![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 28 to 52 of 52. Go back in thread:
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
Posted by ed_uk2010 on February 19, 2015, at 20:42:28
In reply to Lou's response-schisldehybuz » Twinleaf, posted by Lou Pilder on February 19, 2015, at 8:31:01
>to drug their child....... or drug their parents >....death, addiction and life-ruining conditions...
What I'm saying, in essence, is that new posters may feel frightened by such exceptionally emotive language. It may cause distress. I don't believe this is your intention, but I do think it may occur. When a poster has concerns, such concerns can be validated in a manner less likely to cause further anxiety.
Instead of talking about 'drugging children', you could ask: have you considered the possibility of serious side effects with this medication?
Instead of talking about 'life-ruining conditions', it might be more helpful to mention a few of the more common, but major, side effects which the drug might cause.
I do believe it's possible to be informative with less risk of inducing panic! I also believe it would benefit you... I think new members would be a lot more likely to engage with you if your posts were written in a less emotive manner.
Posted by ed_uk2010 on February 19, 2015, at 20:45:38
In reply to Re: Making the best decision » Dr. Bob, posted by Twinleaf on February 19, 2015, at 3:56:45
>it is in everyones' interest to be able to find information here in as safe...
That's what I mean really. I do believe it's very important to hear about the potential negative effects of medications. I don't believe it's supportive for this to occur in a manner likely to induce anxiety. I think a poster's fears can be validated in a panic-free manner!
Posted by ed_uk2010 on February 19, 2015, at 20:46:40
In reply to Re: Making the best decision, posted by Dr. Bob on February 19, 2015, at 1:18:29
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 15, 2015, at 10:27:28
In reply to Re: Making the best decision » Twinleaf, posted by ed_uk2010 on February 19, 2015, at 20:45:38
> > 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
>
> That's what I mean really. I do believe it's very important to hear about the potential negative effects of medications. I don't believe it's supportive for this to occur in a manner likely to induce anxiety. I think a poster's fears can be validated in a panic-free manner!I wonder how often it induces anxiety and how often the reader is already anxious and it makes them feel they're not alone.
I also support validating fears in a panic-free manner. There's room for posts like that, too.
Bob
Posted by Twinleaf on March 15, 2015, at 12:54:11
In reply to Re: fears, posted by Dr. Bob on March 15, 2015, at 10:27:28
I think many of us would be extremely supportive to see a bit more evidence of this. This would involve your using your own extensive medical knowledge and leadership ability to help newcomers, especially, distinguish between scientifically-based concerns, which are always present and need to be considered carefully, and extreme individual reactions which are not explicable in this manner. Even a minimum of scientific leadership in the situation in question would have helped Psychobabble retain a more professional, reliable status for newcomers. Probably most of them have adequate emotional and professional support; they are just looking for the best information they can get!
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 17, 2015, at 9:47:52
In reply to Re: fears, posted by Twinleaf on March 15, 2015, at 12:54:11
> This would involve your using your own extensive medical knowledge and leadership ability to help newcomers, especially, distinguish between scientifically-based concerns, which are always present and need to be considered carefully, and extreme individual reactions which are not explicable in this manner. Even a minimum of scientific leadership in the situation in question would have helped Psychobabble retain a more professional, reliable status for newcomers.
That's one vision for a web site. But I've always seen Babble as a place for peer support, not support from me. Which could be a source of dissatisfaction. I'm an authority figure who withholds his extensive medical knowledge and leadership ability.
Bob
Posted by Twinleaf on March 17, 2015, at 21:26:14
In reply to Re: support from me, posted by Dr. Bob on March 17, 2015, at 9:47:52
I think I was very clear. We are not asking for "the one right answer" from you (there's no such thing anyway!). Just the basic general information which would help newcomers distinguish between reasonable, thoughtful options for them, and endless, repetitive discussions like this one which might cause newcomers to believe things which are extreme and based on completely incorrect interpretations of data. That is minimal, respectful leadership at its best, and a necessity to make our forum safe and worthwhile. Many newcomers in recent years have openly expressed fear and confusion at the extreme views they encounter inLou's posts and have disappeared because of it.
Perhaps you are looking for a way to end Babble, as you hinted. Making it worthless is one way!
Posted by Phillipa on March 17, 2015, at 22:15:09
In reply to Re: support from me » Dr. Bob, posted by Twinleaf on March 17, 2015, at 21:26:14
My exact thought when asked why the post was there. Seemed to me the reason
Posted by Twinleaf on March 19, 2015, at 16:11:21
In reply to Re: support from me, posted by Dr. Bob on March 17, 2015, at 9:47:52
I think you have misunderstood me. We have never expected "the final word" on anything from you.( it doesn't exist snyway!) Many of us just have been hoping that you would use reasonable standards in monitoring the medical veracity and usefulness of the comments in this particular situation. Not for us, but for newcomers who may be less informed.
I am perfectly comfortable with the relative lack of emotional support from you. When the boards were more active, excellent support was available from fellow posters. I do not look for it here any longer, although there may still be a few people who do
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 19, 2015, at 16:50:55
In reply to Re: support from me » Dr. Bob, posted by Twinleaf on March 17, 2015, at 21:26:14
> I think I was very clear. We are not asking for "the one right answer" from you (there's no such thing anyway!). Just the basic general information which would help newcomers distinguish between reasonable, thoughtful options for them, and endless, repetitive discussions like this one which might cause newcomers to believe things which are extreme and based on completely incorrect interpretations of data. That is minimal, respectful leadership at its best, and a necessity to make our forum safe and worthwhile. Many newcomers in recent years have openly expressed fear and confusion at the extreme views they encounter inLou's posts and have disappeared because of it.
>
> Perhaps you are looking for a way to end Babble, as you hinted. Making it worthless is one way!T_l,
What you have posted about me here gives me a want for information. If you could post a URL here of what you are wanting readers to think about me, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 21, 2015, at 16:36:09
In reply to Lou's request-pscehypgo » Twinleaf, posted by Lou Pilder on March 19, 2015, at 16:50:55
> > I think I was very clear. We are not asking for "the one right answer" from you (there's no such thing anyway!). Just the basic general information which would help newcomers distinguish between reasonable, thoughtful options for them, and endless, repetitive discussions like this one which might cause newcomers to believe things which are extreme and based on completely incorrect interpretations of data. That is minimal, respectful leadership at its best, and a necessity to make our forum safe and worthwhile. Many newcomers in recent years have openly expressed fear and confusion at the extreme views they encounter inLou's posts and have disappeared because of it.
> >
> > Perhaps you are looking for a way to end Babble, as you hinted. Making it worthless is one way!
>
> T_l,
> What you have posted about me here gives me a want for information. If you could post a URL here of what you are wanting readers to think about me, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
> LouT_l,
You wrote,[...discussions like this one which might cause newcomers to believe things which are extreme and based on {completely} *incorrect interpretations of data*...].
I could be thought here to be your subject person that posts what you say is extreme and based on incorrect interpretations of data, completely. That could cause hostile and disagreeable feelings and opinions about me and decrease the respect, regard and confidence in which I am held.
Friends, be not deceived. I would like for you to examine what can be seen in this and (redacted by respondent)
Lou
This is the end of the 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.