![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 105 to 129 of 129. Go back in thread:
Posted by zeugma on January 6, 2006, at 22:48:32
In reply to Re: Just my opinion..., posted by alexandra_k on January 6, 2006, at 21:33:28
if you don't have this view of what he is trying to do...
then you don't really look for the sense behind the blocks.
i mean...
i suppose there are benefits to that in a way.
the blocked poster didn't do anything wrong...
dr-bob is just being a meanie
making arbitrary decisions that make no sense.>>no, this is false, and condescending.
and you are fooling yourself into believing that you do not use hurtful language when describing others' behavior.
people who are blocked generally disagree with the principle of the blocks, fully aware that a principle is at work (a principle they see as misguided).
and this place is not safe. people get upset here and there is nothing in place to help the emotions that get unleashed here.
-z
Posted by alexandra_k on January 6, 2006, at 23:02:42
In reply to Re: Just my opinion... » alexandra_k, posted by zeugma on January 6, 2006, at 22:48:32
> no, this is false, and condescending.
i'm sorry z.
i really did not mean to be condescending.
i'm sorry if i hurt you
that was not my intention :-(
> people who are blocked generally disagree with the principle of the blocks, fully aware that a principle is at work (a principle they see as misguided).okay.
i would like to talk about this.
see...
what is the principle of the blocks?
what is the principle of the blocks that you disagree with?
because i think that whether you accept the block or not
whether you see the sense in the block or not
whether you feel really very angry / hurt in response to a block or not...
all of that...depends really very heavily on the way you describe the principle of the block.
the way you describe what you were blocked for
and what dr-bob was trying to do when he blocked you.
> and this place is not safe. people get upset here and there is nothing in place to help the emotions that get unleashed here.((((((z))))))
how do you think it could be safer?
Posted by sleepygirl on January 6, 2006, at 23:47:26
In reply to Re: Just my opinion... » zeugma, posted by alexandra_k on January 6, 2006, at 23:02:42
You know I've had a lot of empathy and patience for Deneb only because I have felt judged as "manipulative" before (evidence was pretty scant for it, but OK)
I've given it a tremendous amount of thought. I've felt awful about it, because I was unclear (that is what I surmised as the problem)
I came to understand the problem as this:
I was terrified to ask for help (from anyone, anytime, anywhere)I don't know....maybe other people identify with this...being unclear, difficult to understand, even evoking negative feelings in others, so we tolerate a lot of that in others (OK maybe that's just MY reason)
What I feel growing in this "drama" is a feeling like stated previously of not being safe. I don't like it when the dangers are less obvious -when we are left to worry about others, and it escalates, and escalates, and escalates...but holy anxiety provoking (for those of us paying attention)
You may look at what Larry said the word "manipulative" - sounds really negative, a word with power, but it does grab a hold of the shades of gray, puts a face on the intention doesn't it? so then we can finally put to words how we feel about one or both sides of the issue
this sucks, it honestly and really does
Posted by sleepygirl on January 6, 2006, at 23:55:20
In reply to Re: Just my opinion..., posted by sleepygirl on January 6, 2006, at 23:47:26
maybe a good idea?
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 7, 2006, at 2:05:27
In reply to Re: Just my opinion..., posted by alexandra_k on January 6, 2006, at 21:33:28
>> i mean...
> i suppose there are benefits to that in a way.
> the blocked poster didn't do anything wrong...
> dr-bob is just being a meanie
> making arbitrary decisions that make no sense.
>
.That's a little reductive,
and I'm put off by the way you worded it.
Predicting blocks isn't really an issue, it's not that difficult. What angers most people who care about it, is that some people can say things that others would get blocked for, and nothing happens, considering the severity of the blocks, that's no small thing.
Posted by alexandra_k on January 7, 2006, at 3:05:43
In reply to Re: Just my opinion..., posted by Gabbix2 on January 7, 2006, at 2:05:27
> and I'm put off by the way you worded it.
yep, i think a few people were. sorry bout that :-(
> Predicting blocks isn't really an issue, it's not that difficult.
okay.
> some people can say things that others would get blocked for, and nothing happens
hmm.
how does that mesh with predictability?
do you need to factor in who the poster is before you make a prediction whether they will get a pbc / block for the content of their post do ya think?
Posted by alexandra_k on January 7, 2006, at 3:10:40
In reply to Re: Just my opinion..., posted by alexandra_k on January 6, 2006, at 21:33:28
well...
what is dr-bob trying to do then...
i mean...
is he misguided or what?
for those who wouldn't have blocked...
would you be prepared to accept my calling you manipulative and just playing games and not getting a blocking?
Posted by zeugma on January 7, 2006, at 7:05:23
In reply to Re: Just my opinion..., posted by alexandra_k on January 7, 2006, at 3:10:40
no alex.
i don't think dr. bob is misguided.
dumb, shallow, uncaring people don't come here and get upset.
including those who are admins. it is a terrible responsibility.
i have to go now because of a timesheet. if not i would gladly say more on this.
-z
Posted by Nickengland on January 7, 2006, at 7:07:05
In reply to Re: Just my opinion..., posted by alexandra_k on January 7, 2006, at 3:10:40
I think my writing on this thread last night was about as confusing as the building blocks of this thread.
Best regards
Nick
Posted by alexandra_k on January 7, 2006, at 16:30:03
In reply to Well,, posted by Nickengland on January 7, 2006, at 7:07:05
well...
i thought your post was clear and made a lot of sense
:-P
so there
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 7, 2006, at 17:55:29
In reply to Re: Just my opinion... » Gabbix2, posted by alexandra_k on January 7, 2006, at 3:05:43
> > and I'm put off by the way you worded it.
>
> yep, i think a few people were. sorry bout that :-(
>Okay!
> > Predicting blocks isn't really an issue, it's not that difficult.
>
> okay.
>
> > some people can say things that others would get blocked for, and nothing happens
>
> hmm.
>
> how does that mesh with predictability?
>
>Good question, as I shouldn't have said predictability. : ) In hindsight, it's fairly easy (now) for me to see why someone was blocked, I would say the reasoning for the blocks is consistant. What I find inconsistant, is that some will get blocked and other people seem to get either endless P.B.C's or nothing said to them at all.
I've often been tempted to call attention to it, but it's really hard to do that, because often I don't think they deserve a block, my only issue is that someone else did get one. If I said something then I feel like a 5 year old tattling. Also I think some people might take it personally if I pointed out that their post seemed to have 'qualified' for a block by Bob's standards, even if I made clear that I don't want them to get one.
It happened to me just a little while ago except I was on the recieving end of leniency when I accidentally overrode the automatic asterisking
and typed in an entire swear word on the same posting day I think it was Shame, who got blocked for using the same word.do you need to factor in who the poster is before you make a prediction whether they will get a pbc / block for the content of their post do ya think?
>
For certain people especially a while ago, you could do that.
Posted by Nickengland on January 7, 2006, at 18:32:44
In reply to Re: Well,, posted by alexandra_k on January 7, 2006, at 16:30:03
Posted by alexandra_k on January 7, 2006, at 20:18:45
In reply to Re: Just my opinion... » alexandra_k, posted by Gabbix2 on January 7, 2006, at 17:55:29
> What I find inconsistant, is that some will get blocked and other people seem to get either endless P.B.C's or nothing said to them at all.
i think lou used to say something similar...
> I've often been tempted to call attention to it, but it's really hard to do that, because often I don't think they deserve a block, my only issue is that someone else did get one. If I said something then I feel like a 5 year old tattling.
i understand.
> Also I think some people might take it personally if I pointed out that their post seemed to have 'qualified' for a block by Bob's standards, even if I made clear that I don't want them to get one.
yes. there does seem to be precedent for people having a tendency to take it that way...
> It happened to me just a little while ago except I was on the recieving end of leniency when I accidentally overrode the automatic asterisking and typed in an entire swear word on the same posting day I think it was Shame, who got blocked for using the same word.
ah.
and how do you feel in response to that?
my guess would be that that would depend on how you describe the reason for him getting blocked and your not getting blocked.1) maybe dr bob decided to give you a break whereas he decided not to give shame a break.
(feeling pretty mad at the existence of a double standard round about now???)
2) maybe dr bob missed your doing that. maybe... he really doesn't have the time (and the attention to detail) required to pick up every instance of that.
(still feel mad?)
i would guess... being charitable here... that would be an oversight. i think that has happened before. i would guess... that dr-bob doesn't have the time to read every post as carefully as one would need to do to pick up on absolutely everything...
er... how do you 'accidently' over-ride automated asterisking?
do you mean by coming up with a word that mirriam webster doesn't acknowledge?
> For certain people especially a while ago, you could do that.maybe...
talking about now.i agree it is harder to predict than it is to retro-dict (which is to say to see the sense in hindsight)
but...
if dr-bob had noticed your bypassing the asterisking...
you would have gotten blocked.
don't you think?
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 7, 2006, at 20:34:36
In reply to Re: Just my opinion... » Gabbix2, posted by alexandra_k on January 7, 2006, at 20:18:45
> > It happened to me just a little while ago except I was on the recieving end of leniency when I accidentally overrode the automatic asterisking and typed in an entire swear word on the same posting day I think it was Shame, who got blocked for using the same word.
>
> ah.
> and how do you feel in response to that?
> my guess would be that that would depend on how you describe the reason for him getting blocked and your not getting blocked.
>
> 1) maybe dr bob decided to give you a break whereas he decided not to give shame a break.
>
> (feeling pretty mad at the existence of a double standard round about now???)
>
> 2) maybe dr bob missed your doing that. maybe... he really doesn't have the time (and the attention to detail) required to pick up every instance of that.
>
None of the above, I can't really speculate on Bob's intentions, though I have pondered, I mean I wouldn't know.. how could I?However Bob considers saying sh*t so harmful to the community that he has to block someone for doing it, then more care needs to be taken that it's not overlooked. How can something be such a transgression if he doesn't even see it sometimes. Blocking is serious! I don't care if I'm blocked anymore but I know that it can be really hurtful
Personally I don't think my posting sh*t adversely affected the community.
Offers and suggestions have been made to Dr. Bob to prevent this from happening, but he's not taken them up.I think Zen made a whole list once of people who've gotten away with swearing, and others who got blocked for saying a**
She got blocked for almost a year for doing the same thing I did, saying sh*t.
It's not like it's a one time thing.
It's an old story though.. one I'm not going to get into any further.Oh I Overode the asterisking by doing it myself, which is a habit. I ended typing it, editing and not double checking, I typed the entire word with the asterisk at the end.
Posted by alexandra_k on January 7, 2006, at 21:20:47
In reply to Re: Just my opinion... » alexandra_k, posted by Gabbix2 on January 7, 2006, at 20:34:36
> She got blocked for almost a year for doing the same thing I did, saying sh*t.
she did not.
she got blocked for saying sh*t.
she got blocked for one year because she had been blocked... how many times before?how long do you think it would take someone to read all the posts carefully enough to pick up every single incident of unasterisked swearing?
do you think it would be possible for one person to do this without error even if they spent every waking hour on that?
if we see something that we believe is inconsistent and we want there to be consistency here...
then i think the burden is on us to bring it to his attention at the very least...i choose to believe he is doing his best.
if you thought that was unfair...
you could have emailed him.
you can do that if you think he is being unfair and don't want people on the boards to think you are picking on them.
Posted by zenhussy on January 7, 2006, at 21:41:41
In reply to Re: Just my opinion... » Gabbix2, posted by alexandra_k on January 7, 2006, at 21:20:47
with regards to language and bypassing auto asterisking....all of our blocks came before the implimentation of the automatic asterisking: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041218/msgs/434839.html
>>>Re: automatic asterisking
Posted by Dr. Bob on December 27, 2004, at 22:10:02
In reply to Re: a more democratic structure?, posted by Dr. Bob on December 7, 2004, at 3:54:48>I've also been thinking about automated asterisking. Maybe it could be an option? So people could turn it off -- but then not be warned before being blocked...
OK, let's give this a try. It should be working now. Sorry about all the testing I had to do... To turn it off, there's a new setting:
http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/settings.pl
Any questions? I hope this helps!
Bob<<<as for the block in question it did not contain the word which either of you refer to. "willy nilly" and "bs" in the context they were used in 2004 did not meet with the civility standard set forth by the administration of this site.
thanks.......now back to your regularly scheduled thread......as someone in the academic field we're sure you can appreciate accuracy and we'd hope you'll try to include that next time you refer to a block of ours.
alexandra_k wrote: she got blocked for one year because she had been blocked... how many times before?
we were blocked seven times(over three years) before we were shown the door for 48 weeks. LH's blocks have been one week, two weeks, six weeks, six weeks, six weeks and six weeks. That's a total of six blockings equaling twenty-seven weeks from 2003-2006. We have a total of eight blocks equaling more than eighty plus weeks from 2002-2004
Posted by alexandra_k on January 7, 2006, at 22:02:46
In reply to please use the archives to get facts straight!! » alexandra_k, posted by zenhussy on January 7, 2006, at 21:41:41
I just knew that would get you talking to me :-)
((((((zen))))))))
> as for the block in question it did not contain the word which either of you refer to. "willy nilly" and "bs" in the context they were used in 2004 did not meet with the civility standard set forth by the administration of this site.right. my apologies.
> thanks.......now back to your regularly scheduled thread......as someone in the academic field we're sure you can appreciate accuracy and we'd hope you'll try to include that next time you refer to a block of ours.
sorry bout that.
> we were blocked seven times(over three years) before we were shown the door for 48 weeks.okay.
> LH's blocks have been one week, two weeks, six weeks, six weeks, six weeks and six weeks. That's a total of six blockings equaling twenty-seven weeks from 2003-2006. We have a total of eight blocks equaling more than eighty plus weeks from 2002-2004
yeah.
do you think that he has been more reluctant to block for lengthy periods in general (ie been a bit more lenient with block lengths and reluctant to block) since people protested about that rather a lot a while back now?
one thing...
one thing i think about sometimes...
is that people may be more likely to be shown leniency if they demonstrate that they are TRYING to understand... and that they are willing to try and see where they went wrong and modify their behaviour in future...
maybe?
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 7, 2006, at 22:19:02
In reply to Re: Just my opinion... » Gabbix2, posted by alexandra_k on January 7, 2006, at 21:20:47
>
> how long do you think it would take someone to read all the posts carefully enough to pick up every single incident of unasterisked swearing?
>
> do you think it would be possible for one person to do this without error even if they spent every waking hour on that?
>There were offers of help to avoid the inconsistancy, this was before the asterisking.
He chose to go through every post and pick out swearwords.
He had an obligation to correct unfairness which WAS brought to his attention and I quote
"I think it's better to let those things go"
Yes he missed them, but now they've been brought to his attention and well let's just let them go even though someone else got blocked for 4 weeks.
Either it's important or it isn't.
That's a mixed mesage.
> if we see something that we believe is inconsistent and we want there to be consistency here...
You give up after a while
> i choose to believe he is doing his best.Yeah, you've made that clear, but that's not what this is about.
these things have happened whatever spin you put on it.
>
> if you thought that was unfair...
> you could have emailed him.Why would you think I didn't?
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 7, 2006, at 22:25:13
In reply to Re: please use the archives to get facts straight!! » zenhussy, posted by alexandra_k on January 7, 2006, at 22:02:46
> I just knew that would get you talking to me :-)> is that people may be more likely to be shown leniency if they demonstrate that they are TRYING to understand... and that they are willing to try and see where they went wrong and modify their behaviour in future...
>
> maybe?
>
In a word or 3 .. NO profoundly NO Profoundly NO
That's not what I've seen.
I think you've underestimated greatly the meticulous methods by which some posters find these inconsistancies.
It's in the archives.
There are two notables who repeatedly made the same kinds of comments and went for years without a block, Something like 27 p.b.cs and no block..
But I don't want to discuss it further.
I don't mind what you choose to believe I'm not here to try and change your mind.
What good would that do?
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 7, 2006, at 22:26:15
In reply to Re: please use the archives to get facts straight!! » alexandra_k, posted by Gabbix2 on January 7, 2006, at 22:25:13
Thank you Zen
I do wish I'd refreshed the board before I'd posted.xoxoxox
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 7, 2006, at 22:28:31
In reply to please use the archives to get facts straight!! » alexandra_k, posted by zenhussy on January 7, 2006, at 21:41:41
Oh and let's not forget Gal/Krissy who got 6 weeks taken off her block.. yes taken OFF her block time, for breaking the rules and posting under another name from another computer.
Bob knew.. and he said publically he was letting it go.
Don't most people get weeks added to their blocks for doing that.
Did Krissy show any remorse or willingness to learn.
Well the archives will answer that question.
Posted by alexandra_k on January 7, 2006, at 22:33:42
In reply to Re: please use the archives to get facts straight!! » zenhussy, posted by Gabbix2 on January 7, 2006, at 22:28:31
ah...
the utter chaos of the world...
i don't know what to say...
i haven't had a problem with anything i have seen in the time i have been here.
i guess... thats all i can say really.
i'm sorry gabbi.
Posted by Dinah on January 7, 2006, at 22:42:03
In reply to Re: please use the archives to get facts straight!!, posted by alexandra_k on January 7, 2006, at 22:33:42
But I suppose a redirect to Admin is in order.
Could any further posts about administrative policies be redirected to Admin please?
Posted by Pfinstegg on January 8, 2006, at 15:26:06
In reply to Too afraid to get help, posted by Deneb on January 4, 2006, at 8:23:02
Hi Deneb... I know you are struggling very, very hard over how to think of yourself; are you well, with normal emotional upsets, or do you have an emotional illness?
When your functioning in daily life is impaired, whether by difficulty in having satisfying, close relationships with other people, by having difficulty doing your schoolwork and planning for a career, by injuring yourself in any way, or by having difficulty with your own mood self-regulation, the answer is that you do have an emotional illness. The newest way that people are thinking about this is that these are disorders in "affect regulation". It's nothing to be ashamed of, it just "is". There is excellent help available to you; it should include individual psychotherapy, medication until the time that you no longer need it, and perhaps other things such as DBT, group therapy, art therapy, drama therapy, EMDR.
I am personally distressed to see you going over and over on whether you are ill or not. I would be so happy to see you posting about accepting it (that takes a lot of courage), and making a good plan for getting well. You are just at the beginning of your life, and are very intelligent- you have everything you need inside you to become well and lead a full and happy life. Why not make a deal with all of us- post about how you are feeling, to be sure, but also let us know that you are making and sticking to a plan for getting well?
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 8, 2006, at 22:50:12
In reply to This is probably way overdue, posted by Dinah on January 7, 2006, at 22:42:03
> Could any further posts about administrative policies be redirected to Admin please?
That's a good idea, here's a link:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20051205/msgs/596905.html
Thanks,
Bob
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Social | 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.