![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 22 to 46 of 71. Go back in thread:
Posted by ClearSkies on February 21, 2008, at 10:48:56
In reply to Psycho-Babble is not dying, posted by Jamal Spelling on February 21, 2008, at 10:16:58
I don't see this as a dying place, either. Gone through some tough times, for sure. Maybe more like growing pains? And maybe some of the growth has been uncomfortable, been perceived as stifling. Maybe some of the things Dr Bob has tried, like the extra boards, haven't worked out as well as he thought. I think that redirects, for example, are "death" to most threads, especially when they're sent to a board that isn't frequently posted to.
But I mostly see Babble as an organic thing, a community, not a static thing - and that's its appeal for me. I know that the traffic will slow or speed up sometimes. I know that discussions can become lively, though less likely they are now to become flame wars (and oh so thankful am I for that! God bless the Notification Button). I, for one, like the fact that people aren't tolerated to be all-out *ssh*l*s towards each other here, as I've seen on other forums.
It's not that I think this makes Babble a homogenized, bland environment. I think it makes lively discussions even more challenging - and at times might keep some of us silent at times. But is that a bad thing, if the alternative would have been to say something offensive? I really think that there's plenty enough of that in our society (just turn on the radio sometime to an AM station, or a cable news channel to get your fill of offensive communication), and I welcome the relative peace of this place, where opinions and feelings can be aired with *civility*.
I'm staying, and this place isn't dead yet.
ClearSkies
Posted by rskontos on February 21, 2008, at 12:54:28
In reply to Re: Psycho-Babble is dying. » Emme, posted by kezia on February 20, 2008, at 10:46:17
I must say that I agree. I have too much else to deal with then always trying to decide if I am breaching some PBC rules I usually delete my post and close my browser or go to another site where I can feel freer to post. :(
rsk
Posted by SLS on February 21, 2008, at 16:13:10
In reply to Re: Psycho-Babble is not dying, posted by ClearSkies on February 21, 2008, at 10:48:56
> I don't see this as a dying place, either. Gone through some tough times, for sure. Maybe more like growing pains?
Which rough times?
When did these growing pains begin?
You know, I really don't have to be right about this. In fact, I hope my postulations are wrong. I just thought it important to help save PB if PB indeed needed saving. It seems that PB is always going through rough times. I am not convinced that three years of "growing pains" should be allowed to continue ad infinitum.
- Scott
Posted by ClearSkies on February 21, 2008, at 16:27:25
In reply to Re: Psycho-Babble is not dying, posted by SLS on February 21, 2008, at 16:13:10
> > I don't see this as a dying place, either. Gone through some tough times, for sure. Maybe more like growing pains?
>
> Which rough times?
>
> When did these growing pains begin?
>
> You know, I really don't have to be right about this. In fact, I hope my postulations are wrong. I just thought it important to help save PB if PB indeed needed saving. It seems that PB is always going through rough times. I am not convinced that three years of "growing pains" should be allowed to continue ad infinitum.
>
>
> - Scott
>
>My thoughts were that with a community where members were joining and leaving - not a static environment - that growth and change would be a constant, and not a period through which we'd go through, and then we'd be Done. Maybe I was projecting my own "rough times" at Babble - becoming and then unbecoming a Deputy, and then the period last summer when the site was hacked. Perhaps any individual here can point to their own Rough Times at Babble...
My point was that a place such as this should be always changing, sometimes growing, maybe sometimes drawing itself smaller, as needs be - for instance, I think when the smaller boards were created, overall traffic might have gone down because people tended to get lost. Or when threads were redirected, they died as people didn't follow them to the redirected board.
Too early to call the time of death, IMO. Did you know this is Babble's 10th birthday year?
CS
Posted by Dinah on February 21, 2008, at 17:12:44
In reply to Re: Psycho-Babble is dying., posted by Toph on February 20, 2008, at 21:21:09
> I may be mistaken but the vitality of Psycho-Babble seems to mirror the interest it's founder has in it.
That's been my feeling as well. Babble is so much an extension of Dr. Bob's ideals and beliefs. And IMO he breathes life into it, because it is so much his creation.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if there were short term dips and peaks around Dr. Bob's appearances.
I rather suspect that will never change back to what it was, and I can't blame him. Babble can take a lot of time even for posters, and deputies. To do what Dr. Bob used to do here must have taken an enormous amount of his time and energy.
Posted by Toph on February 21, 2008, at 21:49:16
In reply to Re: Psycho-Babble is dying. » Toph, posted by Dinah on February 21, 2008, at 17:12:44
A couple of things strike me about this topic. Ultimately, commiting to this place for me was feeling accepted, not just getting support by the many nice, supportive folks here, but being recognized and having meaningful dialogue with the grand members. I think you know who I mean, the zenhusseys, Larrys, susans, Atticuses, Alexes, Dinahs, and others to name a few. For those people to care about the new guy was a rite of passage for me. Believe it or not the flamers and trolls helped solidify my allegiance to the group. I would quickly switch my agitator hat for my defender hat. I remember one night someone had a meltdown and attacked Bob. Bob made a comment that that appeared to me and others as very condescending. There was a flurry of posting on the admin board. The tention was palpable and the posts were flying so fast that PB turned into a chat room. I remember those days, as a time when the attachment and contention reflected a passion that everyone had for this place and each other. But I had to distance myself from Babble because my involvement interfered with my work and my marriage. So maybe its unfair for me to make any judgment about the current cohort of babblers. We all some day will be nostalgic about the group with whom we bonded most here.
Posted by Dinah on February 21, 2008, at 22:04:52
In reply to Re: Psycho-Babble is dying., posted by Toph on February 21, 2008, at 21:49:16
Thank you, Toph, for including me. :) And now you're one of the venerable posters.
My therapist refers to it as the drama triangle. It certainly does lead to more intensity and passion. And more passion can lead to more attachment.
But I also think there's probably a cost involved.
I have a certain amount of nostalgia for those days when I saw myself as sort of a caped crusader. But ultimately I think I began to see things the way my therapist did, and Dr. Bob I think. It's hard to tell with Dr. Bob.
Posted by medjuggler on February 22, 2008, at 1:01:25
In reply to Plus:, posted by Jamal Spelling on February 21, 2008, at 10:25:03
> I'm sure Dr Grohol will be happy to see you at PsychCentral.
Thanks for the tip mate! Just been there & it looks pretty damn good :) Time will tell but I'll give it a go!
For what its worth, in the 5-6 years I've posted here I've never known it to be this bad. People being blocked for being human - like someone said above, its becoming too robotic here. Can I say this? Should I say that? Should I just piss off somewhere else? Maybe!
mj
Posted by SLS on February 22, 2008, at 5:47:55
In reply to Re: Plus: » Jamal Spelling, posted by medjuggler on February 22, 2008, at 1:01:25
...and it was what it was. I can tell the difference. There is much I do like about Psycho-Babble now, much of which comes from moderation. I doubt I will invest my time anywhere else. Still, I must question the degree of intrusion. The good doctor applies grammar strictly and logically - equally. However, this type of logic and desire for a utopian society can cause an ever-expanding set of sanctionable rules in an effort to make it so.
My comments along this thread are meant to be provacative and get people thinking. My personal relationship with PB is complex, and too difficult to verbalize here. It does, however, change over time, as do most relationships. Both I and PB are evolving entities. I have reservations as to where these changes are headed. I feel less comfortable rather than more comfortable as the administration of PB has changed in 1 1/2 years. Perhaps my perspective is rather unique as I had the opportunity to witness a before and after observation of how the environment here has, in my judgment, deteriorated. Perhaps this is melodrama, but I hope my point is made and not necessarily agreed upon. It is what it is, regardless of our personal relationships with Psycho-Babble. These are, because of human nature, quite diverse. I don't like that I see less diversity in the personality of posts. Of course, this is a personal opinion that may have more to do with me than with PB.
I don't know.
It is what it is.
I think I'll hang around a bit longer.
- Scott
Posted by Jamal Spelling on February 22, 2008, at 7:14:56
In reply to Re: Plus: » Jamal Spelling, posted by medjuggler on February 22, 2008, at 1:01:25
> > I'm sure Dr Grohol will be happy to see you at PsychCentral.
>
> Thanks for the tip mate! Just been there & it looks pretty damn good :) Time will tell but I'll give it a go!
>
> For what its worth, in the 5-6 years I've posted here I've never known it to be this bad. People being blocked for being human - like someone said above, its becoming too robotic here. Can I say this? Should I say that? Should I just piss off somewhere else? Maybe!
>
> mjLOL, that's not quite what I meant. I expressed myself in a particularly abrasive way, I'm sorry.
What I meant to express is that the reason I keep coming back here myself, despite PB's imperfections, is because I believe PB is the best website of its kind for information and support regarding mental health issues.
Posted by Jamal Spelling on February 22, 2008, at 7:20:40
In reply to It is what it is..., posted by SLS on February 22, 2008, at 5:47:55
> I think I'll hang around a bit longer.
Yes, please do.
Posted by Jamal Spelling on February 22, 2008, at 7:33:02
In reply to Plus:, posted by Jamal Spelling on February 21, 2008, at 10:25:03
I'm sorry for the post I made above saying how people should leave if they find PB objectionable. It was a stupid post. I don't want anyone to leave, and that's not how I meant it anyway.
I meant that, why do people keep coming back for more if PB is so bad? Maybe it's because PB ultimately isn't all that bad. Other forums have their own issues that posters complain about too, just like PB.
Posted by medjuggler on February 22, 2008, at 10:51:44
In reply to Re: Plus:, posted by Jamal Spelling on February 22, 2008, at 7:14:56
> LOL, that's not quite what I meant. I expressed myself in a particularly abrasive way, I'm sorry.
>
> What I meant to express is that the reason I keep coming back here myself, despite PB's imperfections, is because I believe PB is the best website of its kind for information and support regarding mental health issues.Dont appologise mate! I'm serious bout what I said. I've had it up to the neck with the administration 'pettiness' that seems to be flooding the boards and interfering with issues on threads which I believe (in most cases) would sort themselves out.
There is a classic example on this board, not that far above this thread.
In fact, I've been so paranoid & angry about 'rumours & gossip' caused by one 'particular individual', who has even brung my family life into the picture (yeah you know who you are!) that I've felt the need to change my name. These type of people barely get a slap on the wrist whilst the real victim gets a warning or even blocked. Too many people abuse this site yet the administrators appear pretty 'unqualified' & pick on the wrong people. If they were my employees they'd have been shown the door long time ago. But then I guess they're only doing what thier 'boss' tells them to do. Hey Dr.Bob! mj
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 22, 2008, at 12:32:24
In reply to Re: Plus:, posted by Jamal Spelling on February 22, 2008, at 7:14:56
> > > I'm sure Dr Grohol will be happy to see you at PsychCentral.
> >
> > Thanks for the tip mate! Just been there & it looks pretty damn good :) Time will tell but I'll give it a go!
> >
> > For what its worth, in the 5-6 years I've posted here I've never known it to be this bad. People being blocked for being human - like someone said above, its becoming too robotic here. Can I say this? Should I say that? Should I just piss off somewhere else? Maybe!
> >
> > mj
>
> LOL, that's not quite what I meant. I expressed myself in a particularly abrasive way, I'm sorry.
>
> What I meant to express is that the reason I keep coming back here myself, despite PB's imperfections, is because I believe PB is the best website of its kind for information and support regarding mental health issues.Jamal,
You wrote,[...PB is the best website of its kind for infomation and support regarding mental health issues...].
Could you clarify and/or identify as to what criteria you have used to write that PB in your belief is the {best} website of its kind? A generally accepted meaning of {best} is that what is best excells all others. If you are using that definition, could you post here what criteria you used to believe that PB excells , let's say, {Psychcentral}? If so, what or how does PB excell other sites of its kind? If you could use that definition of {best}, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly. If you have another definition of {best}, could you post here what that definition is in any reply to me here?
Lou
Posted by Jamal Spelling on February 22, 2008, at 12:51:09
In reply to Lou's request for clarification--ovrgen? » Jamal Spelling, posted by Lou Pilder on February 22, 2008, at 12:32:24
> Jamal,
> You wrote,[...PB is the best website of its kind for infomation and support regarding mental health issues...].
> Could you clarify and/or identify as to what criteria you have used to write that PB in your belief is the {best} website of its kind? A generally accepted meaning of {best} is that what is best excells all others. If you are using that definition, could you post here what criteria you used to believe that PB excells , let's say, {Psychcentral}? If so, what or how does PB excell other sites of its kind? If you could use that definition of {best}, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly. If you have another definition of {best}, could you post here what that definition is in any reply to me here?
> LouDear Lou
What I said is that
"...I *believe* PB is the best website of its kind..."
i.e. I expressed a belief, in the form of an opinion, rather than as a fact.
I have not thoroughly and exhaustively scrutinised all psychiatry forums on the internet, so I have no factual basis for claiming that Psycho-Babble is the best of its kind.
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 22, 2008, at 13:59:03
In reply to It is what it is..., posted by SLS on February 22, 2008, at 5:47:55
> ...and it was what it was. I can tell the difference. There is much I do like about Psycho-Babble now, much of which comes from moderation. I doubt I will invest my time anywhere else. Still, I must question the degree of intrusion. The good doctor applies grammar strictly and logically - equally. However, this type of logic and desire for a utopian society can cause an ever-expanding set of sanctionable rules in an effort to make it so.
>
> My comments along this thread are meant to be provacative and get people thinking. My personal relationship with PB is complex, and too difficult to verbalize here. It does, however, change over time, as do most relationships. Both I and PB are evolving entities. I have reservations as to where these changes are headed. I feel less comfortable rather than more comfortable as the administration of PB has changed in 1 1/2 years. Perhaps my perspective is rather unique as I had the opportunity to witness a before and after observation of how the environment here has, in my judgment, deteriorated. Perhaps this is melodrama, but I hope my point is made and not necessarily agreed upon. It is what it is, regardless of our personal relationships with Psycho-Babble. These are, because of human nature, quite diverse. I don't like that I see less diversity in the personality of posts. Of course, this is a personal opinion that may have more to do with me than with PB.
>
> I don't know.
>
> It is what it is.
>
> I think I'll hang around a bit longer.
>
>
> - ScottScott,
You wrote,[...administration of PB has changed in 1 1/2 years...it is what it is...].
Could you identify in more detail what in the administration here has changed from 1 1/2 years ago? If you could, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
In any reply to me, could you include in your opinion as to if the 3-consecutive post rule was a good idea or not and had anything to do with it is what it is? And if something is what it is, could that mean that what was is what is not?
Lou
Posted by Deneb on February 22, 2008, at 14:18:20
In reply to Re: Psycho-Babble is not dying, posted by ClearSkies on February 21, 2008, at 10:48:56
I hope you're right about PB not dying!
I like Babble just the way it is. (((((((I love you Psycho-Babble)))))))))))
Maybe we should come up with ideas on how to increase participation.
Posted by SLS on February 22, 2008, at 15:33:15
In reply to Lou's request to Scott for identification-thwywewr » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on February 22, 2008, at 13:59:03
Sorry... This is more of a spontaneous venting than a well-deliberated treatise. It might not be a perfect use of anyone's time to read it.
--------------------------------------------------------------
> > ...and it was what it was. I can tell the difference. There is much I do like about Psycho-Babble now, much of which comes from moderation. I doubt I will invest my time anywhere else. Still, I must question the degree of intrusion. The good doctor applies grammar strictly and logically - equally. However, this type of logic and desire for a utopian society can cause an ever-expanding set of sanctionable rules in an effort to make it so.
> >
> > My comments along this thread are meant to be provocative and get people thinking. My personal relationship with PB is complex, and too difficult to verbalize here. It does, however, change over time, as do most relationships. Both I and PB are evolving entities. I have reservations as to where these changes are headed. I feel less comfortable rather than more comfortable as the administration of PB has changed in 1 1/2 years. Perhaps my perspective is rather unique as I had the opportunity to witness a before and after observation of how the environment here has, in my judgment, deteriorated. Perhaps this is melodrama, but I hope my point is made and not necessarily agreed upon. It is what it is, regardless of our personal relationships with Psycho-Babble. These are, because of human nature, quite diverse. I don't like that I see less diversity in the personality of posts. Of course, this is a personal opinion that may have more to do with me than with PB.
> >
> > I don't know.
> >
> > It is what it is.
> >
> > I think I'll hang around a bit longer.
> >
> >
> > - Scott
>
> Scott,
> You wrote,[...administration of PB has changed in 1 1/2 years...it is what it is...].
> Could you identify in more detail what in the administration here has changed from 1 1/2 years ago? If you could, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
> In any reply to me, could you include in your opinion as to if the 3-consecutive post rule was a good idea or not and had anything to do with it is what it is? And if something is what it is, could that mean that what was is what is not?
> Lou
Hi Lou.
Your requests for specificity always tickle me. They are fraught with pure logic that can be somewhat difficult for me to respond to. In some ways, the purity of your logic is intimidating.Don't worry too much about what I said above. It was meant to be more of a complement than a pejorative.
Let's see...
I think there is a feeling of intrusiveness when threads are peppered with PBCs. The threads are no longer a serial of relevant content as they are more of an exercise in format and diction. I feel like a child having to take a quiz - and get graded on it. There is a fear of retribution should the author not pass the quiz. Better that one not take the quiz at all. It is embarrassing to be punished in front of all of cyberspace.
For me, this is more of a nuisance than a catastrophe. There have been many whom regarded this guided speech to be stifling, and have subsequently left. These were good people. They were people of knowledge and investigation. They were people of passion. They were people of great concern for the needs of others. They brought a great deal of continuity here. It was safe to say things here. I think these people reached a threshold of tolerance for the constant punitive intrusions and just said to themselves, "The heck with it" (or perhaps something more vulgar and expletive). I left here 1 1/2 years ago because of content. I feel as if I might want to leave because of format.
I think the moderator has a good grasp of what constitutes civility as it applies to his own speech. That he judges civility so pervasively is a reflection of his quest for perfection. But people aren't, nor can they be, perfect. I do not question the perfection of Dr. Hsiung's conceptualization of grammar and diction. I do question his heavy-handed intrusions that make people want to post less or leave entirely. While this is a subjective judgment on my part, the flight of people from this site is fact.
I think I know why some people leave and then come back. They need to fill time. Posting on Psycho-Babble can be a great diversion. Sometimes, the need for diversion is stronger than the need to be true to one's convictions. I guess convictions come and go. I just wish that the threat of convictions were not such an overwhelming and never-ending activity of the moderators.
I don't think there is anything wrong with ensuring a sense of safety at Psycho-Babble.
I think there should be less emphasis on the attainment of perfection and more allowance for imperfection. People should be allowed to be the imperfect creatures that they are. Perhaps an imperfect enforcement of the doctor's rules of civility is more desirable than the current zero-tolerance application of them. Perhaps. I would sure like to see punitive actions occur here less frequently. I don't care whether it is due to an embracement of the doctor's rules of speech, or a reduction in the frequency of comment and sanction by the moderators.
Now, I am very much conflicted regarding the enforcement of rules for civil conduct here. It helps prevent this place from becoming an ASD.
(alt.support.depression). This is a good thing. That so many good people left Psycho-Babble upon their declaration of intolerance to the doctor's rules is a bad thing. I guess that's all I really care about.
- Scott
P.S. I still believe that there should be a limit to the numbers of consecutive posts allowed. A limit of 3 seems to be working well.
Posted by fayeroe on February 22, 2008, at 23:09:48
In reply to Re: Psycho-Babble is dying., posted by SLS on February 20, 2008, at 9:08:25
Would it be considered uncivil to begin planning the funeral?
Posted by Dr. Bob on February 22, 2008, at 23:14:41
In reply to Re: Lou's request to Scott for identification-thwy » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on February 22, 2008, at 15:33:15
> I think there should be less emphasis on the attainment of perfection and more allowance for imperfection.
How much more imperfection?
Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on February 22, 2008, at 23:21:50
In reply to Re: Plus: » Jamal Spelling, posted by medjuggler on February 22, 2008, at 10:51:44
> 'rumours & gossip' caused by one 'particular individual' ... (yeah you know who you are!)
Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused.
But please don't take this personally, either, this doesn't mean I don't like you or think you're a bad person.
I encourage anyone who has questions about this or about posting policies in general, or is interested in alternative ways of expressing themselves, to see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#enforceFollow-ups regarding these issues, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
> I've felt the need to change my name
Thanks for letting us know,
Bob
Posted by Sigismund on February 22, 2008, at 23:32:36
In reply to Re: allowance for imperfection, posted by Dr. Bob on February 22, 2008, at 23:14:41
Too much emphasis on support and education can (and does) lead to an unneccessarily humourless style.
>How much more imperfection?
A fair bit.
Posted by SLS on February 23, 2008, at 5:51:44
In reply to Re: allowance for imperfection, posted by Dr. Bob on February 22, 2008, at 23:14:41
> > I think there should be less emphasis on the attainment of perfection and more allowance for imperfection.
>
> How much more imperfection?This question rests on the assumption that there is a lack of perfection on your part in governing already. How much more imperfection should you tolerate? I would suggest that since you recognize that there is a tolerance on your part for a certain degree of imperfection, that you perhaps tolerate more.
To be honest, I am in awe of your conception and implementation of civility. They really are close to being perfect. I don't mean to be unnecessarily flattering, but that is my opinion. Perhaps you have taken this into consideration already (I imagine you have), but I have seen, what is in my mind a tragic loss of novice and expert membership. I know being either type of member does not immunize one from being uncivil. Perhaps a perfect implementation of civility is de facto imperfect if the rate of attrition is greater than the retention of people posting.
I know what I wrote above is going to seem like the waffling of some politicians. However, I am truly conflicted over this issue; the issue being the density of PBCs and posting blocks versus the benefits to the community of a strict enforcement of your rules of civility.
I hope someone can convince me that the people who left the posting community of Psycho-Babble would have done so despite the advent of civility guidelines. Of course, I won't disclose the names of these fine people, but perhaps some of the continuous members to PB will remember them. I will say that I am quite happy to see that certain members have indeed posted this last week. They didn't all disappear.
How much imperfection? Enough to have prevented so many people from leaving. Unfortunately, I have no statistics. My appraisal of the numbers who have fled is necessarily subject to my own subjectivity. How you interpret your rules and their degree of enforcement can be subjective as well.
It is a matter of tolerance. It is a matter of degree. It is an issue of subjectivity inherent in human judgment. Perhaps you can deliberate the desirability of your degree of enforcement based upon your appraisal of the subjectivity that must accompany the human judgment of the behavior of human beings.
- Scott
Posted by Justherself54 on February 23, 2008, at 9:31:19
In reply to Re: allowance for imperfection, posted by SLS on February 23, 2008, at 5:51:44
I'm still not sure if I'm going to stay at Babble.
I'm not as articulate as a lot of posters who have resonded on this thread but this I will say. I would like to see more allowance given to posters who come to the defense of others and who are trying to be civil but got "caught up in the moment".
I think a simple chance to apologize for being "uncivil" would suffice in these instances, instead of being blocked. To me it fits right in with the dictionary description of ostrasize.
Definition of Ostracize
Os´tra`cize
v. t.1.(Gr. Antiq.) To exile by ostracism; to banish by a popular vote, as at Athens.
[imp. & p. p. Ostracized ; p. pr. & vb. n. Ostracizing .]
2.To banish from society, by a general consent; to exclude from social, political, or private favor; to exclude from conversation or friendship; to shun; as, he was ostracized by his former friends. A person may be ostracized by a formal vote or by a widespread but informal agreement.
I was brought up to defend the underdog, so when I see someone being picked on and another poster comes to their defense and gets blocked for it, it gets right up my nose.The only time I ever received a PBC was when someone came on and was rude and antagonistic and I responded "off the hip" and got a PBC which infuriated me at the time. Blocking to me is also discipline. When I see someone get blocked for defending someone I get the feeling of being sent to my room. But here you get sent for a week or three. I would never discipline my own child that harshly.
The PBC's and blocking stifle open discussion. You see it on every thread where people are passionate on a subject. Someone gets blocked for generalizations or breaking one of the dreaded civility rules and the discussion ends up going nowhere because posters are then scared to respond for fear of also getting blocked. I sometimes get uncomfortable knowing that someone is listening over my shoulder and not joining in the conversation but is simply there to ensure I don't break any conversation rules.
I feel guilty for not posting to someone who is asking for help but I'm still angry at the stringent rules of the site..so I feel at a crossroads and don't know which one to take.
That's my ramblings for this morning.
Posted by phoenix1 on February 23, 2008, at 12:09:58
In reply to Re: allowance for imperfection, posted by Justherself54 on February 23, 2008, at 9:31:19
Hi all,
I'm back from by block (I think). I'm not leaving babble just yet, but I won't be posting much on admin. I just don't know how not to cross the (seemingly flexible) line between civility and incivility. It's also nearly impossible and useless to debate or defend using completely civil language. I can't say I totally agree with the application of the civility rules, except to say they are necessary in some cases, but seem to be haphazardly applied within a certain "gray" zone.
Anyways, I'm back because I was given so much support here when I needed it. I feel obligated to help others now that I'm feeling so much better.
And Justherself, I agree with your last post, and thanks for the support!
Phoenix1
> I'm still not sure if I'm going to stay at Babble.
>
> I'm not as articulate as a lot of posters who have resonded on this thread but this I will say. I would like to see more allowance given to posters who come to the defense of others and who are trying to be civil but got "caught up in the moment".
>
> I think a simple chance to apologize for being "uncivil" would suffice in these instances, instead of being blocked. To me it fits right in with the dictionary description of ostrasize.
>
> Definition of Ostracize
> Os´tra`cize
> v. t.1.(Gr. Antiq.) To exile by ostracism; to banish by a popular vote, as at Athens.
> [imp. & p. p. Ostracized ; p. pr. & vb. n. Ostracizing .]
> 2.To banish from society, by a general consent; to exclude from social, political, or private favor; to exclude from conversation or friendship; to shun; as, he was ostracized by his former friends. A person may be ostracized by a formal vote or by a widespread but informal agreement.
>
>
> I was brought up to defend the underdog, so when I see someone being picked on and another poster comes to their defense and gets blocked for it, it gets right up my nose.
>
> The only time I ever received a PBC was when someone came on and was rude and antagonistic and I responded "off the hip" and got a PBC which infuriated me at the time. Blocking to me is also discipline. When I see someone get blocked for defending someone I get the feeling of being sent to my room. But here you get sent for a week or three. I would never discipline my own child that harshly.
>
> The PBC's and blocking stifle open discussion. You see it on every thread where people are passionate on a subject. Someone gets blocked for generalizations or breaking one of the dreaded civility rules and the discussion ends up going nowhere because posters are then scared to respond for fear of also getting blocked. I sometimes get uncomfortable knowing that someone is listening over my shoulder and not joining in the conversation but is simply there to ensure I don't break any conversation rules.
>
> I feel guilty for not posting to someone who is asking for help but I'm still angry at the stringent rules of the site..so I feel at a crossroads and don't know which one to take.
>
> That's my ramblings for this morning.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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.