![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 55 to 79 of 98. Go back in thread:
Posted by Twinleaf on January 23, 2014, at 16:06:52
In reply to Re: please rephrase that » Twinleaf, posted by Ronnjee on January 23, 2014, at 12:48:21
No, I'm not. I'd like to know.
Posted by Ronnjee on January 23, 2014, at 16:27:43
In reply to Re: please rephrase that » Ronnjee, posted by Twinleaf on January 23, 2014, at 16:06:52
The Scorpion and the Frog
A scorpion and a frog meet on the bank of a stream and the scorpion asks the frog to carry him across on its back. The frog asks, "How do I know you won't sting me?" The scorpion says, "Because if I do, I will die too". The frog is satisfied, and they set out, but in midstream, the scorpion stings the frog. The frog feels the onset of
paralysis and starts to sink, knowing they both will drown, but has just enough time to gasp, "Why?"Replies the scorpion: "Its my nature..."
make any sense now?
Posted by Twinleaf on January 23, 2014, at 16:43:02
In reply to Scorpion and Frog » Twinleaf, posted by Ronnjee on January 23, 2014, at 16:27:43
It does. I think it captures the essence of what is going on perfectly.
When differences are resolved successfully, there are two winners, but when they aren't, both people lose. I lose my participation in Babble, and Bob - well, he will have to be the one to think about what the loss would be for him.
Posted by alexandra_k on January 23, 2014, at 17:15:42
In reply to Re: Scorpion and Frog » Ronnjee, posted by Twinleaf on January 23, 2014, at 16:43:02
welcome back, by the way. it is good to have you :)
Posted by Ronnjee on January 23, 2014, at 17:20:01
In reply to Re: Scorpion and Frog » Ronnjee, posted by Twinleaf on January 23, 2014, at 16:43:02
Interesting interpretation, but I was just referring to Bob simply doing what's in his nature.
Posted by HomelyCygnet on January 23, 2014, at 17:42:37
In reply to Re: Scorpion and Frog » Twinleaf, posted by Ronnjee on January 23, 2014, at 17:20:01
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFQ6zZ5aID4
I think Bob has made his character apparent through his actions. His words don't impress me much although it is fun to try and figure out his motivation. It's important not to invest much in them. He's not someone I trust based on his actions through the years. Certainly not someone I think is capable of teaching or giving moral guidance to others. Why does anyone expect anything different?
Posted by Ronnjee on January 23, 2014, at 17:52:35
In reply to Re: Scorpion and Frog » Ronnjee, posted by HomelyCygnet on January 23, 2014, at 17:42:37
> I think Bob has made his character apparent through his actions. His words don't impress me much although it is fun to try and figure out his motivation. It's important not to invest much in them. He's not someone I trust based on his actions through the years. Certainly not someone I think is capable of teaching or giving moral guidance to others. Why does anyone expect anything different?
I try really hard not to even attempt to assess another's character, especially online. I have often wondered what Bob is up to, but I honestly don't know. I could only guess, which would be stupid of me. I would prefer to deal with each encounter as it comes, trying not to let earlier encounters "color" my reactions.
Posted by SLS on January 23, 2014, at 23:11:54
In reply to Re: Scorpion and Frog » Ronnjee, posted by Twinleaf on January 23, 2014, at 16:43:02
> It does. I think it captures the essence of what is going on perfectly.
>
> When differences are resolved successfully, there are two winners, but when they aren't, both people lose. I lose my participation in Babble, and Bob - well, he will have to be the one to think about what the loss would be for him.I wouldn't blame you for leaving Psycho-Babble. However, my sense of loss would be great. I missed you these past few weeks, worried that you might not return. You are a good egg :-) - one of the best that I have yet encountered.
Ramble...
I am perplexed by what looks like selective enforcement. Surely, your language has been more civilized than some of vile personal attacks that I have seen posted contemporaneously with your posting block.Why should a cop spend his whole day ticketing jay-walkers while allowing drunk drivers to pass by totally ignored? I don't know, but jay-walking is still against the law. Perhaps the cop thinks that he is saving the jay-walkers' lives because there are so many drunk drivers on the road. Who knows what is going on in the cop's mind.
Navigating Dr. Bob's paradigm for civil speech is not easy. There is a rather steep learning curve. The desire to remain a poster on Psycho-Babble must be greater than the desire to speak freely. Adhering to Dr. Bob's rules of civility is a skill requiring an understanding of diction and grammar, even if only intuitively. The first time around, I felt severely constricted by a new moderation style. The wild West days were over, and I was angry. Well, it was important for me to remain a poster here, so I learned what I needed to in order to avoid being admonished and blocked from posting. I soon recognized the value in having Psycho-Babble moderated, and that learning how to communicate civilly could be an asset to me.
Play by the rules or don't play at all? It's Dr. Bob's game. If those most capable of being civil don't exercise civility, how can others learn by example? Were you uncivil? I think your posts were scrutinized more than those of many others. IRL, I don't think that you were uncivil - at least it didn't seem that way to me. However, I could have predicted Dr. Bob's reaction to your language based upon his rulings during the first era of civility. Perhaps Dr. Bob should allow some more time for people to acclimate themselves to his regulations before scrutinizing language so closely.
- Scott
Posted by Twinleaf on January 24, 2014, at 8:48:27
In reply to Ramble. » Twinleaf, posted by SLS on January 23, 2014, at 23:11:54
Thanks so much, Scott.
I do think it's ironic (even humorous) that I had expressed the wish for a newer, more moderate and flexible kind of moderation ( rather than none at all), and Bob has granted my wish by making me almost the only person he is applying them to! The administrative sanctions he applies to me are not even new or flexible; they are the same as the ones he used five years ago.
I think you are right - that I perhaps have not paid enough attention to what the civility guidelines here actually are. There are times when other considerations seem so much more important - in this case fairness towards Dinah. At times like this, civility guidelines and human consideration for the well-being of community members seem to me to clash.
The only thing that is truly unacceptable to me is that the civility rules are not applied equally. While I am punished for every little thing, others are able to say things which are truly destructive and potentially harmful to both Bob and other community members, and nothing happens. This is harmful - both for me, and for everyone else.
Babble and it's posters have been very valuable to me for the past 10 (!) years; people here, their support and ideas, have been a small but vital part of the recovery I have been able to achieve. I would hate to lose that, but if I continue to be selectively singled out for punishment, it is, sadly, not compatible with good mental health for me to continue on here indefinitely. For me, it has become absolutely vital that the civility rules be applied equally and fairly to all community members.
Posted by SLS on January 24, 2014, at 10:07:32
In reply to Re: Ramble. » SLS, posted by Twinleaf on January 24, 2014, at 8:48:27
> For me, it has become absolutely vital that the civility rules be applied equally and fairly to all community members.
Yes. I couldn't agree with you more. Who wouldn't agree with you? Dr. Bob, I guess.
I think that just because others have learned how to "wear a shield" to discourage retribution, this should not grant a poster a free pass to be uncivil to those who do have shields. You are just about the most reasonable, sober, deliberative, generous, and civil poster here (I could go on, of course, but I am not convinced that you have developed neck muscles strong enough to support a swelled head). I'm not sure how strong your shield is, but why should one need to have a shield at all? I was hoping that Dr. Bob could function as a shield to protect everyone equally. I don't know. Perhaps the best way to prevent being blocked from posting is to beg Dr. Bob to be blocked and write grossly uncivil things. Perhaps the doctor looks at someone doing this as having a pathological "meltdown", in which case the usual rules are suspended. Right now, I don't see much in the way of meltdowns. I see pathology - even my own - but I don't think anyone should be exempt from being judged by the same criteria of civil communication as you are. That doesn't mean that people should necessarily be blocked as they struggle to learn and adapt to the moderation style of Dr. Bob.
- Scott
Posted by Twinleaf on January 24, 2014, at 10:46:39
In reply to Another ramble. » Twinleaf, posted by SLS on January 24, 2014, at 10:07:32
Learning to "wear a shield" against abuse is of course something we must all do occasionally in our daily lives; it seems like a strange goal to have in a board devoted to mental health. A reasonable degree of moderation would allow a much better goal: the increasing development of mutual trust, understanding and compromise - a goal that leads to better mental health. The present goal seems to me to lead to excessive anxiety, watchfulness and suppressed anger - signs of persons who are coping with trauma. Why would one visit a mental health site for that?
I think the criteria used to block me are too severe; they are the same ones that so many people disliked and complained about 5 years ago. I would like to see more occasional, moderate criteria, reserved for clear instances of hurtfulness (not just hurt feelings caused by reasonable reactions to one's own actions), and applied equally to everyone. Reasonable as that is, sadly, I don't think it is going to happen.
Posted by Twinleaf on January 24, 2014, at 14:39:54
In reply to Another ramble. » Twinleaf, posted by SLS on January 24, 2014, at 10:07:32
Scott, in my intense focus on the difficulties I'm personally facing here, I forgot to note how much I appreciate your wonderful ( undeserved) words of affirmation and support. I hope my head doesn't start wobbling! You can be sure that, if I find it's really not healthy for me to stay here, I will take your words with me, and keep them with me always. You are the very best of Babble.
Posted by HomelyCygnet on January 24, 2014, at 15:53:07
In reply to Another ramble. » Twinleaf, posted by SLS on January 24, 2014, at 10:07:32
Homer's Brain: Don't you get it? You've gotta use reverse psychology.
Homer: That sounds too complicated.
Homer's Brain: OK, don't use reverse psychology.
Homer: All right, I will!> I don't know. Perhaps the best way to prevent being blocked from posting is to beg Dr. Bob to be blocked
Posted by HomelyCygnet on January 24, 2014, at 16:26:01
In reply to Dr Bob Please please please don't ever block me!, posted by HomelyCygnet on January 24, 2014, at 15:53:07
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_psychology
Must set a good example for Bob re proper attribution.
Posted by Twinleaf on January 24, 2014, at 19:04:33
In reply to Dr Bob Please please please don't ever block me!, posted by HomelyCygnet on January 24, 2014, at 15:53:07
It might be too late for me to try that maneuver, but it does seem to have worked in the past!
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 24, 2014, at 23:30:07
In reply to Re: please rephrase that, posted by Twinleaf on January 23, 2014, at 12:24:34
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 25, 2014, at 0:26:56
In reply to Re: Another ramble. » SLS, posted by Twinleaf on January 24, 2014, at 10:46:39
> I was startled that you seemed to think that I wanted to replicate my therapeutic relationship in discussions with you - that seemed to me to be a very inappropriate comment, and is not evenly remotely the case.
>
> TwinleafI didn't know, so I asked. Thanks for clarifying.
--
> I perhaps have not paid enough attention to what the civility guidelines here actually are.
>
> Twinleaf> Perhaps the best way to prevent being blocked from posting is to beg Dr. Bob to be blocked and write grossly uncivil things.
>
> - ScottYou're welcome to try reverse psychology, but I see it as relatively straightforward. Pay attention to the guidelines!
I do realize that's easier said than done.
--
> The only thing that is truly unacceptable to me is that the civility rules are not applied equally. While I am punished for every little thing, others are able to say things ... and nothing happens.
>
> Twinleaf1. I wouldn't say nothing happens.
2. Are you saying you'd like to join Lou and Adorable's club?
> You are just about the most reasonable, sober, deliberative, generous, and civil poster here
>
> - ScottThat's actually one reason I'm not showing her leniency. Her posts are uncivil (IMO) more often than most posters'.
--
> I was hoping that Dr. Bob could function as a shield to protect everyone equally. I don't know.
>
> - Scott> Learning to "wear a shield" against abuse is of course something we must all do occasionally in our daily lives; it seems like a strange goal to have in a board devoted to mental health. A reasonable degree of moderation would allow a much better goal: the increasing development of mutual trust, understanding and compromise - a goal that leads to better mental health. The present goal seems to me to lead to excessive anxiety, watchfulness and suppressed anger - signs of persons who are coping with trauma. Why would one visit a mental health site for that?
>
> TwinleafI see having a refuge and being out in the world both as valuable goals. Even for persons coping with trauma. The focus at Babble has shifted from the former (when I functioned as a shield to protect everyone equally) to the latter.
Also, there isn't much sustained interest in a refuge now.
This has been a nice discussion, I hope I don't derail it by chiming in.
Bob
Posted by SLS on January 25, 2014, at 3:13:32
In reply to Re: strange goal, posted by Dr. Bob on January 25, 2014, at 0:26:56
Dear Dr. Bob,
I've been watching.
I am missing something, though.
Perhaps you can clarify for me how to interpret the FAQ guidelines now - you know, with the racist whores and parasitic bitches and all? Are you perhaps more forgiving of the foibles of the mentally ill? Yay! Twinleaf is not mentally ill! (Not that there's anything wrong with that...). So, what you are indicating is that those who are most capable of meticulously interpreting and following your guidelines of civility shall be judged by a different standard than those who you deem to be less capable. As a psychiatrist, you would, of course, recognize psychopathology. Wouldn't it be of value to at least guide the less capable so that they become more capable of civil communication instead of presenting as if nothing had happened? At the very least, you would be guiding everyone else, even if the old nag won't drink the water.
- Scott
Posted by Ronnjee on January 25, 2014, at 9:48:57
In reply to Re: strange goal, posted by Dr. Bob on January 25, 2014, at 0:26:56
>
> I see having a refuge and being out in the world both as valuable goals. Even for persons coping with trauma. The focus at Babble has shifted from the former (when I functioned as a shield to protect everyone equally) to the latter.
>
> BobMakes sense, Bob! Kudos
Posted by Twinleaf on January 25, 2014, at 9:53:01
In reply to Re: strange goal, posted by Dr. Bob on January 25, 2014, at 0:26:56
Babble has become so strange! A place where certain posters can say extremely destructive, harmful things, and the recipients of this abuse are apparently given a wonderful opportunity to "grow a shield". I think this is unfair to everyone, but particularly to the ones who are saying these destructive things. It's as if you were affirming that they were too impaired to be able to improve their behavior - a horrible message! Negative and traumatic for everyone.
I, on the other hand, am considered more competent, and so, almost alone of the people posting here, I am blocked, not for being uncivil to other posters, but for speaking honestly to Bob when I feel he has made a mistake that is harmful either to another poster (Dinah) or to the functioning of the site (objecting to the civility rules being applied unequally). I am not subscribing properly to the implicit principle that Babble is basically a dictatorship! I do this because I do not believe that dictatorships are compatible with good mental health - not for the dictator, and not for those under his control.
Scott is right. The old nag will never be able to make herself drink the water, because she believes it is contaminated.
Posted by jane d on January 25, 2014, at 22:13:05
In reply to Re: strange goal, posted by Twinleaf on January 25, 2014, at 9:53:01
I think you are confusing two separate issues and therefore coming to an incorrect conclusion. First there's the issue of what is or should be allowed and the relative severity or equivalence of different violations of the rules. I doubt anyone agrees about all of that. I know I don't agree with every call on that. I never have.
I don't think your interpretation of why certain recent posts were ignored is the only one. I personally found it impossible to take them seriously. I have no clue what Bob's reasoning was. I do think he should explain it. I don't expect it.
The second issue is whether you are treated more harshly for the same violations and I think you are wrong about that. If I said to you all the things you have said to Bob, particularly if I said them over and over and over again I have no doubt I would get blocked for it. Whether or not I thought those things were true or I thought you, or Babble, would be better off for my saying them. There are certain things you just can't say about other people here.* Try substituting my name and yours into the posts you got blocked for and see if they still sound the same to you.
*I'm not sure whether I think it's good or bad that you can't say those things here. I tend to think the rules are too strict but I'm less sure of that than I once was.
Posted by sleepygirl2 on January 26, 2014, at 0:26:00
In reply to Re: strange goal » Twinleaf, posted by jane d on January 25, 2014, at 22:13:05
Hi jane,
I agree with everything you said.
Happy New Year :-)
-sid
Posted by jane d on January 26, 2014, at 1:58:39
In reply to Re: strange goal » jane d, posted by sleepygirl2 on January 26, 2014, at 0:26:00
> Happy New Year :-)
> -sidAnd a happy new year to you too!
Posted by SLS on January 26, 2014, at 6:02:55
In reply to Re: strange goal » Twinleaf, posted by jane d on January 25, 2014, at 22:13:05
You make some good points. However, there is something about about "Equal treatment under the law" that has always appealed to me. Unfortunately, I see selective enforcement occurring here.
Do you see any phrasing by posters other than Twinleaf that refers to Dr. Bob in a clearly uncivil manner and that has not been sanctioned, despite repeat offenses?
If not, then we have nowhere to go.
I understand that this is not a republic democracy.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on January 26, 2014, at 6:28:44
In reply to Re: strange goal » jane d, posted by sleepygirl2 on January 26, 2014, at 0:26:00
> Hi jane,
> I agree with everything you said.
> Happy New Year :-)
> -sid
I see that Jane has made some technically valid observations.It is interesting how two people can view a third person in very different ways.
I have a bias towards Twinleaf because I like her, and I consider her to be a valuable poster on Psycho-Babble. Because I see kindness, generosity, careful deliberation, knowledge, and intelligent reasoning in her, I get upset when I see her blocked. So, when I see others saying uncivil things on a regular basis who are not being blocked, I look for justice and see none.
I like moderation in moderation.
- Scott
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.