![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 17 to 41 of 52. Go back in thread:
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 13, 2014, at 9:55:08
In reply to Re: why Lou isn't blocked » Dr. Bob, posted by oceansun on November 12, 2014, at 20:49:48
> I was scared because his post to me was one of the first ones I read. My first response was actually shock. I've only recently resurfaced, and I remember the board 10+ years ago when it was a big source of support and knowledge to me. From what I understand from The New York Times article, it was still flourishing in 2010.
>
> What I've seen on this board lately still retains that care and compassion and curiosity, but the sheer number of people posting has dropped dramatically. Shockingly. I certainly can't speak for any member, past or present, but I myself wish more people were able to gain the sort of support and information offered here.
>
> So, I wonder, although I don't know how long Lou has been posting, has he, or similar people, been a factor in the decrease in posters? Has he been turning off new people who could contribute to the site? He's clearly more scary, and prolific, than other unpleasant posters I remember. Unfortunately, because of the small size of the board, his voice is pretty loud. And I honestly think he would have been blocked in the past.
>
> I don't think it's a matter of triggers -- many people seem to ignore him, though I'm guessing pretty annoyed that he's still around -- but of maintaining the health and wellness of the board as a whole, and encouraging growth, if that is wanted, of course.
>
> I continue to post, and am posting this post, simply because I remember the board of the past and thus was able to look past his post to the wonderful other posters here. I don't read his posts. It's the new and potential posters I am worried about, who don't have prior knowledge of the board and might just be turned off immediately, and the current members who might get discouraged and leave.
>
> Of course, there could be many other reasons for the downturn in posters in the past few years. I'm really curious about this, and concerned -- if anyone has any thoughts about this, I would appreciate any input.
>
>
>
> > > I just wonder, why isn't Lou blocked? ... His first post to me scared me, and I can see how a new member might not post again with his responses.
> >
> > > I'm greatly saddened by it.
> >
> > Sorry about not replying more promptly.
> >
> > I'd feel sad, too, if feeling scared kept people from posting. In this case, yes, I could block one trigger. (And I plan to add a Refuge board that would be more safe/less tolerant.) In general, however, it's impossible just to do away with triggers. My idea is that support and encouragement might help counteract fear. How were you able to overcome feeling scared and post again?
> >
> > Bob
>
> Friends,
If you are considering being a discussant here, I am requesting for you to read the following.
To see this post go to the search box at the end of this page and type in:
[ admin, 428781 ]
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 14, 2014, at 5:27:52
In reply to Lou's response-, posted by Lou Pilder on November 13, 2014, at 9:55:08
> > I was scared because his post to me was one of the first ones I read. My first response was actually shock. I've only recently resurfaced, and I remember the board 10+ years ago when it was a big source of support and knowledge to me. From what I understand from The New York Times article, it was still flourishing in 2010.
> >
> > What I've seen on this board lately still retains that care and compassion and curiosity, but the sheer number of people posting has dropped dramatically. Shockingly. I certainly can't speak for any member, past or present, but I myself wish more people were able to gain the sort of support and information offered here.
> >
> > So, I wonder, although I don't know how long Lou has been posting, has he, or similar people, been a factor in the decrease in posters? Has he been turning off new people who could contribute to the site? He's clearly more scary, and prolific, than other unpleasant posters I remember. Unfortunately, because of the small size of the board, his voice is pretty loud. And I honestly think he would have been blocked in the past.
> >
> > I don't think it's a matter of triggers -- many people seem to ignore him, though I'm guessing pretty annoyed that he's still around -- but of maintaining the health and wellness of the board as a whole, and encouraging growth, if that is wanted, of course.
> >
> > I continue to post, and am posting this post, simply because I remember the board of the past and thus was able to look past his post to the wonderful other posters here. I don't read his posts. It's the new and potential posters I am worried about, who don't have prior knowledge of the board and might just be turned off immediately, and the current members who might get discouraged and leave.
> >
> > Of course, there could be many other reasons for the downturn in posters in the past few years. I'm really curious about this, and concerned -- if anyone has any thoughts about this, I would appreciate any input.
> >
> >
> >
> > > > I just wonder, why isn't Lou blocked? ... His first post to me scared me, and I can see how a new member might not post again with his responses.
> > >
> > > > I'm greatly saddened by it.
> > >
> > > Sorry about not replying more promptly.
> > >
> > > I'd feel sad, too, if feeling scared kept people from posting. In this case, yes, I could block one trigger. (And I plan to add a Refuge board that would be more safe/less tolerant.) In general, however, it's impossible just to do away with triggers. My idea is that support and encouragement might help counteract fear. How were you able to overcome feeling scared and post again?
> > >
> > > Bob
> >
> > Friends,
> If you are considering being a discussant here, I am requesting for you to read the following.
> To see this post go to the search box at the end of this page and type in:
> [ admin, 428781 ]
> Lou
>
> Friends,
Where does this (expletive) come from about me?
I would like for interested readers to bring up the following post and in the post is a video that I would like for you to view.
The members here bringing me up in the light that could induce hostile and disagreeable feelings and opinions about me and decrease the respect and regard and confidence in which I am held is nothing new. It is an old tactic that history records. but whose loss could it be if my voice is stilled here? Who would benifit? And what woulod be the result?
Let us look at this post and the video offered to see where this (expletive) comes from.
Lou
To see the post go to the search box at the bottom of this page and type in:
[ babble, 1046247 ]
then follow the directions to see the video
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 14, 2014, at 7:17:25
In reply to Re: why Lou isn't blocked » oceansun, posted by Twinleaf on November 12, 2014, at 23:41:58
> I, for one, appreciate your concerns about the negative effect these posts might be having on newcomers. A number of us have expressed this concern for several years now, but have eventually accepted, however reluctantly, that this does not appear to be a concern shared with Bob.
>
> While the medication board has continued to be a great source of informstion for new treatments, it does seem that the sense of warmth and community which once characterized Babble has largely disappeared. The number of active posters appears to be decreasing. I don't really understand the reasons for this, although I do feel it would have been helpful to both Lou and the community to impose moderate checks on some of his more frightening statements. I don't read them, but I can see that they could be quite alarming to new posters who are just trying to find out if this site is helpful for them. We will never know how many potential posters have decided to reject this site because of this. It is very sad to see how lifeless Babble is now, compared to how it once was.T_l,
You wrote,[...the negative effect...the sense of warmth..has largly disappeared..active posters..decreasing...both Lou and the community to impose moderate checks on some of his more frightening statements. I don't read them, but I can see that they could be quite alarming to new posters...We will never know how many potential posters have decided to reject this site because of this. It is very sad to see how lifeless Babble is now...].
What you have written could lead a subset of readers to think that I am your subject person here to be considered to be the cause of a real or imagined ill of the community. Note my objection to you posting such, for I think that what you have posted here could induce hostil and disagreeable feeliings toward me and decrease the respect, regard and confidence in which I am held.
I am asking for you to post here:
A. What kind of statement has a negative effect?
B. Why could that type of statement not be positive?
C. What would be a moderate check consist of?
D. What constitutes a frightening statement?
E. What could you do here to bring back to life this forum as you say it is lifeless
F. Do you know how many people that are not seen here that have died?
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 14, 2014, at 16:06:04
In reply to Re: why Lou isn't blocked » Dr. Bob, posted by oceansun on November 12, 2014, at 20:49:48
> I was scared because his post to me was one of the first ones I read. My first response was actually shock. I've only recently resurfaced, and I remember the board 10+ years ago when it was a big source of support and knowledge to me. From what I understand from The New York Times article, it was still flourishing in 2010.
>
> What I've seen on this board lately still retains that care and compassion and curiosity, but the sheer number of people posting has dropped dramatically. Shockingly. I certainly can't speak for any member, past or present, but I myself wish more people were able to gain the sort of support and information offered here.
>
> So, I wonder, although I don't know how long Lou has been posting, has he, or similar people, been a factor in the decrease in posters? Has he been turning off new people who could contribute to the site? He's clearly more scary, and prolific, than other unpleasant posters I remember. Unfortunately, because of the small size of the board, his voice is pretty loud. And I honestly think he would have been blocked in the past.
>
> I don't think it's a matter of triggers -- many people seem to ignore him, though I'm guessing pretty annoyed that he's still around -- but of maintaining the health and wellness of the board as a whole, and encouraging growth, if that is wanted, of course.
>
> I continue to post, and am posting this post, simply because I remember the board of the past and thus was able to look past his post to the wonderful other posters here. I don't read his posts. It's the new and potential posters I am worried about, who don't have prior knowledge of the board and might just be turned off immediately, and the current members who might get discouraged and leave.
>
> Of course, there could be many other reasons for the downturn in posters in the past few years. I'm really curious about this, and concerned -- if anyone has any thoughts about this, I would appreciate any input.
>
>
>
> > > I just wonder, why isn't Lou blocked? ... His first post to me scared me, and I can see how a new member might not post again with his responses.
> >
> > > I'm greatly saddened by it.
> >
> > Sorry about not replying more promptly.
> >
> > I'd feel sad, too, if feeling scared kept people from posting. In this case, yes, I could block one trigger. (And I plan to add a Refuge board that would be more safe/less tolerant.) In general, however, it's impossible just to do away with triggers. My idea is that support and encouragement might help counteract fear. How were you able to overcome feeling scared and post again?
> >
> > Bob
>
> o_s,
You wrote,[...the sort of information and support offered here...or similar people...he is clearly more scary...other unpleasant posters...I'm ge(t)(t)ing pretty annoyed that he's still around...was able to look past his post to the wonderful other posters here...I don't read his posts...].
As I am your subject person named, there could be a subset of readers influenced by what you wrote to have induced into them hostile and disagreeable feelings and opinions about me and decrease the respect, regard and confidence in which I am held. I base this on the fact that the grammatical structure of your post leaves one open to think different things about me , so if you could answer the following, then I could respond accordingly and it could be known what you want readers to think about me.
A. If you are getting annoyed that you see me around here, what is it about me that makes you annoyed?
B. If you post a reason here, is it in your opinion a rational reason, and if so, why?
C. What is the information that you want people to gain here?
D. Does my posting keep others from obtaining that information? If so, why?
E. What is it that you see that I write, if you do see something of mine, that is more scary?
F. If there are wonderful posters here, am I included in that subset of posters, and if not, why not?
G. If I am not included by you in that subset, (redacted by respondent)
H. If you do not read my post, how do you know that I am clearly more scary?
I. Are you familiar with the criteria used to determine if when one uses a person as a subject person, if the criteria to determine if the post is an anti-Semitic post such as using a person that is Jewish as a scapegoat for the real or imagined ills of a community?
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 14, 2014, at 16:50:08
In reply to Lou's request-skehypgaux? » oceansun, posted by Lou Pilder on November 14, 2014, at 16:06:04
> > I was scared because his post to me was one of the first ones I read. My first response was actually shock. I've only recently resurfaced, and I remember the board 10+ years ago when it was a big source of support and knowledge to me. From what I understand from The New York Times article, it was still flourishing in 2010.
> >
> > What I've seen on this board lately still retains that care and compassion and curiosity, but the sheer number of people posting has dropped dramatically. Shockingly. I certainly can't speak for any member, past or present, but I myself wish more people were able to gain the sort of support and information offered here.
> >
> > So, I wonder, although I don't know how long Lou has been posting, has he, or similar people, been a factor in the decrease in posters? Has he been turning off new people who could contribute to the site? He's clearly more scary, and prolific, than other unpleasant posters I remember. Unfortunately, because of the small size of the board, his voice is pretty loud. And I honestly think he would have been blocked in the past.
> >
> > I don't think it's a matter of triggers -- many people seem to ignore him, though I'm guessing pretty annoyed that he's still around -- but of maintaining the health and wellness of the board as a whole, and encouraging growth, if that is wanted, of course.
> >
> > I continue to post, and am posting this post, simply because I remember the board of the past and thus was able to look past his post to the wonderful other posters here. I don't read his posts. It's the new and potential posters I am worried about, who don't have prior knowledge of the board and might just be turned off immediately, and the current members who might get discouraged and leave.
> >
> > Of course, there could be many other reasons for the downturn in posters in the past few years. I'm really curious about this, and concerned -- if anyone has any thoughts about this, I would appreciate any input.
> >
> >
> >
> > > > I just wonder, why isn't Lou blocked? ... His first post to me scared me, and I can see how a new member might not post again with his responses.
> > >
> > > > I'm greatly saddened by it.
> > >
> > > Sorry about not replying more promptly.
> > >
> > > I'd feel sad, too, if feeling scared kept people from posting. In this case, yes, I could block one trigger. (And I plan to add a Refuge board that would be more safe/less tolerant.) In general, however, it's impossible just to do away with triggers. My idea is that support and encouragement might help counteract fear. How were you able to overcome feeling scared and post again?
> > >
> > > Bob
> >
> > o_s,
> You wrote,[...the sort of information and support offered here...or similar people...he is clearly more scary...other unpleasant posters...I'm ge(t)(t)ing pretty annoyed that he's still around...was able to look past his post to the wonderful other posters here...I don't read his posts...].
> As I am your subject person named, there could be a subset of readers influenced by what you wrote to have induced into them hostile and disagreeable feelings and opinions about me and decrease the respect, regard and confidence in which I am held. I base this on the fact that the grammatical structure of your post leaves one open to think different things about me , so if you could answer the following, then I could respond accordingly and it could be known what you want readers to think about me.
> A. If you are getting annoyed that you see me around here, what is it about me that makes you annoyed?
> B. If you post a reason here, is it in your opinion a rational reason, and if so, why?
> C. What is the information that you want people to gain here?
> D. Does my posting keep others from obtaining that information? If so, why?
> E. What is it that you see that I write, if you do see something of mine, that is more scary?
> F. If there are wonderful posters here, am I included in that subset of posters, and if not, why not?
> G. If I am not included by you in that subset, (redacted by respondent)
> H. If you do not read my post, how do you know that I am clearly more scary?
> I. Are you familiar with the criteria used to determine if when one uses a person as a subject person, if the criteria to determine if the post is an anti-Semitic post such as using a person that is Jewish as a scapegoat for the real or imagined ills of a community?
> Lou
Friends,
Here is a post and look at what Jane said that is plainly visible.
Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20130702/msgs/1047738.html
Posted by oceansun on November 14, 2014, at 22:19:14
In reply to Re: why Lou isn't blocked » oceansun, posted by Twinleaf on November 12, 2014, at 23:41:58
Thanks for writing back Twinleaf. I didn't really know the history of it. Sigh.
And I guess I'm placing my memories of the old board onto this new one, which I really shouldn't be doing. I'm just a newbie. But I agree it was more supportive in the past. Sigh again.
Posted by SLS on November 17, 2014, at 12:32:44
In reply to Lou's response-brngumbkehylyve » Twinleaf, posted by Lou Pilder on November 14, 2014, at 7:17:25
> > I, for one, appreciate your concerns about the negative effect these posts might be having on newcomers. A number of us have expressed this concern for several years now, but have eventually accepted, however reluctantly, that this does not appear to be a concern shared with Bob.
> >
> > While the medication board has continued to be a great source of informstion for new treatments, it does seem that the sense of warmth and community which once characterized Babble has largely disappeared. The number of active posters appears to be decreasing. I don't really understand the reasons for this, although I do feel it would have been helpful to both Lou and the community to impose moderate checks on some of his more frightening statements. I don't read them, but I can see that they could be quite alarming to new posters who are just trying to find out if this site is helpful for them. We will never know how many potential posters have decided to reject this site because of this. It is very sad to see how lifeless Babble is now, compared to how it once was.
>
> T_l,
> You wrote,[...the negative effect...the sense of warmth..has largly disappeared..active posters..decreasing...both Lou and the community to impose moderate checks on some of his more frightening statements. I don't read them, but I can see that they could be quite alarming to new posters...We will never know how many potential posters have decided to reject this site because of this. It is very sad to see how lifeless Babble is now...].> I am asking for you to post here:
> A. What kind of statement has a negative effect?
> B. Why could that type of statement not be positive?
> C. What would be a moderate check consist of?
> D. What constitutes a frightening statement?
> E. What could you do here to bring back to life this forum as you say it is lifeless
>
> LouMr. Pilder,
That you even have to ask these questions could lead a subset of people to conclude that you should be able to answer the questions for yourself before continuing to post on a mental health website. I have found that interpersonal therapy is helpful for being able to develop one's ability to understand others through the construction of "theory of mind".
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 17, 2014, at 17:59:21
In reply to Posing questions. » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on November 17, 2014, at 12:32:44
> > > I, for one, appreciate your concerns about the negative effect these posts might be having on newcomers. A number of us have expressed this concern for several years now, but have eventually accepted, however reluctantly, that this does not appear to be a concern shared with Bob.
> > >
> > > While the medication board has continued to be a great source of informstion for new treatments, it does seem that the sense of warmth and community which once characterized Babble has largely disappeared. The number of active posters appears to be decreasing. I don't really understand the reasons for this, although I do feel it would have been helpful to both Lou and the community to impose moderate checks on some of his more frightening statements. I don't read them, but I can see that they could be quite alarming to new posters who are just trying to find out if this site is helpful for them. We will never know how many potential posters have decided to reject this site because of this. It is very sad to see how lifeless Babble is now, compared to how it once was.
> >
> > T_l,
> > You wrote,[...the negative effect...the sense of warmth..has largly disappeared..active posters..decreasing...both Lou and the community to impose moderate checks on some of his more frightening statements. I don't read them, but I can see that they could be quite alarming to new posters...We will never know how many potential posters have decided to reject this site because of this. It is very sad to see how lifeless Babble is now...].
>
> > I am asking for you to post here:
> > A. What kind of statement has a negative effect?
> > B. Why could that type of statement not be positive?
> > C. What would be a moderate check consist of?
> > D. What constitutes a frightening statement?
> > E. What could you do here to bring back to life this forum as you say it is lifeless
> >
> > Lou
>
> Mr. Pilder,
>
> That you even have to ask these questions could lead a subset of people to conclude that you should be able to answer the questions for yourself before continuing to post on a mental health website. I have found that interpersonal therapy is helpful for being able to develop one's ability to understand others through the construction of "theory of mind".
>
>
> - Scott
> S,
You wrote,[...you (Lou) be able to answer these questions yourself...].
I have asked the poster those questions because I do not know the answers from the poster as to what the poster wants people to think so that I can continue dialog with that poster. If I was to know what the poster wanted readers to think, then I could have a better idea of what the intent of the poster here is and respond accordingly.
In my want for information, if I was to know what the poster meant by a "negative effect" as to what constitutes such, then I could have a better understanding of the mind-set of that poster. And if I was to know what was in the mind of the poster by the poster answering my questions, then I could have a better way to understand the poster and have interpersonal dialog with the poster and be better able to develop my ability to know what motivates the poster to write what the poster has about me as a subject person.
As a subject person, I do not want to jump to a conclusion about the intent of the poster which I, and readers, could avoid if I was to know the answers to my questions from that poster. If I was to know the answers from that poster, which I am offereing the opportunity to reply to them, then I could possibly rule out what is written about my character here that IMHO a subset of readers could think could decrease the respect regard and confidence in which I am held and rule out what the poster wrote about me as the possibility to cause hostile and disagreeable feelings and opinions about me. If the poster rejects the opportunity to answer the questions, that , in and of itself, could allow readers to think about me in the terms that I do not want for people to think about me here. And as long as that opportunity exists for readers to think of me in the terms that I do not want to jump to a conclusion about, then there could be a false conclusion about my character made in the minds of a subset of readers which I am giving the poster an opportunity to rule out.
Without the poster accepting the opportunity to answer my questions, IMHHHO, I could be portrayed here in a {false light} and suffer the effects of readers seeing those statements that could be about me as supportive here and will be good for this community as a whole in Mr. Hsiungs thinking.
Lou
Posted by Elanor Roosevelt on January 22, 2015, at 18:50:07
In reply to Posing questions. » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on November 17, 2014, at 12:32:44
I had to stop reading Lou completely in order to continue to visit this site.
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 22, 2015, at 19:30:11
In reply to why read Lou?, posted by Elanor Roosevelt on January 22, 2015, at 18:50:07
> I had to stop reading Lou completely in order to continue to visit this site.
ER,
You wrote the above. I am unsure as to what you want readers to think by what you wrote. If you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
A. What could you see in what I wrote that could cause you to not visit this site?
B. Why would if you saw that cause you not to visit this site?
Lou
Posted by 10derheart on February 10, 2015, at 22:11:02
In reply to why read Lou?, posted by Elanor Roosevelt on January 22, 2015, at 18:50:07
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 12, 2015, at 8:19:18
In reply to I understand. Entirely. (nm) » Elanor Roosevelt, posted by 10derheart on February 10, 2015, at 22:11:02
10,
The poster wrote that she had to stop reading my posts in order to continue here. You wrote that you understand.
I have the following concerns and if you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
True or False:
A. I could have sanctioned the anti-Semitic statements here that can be seen as supportive and will be good for this community as a whole in Mr. Hsiung's thinking, Lou, if I wanted to.
B. I have examined the impact of allowing anti-Jewish thought as being able to be seen here as supportive, Lou, as that it could also be considered that as a deputy then, I was ratifying the anti-Jewish thought by not exercising my power to sanction those statements in the same manner as other statements that are against the rules here were sanctioned by me.
C. I agree, Lou, that by me not using my power to sanction those statements, that I made it possible for anti-Semitism to flourish from here.
D. The damage from that anti-Semitic statements can be seen here as civil, Lou, can not be erased unless Mr. Hsiung posts a repudiation to each of those posts.
E. The fact that Mr. Hsiung states that he will abide by his rules for notifications, except some of mine, is discriminatory, Lou. I am sorry that I was a part of it, Lou.
Fill in:
F. Now that you are being successful here in causing Mr. Hsiung to post repudiations to some of the anti-Jewish statements, Lou, some readers do not read your posts because of some unknown reason that I might know, for I wrote that I understand the poster that posted that she has to not read your posts, Lou, in order to continue here. My reasoning that I understand is:
_____________________________________________
______________________________________________
__________________________________________
Lou
Posted by Dr. Bob on February 15, 2015, at 21:53:25
In reply to Re: why Lou isn't blocked » oceansun, posted by Twinleaf on November 12, 2014, at 23:41:58
> I was scared because his post to me was one of the first ones I read. My first response was actually shock. I've only recently resurfaced, and I remember the board 10+ years ago when it was a big source of support and knowledge to me.
>
> What I've seen on this board lately still retains that care and compassion and curiosity, but the sheer number of people posting has dropped dramatically. Shockingly. I certainly can't speak for any member, past or present, but I myself wish more people were able to gain the sort of support and information offered here.
>
> So, I wonder, although I don't know how long Lou has been posting, has he, or similar people, been a factor in the decrease in posters?
>
> I don't think it's a matter of triggers -- many people seem to ignore him, though I'm guessing pretty annoyed that he's still around -- but of maintaining the health and wellness of the board as a whole, and encouraging growth, if that is wanted, of course.
>
> I continue to post, and am posting this post, simply because I remember the board of the past and thus was able to look past his post to the wonderful other posters here. I don't read his posts. It's the new and potential posters I am worried about, who don't have prior knowledge of the board and might just be turned off immediately, and the current members who might get discouraged and leave.
>
> oceansun> While the medication board has continued to be a great source of informstion for new treatments, it does seem that the sense of warmth and community which once characterized Babble has largely disappeared. The number of active posters appears to be decreasing. I don't really understand the reasons for this, although I do feel it would have been helpful to both Lou and the community to impose moderate checks on some of his more frightening statements. I don't read them, but I can see that they could be quite alarming to new posters who are just trying to find out if this site is helpful for them. We will never know how many potential posters have decided to reject this site because of this.
>
> TwinleafThanks for your posts. Sorry again about not replying more promptly.
My idea is that new posters who are turned off by Lou (or anyone else) will be more likely to stay if posters with more experience reassure, support, and encourage them. For their own health and wellness, they might simply ignore Lou. But it would help maintain the health and wellness of the board if they paid attention to his effect on others.
Bob
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 16, 2015, at 9:00:19
In reply to Re: the health and wellness of the board, posted by Dr. Bob on February 15, 2015, at 21:53:25
> > I was scared because his post to me was one of the first ones I read. My first response was actually shock. I've only recently resurfaced, and I remember the board 10+ years ago when it was a big source of support and knowledge to me.
> >
> > What I've seen on this board lately still retains that care and compassion and curiosity, but the sheer number of people posting has dropped dramatically. Shockingly. I certainly can't speak for any member, past or present, but I myself wish more people were able to gain the sort of support and information offered here.
> >
> > So, I wonder, although I don't know how long Lou has been posting, has he, or similar people, been a factor in the decrease in posters?
> >
> > I don't think it's a matter of triggers -- many people seem to ignore him, though I'm guessing pretty annoyed that he's still around -- but of maintaining the health and wellness of the board as a whole, and encouraging growth, if that is wanted, of course.
> >
> > I continue to post, and am posting this post, simply because I remember the board of the past and thus was able to look past his post to the wonderful other posters here. I don't read his posts. It's the new and potential posters I am worried about, who don't have prior knowledge of the board and might just be turned off immediately, and the current members who might get discouraged and leave.
> >
> > oceansun
>
> > While the medication board has continued to be a great source of informstion for new treatments, it does seem that the sense of warmth and community which once characterized Babble has largely disappeared. The number of active posters appears to be decreasing. I don't really understand the reasons for this, although I do feel it would have been helpful to both Lou and the community to impose moderate checks on some of his more frightening statements. I don't read them, but I can see that they could be quite alarming to new posters who are just trying to find out if this site is helpful for them. We will never know how many potential posters have decided to reject this site because of this.
> >
> > Twinleaf
>
> Thanks for your posts. Sorry again about not replying more promptly.
>
> My idea is that new posters who are turned off by Lou (or anyone else) will be more likely to stay if posters with more experience reassure, support, and encourage them. For their own health and wellness, they might simply ignore Lou. But it would help maintain the health and wellness of the board if they paid attention to his effect on others.
>
> BobMr. Hsiung,
You wrote,[...For their own health and wellness, they might simply ignore Lou. But it would help maintain the health and wellness of the board if they paid attention to his effects on others...].
I am unsure as to what you want readers to think by what you wrote about me here. If you could post answers to the following, then I could respond accordingly.
True or False:
A. What I write about here that you, Mr. Hsiung, are referring to, is specified here by you.
B. Readers could think from what you, Mr. Hsiung, wrote about me here, that what I post here could effect the health and wellness of readers adversely.
C. When you write about that combinations of drugs, Lou, advocated by posters here could kill or addict or cause a life-ruining condition to those that take those combinations, readers are advised by me, Lou, to ignore you.
D. When you post to parents, Lou, who are trying to decide to drug their child or not in collaboration with a psychiatrist/doctor about that psychiatric drugs could kill their child or give them tardive dyskinesia or addiction or worse, for their child's own health and wellness, they might ignore you, Lou
E. When you post to me exposing the anti-Semitic posts allowed to be seen as supportive by me and my deputies of record, Lou, that you want purged from here, for the health and wellness of readers I am suggesting that they ignore you, Lou.
Fill in:
F. The posts here by you, Lou, that the poster did not cite that could be the ones in question are the links as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.others
Lou Pilder
Posted by ed_uk2010 on February 16, 2015, at 13:37:26
In reply to Lou's response-wholdtukuntmp » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on February 16, 2015, at 9:00:19
Lou,
You do make some useful points. Drugs do have the potential to cause serious adverse effects. This is a fact. The problem is, as I see it, that your posts on the main board are extremely one-sided. You emphasise the possibility of life ruining side effects, but never discuss the benefits of treatment.
It's important to consider:
a) The risks of *not* getting treatment for a mental health problem. You often discuss people being driven to suicide due to side effects. Bear in mind, people can be driven to suicide by untreated illness too.
and b) The benefit(s) that the medication/treatment may produce. In order to decide whether a treatment is likely to be beneficial or harmful, you have to know a lot about the person who may be taking it. Decisions are not simple.
In my opinion, new members need to be able to obtain as balanced a view of medication as possible, so that they can assess the risks and benefits from themselves. When it comes to medication, wise decisions can only be made on an individual basis. This involves a knowledge of that person so that the benefits vs the risks can be weighed up.
New posters may be very vulnerable and frightened. No one is likely to be able to make the best decisions while afraid. We need to welcome new posters to the board and provide them with balanced information.... as much as is possible. If posters receive replies which cause fear, this may be very bad for their mental health.... and may have serious consequences. I'm sure this is not what you want.
Take care.
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 16, 2015, at 14:17:21
In reply to Making the best decision » Lou Pilder, posted by ed_uk2010 on February 16, 2015, at 13:37:26
> Lou,
>
> You do make some useful points. Drugs do have the potential to cause serious adverse effects. This is a fact. The problem is, as I see it, that your posts on the main board are extremely one-sided. You emphasise the possibility of life ruining side effects, but never discuss the benefits of treatment.
>
> It's important to consider:
>
> a) The risks of *not* getting treatment for a mental health problem. You often discuss people being driven to suicide due to side effects. Bear in mind, people can be driven to suicide by untreated illness too.
>
> and b) The benefit(s) that the medication/treatment may produce. In order to decide whether a treatment is likely to be beneficial or harmful, you have to know a lot about the person who may be taking it. Decisions are not simple.
>
> In my opinion, new members need to be able to obtain as balanced a view of medication as possible, so that they can assess the risks and benefits from themselves. When it comes to medication, wise decisions can only be made on an individual basis. This involves a knowledge of that person so that the benefits vs the risks can be weighed up.
>
> New posters may be very vulnerable and frightened. No one is likely to be able to make the best decisions while afraid. We need to welcome new posters to the board and provide them with balanced information.... as much as is possible. If posters receive replies which cause fear, this may be very bad for their mental health.... and may have serious consequences. I'm sure this is not what you want.
>
> Take care.ed,
You wrote,[...You do make some useful points...your posts...are..one-sided...never discuss the benefits of treatment..].
The point of view that mind-altering drugs could be beneficial is not being denied to posters here to post about. Neither is the point of view that taking mind-altering drugs could cause death, addiction and life-ruining conditions.
Both points of view are actually encouraged to be posted here according to the TOS here. You are welcome to post whatever benefits you think could be had by a poster taking mind-altering drugs in collaboration with a psychiatrist/doctor.
The FDA agrees with me that a lot of these drugs could increase suicidal thinking. And there is not an anti-suicide pill, for the army is trying to create one.
Both perspectives can be posted here and these perspectives can come from different posters, not just one. My point of view is not unique and many psychiatrists agree with me. If someone here is denied to hear from me, they could not really receive a balanced view, could they?
The fear of being addicted or killed or receiving a life-ruining condition from these drugs could save lives and prevent addictions and life-ruining conditions IMHO because a more-informed decision could be made as to take these drugs or drugg your child or loved one after they hear from me. Others here are welcome to post to take the drugs, but look at the suffering posted here by those that take these drugs. Look at the adddictions, the withdrawal horrors, the insomnia, the dyskinesia, the suicidal thinking, those that killed themselves here, those that the drugs killed here, and let the fact speak for themselves.
For there has been revealed to me a great deception. A deception that I am prevented to post about here due to the prohibitions posted to me here by Mr. Hsiung. And if those prohibitions were withdrawn, IMHHHHHO, lives could be saved, addictions and life-ruining conditions could be prevented, and readers could have a new life, free from the horrors of these drugs to be led out of the darkness of depression and into a marvelous light of peace and joy.
I am following the prohibitions from Mr. Hsiung. I am not preventing anyone from posting to advocate taking these drugs. But I say to those that advocate to take mind-altering drugs, it has been revealed to me what the wages will be that you will receive.
Lou
Posted by ed_uk2010 on February 16, 2015, at 15:05:42
In reply to Lou's reply-wheygizovpsyn » ed_uk2010, posted by Lou Pilder on February 16, 2015, at 14:17:21
>The fear of being addicted or killed or receiving a life-ruining condition from these drugs could save lives and prevent addictions and life-ruining conditions
I do understand what you're saying. What I'm thinking is that new members may feel frightened rather than informed by some of your posts.
Rather than referring generally to life-ruining conditions, which might be disturbing, I think it's important to discuss the possible side effects of each drug in a more specific manner.
For example, if a member was thinking about taking an antipsychotic for depression, you could point out the risk of diabetes or tardive dyskinesia. This is important information, but needs to be presented in a manner which is not excessively anxiety-provoking.
If a new member was to read your reply and feel afraid, they may simply choose to leave the board. In that case, they wouldn't be able to benefit from the information and help that can be obtained here, from all posters, including yourself.
I think you want to help people here, which is commendable. As I see it, you don't always inform and advise new members in the most effective way. Good advice is difficult to provide. It's not just about giving information; it's about presenting it in a manner which is most helpful to the person in need to advice. The information has to be clear and unambiguous. It has to be balanced, and it should not create fear or panic - for that is not likely to be therapeutic!
What do you think?
:)
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 16, 2015, at 17:30:34
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-wheygizovpsyn » Lou Pilder, posted by ed_uk2010 on February 16, 2015, at 15:05:42
> >The fear of being addicted or killed or receiving a life-ruining condition from these drugs could save lives and prevent addictions and life-ruining conditions
>
> I do understand what you're saying. What I'm thinking is that new members may feel frightened rather than informed by some of your posts.
>
> Rather than referring generally to life-ruining conditions, which might be disturbing, I think it's important to discuss the possible side effects of each drug in a more specific manner.
>
> For example, if a member was thinking about taking an antipsychotic for depression, you could point out the risk of diabetes or tardive dyskinesia. This is important information, but needs to be presented in a manner which is not excessively anxiety-provoking.
>
> If a new member was to read your reply and feel afraid, they may simply choose to leave the board. In that case, they wouldn't be able to benefit from the information and help that can be obtained here, from all posters, including yourself.
>
> I think you want to help people here, which is commendable. As I see it, you don't always inform and advise new members in the most effective way. Good advice is difficult to provide. It's not just about giving information; it's about presenting it in a manner which is most helpful to the person in need to advice. The information has to be clear and unambiguous. It has to be balanced, and it should not create fear or panic - for that is not likely to be therapeutic!
>
> What do you think?
>
> :)ed,
You wrote,[...you don't inform/advise new members of the most effective way..].
I am prevented from advising anyone here of the most effective way as revealed to me due to the prohibitions posted to me here by Mr. Hsiung. I know of two roads to follow, one the road of human achievement and the other of the road of divine accomplishment. There are many posters here that advise /inform others to go on the road of human achievement and it can be seen where that road leads.
Lou
Posted by ed_uk2010 on February 16, 2015, at 17:46:43
In reply to Lou's reply-turhodz » ed_uk2010, posted by Lou Pilder on February 16, 2015, at 17:30:34
>I am prevented from advising anyone here of the most effective way as revealed to me due to the prohibitions posted to me here by Mr. Hsiung.
I'm not sure what you mean but... If you want to tell posters about religion, I assume you can, at least on the faith board. Naturally, the meds board is mainly about medication - both benefits and side effects.
Posted by Phillipa on February 16, 2015, at 18:57:07
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-turhodz » Lou Pilder, posted by ed_uk2010 on February 16, 2015, at 17:46:43
Ed well written and that is so correct. Meds board for those who wish to know the facts or others experiences. Faith board for religious posts. PJ
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 17, 2015, at 6:50:50
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-turhodz » ed_uk2010, posted by Phillipa on February 16, 2015, at 18:57:07
> Ed well written and that is so correct. Meds board for those who wish to know the facts or others experiences. Faith board for religious posts. PJ
PJ,
The prohibition to me from Mr. Hsiung is for any board here, including the faith board. This may help you in understanding some of my posts here.
Lou
Posted by ed_uk2010 on February 17, 2015, at 15:24:09
In reply to Lou's response-nhohudder » Phillipa, posted by Lou Pilder on February 17, 2015, at 6:50:50
>The prohibition to me from Mr. Hsiung is for any board here, including the faith board.
Do you have a link to the specific prohibition you are referring to?
Posted by Dr. Bob on February 19, 2015, at 1:18:29
In reply to Making the best decision » Lou Pilder, posted by ed_uk2010 on February 16, 2015, at 13:37:26
> Lou,
>
> You do make some useful points. ... The problem is, as I see it, that your posts on the main board are extremely one-sided.
>
> New posters may be very vulnerable and frightened. No one is likely to be able to make the best decisions while afraid. We need to welcome new posters to the board and provide them with balanced information.... as much as is possible. If posters receive replies which cause fear, this may be very bad for their mental health.... and may have serious consequences.The way I see it, there are two ways to provide balanced information:
1. Each poster posts balanced information.
2. Multiple posters post one-sided information from multiple sides. Taken as a whole, the information they provide will be balanced.
Replies that cause fear may be considered bad since fear may be considered bad. OTOH, posters who already feel afraid may feel supported if their fears are validated.
Bob
Posted by Twinleaf on February 19, 2015, at 3:56:45
In reply to Re: Making the best decision, posted by Dr. Bob on February 19, 2015, at 1:18:29
What you say is true, Bob, but you seem to have dropped out Ed-uk's main point, which is that it is in everyones' interest to be able to find information here in as safe and fear-free a way as is possible for as many posters as possible - new ones especially.
A mental health board which apparently accords equal value to confirming newcomers' fears no longer has a good reason for existing.
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 19, 2015, at 8:31:01
In reply to Re: Making the best decision » Dr. Bob, posted by Twinleaf on February 19, 2015, at 3:56:45
> What you say is true, Bob, but you seem to have dropped out Ed-uk's main point, which is that it is in everyones' interest to be able to find information here in as safe and fear-free a way as is possible for as many posters as possible - new ones especially.
>
> A mental health board which apparently accords equal value to confirming newcomers' fears no longer has a good reason for existing.T_l,
You wrote,[...confirming newcomer's fears no longer has...].
A good reason for existing could be to help readers make a more-informed decision as to drug their child or take the drugs themselves or drug their parents in collaboration with a psychiatrist/doctor. The facts concerning that these drugs allowed to be advocated here could cause death, addiction and life-ruining conditions could offer readers the opportunity to prevent the death of a loved-one or themselves.
What exactly do you want to be implemented here in relation to posting that these drugs could kill the child that a parent comes here for information about these drugs in order to make a more informed decision as to drug their child or not in collaboration with a psychiatrist/doctor?
Lou
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.