![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 39. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by beardedlady on April 7, 2002, at 10:58:52
Don't you think Fruitcake Freddy and OCDiddy are the same guy? And don't you think maybe they are someone else, who was blocked a long time ago and never came back? Maybe posed as someone else?
As for Colin being uncivil, I think he was being sarcastic. Besides, he was using exactly the same language of OCDiddy's post, for which you simply gave him a warning (even though he seems like he's Fruitcake Freddy, and even though he's using the same language all over the place).
Anyway, I'm not saying I'm offended by OCDiddy. But gangsta rap treats women with disrespect, and almost all of Diddy's posts do too. Maybe he thinks he's being funny. Or maybe he's a racist. Or maybe he's really a gangsta rapper. I still think intention is everything, because only the first choice makes it somewhat excusable on this forum. But then, it's really only funny the first time, isn't it (place interrobang here for the rhetorical question).
beardy : />
Posted by OCDdiddy on April 7, 2002, at 11:20:42
In reply to Dr. Bob: I'm being a tattletale. Shame on me., posted by beardedlady on April 7, 2002, at 10:58:52
> Don't you think Fruitcake Freddy and OCDiddy are the same guy? And don't you think maybe they are someone else, who was blocked a long time ago and never came back? Maybe posed as someone else?
>
> As for Colin being uncivil, I think he was being sarcastic. Besides, he was using exactly the same language of OCDiddy's post, for which you simply gave him a warning (even though he seems like he's Fruitcake Freddy, and even though he's using the same language all over the place).
>
> Anyway, I'm not saying I'm offended by OCDiddy. But gangsta rap treats women with disrespect, and almost all of Diddy's posts do too. Maybe he thinks he's being funny. Or maybe he's a racist. Or maybe he's really a gangsta rapper. I still think intention is everything, because only the first choice makes it somewhat excusable on this forum. But then, it's really only funny the first time, isn't it (place interrobang here for the rhetorical question).
>
> beardy : />Once again, an attempt to hold the Black Man Down. If I get block, I am haven the NAACP come down here and sue you ass.
OCD Diddy
Posted by Lou Pilder on April 7, 2002, at 11:34:21
In reply to Trying to hold the Black Man Down?, posted by OCDdiddy on April 7, 2002, at 11:20:42
OCDditty;
We all know from your posts that you have something importamt to say to the people on this board. Now I am sggesting that we all reason togeather and put aside our own feelings and present our concerns in a rational , reasonable manner. I am asking Dr. Bob to suspend the "rules of civility " as pertaining to this board temporarily in order to accomodate your contributions to this board. Could you hold on untill Dr. Bob responds? , for it appears that your rhetoric is uncompattible with this board's rules.
Lou
Posted by OCDdiddy on April 7, 2002, at 11:36:30
In reply to A special request to Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on April 7, 2002, at 11:34:21
> OCDditty;
> We all know from your posts that you have something importamt to say to the people on this board. Now I am sggesting that we all reason togeather and put aside our own feelings and present our concerns in a rational , reasonable manner. I am asking Dr. Bob to suspend the "rules of civility " as pertaining to this board temporarily in order to accomodate your contributions to this board. Could you hold on untill Dr. Bob responds? , for it appears that your rhetoric is uncompattible with this board's rules.
> LouYo Lou,
I am down with that. Thanks for being my bro.
OCD Diddy
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 7, 2002, at 11:41:48
In reply to Trying to hold the Black Man Down?, posted by OCDdiddy on April 7, 2002, at 11:20:42
> If I get block, I am haven the NAACP come down here and sue you ass.
Threats aren't civil. I've already asked you please to be civil, so now I'm going to try to block you from posting for a week.
Bob
Posted by Lou Pilder on April 7, 2002, at 11:43:49
In reply to Re: A special request to Dr. Bob » Lou Pilder, posted by OCDdiddy on April 7, 2002, at 11:36:30
OCDdittyy;
I have emaile Dr. Bob with my request. I believe that you are trying to tell us something important and that we all really want o hear from you. Unfourtionatly, you are new here and your rhetoric is in violation of the rules of this boaed. That doesn't mean that what you are trying to say is invalid. In fact, I am your brother, and I have found out that we ar all brothers in the truth, all brothers in love , and all brothers in peace.
Lou
Posted by beardedlady on April 7, 2002, at 11:45:36
In reply to Trying to hold the Black Man Down?, posted by OCDdiddy on April 7, 2002, at 11:20:42
Yes (warning: sarcasm coming), the bearded lady looks for opportunities to oppress minorities just about every day of her life, which is a special challenge on the boards.
But I am willing to bet you are about as black as my beard. And now I'm pretty convinced that you are the one who's doing the oppressing. I suppose, since this is a board for folks with psychological and mood disorders, you belong here just as much as the rest of us.
beardy
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 7, 2002, at 11:49:18
In reply to Re: Trying to hold the Black Man Down?, posted by beardedlady on April 7, 2002, at 11:45:36
> I am willing to bet you are about as black as my beard. And now I'm pretty convinced that you are the one who's doing the oppressing.
Please don't jump to conclusions about others or post anything they could take as accusatory, thanks.
Bob
Posted by beardedlady on April 7, 2002, at 11:50:02
In reply to Dr. Bob: I'm being a tattletale. Shame on me., posted by beardedlady on April 7, 2002, at 10:58:52
Sorry, Dr. Bob. Your post wasn't there and only cropped up while I was responding to Obsessive Compulsive's post. My claws sort of came out.
beardy : (>
Posted by beardedlady on April 7, 2002, at 11:51:25
In reply to Re: please be civil » beardedlady, posted by Dr. Bob on April 7, 2002, at 11:49:18
Thanks. I guess I'm blocked now, since you posted while I was posting, again. (The initials of his name, however, were somewhere on a post, which is why I believed he used those initials.)
beardy
Posted by Bekka H. on April 7, 2002, at 14:36:41
In reply to Dr. Bob: I'm being a tattletale. Shame on me., posted by beardedlady on April 7, 2002, at 10:58:52
> Don't you think Fruitcake Freddy and OCDiddy are the same guy? ?
>
*************************************************Hello Beardy and anyone else. . .
A special investigative team has analyzed Fruitcake Freddy's posts and OCDDitty's posts, and it has been determined that Freddy and Ditty are NOT the same person. OCDDitty is someone else altogether. I have no idea who Ditty is.
Bekka
Posted by Elizabeth on April 8, 2002, at 1:43:18
In reply to Re: Trying to hold the Black Man Down?, posted by beardedlady on April 7, 2002, at 11:45:36
> But I am willing to bet you are about as black as my beard
Come to think of it...what color *is* your beard?
:-)
-elizabeth
Posted by Zo on April 8, 2002, at 3:08:55
In reply to Breaking News: Classified Information, posted by Bekka H. on April 7, 2002, at 14:36:41
Posted by Zo on April 8, 2002, at 3:24:28
In reply to Re: please be civil » beardedlady, posted by Dr. Bob on April 7, 2002, at 11:49:18
Bob,
Does this really jump out at you, Beardy's post? I mean, you see the whole board at once, and so have a perspective. . .but it always pains me to people like Beardy, like Elizabeth, get a PBC. It's pretty reliable-- mature, thoughtful people are most often speaking in a mature, thoughtful way. They just don't get there undies in a bunch over personalities, you know? I read Beardy's post as ironic. And this form, and your criteria, really handicap, even punish, irony. The capability for irony is an adult quality; without taking this into consideration, it seems like you're unfairly levelling the playing field.
In fact, I don't see how you can do this whole thing without taking the person into account. Maybe you can, I just don't see it.
Zo
PS. I don't think you answered on what basis you decide how many weeks to block someone. Thanks.
PPS. Spike emails that he is blocked until June 2003. I think he might be exaggerating a little. What do you think? ;o)
Posted by Zo on April 8, 2002, at 3:50:14
In reply to Re: A special request to Dr. Bob » Lou Pilder, posted by OCDdiddy on April 7, 2002, at 11:36:30
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 8, 2002, at 11:36:23
In reply to Re: Beardy's PBC » Dr. Bob, posted by Zo on April 8, 2002, at 3:24:28
> Does this really jump out at you, Beardy's post? I mean, you see the whole board at once, and so have a perspective. . .but it always pains me to people like Beardy, like Elizabeth, get a PBC.
It pains me, too, they could set an example instead...
> I read Beardy's post as ironic. And this form, and your criteria, really handicap, even punish, irony. The capability for irony is an adult quality...
But is it supportive?
> In fact, I don't see how you can do this whole thing without taking the person into account.
The tricky thing about taking the person into account is it can seem like favoritism...
> PS. I don't think you answered on what basis you decide how many weeks to block someone. Thanks.
Did you follow the link in my earlier post?
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20020308/msgs/3894.html
> PPS. Spike emails that he is blocked until June 2003. I think he might be exaggerating a little. What do you think? ;o)
I think that's what I posted. See above.
Bob
Posted by trouble on April 8, 2002, at 11:45:42
In reply to Dr. Bob: I'm being a tattletale. Shame on me., posted by beardedlady on April 7, 2002, at 10:58:52
After you've been blocked once is your record clean and you start over, w/ a warning next time or no?
And is the next one 2 weeks?thanks
trouble
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 8, 2002, at 12:54:46
In reply to Re: Dr. Bob: question about blocking, posted by trouble on April 8, 2002, at 11:45:42
> After you've been blocked once is your record clean and you start over, w/ a warning next time or no?
There, I think it depends...
> And is the next one 2 weeks?
Probably...
Bob
Posted by Zo on April 9, 2002, at 0:10:07
In reply to Re: irony and blocking, posted by Dr. Bob on April 8, 2002, at 11:36:23
Posted by wendy b. on April 10, 2002, at 13:08:34
In reply to follow the link?. .. duh. . .. (nm) » Dr. Bob, posted by Zo on April 9, 2002, at 0:10:07
Zo,
You have to follow the link within the link, text is copied and supplied below. Thread is on "Do's and Don't after being blocked..." I think it's Dr Bob's list. They could stand repeating in another thread, like this one right here...
W.
**************> o Do review the reasons for which you have been blocked. Some violations are included in the FAQ... others may be common sense (or, you may have been previously warned that such behaviour is unacceptable on the Babble boards). If you are still not sure why you have been blocked, you can search the archives...
I try to give a reason when I tell someone they're blocked, so it shouldn't be a mystery.
> o Do try to understand the feelings that led to your inappropriate post(s)... Remember that the length in weeks of your blockage is proportianate to the number of times you have been blocked (after a while, your record (or Dr. Bob's memory) may be nulled).
What I actually have in mind is to double it, rather than just increase it by one week, each time. And I don't rely on my memory anymore, I keep a list.
> o Do use your lost Babble time to pursue other activities.
>
> o Don't subvert your block. Don't register as another user. Doing so will result in an extra week of downtime. You and your posts are easily identifiable for many reasons (none of which I will list).See above regarding the amount of extra time. I'm not sure I'd say "easily", though that might have some deterrent effect. :-)
> o Don't take anger you may have from being blocked out on yourself, other babblers, Dr. Bob, or Babble. Take responsibility for your actions, but don't obsess over things you cannot change. Being blocked is not a personal attack.
It's definitely not meant to be an "attack". It could be argued that it's "personal", in the sense of "relating to a person", but it's not meant to be insulting or anything like that.
Bob
Posted by Elizabeth on April 11, 2002, at 17:06:00
In reply to Re: irony and blocking, posted by Dr. Bob on April 8, 2002, at 11:36:23
> > I read Beardy's post as ironic. And this form, and your criteria, really handicap, even punish, irony. The capability for irony is an adult quality...
>
> But is it supportive?I think it's reasonable to distinguish irony from sarcasm. When you're being sarcastic, there's a good chance you might be hurting somebody's feelings. Irony isn't necessarily sarcasm, though.
What bothers me about "The Rules" is that I can't read other people's minds. (Well, that generally bothers me. :-) ) Some of the people here are very sensitive and are easily offended. It's hard for me to guess what might upset a hypersensitive person even if I specifically go through something I've written looking for "potentially offensive" bits. I think there's a real problem with trying to follow a rule that has to do with someone else's subjective state of mind (and I do try to follow this rule).
> The tricky thing about taking the person into account is it can seem like favoritism...
I agree. The same standard should apply to everyone. If a distinction is to be made, it should be based on the context, not on the individual making the remark.
> > PPS. Spike emails that he is blocked until June 2003. I think he might be exaggerating a little. What do you think? ;o)
>
> I think that's what I posted. See above.My goodness. What did he do? I think I must have missed something.
-elizabeth
Posted by IsoM on April 11, 2002, at 21:00:40
In reply to Re: irony and blocking - Dr. Bob, Zo, posted by Elizabeth on April 11, 2002, at 17:06:00
Dr. Bob, is Spike really blocked that long & like Elizabeth asked, what did he do? Do you have *proof* that the other posts were his?
I don't think those other posts were his AT ALL. I never, ever believed they were. Not his style (& I 'read' people well, we e-mail each other off & on) - just the Spike's Twin Brother bits were.
Without solid evidence, I urge you to reconsider your thoughts that it was Spike posting them. If you don't have proof, I'd err on the side of mercy, if I were you. We all can jump to the wrong conclusions from time to time. You're a very reasonable person, Dr. Bob.
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 11, 2002, at 23:44:19
In reply to Re: irony and blocking - Dr. Bob, Zo, posted by Elizabeth on April 11, 2002, at 17:06:00
> > > I read Beardy's post as ironic. And this form, and your criteria, really handicap, even punish, irony. The capability for irony is an adult quality...
> >
> > But is it supportive?
>
> I think it's reasonable to distinguish irony from sarcasm. When you're being sarcastic, there's a good chance you might be hurting somebody's feelings. Irony isn't necessarily sarcasm, though.But is it supportive?
> What bothers me about "The Rules" is that I can't read other people's minds... It's hard for me to guess what might upset a hypersensitive person even if I specifically go through something I've written looking for "potentially offensive" bits. I think there's a real problem with trying to follow a rule that has to do with someone else's subjective state of mind (and I do try to follow this rule).
Thanks for trying. It's not always easy, and no one's perfect.
Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 12, 2002, at 0:53:05
In reply to Spike Blocked That Long??, posted by IsoM on April 11, 2002, at 21:00:40
> Dr. Bob, is Spike really blocked that long & like Elizabeth asked, what did he do? Do you have *proof* that the other posts were his?
>
> I don't think those other posts were his AT ALL. I never, ever believed they were. Not his style ... just the Spike's Twin Brother bits were.
>
> Without solid evidence, I urge you to reconsider your thoughts that it was Spike posting them. If you don't have proof, I'd err on the side of mercy, if I were you. We all can jump to the wrong conclusions from time to time. You're a very reasonable person, Dr. Bob.Spike is blocked at least that long. It may now actually be more like 1024 weeks.
What constitutes proof? Writing style?
It's hard to argue against "mercy". But I'm trying to think of the community as a whole and not just one individual. Who, after all, is free to go elsewhere for support. "The good of the many outweighs the good of the few."
Bob
Posted by IsoM on April 12, 2002, at 1:53:08
In reply to Re: Spike Blocked That Long, posted by Dr. Bob on April 12, 2002, at 0:53:05
Bob, when I mentioned proof, I was referring to stuff like ISP addresses, not writing style. I can easily imitate the style of another or change mine so you wouldn't know it was me - it's a piece of cake. But because I use cable, my ISP address would remain the same, but Spike might just have a phone connection - I don't know.
Still, going back a way, when Jill K posted that Spike was blocked & gave his e-mail address, you thought it was Spike posting. Correct me if I'm wrong.
It started a flurry of comments & posts from others, so I kept back, letting them emote. But I didn't think it to be Spike. You see, I was going to say the exact same thing Jill K did but when I went to post, her post was already there explaining Spike being unable to answer.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20020307/msgs/96981.htmlAs for mercy, I don't mean lifting the ban when you KNOW who the post comes from. Instead, I was referring to posts that are uncertain of the true identity of the person - it could even be a prank post from someone else who decided to make life more difficult for the other banned person.
All I'm asking is that you only extend a ban when you know for a CERTAINTY who the post comes from. If it's already the case that you DO know, I'll kindly back down. I'm not asking for retraction of previous banning.
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.