![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 39 to 63 of 82. Go back in thread:
Posted by muffled on April 24, 2008, at 13:39:32
In reply to Re: we get to holler, posted by Dr. Bob on April 24, 2008, at 10:22:34
Positively surreal :-).
"but I didnt mean just what you know I have, but what you imagine I might have.
The things I have you may or may not want. And theres the opposite idea, too, that you may have things that I want."
This is so classic Bob.
Its actually what i like about him.
His quirky mind.
He annoys the crap outta me the way he runs this site, but OMG his MIND! Its a wonder.
I would love to talk to Bob STONED! OMG I would proly be in serious agony from laughing and trying to follow his thot train :-)
Wonder if Bob smokes weed???? I don't anymore, but i'd make an exception! ROFL!!!
Yup I miss babble all right.
Take care all you guys.
You good people.
M
Posted by fayeroe on April 24, 2008, at 13:46:17
In reply to OMG this is too funny., posted by muffled on April 24, 2008, at 13:39:32
> Positively surreal :-).
>
> "but I didnt mean just what you know I have, but what you imagine I might have.
>
> The things I have you may or may not want. And theres the opposite idea, too, that you may have things that I want."
>
> This is so classic Bob.
> Its actually what i like about him.
> His quirky mind.
> He annoys the crap outta me the way he runs this site, but OMG his MIND! Its a wonder.
> I would love to talk to Bob STONED! OMG I would proly be in serious agony from laughing and trying to follow his thot train :-)
> Wonder if Bob smokes weed???? I don't anymore, but i'd make an exception! ROFL!!!
> Yup I miss babble all right.
> Take care all you guys.
> You good people.
> M
>Muffled, how about some good brownies after dinner? that is easier than smoking....:-0
Posted by Lou Pilder on April 24, 2008, at 16:59:53
In reply to Re: we get to holler » Dr. Bob, posted by fayeroe on April 24, 2008, at 12:35:41
> > > Yes. :)
> > >
> > > You have the ultimate detachment. It allows you to at least *appear* to never be hurt.
> > >
> > > I'm ambivalent about whether I wish that quality for myself or not.
> > >
> > > Dinah
> >
> > > You have a better ability to refrain from giving a contentious response to a perceived insult than I do, I think.
> > >
> > > You seem to actually know more about stuff than I think I know about stuff.
> > >
> > > You have a nicer camera than I do.
> > >
> > > You have an uglier couch than I do.
> > >
> > > Sad that I've known you for four years and I can't think of more things.
> > >
> > > Toph
> >
> > > Yes, I do think you have things I don't have. But I also suspect I have things you don't have, and that makes me feel sorry for you.
> > >
> > > MidnightBlue
> >
> > > I'm quite sure you have lots more stuff than I have.
> > >
> > > But you can't buy empathy or people skills even with an MD salary.
> > >
> > > AbbieNormal
> >
> > Thats not my couch :-) but I didnt mean just what you know I have, but what you imagine I might have.
> >
> > The things I have you may or may not want. And theres the opposite idea, too, that you may have things that I want.
> >
> > Bob
>
> i've never even given any thought at all as to what you have or don't have. that seems to be a really loaded question with alot of traps in it.
>
> i am in awe that you came up with that.
>
> i think it is the ultimate in an attempt at oneupmanshp, in a really perverted way.fayeroe,
You wrote,[...in a..{perverted} way...].
I am unsure as to how the word {perverted could be meant in the above.Could you clarify what meaning that you are wanting to convey here as to your use of the word, {perverted}? If you could, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
Lou
Posted by fayeroe on April 24, 2008, at 17:05:47
In reply to Lou's request to fayeroe for clarification-inaweig » fayeroe, posted by Lou Pilder on April 24, 2008, at 16:59:53
1. deviating from what is proper: deviating greatly from what is accepted as right, normal, or proper
Posted by Lou Pilder on April 24, 2008, at 17:33:34
In reply to Re: Lou's request to fayeroe for clarification-inaweig » Lou Pilder, posted by fayeroe on April 24, 2008, at 17:05:47
> 1. deviating from what is proper: deviating greatly from what is accepted as right, normal, or proper.
fayeroe,
You wrote,[...accepted as right, normal, or proper...]
I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean by what could be right , normal or proper. Could you then rephrase what the statement in question by Mr. Hsiung could be as to a statement that would be, in your opinion, {right, normal. or proper}? If you could, then I could have the opportunity to make the comparison of the one Mr. Hsiung wrote and your phrasing and then make my own determination as to what is {right, normal or proper}.
Lou
Posted by AbbieNormal on April 24, 2008, at 17:34:42
In reply to Re: we get to holler, posted by Toph on April 24, 2008, at 10:37:01
Posted by fayeroe on April 24, 2008, at 18:19:34
In reply to Lou's request for clarification-rtnrmprpr » fayeroe, posted by Lou Pilder on April 24, 2008, at 17:33:34
> > 1. deviating from what is proper: deviating greatly from what is accepted as right, normal, or proper.
>
> fayeroe,
> You wrote,[...accepted as right, normal, or proper...]
> I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean by what could be right , normal or proper. Could you then rephrase what the statement in question by Mr. Hsiung could be as to a statement that would be, in your opinion, {right, normal. or proper}? If you could, then I could have the opportunity to make the comparison of the one Mr. Hsiung wrote and your phrasing and then make my own determination as to what is {right, normal or proper}.
> LouI do believe that you can tell from looking that those are not my words, that they came out of a dictionary.
>
Posted by Lou Pilder on April 24, 2008, at 21:09:34
In reply to Re: Lou's request for clarification-rtnrmprpr » Lou Pilder, posted by fayeroe on April 24, 2008, at 18:19:34
> > > 1. deviating from what is proper: deviating greatly from what is accepted as right, normal, or proper.
> >
> > fayeroe,
> > You wrote,[...accepted as right, normal, or proper...]
> > I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean by what could be right , normal or proper. Could you then rephrase what the statement in question by Mr. Hsiung could be as to a statement that would be, in your opinion, {right, normal. or proper}? If you could, then I could have the opportunity to make the comparison of the one Mr. Hsiung wrote and your phrasing and then make my own determination as to what is {right, normal or proper}.
> > Lou
>
> I do believe that you can tell from looking that those are not my words, that they came out of a dictionary.fayeroe,
To offer clarification, we could look at the request from me in the above as the following:
[...I am unsure as to what you wanting to mean by what could be right normal or proper...].
I am unsure because the dictionary does give more than one connotation and usage for, let's use {normal}.
There are more than one usage for {normal}, for instance;
A.Characterized by average intelligence
B. free from mental disorder
C. conforming to a standard (then what is the standard?).
Lou
Posted by twinleaf on April 24, 2008, at 21:25:32
In reply to Re: we get to holler, posted by Dr. Bob on April 24, 2008, at 10:22:34
This is just all totally nutty. It's (sort of) funny, but it's also off-topic and aimless. Here on Administration, couldn't we begin addressing the real problems this board now has? For a start, how about asking all interested posters to list what they think the problems actually are? Once we know that, we can begin to put our heads together about solutions. And lets give the PCB function a little vacation while we do that. Is anyone interested?
Posted by Lou Pilder on April 25, 2008, at 5:01:36
In reply to you get to holler and I'm about to scream..., posted by twinleaf on April 24, 2008, at 21:25:32
> This is just all totally nutty. It's (sort of) funny, but it's also off-topic and aimless. Here on Administration, couldn't we begin addressing the real problems this board now has? For a start, how about asking all interested posters to list what they think the problems actually are? Once we know that, we can begin to put our heads together about solutions. And lets give the PCB function a little vacation while we do that. Is anyone interested?
twinleaf,
You wrote,[...the real problems this board now has...interested posters list...heads together...is anyone...?]
Are you aware of the issues here that I am presenting in other threads here? If so, could you make a list of what you may see as {problems this board has now}?
If you could, then I could add or delete to what you list, if any.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on April 25, 2008, at 5:17:43
In reply to Lou's reply to twinleaf-lstvprbs » twinleaf, posted by Lou Pilder on April 25, 2008, at 5:01:36
> > This is just all totally nutty. It's (sort of) funny, but it's also off-topic and aimless. Here on Administration, couldn't we begin addressing the real problems this board now has? For a start, how about asking all interested posters to list what they think the problems actually are? Once we know that, we can begin to put our heads together about solutions. And lets give the PCB function a little vacation while we do that. Is anyone interested?
>
> twinleaf,
> You wrote,[...the real problems this board now has...interested posters list...heads together...is anyone...?]
> Are you aware of the issues here that I am presenting in other threads here? If so, could you make a list of what you may see as {problems this board has now}?
> If you could, then I could add or delete to what you list, if any.
> Loutwinleaf,
In regards to that you have written here about {..[real]problems this board has...} this board has now as to asking members to list them, I am unsure as to what you consider to be a {[real]problem} here or not.
I could have a better understanding if we look at one aspect here being that I have posted here that I have used the notification feature and I am reminding the administration that I have not received a reply from them or have I seen a post from the administration to the statement in question as per the TOS here.(citation hpct28)
If you could post here what your thinking is concerning as to if my concern is or is not a {...[real]problem this board has...}, then I could have a better understanding of the type of {problems} that you consider to be of the nature of being {real} or not and respond accordingly.
Lou
citation hpct28
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20080313/msgs/824929.html
Posted by Lou Pilder on April 25, 2008, at 5:28:48
In reply to Lou's request twinleaf for identification-wreighll, posted by Lou Pilder on April 25, 2008, at 5:17:43
> > > This is just all totally nutty. It's (sort of) funny, but it's also off-topic and aimless. Here on Administration, couldn't we begin addressing the real problems this board now has? For a start, how about asking all interested posters to list what they think the problems actually are? Once we know that, we can begin to put our heads together about solutions. And lets give the PCB function a little vacation while we do that. Is anyone interested?
> >
> > twinleaf,
> > You wrote,[...the real problems this board now has...interested posters list...heads together...is anyone...?]
> > Are you aware of the issues here that I am presenting in other threads here? If so, could you make a list of what you may see as {problems this board has now}?
> > If you could, then I could add or delete to what you list, if any.
> > Lou
>
> twinleaf,
> In regards to that you have written here about {..[real]problems this board has...} this board has now as to asking members to list them, I am unsure as to what you consider to be a {[real]problem} here or not.
> I could have a better understanding if we look at one aspect here being that I have posted here that I have used the notification feature and I am reminding the administration that I have not received a reply from them or have I seen a post from the administration to the statement in question as per the TOS here.(citation hpct28)
> If you could post here what your thinking is concerning as to if my concern is or is not a {...[real]problem this board has...}, then I could have a better understanding of the type of {problems} that you consider to be of the nature of being {real} or not and respond accordingly.
> Lou
> citation hpct28
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20080313/msgs/824929.htmlThe correction to the link was for the policy here concerning the reminder procedure here as to keep reminding the administartion. Here is one link to that.
Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061018/msgs/700211.html
Posted by twinleaf on April 25, 2008, at 18:54:10
In reply to Lou's request twinleaf for identification-wreighll, posted by Lou Pilder on April 25, 2008, at 5:17:43
Sorry, Lou- I didn't read all the posts in this section before writing mine. I guess I was hoping everyone would list what they feel could make the board go better. Your idea is a very valid one- and, of course, it's your own- so I wouldn't want to pass any kind of judgement on it.
Previously, I have identified some problem areas here, and I could certainly do so again. I was hoping that Bob would show some interest in a brain-storming session like this. I think it would clear the air of a lot of still-simmering resentment, and would probably produce some useful ideas. I guess I am waiting for him to show some support for something like this.
Posted by Lou Pilder on April 25, 2008, at 20:14:12
In reply to Re: Lou's request twinleaf for identification-wrei » Lou Pilder, posted by twinleaf on April 25, 2008, at 18:54:10
> Sorry, Lou- I didn't read all the posts in this section before writing mine. I guess I was hoping everyone would list what they feel could make the board go better. Your idea is a very valid one- and, of course, it's your own- so I wouldn't want to pass any kind of judgement on it.
>
> Previously, I have identified some problem areas here, and I could certainly do so again. I was hoping that Bob would show some interest in a brain-storming session like this. I think it would clear the air of a lot of still-simmering resentment, and would probably produce some useful ideas. I guess I am waiting for him to show some support for something like this.twinleaf,
You wrote,[...I have identified some problem ares here...]
Could you post those areas here in this thread or post a link to those posts ?If you could, then I could possibly offer additional input as seeing what are {real} problems.
Lou
Posted by twinleaf on April 25, 2008, at 20:59:18
In reply to Lou's reply to twinleaf -getngtunoughu » twinleaf, posted by Lou Pilder on April 25, 2008, at 20:14:12
Oh, Lou, I just don't feel that I possess the time or patience to comb through all these old threads. I do, generally, remember identifying some of the factors that I thought went into our "March Meltdown", and I would be very willing to post about those again, but only if Bob supports this as part of a problem-solving effort by everyone, and only if other posters also feel that it is useful and something they also wish to participate in.
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 26, 2008, at 0:05:40
In reply to Re: we get to holler » Dr. Bob, posted by fayeroe on April 24, 2008, at 12:35:41
> i've never even given any thought at all as to what you have or don't have. that seems to be a really loaded question with alot of traps in it.
It feels kind of loaded to me, too. Which is partly why I thought it might be worth exploring. But maybe not.
Bob
Posted by fayeroe on April 26, 2008, at 8:13:34
In reply to Re: we get to holler, posted by Dr. Bob on April 26, 2008, at 0:05:40
> > i've never even given any thought at all as to what you have or don't have. that seems to be a really loaded question with alot of traps in it.
>
> It feels kind of loaded to me, too. Which is partly why I thought it might be worth exploring. But maybe not.
>
> Bob
If, and it is a big if, I belonged to The Sacred Church of the Holy Chihauhaus, I would knock those doors open so fast today to get moi some spiritual support from the little dog.
There are about 1,000,000 things that we need here and we get a loaded question...I knew it~I knew it~I knew it~It is bad enough that you did it, but I think admitting it ices the cake.
After this "dog and pony show" or "smoke and mirrors show", what can follow? Maybe I am not seeing the forest for the trees and your not being here would work.I do not speak for anyone other than myself concerning your attendance here.
Pat
Posted by karen_kay on April 27, 2008, at 7:50:54
In reply to Re: we get to holler, posted by Toph on April 24, 2008, at 10:37:01
Posted by karen_kay on April 27, 2008, at 7:55:25
In reply to Re: we get to holler, posted by Dr. Bob on April 24, 2008, at 10:22:34
you forgot your apostrophes (did i spell that right? it doesn't look correct... anywhoo...)
i can think of a few thigns you have that i want and i'm pretty sure i have a few things you might want too. i make a mean chocolate chip cookie, wanna trade?
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 27, 2008, at 13:20:29
In reply to Re: we get to holler » Dr. Bob, posted by fayeroe on April 26, 2008, at 8:13:34
> > > that seems to be a really loaded question with alot of traps in it.
> >
> > It feels kind of loaded to me, too. Which is partly why I thought it might be worth exploring. But maybe not.
>
>
> There are about 1,000,000 things that we need here and we get a loaded question...I knew it~I knew it~I knew it~Sorry, maybe we meant different things by "loaded". What I meant was that it might have a lot of "baggage" attached, which might make it difficult to address, which could be a "trap".
Bob
Posted by Dinah on April 27, 2008, at 13:46:41
In reply to Re: we get to holler, posted by Dr. Bob on April 27, 2008, at 13:20:29
I don't mind discussing it, Dr. Bob. It's the sort of thing I enjoy doing.
But honestly, aside from the things I deduce from you from your posts (your detachment and seeming lack of hurt from personal attacks for example), I don't spend all that much time imagining what you have.
You're intelligent, obviously. But intelligence is not something that I would want, precisely. I'm comfortable there. You seem to have a sly sense of humor. And while I appreciate it, it's again nothing I would feel envy for. I am assuming you don't mean worldly possessions. So power? Is it power you're going for?
I'm perfectly happy with your having power and my having much less power. I have power over myself and my reactions. Your power over the site seems meet and fitting to me. You own it. It's yours. However much I might yell at you from time to time over your decisions, I would not want your power or your responsibility.
I do admit that while I might not like the things that come with detachment and imperviousness to hurt, I would still like to have those. I hurt way too much and am way too interpersonally sensitive. But it's just my perception that you're invulnerable. Lots of people IRL see me as snobby and aloof and unhurtable, and don't realize how much it's just a shield against being too vulnerable.
Your persona of invulnerability may make me want to yell and scream and kick and dent it a bit, and get a reaction from you, any reaction at all. I'd behave much better if you showed a bit of vulnerability. :)
But I also do envy it. It would be nice to never be sucked into vortexes, and never feel hurt by what people say.
There. I've been entirely honest.
How about some reciprocity?
Do we have anything you want?
Vulnerability, emotional honesty, the ability to say what we think? Connection with each other. Complexity? I'm just throwing a few things out there to start you off.
Sure it's a loaded question, and may carry a lot of baggage and feel like a trap. But sometimes loaded questions bring many rewards.
Posted by muffled on April 27, 2008, at 18:04:35
In reply to Re: we get to holler » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on April 27, 2008, at 13:46:41
is that Bob gets to choose the battles. He picks what he wants to respond to and ignores that which he doesn't.
I hate to be ignored, or I used to....now I think I just don't give a sh*t anymore :-( not really.
Eyes wide open.
Bob has the pwer here.
This is Bobs website.
He can keep archivees forever.
He can use them in his work.
He can block at will.
He has noone to answer to but himself.
If it gets ugly here he can just walk away.
Bob has given me no real good indications that make me feel I can trust consistancy from him.
He is a wild card, can go any which way.
He's nebulous like a fogbank.
Clear as mud.
Thats why I be careful.
M
Posted by Dinah on April 27, 2008, at 19:02:19
In reply to nuther thing bout power...., posted by muffled on April 27, 2008, at 18:04:35
Well, I don't disagree precisely. But someone has to have the power. Dr. Bob isn't such a terrible choice, considering.
Posted by muffled on April 27, 2008, at 21:07:50
In reply to Re: nuther thing bout power.... » muffled, posted by Dinah on April 27, 2008, at 19:02:19
Posted by fayeroe on April 27, 2008, at 21:30:43
In reply to Re: we get to holler, posted by Dr. Bob on April 27, 2008, at 13:20:29
> > > > that seems to be a really loaded question with alot of traps in it.
> > >
> > > It feels kind of loaded to me, too. Which is partly why I thought it might be worth exploring. But maybe not.
> >
> >
> > There are about 1,000,000 things that we need here and we get a loaded question...I knew it~I knew it~I knew it~
>
> Sorry, maybe we meant different things by "loaded". What I meant was that it might have a lot of "baggage" attached, which might make it difficult to address, which could be a "trap".
>
> BobBob, I am here because I have alot of "baggage", among other things. For me, I know a "loaded" question. You know what a "loaded" question is.
I really don't know how to explain to you that I knew that you knew that I knew what you meant.
Long day, Pat
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.