![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 82 to 106 of 225. Go back in thread:
Posted by Emme_V2 on July 11, 2013, at 18:10:11
In reply to Re: the big picture » 10derheart, posted by 10derheart on July 11, 2013, at 17:41:06
> :-) I just saw and read your post now.
>
> Spooky....in a good way.
>
> GMTA and all that, but in this case, I think it's just straightforward, plainspoken minds....
>
> I'm really confident it is not even just you and me.
>
>My eyes have glazed over a bit on all of this, but I think you guys are hitting on a lot of what I think. I think the situation is being overthought and the solution made to be much much harder than it needs to be.
I think the minimal moderation approach would work pretty well most of the time. To me, it would make sense to let the board generally take care of small brushfires on its own if they resolve quickly. But when a situation becomes really disruptive, step in and enforce the existing rules with a PBC or a short block (hope it's not needed). This really doesn't need to exhaust Bob emotionally or time-wise. FWIW, I do rather like having him around for some interaction in general (enforcement actions aside), and I would hope he'd find that involvement doesn't burden him.
Posted by 10derheart on July 11, 2013, at 19:38:53
In reply to Re: the big picture, posted by alexandra_k on July 11, 2013, at 18:06:57
I see next to nothing because I don't understand what Dr. Bob means - at all. Too many pronouns, too many metaphors...
I'm not a big fan of code. It's exhausting and frustrating and I'm likely to misunderstand it.
Posted by Phillipa on July 11, 2013, at 19:52:25
In reply to Whew! » 10derheart, posted by Dinah on July 11, 2013, at 17:31:28
I thought it was I. Phillipa
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 12, 2013, at 12:18:15
In reply to Re: the big picture » alexandra_k, posted by 10derheart on July 11, 2013, at 19:38:53
> I think the situation is being overthought and the solution made to be much much harder than it needs to be.
>
> I think the minimal moderation approach would work pretty well most of the time. To me, it would make sense to let the board generally take care of small brushfires on its own if they resolve quickly. But when a situation becomes really disruptive, step in and enforce the existing rules with a PBC or a short block (hope it's not needed). This really doesn't need to exhaust Bob emotionally or time-wise. FWIW, I do rather like having him around for some interaction in general (enforcement actions aside), and I would hope he'd find that involvement doesn't burden him.
>
> Emme_V2I agree. The question is, harder for whom? Or, where's the line between "small brushfires" and "really disruptive"? Would it exhaust posters emotionally or time-wise to take care of larger, more disruptive brushfires?
Thanks for liking to have me around. It's nice not to be alone.
--
> i see it as an invitation
> to participate
> in trying to make sense
> in trying to make things better
> in... persistence
>
> alexandra_k> I see next to nothing because I don't understand what Dr. Bob means - at all. Too many pronouns, too many metaphors...
>
> I'm not a big fan of code. It's exhausting and frustrating and I'm likely to misunderstand it.
>
> 10derheartIt can help if others can translate. Did Alex not help, or is it an invitation you have reservations about accepting?
--
> > 1. I can make a decision in my best interest, or the best interest of Babble.
>
> I wish there were a place where the best interests of both could be served. Apparently, you don't feel that there is such a place, as I am sure that you would seek to be there if there were. I am hoping that you will find this place with continued exploration. However, until such a time arrives, I would prefer that Psycho-Babble remain intact. I am not happy to learn that the continuance of Psycho-Babble must occur at your detriment.
>
> > 2. And if there are others with me between that rock and that hard place, maybe together we can learn ways to cope and find the energy to persevere.
>
> I'll try if you will.
>
> :-)
>
> - Scott1. I didn't mean to put that as an either-or. I definitely feel there are times when both can be served. Like now.
And I wonder about the other times. Maybe I'm like fossil fuel, and it might be nice if I remained available, but it might be even better if Babble could be less dependent on me. Then it would be even less either-or.
2. Thanks, it's nice not to be alone. :-)
Bob
Posted by Lou PIlder on July 12, 2013, at 15:55:22
In reply to Re: the big picture, posted by Dr. Bob on July 11, 2013, at 9:50:14
> > Is there some reason you can't or won't just come out and say you aren't willing to moderate any more?
> >
> > gardenergirl
>
> > Are you saying that you don't intend to do anything with posts like the ones that have been brought to your attention?
> >
> > If you say that you think those rules are fine under the existing rules, we can decide what to do.
> >
> > If you say they may not be but you have no intention of enforcing existing rules (and also have no intention of clarifying the new ones), then we can decide what to do.
> >
> > Dinah
>
> Sorry about being cryptic. I know I get that way sometimes.
>
> I'm willing to moderate.
>
> When I'm notified of posts, I'm enforcing existing rules and responding either on the board or to the posters who notified me. One exception is that I think right now it may be good for this community as a whole, and for me, to leave some of Lou's notifications outstanding.
>
> --
>
> > > Perhaps something related to legal advice or action of some sort?
> >
> > This is what I am thinking.
> >
> > - Scott
>
> > What seems to baffle us is why would someone with consummate power to make and change the rules ever be stuck?
> >
> > Toph
>
> > You sound a bit peeved, now. Did the mirror stung a little bit?
> >
> > gardenergirl
>
> 10der asked before what I meant by "the old model". Another aspect of it was relying on the power to define and enforce boundaries for acceptable behavior. That was how the administration made this a refuge.
>
> It's tempting to turn to power and, I suppose, fear. As a response and as an explanation: if what I'm doing doesn't make sense, maybe someone else is more powerful or making me feel afraid.
>
> A mirror is an alternative to power (or maybe a different kind of power). I confess I've tried a mirror, with the hope that it might sting a little.
>
> --
>
> > > Do you ever find yourself between a rock and a hard place? What do you do then?
> >
> > All the time.
> > I go underground, surrender.
> > It's a battle you can't fight.
> > There's no winning.
>
> > If I can't solve a problem, I just accept it, and make a decision in my best interest.... Hopefully
> > Like for instance,
> > Not reading Lou's posts
> > Not because I care all that much, I do, a little, but there's not a damn thing I can do about it.
> >
> > sleepygirl2
>
> > OMgosh, you rock, gg!!
> >
> > This whole post is *precisely* what I've been wanting to say for days/weeks.
> >
> > Why I couldn't be so clear beats me, but it doesn't matter who does it, and now you have captured the essence - thank you, thank you!
> >
> > 10derheart
>
> > Thanks. One of Dinah's recent posts helped these thoughts come together for me. Still a good team. :)
> >
> > gg
>
> That's what I'm thinking, too. There's no winning. But maybe surrender isn't the only other choice.
>
> 1. I can make a decision in my best interest, or the best interest of Babble.
>
> 2. And if there are others with me between that rock and that hard place, maybe together we can learn ways to cope and find the energy to persevere.
>
> BobFriends,
It is written her,
[...I am enforcing existing rules...one exception...it may be good for this community as a whole to leave {some} of Lou's posts outstanding...].
Be advised, my friends, that this has historical parallels. The danger here to readers I am prevented from posting here due to the prohibitions posted to me here by Mr Hsiung.
You see, the posts that Mr Hsiung will leave outstanding are not specified as to which type of post will be allowed to remain outstanding. He does say that it {will be} good for this community as a whole for him to do that. Now that could mean that there is some precedent that Mr Hsiung is relying on to state such a claim that it {will be} good. Now the historical record shows what has happened when there are two standards in a community for Mr Hsiung states that he will enforce the rules {except} in Lou's case for {some} of his notifications.
Now we do not know which posts belong in the set of {some} of Lou's notifications. And we do not know what the magnitude of what {some} could mean. Could it be that just a few notifications are not going to be responded to? Could it mean that 99% of the notifications from me are not going to be responded to? And what about the years of outstanding notifications from me? And what about the outstanding notifications from when he posted this? And what good could it be for this community to leave {any} notification outstanding? And how could a mother trying to make a more-informed decision as to drug their child or not in collaboration with a psychiatrist/doctor make the best decision if there are posts that if my notification was acted on helped the parent make the best decision? And how many years must a notification exist, before a notification is honored? And how many times can a statement stand, before it is said to be bad? The answer, my friends, is that Mr Hsiung says it may be good for this community as a whole, for Mr. Hsiung states that support takes precedence and it may be good for the community to see my posts not responded to, which could lead some readers to think what is allowed to stand is supportive since it is not acted on. I wonder what type of mind a person could have here that wants to be in concert with Mr Hsiung in this not responding to my posts here. You see, the argument that it {will be} good for the community as a whole is the same argument to justify infanticide, it is the same argument to justify genocide, it is the same argument to justify slavery, it is the same argument to justify segregation, it is the same argument to justify discrimination. It is nothing new, my friends, it is an old argument, and I can't accept it, for I have seen what two standards can do to people in a community that allows it to be fostered.
Lou
Posted by Lou PIlder on July 12, 2013, at 16:38:28
In reply to Lou's warning-gudphoardhakahmunitty » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou PIlder on July 12, 2013, at 15:55:22
> > > Is there some reason you can't or won't just come out and say you aren't willing to moderate any more?
> > >
> > > gardenergirl
> >
> > > Are you saying that you don't intend to do anything with posts like the ones that have been brought to your attention?
> > >
> > > If you say that you think those rules are fine under the existing rules, we can decide what to do.
> > >
> > > If you say they may not be but you have no intention of enforcing existing rules (and also have no intention of clarifying the new ones), then we can decide what to do.
> > >
> > > Dinah
> >
> > Sorry about being cryptic. I know I get that way sometimes.
> >
> > I'm willing to moderate.
> >
> > When I'm notified of posts, I'm enforcing existing rules and responding either on the board or to the posters who notified me. One exception is that I think right now it may be good for this community as a whole, and for me, to leave some of Lou's notifications outstanding.
> >
> > --
> >
> > > > Perhaps something related to legal advice or action of some sort?
> > >
> > > This is what I am thinking.
> > >
> > > - Scott
> >
> > > What seems to baffle us is why would someone with consummate power to make and change the rules ever be stuck?
> > >
> > > Toph
> >
> > > You sound a bit peeved, now. Did the mirror stung a little bit?
> > >
> > > gardenergirl
> >
> > 10der asked before what I meant by "the old model". Another aspect of it was relying on the power to define and enforce boundaries for acceptable behavior. That was how the administration made this a refuge.
> >
> > It's tempting to turn to power and, I suppose, fear. As a response and as an explanation: if what I'm doing doesn't make sense, maybe someone else is more powerful or making me feel afraid.
> >
> > A mirror is an alternative to power (or maybe a different kind of power). I confess I've tried a mirror, with the hope that it might sting a little.
> >
> > --
> >
> > > > Do you ever find yourself between a rock and a hard place? What do you do then?
> > >
> > > All the time.
> > > I go underground, surrender.
> > > It's a battle you can't fight.
> > > There's no winning.
> >
> > > If I can't solve a problem, I just accept it, and make a decision in my best interest.... Hopefully
> > > Like for instance,
> > > Not reading Lou's posts
> > > Not because I care all that much, I do, a little, but there's not a damn thing I can do about it.
> > >
> > > sleepygirl2
> >
> > > OMgosh, you rock, gg!!
> > >
> > > This whole post is *precisely* what I've been wanting to say for days/weeks.
> > >
> > > Why I couldn't be so clear beats me, but it doesn't matter who does it, and now you have captured the essence - thank you, thank you!
> > >
> > > 10derheart
> >
> > > Thanks. One of Dinah's recent posts helped these thoughts come together for me. Still a good team. :)
> > >
> > > gg
> >
> > That's what I'm thinking, too. There's no winning. But maybe surrender isn't the only other choice.
> >
> > 1. I can make a decision in my best interest, or the best interest of Babble.
> >
> > 2. And if there are others with me between that rock and that hard place, maybe together we can learn ways to cope and find the energy to persevere.
> >
> > Bob
>
> Friends,
> It is written her,
> [...I am enforcing existing rules...one exception...it may be good for this community as a whole to leave {some} of Lou's posts outstanding...].
> Be advised, my friends, that this has historical parallels. The danger here to readers I am prevented from posting here due to the prohibitions posted to me here by Mr Hsiung.
> You see, the posts that Mr Hsiung will leave outstanding are not specified as to which type of post will be allowed to remain outstanding. He does say that it {will be} good for this community as a whole for him to do that. Now that could mean that there is some precedent that Mr Hsiung is relying on to state such a claim that it {will be} good. Now the historical record shows what has happened when there are two standards in a community for Mr Hsiung states that he will enforce the rules {except} in Lou's case for {some} of his notifications.
> Now we do not know which posts belong in the set of {some} of Lou's notifications. And we do not know what the magnitude of what {some} could mean. Could it be that just a few notifications are not going to be responded to? Could it mean that 99% of the notifications from me are not going to be responded to? And what about the years of outstanding notifications from me? And what about the outstanding notifications from when he posted this? And what good could it be for this community to leave {any} notification outstanding? And how could a mother trying to make a more-informed decision as to drug their child or not in collaboration with a psychiatrist/doctor make the best decision if there are posts that if my notification was acted on helped the parent make the best decision? And how many years must a notification exist, before a notification is honored? And how many times can a statement stand, before it is said to be bad? The answer, my friends, is that Mr Hsiung says it may be good for this community as a whole, for Mr. Hsiung states that support takes precedence and it may be good for the community to see my posts not responded to, which could lead some readers to think what is allowed to stand is supportive since it is not acted on. I wonder what type of mind a person could have here that wants to be in concert with Mr Hsiung in this not responding to my posts here. You see, the argument that it {will be} good for the community as a whole is the same argument to justify infanticide, it is the same argument to justify genocide, it is the same argument to justify slavery, it is the same argument to justify segregation, it is the same argument to justify discrimination. It is nothing new, my friends, it is an old argument, and I can't accept it, for I have seen what two standards can do to people in a community that allows it to be fostered.
> Lou
>Friends,
The correction is that Mr Hsiung wrote:
It {may} be good for this community as a whole. That is different from that it {will} be good for this community as a whole. But what is the difference? Does it matter? Let's see.
If it {will} be good for this community as a whole, that is saying that {in the future} that could be concluded now. But would not time be the judge of that?
Now let's look at it {may} be. Is this the same as {will be}? Both are to be decided in the future as to if what Mr Hsiung does in leaving some of my notifications outstanding, whatever {some} could mean. But this could mean that Mr Hsiung is uncertain as to what his actions will bring to this community by him leaving some of my notifications outstanding. Either way, time will be the judge. A difference is that if it may be, it may not be.
Lou
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 13, 2013, at 1:12:53
In reply to Lou's warning-gudphoardhakahmunitty » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou PIlder on July 12, 2013, at 15:55:22
> Now we do not know which posts belong in the set of {some} of Lou's notifications. ... what good could it be for this community to leave {any} notification outstanding? ... You see, the argument that it {will be} good for the community as a whole is the same argument to justify infanticide, it is the same argument to justify genocide, it is the same argument to justify slavery, it is the same argument to justify segregation, it is the same argument to justify discrimination. It is nothing new, my friends, it is an old argument, and I can't accept it, for I have seen what two standards can do to people in a community that allows it to be fostered.
One thing infanticide, genocide, slavery, segregation, discrimination -- and bullying -- all have in common is the abuse of power.
Lou has pressed me to use my power on his behalf, and others have pressed me to use my power on their behalf. I understand turning to the use of power when feeling threatened. It's one way to feel safe, to create a refuge. My single standard, at least right now, is that I'm not giving in to pressure from either the rock or the hard place.
Scott said before that a refuge at Babble to protect people from Babble was a paradox. I think it has to do with your perspective. Some members of a community may want a refuge from other members of that community, but if you "zoom out", the big picture may be that that all members of that community feel it's a refuge from the outside world.
I like to think all members of this community, even if they feel unsafe in some way here, feel more safe in some way than in the non-Babble world.
Bob
Posted by 10derheart on July 13, 2013, at 12:46:31
In reply to Re: the big picture, posted by Dr. Bob on July 13, 2013, at 1:12:53
At least I know where I stand now.
If Lou can compare your statements in a post to those outrageous, horrible things and instead of being reminded this is (**was** now, obviously) a civil place, you engage in more philosophizing and other ^&%$%, just imagine what Lou will feel free to say to me and other ordinary posters.
Pressure? Is it pressure when I ask the police to ticket people driving fast down a densely populated cul-de-sac where many children play, because they may hit someone? Harm, maim, or worse?
You used to use these very same kind of analogies to explain your PBCs/blocks to posters who didn't understand the necessity for boundaries and limited freedom of speech.
It is not okay, for me, that you elect abdication. You say you are willing to moderate. But not really. Not really.
Later. Much later.
Posted by SLS on July 13, 2013, at 14:42:01
In reply to Lou's warning-gudphoardhakahmunitty » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou PIlder on July 12, 2013, at 15:55:22
> You see, the argument that it {will be} good for the community as a whole is the same argument to justify infanticide, it is the same argument to justify genocide, it is the same argument to justify slavery, it is the same argument to justify segregation, it is the same argument to justify discrimination.
What is this same argument? You neglected to describe it.
Is it your accusation that because your notifications to the administrator of this tiny website are to be left outstanding, infanticide, genocide, slavery, segregation, and discrimination will result?
What is it that Dr. Bob is doing to promote genocide?
Scapegoat?
I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting antisemitism would be in the community's best interests. I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting infanticide would be in the community's best interests. I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting genocide would be in the community's best interests. I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting slavery would be in the community's best interests. I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting segregation would be in the community's best interests. I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting discrimination would be in the community's best interests.
- Scott
Posted by Dinah on July 13, 2013, at 15:09:12
In reply to Re: the big picture » Dr. Bob, posted by 10derheart on July 13, 2013, at 12:46:31
He's made his position clear, and I doubt it will change.
I do think he should change the FAQ to reflect the new Babble rules.
All in our power is to decide how to react to the reality.
Posted by Dinah on July 13, 2013, at 15:10:19
In reply to Re: The big picture » Lou PIlder, posted by SLS on July 13, 2013, at 14:42:01
I do too.
It's a shame that the only one with the power to do anything has chosen not to.
The only power any of us has is to choose what to do about the reality.
Posted by SLS on July 13, 2013, at 15:22:37
In reply to Re: The big picture » SLS, posted by Dinah on July 13, 2013, at 15:10:19
> I do too.
>
> It's a shame that the only one with the power to do anything has chosen not to.
>
> The only power any of us has is to choose what to do about the reality.
Yes. You are right. I guess it is an evolution of sorts. I'm still finding my way.
- Scott
Posted by Twinleaf on July 13, 2013, at 15:24:43
In reply to Re: the big picture, posted by Dr. Bob on July 13, 2013, at 1:12:53
Respectfully, Dr.Bob, if you say you are going to moderate, then our community does expect you to do so, in whatever way currently seems best to you.
Considering Lou's accusations and community requests that you actively follow your civility guidelines as just differing points of view does not accurately describe this situation. By refusing to move towards either point of view, you are not moderating as you had promised to do. Having Lou condemn and threaten people is not equal to posters asking you to follow your own civility guidelines. By saying you will not be pulled towards either point of view, you are saying that you will not moderate.
I am all for a flexible type of administrating which would be comfortable and rewarding for you, and for us. But an unmoderated board is unacceptable to me. I find it to be just as unsafe as stressful interpersonal situations in real life. With those, I either solve the stressful aspects or, if I am unable to do that, I eliminate it from my life. Much as I love and appreciate Babble, I will do the same here if the board continues to be unmoderated.
Which will it be?
Posted by SLS on July 13, 2013, at 15:26:22
In reply to correction: Lou's warning-mehyknott, posted by Lou PIlder on July 12, 2013, at 16:38:28
> > You see, the argument that it {will be} good for the community as a whole is the same argument to justify infanticide, it is the same argument to justify genocide, it is the same argument to justify slavery, it is the same argument to justify segregation, it is the same argument to justify discrimination.
>
> What is this same argument? You neglected to describe it.
>
> Is it your accusation that because your notifications to the administrator of this tiny website are to be left outstanding, infanticide, genocide, slavery, segregation, and discrimination will result?
>
> What is it that Dr. Bob is doing to promote genocide?
>
> Scapegoat?
>
> I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting antisemitism would be in the community's best interests. I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting infanticide would be in the community's best interests. I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting genocide would be in the community's best interests. I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting slavery would be in the community's best interests. I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting segregation would be in the community's best interests. I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting discrimination would be in the community's best interests.
As you like to say, there is so much more than this.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on July 13, 2013, at 15:45:22
In reply to Re: the big picture, posted by Twinleaf on July 13, 2013, at 15:24:43
> I either solve the stressful aspects or, if I am unable to do that, I eliminate it from my life. Much as I love and appreciate Babble, I will do the same here if the board continues to be unmoderated.
I would be very, very unhappy were this to occur.
I hold you in high esteem, and always look forward to reading your posts. You are a great asset to the Psycho-Babble community. You are a great resource for me personally.
Community. What a nice word. I guess there will always be people posting on these boards, but the sense of community may suffer for your absence, nevertheless.
- Scott
Posted by gardenergirl on July 13, 2013, at 17:58:35
In reply to Re: The big picture » Lou PIlder, posted by SLS on July 13, 2013, at 14:42:01
Where's the retweet button? I would so retweet this. :)
>
> Is it your accusation that because your notifications to the administrator of this tiny website are to be left outstanding, infanticide, genocide, slavery, segregation, and discrimination will result?
>
> What is it that Dr. Bob is doing to promote genocide?
>
> Scapegoat?
>
> I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting antisemitism would be in the community's best interests. I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting infanticide would be in the community's best interests. I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting genocide would be in the community's best interests. I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting slavery would be in the community's best interests. I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting segregation would be in the community's best interests. I think that blocking you from posting accusations that people are promoting discrimination would be in the community's best interests.
>
>
> - Scott
Posted by Twinleaf on July 13, 2013, at 19:19:56
In reply to Re: the big picture » Twinleaf, posted by SLS on July 13, 2013, at 15:45:22
Oh, thank you, Scott - you are such a sweetheart! I feel the same way about you, and always read your posts with interest and appreciation. In my imagination, I think of you finally finding the complete treatment you need ( perhaps a form of deep tmi), and telling us that you are working and having a satisfying personal life. I don't know why exactly, but I feel very certain that you will find the way.
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 16, 2013, at 12:54:04
In reply to Re: The big picture, posted by gardenergirl on July 13, 2013, at 17:58:35
> If Lou can compare your statements in a post to those outrageous, horrible things and instead of being reminded this is (**was** now, obviously) a civil place, you engage in more philosophizing and other ^&%$%, just imagine what Lou will feel free to say to me and other ordinary posters.
>
> Pressure? Is it pressure when I ask the police to ticket people driving fast down a densely populated cul-de-sac where many children play, because they may hit someone? Harm, maim, or worse?
>
> It is not okay, for me, that you elect abdication.
>
> 10derheartYou're not a child. You could elect not to be hit. If you feel hurt reading what someone writes, you could stop reading what they write. What if you and Phillipa tried to help each other do that?
--
> > You see, the argument that it {will be} good for the community as a whole is the same argument to justify infanticide...
>
> Is it your accusation that because your notifications to the administrator of this tiny website are to be left outstanding, infanticide, genocide, slavery, segregation, and discrimination will result?
>
> - ScottThat's a good point. Is there evidence of infanticide, genocide, slavery, segregation, discrimination -- or maiming -- here now? Or anxiety that there will be in the future?
--
> You say you are willing to moderate. But not really. Not really.
>
> 10derheart> Respectfully, Dr.Bob, if you say you are going to moderate, then our community does expect you to do so, in whatever way currently seems best to you.
>
> TwinleafI'm moderating in the sense of "presiding over". When I'm notified of posts, I'm enforcing existing rules and responding either on the board or to the posters who notified me. One exception is that I think right now it may be good for this community as a whole, and for me, to leave some of Lou's notifications outstanding.
I'm also moderating in the sense of "lessening the intensity or extremeness of".
--
> Where's the retweet button? I would so retweet this. :)
>
> gardenergirlI'm glad you brought that up. :-)
3/4 of the posters on this thread have elected to disable the Facebook and Twitter buttons. I see that as voting to limit the visibility of Babble. Maybe I understand that better now. If Babble is a tiny cul-de-sac, then it may be more like a refuge.
Bob
Posted by Dinah on July 16, 2013, at 21:41:38
In reply to Re: a refuge, posted by Dr. Bob on July 16, 2013, at 12:54:04
> You're not a child. You could elect not to be hit. If you feel hurt reading what someone writes, you could stop reading what they write. What if you and Phillipa tried to help each other do that?
OMG
I'd better the h*ll quit reading *your* posts.
Posted by 10derheart on July 16, 2013, at 21:45:37
In reply to Re: a refuge, posted by Dr. Bob on July 16, 2013, at 12:54:04
>>When I'm notified of posts, I'm enforcing existing rules
Not true. Twist it, turn in anyway you like, I'm not wrong. You are allowing posts that could lead others to feel accused or put down, routinely, especially if Lou is the author.
And telling me I'm not a child.... {ugh} You utterly missed the point - on purpose, perhaps.
You know, Dr. Bob, I'm thinking this is just one big joke to you, where you eagerly await another post so you can play semantic gymnastics with it. I could have picked **any** example of boundaries that are akin to violations of traffic laws, which as I said, and will say for the final time here, are precisely the same analogies you used to use to challenge those who did not understand the need for civility rules.
In fact, if you are following the rules, you will enforce the rules on this post since I am not trying to be civil and have certainly accused you of negative things.
I'll be sure it gets reported.
Posted by 10derheart on July 16, 2013, at 21:50:48
In reply to Re: a refuge » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on July 16, 2013, at 21:41:38
Gosh, how much more I **love** your response to him than my namby pamby one.
Succinct, authentic and right to the heart of the matter.
Why I bother with any manner of communication, I'll never know...
Posted by 10derheart on July 16, 2013, at 22:01:23
In reply to Re: a refuge, posted by Dr. Bob on July 16, 2013, at 12:54:04
>>If Babble is a tiny cul-de-sac
Stop it. That is not what I meant and you know it.
Posted by gardenergirl on July 16, 2013, at 22:17:29
In reply to Re: a refuge » Dinah, posted by 10derheart on July 16, 2013, at 21:50:48
I had a similar response, but didn't muster up a reply, because I don't really feel like I have a dog in this fight anymore. Except that I get mad when people I love and respect are hurt.
Standing with you.
Posted by gardenergirl on July 16, 2013, at 22:31:16
In reply to Re: a refuge, posted by Dr. Bob on July 16, 2013, at 12:54:04
It was a metaphor. I guess I could have just reposted Scott's words with a smiley emoticon. But I would never conflate my Facebook and Babble identities. Nor would I create a fake Facebook identity, against their site guidelines, to promote this site.
Sigh, it's not a vote to limit the visibility of Babble, it's a vote NOT TO COMPROMISE MY PRIVACY. I am stunned that anyone would endorse that. And promoting your site, the one you have left to languish, is neither my job nor hobby.
> > Where's the retweet button? I would so retweet this. :)
> >
> > gardenergirl
>
> I'm glad you brought that up. :-)
>
> 3/4 of the posters on this thread have elected to disable the Facebook and Twitter buttons. I see that as voting to limit the visibility of Babble. Maybe I understand that better now. If Babble is a tiny cul-de-sac, then it may be more like a refuge.
>
> Bob
Posted by SLS on July 16, 2013, at 22:45:11
In reply to Re: a refuge » Dr. Bob, posted by gardenergirl on July 16, 2013, at 22:31:16
I'm very sad right now.
- Scott
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.