wikipedia article as "supporting" Dr. Bob when I saw it as just positive, negative, and neutral information.

 

what-ifs » thuso

Posted by pseudoname on December 27, 2005, at 21:18:56

In reply to Re: Toronto publicity issues » pseudoname, posted by thuso on December 27, 2005, at 19:31:02

> There are a million "what if's" [...]

I'm guessing you haven't seen Bob's web critics that I've seen. The intensity of very personal, enduring hostility in some of that writing about Bob & other Babblers should give anyone pause.

I'm stuck somewhat because for several reasons I can't quote it or link to it. For one thing, I don't want to allege that someone who publishes a strongly worded, extremely critical article about Babbler X* is likely to do anything else to embarrass X. He/she may just want to write vitriolically about X and leave it at that. But at the very least, X should be alerted to the writing, and other people should be aware that such energetic hostility toward Babblers is out there before they expose themselves at APA.

> And I would probably hesitate posting something that could cause undue anxiety on those who are planning to go.

Maybe we can agree to disagree about whether this information is "due". Surely the people who are going are adults and can evaluate the issue for themselves, in part by reading your responses. That's a core principle of Babble, right? For a while, a few had this info and no one else did; now it's in the open. I'm not in a paternalistic position of judging what other Babblers don't need to know.
______
   *Babbler X = a prominent Babbler

 

Re: what-ifs » pseudoname

Posted by thuso on December 27, 2005, at 22:35:46

In reply to what-ifs » thuso, posted by pseudoname on December 27, 2005, at 21:18:56

> Maybe we can agree to disagree about whether this information is "due". Surely the people who are going are adults and can evaluate the issue for themselves, in part by reading your responses. That's a core principle of Babble, right? For a while, a few had this info and no one else did; now it's in the open. I'm not in a paternalistic position of judging what other Babblers don't need to know.
>

I wasn't trying to disagree with you at all. I was saying that *I* would probably hesitate... Just from my experiences with people who get anxious easily (friends, family, etc), even mentioning something that can spark fear can easily cause a person to back out of what they originally were going to do. I've seen this happen IRL way too often and being the pessimist that I am, I try not to verbalize negative possibilities unless necessary. I can really freak people out without even realizing it.

In the end, I don't agree with your post as a whole, but I do understand your worries. People should understand what they are about to do...good and/or bad. I think there are more good things that will come out of this experience than bad things for the participants, so that I what I am going to focus on.

 

Re: what-ifs

Posted by Deneb on December 27, 2005, at 23:47:53

In reply to what-ifs » thuso, posted by pseudoname on December 27, 2005, at 21:18:56

> > There are a million "what if's" [...]
>
> I'm guessing you haven't seen Bob's web critics that I've seen. The intensity of very personal, enduring hostility in some of that writing about Bob & other Babblers should give anyone pause.

OK, that scares me a lot. Please tell me if I'm Babbler X.

 

Re: what-ifs » pseudoname

Posted by Gabbix2 on December 28, 2005, at 0:34:39

In reply to what-ifs » thuso, posted by pseudoname on December 27, 2005, at 21:18:56

There's a blog I read occassionally, about Dr. Bob.
I don't think it's by the web critics you're referring to though, as I don't find it excessive, but a critique of what exists openly.
Rather like someone with extensive knowledge of the bible pointing out it's inconsistancies passage by passage..

 

Re: what-ifs » Gabbix2

Posted by sleepygirl on December 28, 2005, at 0:58:51

In reply to Re: what-ifs » pseudoname, posted by Gabbix2 on December 28, 2005, at 0:34:39

Really? someone has a blog just to talk about Dr. Bob? (not that there's anything wrong with talking about Dr. Bob), but I guess you have to be pretty interested to have a blog about it

Perhaps we'll have to come disguised as psychiatrists.

 

Re: what-ifs » sleepygirl

Posted by Gabbix2 on December 28, 2005, at 1:12:47

In reply to Re: what-ifs » Gabbix2, posted by sleepygirl on December 28, 2005, at 0:58:51

Hi Sleepygirl!

It does sound odd I know, I won't try to explain cause I would have been kind of .. dismissive of it a while ago, I think, no matter what anybody had said.
Now after being here a while I can understand why some people are very angry.

We're a vulnerable group.

 

Re: what-ifs » pseudoname

Posted by alexandra_k on December 28, 2005, at 3:35:30

In reply to what-ifs » thuso, posted by pseudoname on December 27, 2005, at 21:18:56

> Surely the people who are going are adults and can evaluate the issue for themselves, in part by reading your responses. That's a core principle of Babble, right? For a while, a few had this info and no one else did; now it's in the open. I'm not in a paternalistic position of judging what other Babblers don't need to know.

well said, i agree with you 100%.

Of course... there can be a fine line between playing on other peoples fears and providing them with information so they can make an informed decision.

sometimes they can seem a bit confused...

but...

to the best of my knowledge...

informed consent is not obtained when the information is restricted.
when relevant bits of information (information that might make a difference to ones rational decision) is ommitted.

if babblers can't navigate their way through a diversity of opinion and make up their own mind then i guess it makes a mockery of the notion of babblers giving informed consent...

but i think it is important for people to make a rational decision about this rather than coming to regret it later...

like i regret many of my posts...

and there is nothing i can do about them.

this is what it is about isn't it...

this is what part of it is about...

'disgruntled' people...

posters who believe it is unethical of you to keep posts that people make at an all time low here in the archives indefinately. for friends and family and enemies and judges and employers and employees to read...

the damage
the humiliation

that could cause...

but thats nothing when it comes to the good of people reading the archives... that is seen as a good for the group...

and f*ck the individuals

and there it is...


 

No Toronto publicity issues

Posted by jay on December 28, 2005, at 7:42:53

In reply to Toronto publicity issues, posted by pseudoname on December 25, 2005, at 15:22:52

Listen...they just had the AA worldwide meeting here last year...with I dunno...5 or so thousand people. They even got the front page of the biggest paper in Canada, the Toronto Star, and they did it with full anonimity. I certainly think our little group could for-sure handle the issue. Toronto is a great, safe, clean, and beautiful city, and it would be a shame if it was passed over. We have some of the top mental health research centers in the world here. If AA can do it, *WE* can certainly do it. We can easily have *closed-door* meetings.

Jay

 

Oops. Sorry. » Deneb

Posted by pseudoname on December 28, 2005, at 10:00:07

In reply to Re: what-ifs, posted by Deneb on December 27, 2005, at 23:47:53

> OK, that scares me a lot. Please tell me if I'm Babbler X.

I'm sorry, Deneb! I should've realized how unclear I was leaving that!

After I found the articles last week, I notified "Babbler X" privately, and he/she replied. So you can be assured it's not you.

I really didn't want to scare anyone, but I thought this stuff should be open.

And I still hope that many people will go.

 

a couple ideas » jay

Posted by pseudoname on December 28, 2005, at 13:55:14

In reply to No Toronto publicity issues, posted by jay on December 28, 2005, at 7:42:53

> If AA can do it, *WE* can certainly do it. We can easily have *closed-door* meetings.

Right! A couple ideas I had...

  •We could put someone at the door to check credentials throughout the workshop. Maybe someone who wants to go but doesn't want to present?
  •We could send someone into the hall afterward to make sure no uncredentialled photographers were out there.
  •Maybe some would prefer NOT to have their posting name on their name tag? That way, no stranger wandering through could connect your face with your long, personal posting history. You could still disclose your posting ID to small groups & individuals.

Planning like that could be enough to deter any pranksters from coming and to reassure the Babblers who want to participate.

I agree with everyone that this is a very low risk, as I said at the start. Any "grudgers" who'd like to hurt Bob's feelings that much probably don't have the resources to travel to Toronto and would probably be afraid of getting humiliated by the unflappable Dr Bob, anyway. (Props to gg for that observation.)

But the risk isn't absolute zero. Some ideas like these are good to have available. Thanks to everyone for this really civil discussion.

 

in case anyone cares..

Posted by Gabbix2 on December 28, 2005, at 15:27:28

In reply to Re: what-ifs » sleepygirl, posted by Gabbix2 on December 28, 2005, at 1:12:47

I just wanted to clarify, that what I had read about Babble and Dr. Bob on the web was not the same as what Pseudoname had seen.

I don't think there is anything wrong with criticizing Dr. Bob, he has put himself in the position where he's going to be observed and criticized publically, but I think targeting any poster is revolting.

 

Re: anxiety and hostility

Posted by Dr. Bob on December 29, 2005, at 1:20:05

In reply to anxiety vs hostility » Dr. Bob, posted by pseudoname on December 27, 2005, at 19:41:20

> > > Have there been any threats of protest Dr. Bob?
> >
> > No threats. But lots of anxiety...
>
> Seeing lots of HOSTILITY was the reason I raised the issue.
>
> Dr Bob:
> I don't think this should be waved away as simply "anxiety". It is information, and YOU told me it made sense to discuss it. Was that so you could glibly dismiss it?!

Sorry, I didn't mean to be dismissive. I don't see it as anxiety vs hostility, but as anxiety about hostility. And maybe about other concerns, too. Plus, anxiety isn't "simply" anxiety, anxiety is a sign that something's bothering someone. Which I do think it makes sense to discuss.

Bob


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.