![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 5 of 5. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 23, 2006, at 10:17:27
DR. Hsiung,
In your policy here concerning your feature provided to members to reportposts to the administration, I had requested that you clarify as to;
A. Is the reply going to be a consensus of the 6 deputies and yourself?
B. Is the reply one deputies opinion? Was a poll taken?
C,D,E and F.
You replied[...consider the reply {from all of us}..]
I am unsure as to what you mean by that. Could any of the following be what you mean so as to clarify your reply to me?
P.The reply is always that all the deputies and myself thought the same as to if the post was civil or not.
Q. The reply is from me and there may have been deputies that dissented from my thinking but they have to be subordinated to my thinking so that is why I wrote that you consider that the reply is from >all< of us, even if some dissent.
R. If a deputy dissents from my thinking, they can not post their dissent in the thread where I post my reply, but can email the member that reports the post outside of the forum's babblemail feature.
S. The reply will be determined by my thinking even if 4 deputies out of 6 dissent from my thinking.
You also replied to me that [...An "appeal" (quotes are yours) >should < go directly to me...]
I am unsure as to what this means, so could you clarify if:
H. That means that one >is not allowed here< to appeal to a deputy?
K. that means that your use of quotation marks could be, or could not be,according to conventional grammatical interpretations of the use of quotes, of the nature that you are indicating that there is something according to you that means that your use of quotes is for some other purpose than to quote the word? If so, could you post here that purpose, if any?
L. that means that the use of the quotes is an indication that the administration here is a centralized, with autocritic control, administration where appeals are unlikely because the appeal can only go to the the maker of the post and could be unlikely to overrule himself.
M. something else
Lou Pilder
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061018/msgs/704782.html
Posted by Dr. Bob on December 23, 2006, at 15:17:24
In reply to Lou's request for clarification from Dr. Hsiung, posted by Lou Pilder on December 23, 2006, at 10:17:27
> appeals are unlikely because the appeal can only go to the the maker of the post and could be unlikely to overrule himself.
He could be. So there could be feelings of disempowerment?
Bob
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 25, 2006, at 9:06:37
In reply to Re: Lou's request, posted by Dr. Bob on December 23, 2006, at 15:17:24
> > appeals are unlikely because the appeal can only go to the the maker of the post and could be unlikely to overrule himself.
>
> He could be. So there could be feelings of disempowerment?
>
> BobDR. Hsiung,
Your reply to me is a question and an answer to one part,(L), of my request to you for clarification. Your answer,[...He could be...], could fit part (L) of my request, but I do not see how it answers the following part of my request for clarification.
My requests were for clarification of my request as to your policy concerning the reply given to those that use the {report this post} feature here as to your previous reply to me,[...consider the reply {from all of us}...].
I am unsure as to what your reply means and I asked if the reply means that it is always that all the deputies and you thought the same as to if the post was civil or not. In your reply in this thread, if your answer,{He could be.}answers my question, I do not understand how it does because I can not see how it says that either all of the deputies and you {thought the same} as to if the post was civil or not.
As to your then asking me a question, I do not undertand how if I replied to you about your question to me as to how that could then facilitate an answer from you that could tell me as to if you and the deputies {think the same } in your determination of the post in question. If you could clarify that, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
Also, I had asked you that by you writing,{..consider the reply from all of us...} what that meant as to if your reply could mean that ther may have been deputies that dissented from your thinking, but the deputies have to be subordinate to your thinking and if that is why you wrote that I consider that the reply is from >all< of us even if some deputies dissented.. In examining your reply to me, I do not understand how your reply,{He could be} answers my question. And in regards to your question to me,{...so the could be feelings of disempowerment...?}, I do not know how if I did answer to you about that ow that could then facilitate an answer from you as to my request for clarification of what I had asked.
Also, The part about your use of quotation marks, I will consider separately as I do not undertand how your reply to me, {He could be}answers my request (A thru S) in the following post requesting clarification of such:
Lou Pilder
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061202/msgs/715846.html
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 25, 2006, at 13:01:42
In reply to Re: Lou's request, posted by Dr. Bob on December 23, 2006, at 15:17:24
> > appeals are unlikely because the appeal can only go to the the maker of the post and could be unlikely to overrule himself.
>
> He could be. So there could be feelings of disempowerment?
>
> BobDR. Hsiung,
In my request to you for clarification, one of the parts was about your use of quotation marks in relation to them being used, or not, for another purpose than to quote the word. Your reply to me in question was,[...an "appeal" should go directly to me...].
There is a grammatical convention in relation to the use of quotes called {scare quotes}. They usually mean some form of irony or that the word is possibly an incorrect use of the word. It is something like {air quotes} when somone speaks and puts up their hands to show that the word in question has quotes around it.
If that is the case here, let us look at your reply to me.
You replied,[...He could be....],and,[...So there could be feelings of disempowerment?...].
My question that you replied to was,[...does that mean that the use of quotes is an idication that the administration here is a centralized,with autocratic control, administration where appeals are unlikely because the appeal can only go to the maker of the post and could be unlikely to overrule himself...].
Your reply,[...He could be..] has the grammatical structure that there is the potential that IMO the {he} is you. If that is the case, then is your use of quotes around {appeal} to be understood as some form of irony? If so, does that mean that you are saying that any appeal is futile to you because it {could be} that you would not overrule yourself?
If you could clarify that, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
Lou Pilder
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061202/msgs/715846.html
Posted by Dr. Bob on December 31, 2006, at 2:51:30
In reply to Lou's reply to DR. Hsiung's reply to Lou » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on December 25, 2006, at 13:01:42
> > > appeals are unlikely because the appeal can only go to the the maker of the post and could be unlikely to overrule himself.
> >
> > He could be.
>
> does that mean that you are saying that any appeal is futile to you because it {could be} that you would not overrule yourself?I might not, but I might, so I wouldn't say it's futile, no.
Bob
This is the end of the 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.