![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 247 to 271 of 304. Go back in thread:
Posted by Dinah on April 24, 2009, at 16:19:59
In reply to Re: an opportunity » Dinah, posted by raisinb on April 23, 2009, at 17:13:59
Thanks, Raisinb. I never quite know if I should get involved.
Posted by raisinb on April 24, 2009, at 17:06:24
In reply to Re: an opportunity » raisinb, posted by Dinah on April 24, 2009, at 16:19:59
With all this going on, I appreciate how difficult the job must be! Keep on truckin' ;)
Posted by BayLeaf on April 24, 2009, at 22:35:01
In reply to Re: blocked for 4 weeks » fayeroe, posted by Dr. Bob on April 24, 2009, at 2:01:57
1) why can u not handle being called a gnat? how 'bout a gnewt? just curious...do you have an issue with insects? or the silent g?
2) Is 1 month now the new black? (max?)
Posted by Sigismund on April 26, 2009, at 23:56:38
In reply to Re: blocked for 4 weeks » Dr. Bob, posted by BayLeaf on April 24, 2009, at 22:35:01
Pat must understand the maths.
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 30, 2009, at 9:27:02
In reply to Re: blocked for 4 weeks » Dr. Bob, posted by BayLeaf on April 24, 2009, at 22:35:01
> 1) why can u not handle being called a gnat? ... do you have an issue with insects?
Should people here be expected to handle being called names?
Some people here might like to be able to call others names. But some people here would prefer not to be called names. We can't have it both ways. My opinion is that it'll be a more supportive community if people don't call each other names. Even though it can be therapeutic for individuals to express themselves.
> 2) Is 1 month now the new black? (max?)
There weren't any replies when I asked for input, so no, nothing's changed.
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on April 30, 2009, at 14:57:10
In reply to Re: an issue with insects, posted by Dr. Bob on April 30, 2009, at 9:27:02
> > 2) Is 1 month now the new black? (max?)
> There weren't any replies when I asked for input, so no, nothing's changed.And of course the number of posters who have requested this in a number of posts over the years, well, their views are irrelevant because they don't jump to post the same old same old to a particular thread that Bob shows an interest in probably only precisely because people have given up saying anything at all considering it basically to be a waste of breath.
Posted by verne on April 30, 2009, at 18:18:33
In reply to Re: an issue with insects, posted by alexandra_k on April 30, 2009, at 14:57:10
I agree with Alex K. Look in the archives.
There are pages of posts about blocks and the "penal colony".
Dr Bob may have "modernized" but let's not remember the fallen posters in more primitive times. They sang a true and honest tune, maybe danced a little, and said that blocks were excessive.
I think Dr Bob tired of his own game, or dance number, and almost overnight, lightened up.
Dr Bob has changed and we posters must now catch up - upgrade. This is Dr Bob 2.0
Verne
Posted by BayLeaf on April 30, 2009, at 19:02:07
In reply to Re: an issue with insects, posted by Dr. Bob on April 30, 2009, at 9:27:02
> 2) Is 1 month now the new black? (max?)
>>There weren't any replies when I asked for input, so no, nothing's changed.
>>Bob
Aren't you embarrased to post something like that??
You have read hundreds of posts asking for a reduction. We may now just feel too tired of typing the same request over and over to have responded to whatever post you are referring to above. I don't recall reading it.
FOR THE RECORD, I REQUEST THAT THE MAXIMUM BANISHMENT BE ONE MONTH.
Bay
Posted by BayLeaf on April 30, 2009, at 19:07:41
In reply to One Month Max, posted by BayLeaf on April 30, 2009, at 19:02:07
> 2) Is 1 month now the new black? (max?)
>>There weren't any replies when I asked for input, so no, nothing's changed.
>>Bob
It's this kind of behavior that causes people to want to call you insect names. It seems intended to provoke.
Why would you provoke vulnerable people?..people who could become upset, possibly act out, and be banished by you?
It's all very interesting.
Posted by verne on April 30, 2009, at 20:20:14
In reply to Dr Bob 2.0, posted by verne on April 30, 2009, at 18:18:33
Dr Bob is all about "power". He's sort of playing with it now but in the end it really comes back to him.
He pretends to give some of it away, causing even more confusion.
He tries to get down home and go gang, street, or whatever culture required.
Other times it's clinical and distant.
In the end, he's pulling the strings. I think most posters are starting to get that and no longer participate. Sure, many, never venture into adminstrative lands, but the majority knows.
Now PsychoBabble is a ghostland. No one ventures to say the least bit anything, the least bit chancy. Only Larry Hoover, like a steadfast soldier, a lighthouse, carries on.
Sorry to invoke your name Larry but you're all that keeps this site afloat. You know all that chemistry and basically everything else - and, I'm not being sarcastic.
No offense to you Dr Bob, but your feelings shouldn't come before the hundreds you've hurt.
Verne
Posted by alexandra_k on May 1, 2009, at 11:50:24
In reply to Re: an issue with insects, posted by Dr. Bob on April 30, 2009, at 9:27:02
> nothing's changed.
Thanks for clearing that up.
'What doesn't kill us makes us stronger'
I guess Bob's decided that its okay that Babble dies
I mean its been dying before his eyesPeople spoke with their feet
After they became too injured politely knocking
Then repeatedly bashing 'gainst the brick wall
Posted by Sigismund on May 3, 2009, at 15:41:51
In reply to Re: an issue with insects, posted by alexandra_k on May 1, 2009, at 11:50:24
There should be blocks for direct personal attacks and also to avoid really negative spirals. Maximum 1 month.
I think (reading between the lines) that Bob realises that the benefits of enforced civility may not have been worth driving so many people away.
Posted by muffled on May 3, 2009, at 23:54:36
In reply to Re: an issue with insects, posted by Sigismund on May 3, 2009, at 15:41:51
but really, I vote for only a week.
Unless it really bad and ongoing, but then it should be dealt with privately.
And only for major breaches that go on and on. Not just for one offs.
My thots.
Proly stupid anyhow.
Many very good points made here above.
Great thinking.
Very on target to my way of thinking.
Best wishes to all.
Posted by verne on May 4, 2009, at 0:42:05
In reply to Re: an issue with insects, posted by Sigismund on May 3, 2009, at 15:41:51
I think it's against Dr Bob's nature to get into the business of forgiving too much. He would rather error on the punitive side.
Perhaps, this site isn't able to handle the administrative job of weekly punishment. Yet, the site's commander seems willing to debate the issue for months and years.
Perhaps, even from an administrative level, site-running level, even a week block would be feasible. Once we get past that, why not even less time for blocks?
A "week" is arbitrary but better than a year. Why not block someone for a few DAYS. Since you can't come up with a new calendar, a week then.
Yet a year, 6-9 months blocks: that's medevial - and a little, maybe alot, sadistic. Not sure it happens anywhere else on the web. (Elsewhere, when you violate the terms of the site's agreement, you can be "banned" which is far less manipulative) It's clear. You violate the TOA and you're gone.
There's no "fanfare", no parade. No debate about the length of blocks. Here, every warning and block is a spectacule, inviting argument and debate. Why "announce" blocks anyway. Just to create the riot?
Other sites handle dysfunction so much better. Dissent isn't new. Many made the same arguments about this site 5 years ago. Many, bashed their heads against the wall (thanks Ak) and experienced true futility, finally leaving for good.
Civility doesn't have to be about shaming and big annoucements on the length of the blocks for those who stray.
In truth, the block system isn't even civil. Imagine being thrown in an Iranian prison for a year? Here the prisoners are voluntary patients with emotional or psych issues.
Verne
Posted by verne on May 4, 2009, at 5:16:36
In reply to Weak at Most, posted by verne on May 4, 2009, at 0:42:05
Before I leave for awhile these are my four favorite videos. Sure I like Bob Dylan and Leonard Cohen but these are my fav vids.
http://www.mtv.com/videos/the-cranberries/8350/zombie.jhtml#artist=1251
http://www.mtv.com/videos/brandi-carlile/141620/the-story.jhtml#artist=1774595
best song and video ever: http://www.mtv.com/videos/michelle-branch/16547/all-you-wanted.jhtml#artist=1164813
http://www.mtv.com/videos/crash-test-dummies/55296/mmm-mmm-mmm-mmm.jhtml
Posted by Dr. Bob on May 5, 2009, at 3:42:49
In reply to Weak at Most, posted by verne on May 4, 2009, at 0:42:05
> I think Dr Bob tired of his own game, or dance number, and almost overnight, lightened up.
>
> Dr Bob has changed and we posters must now catch up - upgrade. This is Dr Bob 2.0
>
> VerneHow did I change? I gave others more time to apologize to me. Some did, some didn't. Those that did avoided being blocked. But the "apology box" isn't new.
> ONE MONTH.
> 1 month.
> a week.
> a week
Thanks for your input. I'll discuss this with the deputies.
> I think it's against Dr Bob's nature to get into the business of forgiving too much. He would rather error on the punitive side.
>
> a year, 6-9 months blocks: that's medevial - and a little, maybe alot, sadistic. Not sure it happens anywhere else on the web. (Elsewhere, when you violate the terms of the site's agreement, you can be "banned" which is far less manipulative) It's clear. You violate the TOA and you're gone.
>
> VerneBut even a cap of a year is a lot more forgiving than being banned forever!
I may or may not change the cap. But I'm not planning on changing what's considered civil here. I let some incivility to others go while I focused on incivility to me recently. But that doesn't mean the rules have changed. The deputies and I will continue to enforce the civility policies.
> Now PsychoBabble is a ghostland. No one ventures to say the least bit anything, the least bit chancy.
>
> VerneI disagree, five people ventured to be uncivil to me recently.
> People spoke with their feet
>
> After they became too injured politely knocking
> Then repeatedly bashing 'gainst the brick wall
>
> alexandra_kMaybe what people said with their feet was they preferred peace to shooting and bashing.
What about Poster 2.0?
Showing other posters how they might interpret things more charitably, encouraging them to apologize, suggesting they not address those they can't get along with, and helping them avoid being blocked -- all would mean more peace.
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on May 5, 2009, at 11:46:39
In reply to Re: posters must now upgrade, posted by Dr. Bob on May 5, 2009, at 3:42:49
> Maybe what people said with their feet was they preferred peace to shooting and bashing.I suppose one could simply disregard what the posters actually said about their motivation in favor of Bob's favorite theory.
And the wheels go round.
Goodbye
Posted by alexandra_k on May 5, 2009, at 12:05:54
In reply to Re: posters must now upgrade, posted by alexandra_k on May 5, 2009, at 11:46:39
You got your upgrade already. The posters you carefully selected for by way of blocking the other ones. Maybe it comes as a surprise to you that people would actually leave after being blocked by you. Or maybe that was the whole point. You got your oligarchy of rulers carefully selected because they agree enough with you to feel that they can in good conscience both divine what you would do were you here and implement it. You got your small boards as people left. Maybe you prefer things this way. I guess it must feel kinda cool to only allow whoever you want on your boards on your boards and have a handy excuse to get rid of other ones (their fault of course). Bet you can't find a poster still posting on your boards (including you) who hasn't said something comparable to what another poster was blocked for. You get to choose. How... Nice for you. Or something.
Nothing has changed really. I guess accepting that... Well a number of posters have explicitly stated that that is why they move on. Something about the draconian blocking system and your just making the wheels go round when people offer concrete suggestions of how you can have a more humane system. Professionals told you it was harmful and arbitrary but really none of that matters so long as Bob gets to do what Bob wants to do.
Nothing has changed. You got that right.
Posted by alexandra_k on May 5, 2009, at 12:06:25
In reply to Re: posters must now upgrade, posted by alexandra_k on May 5, 2009, at 12:05:54
Much more of an upgrade and you really would be just playing with yourself
Posted by Dinah on May 5, 2009, at 12:42:56
In reply to Re: posters must now upgrade, posted by alexandra_k on May 5, 2009, at 12:05:54
Mind you, that's just the posters who *say* why they leave. Not the ones who just leave.
Posters quit posting because they have hurt feelings too. They just don't come to Admin and say so. In fact, posters who just quit posting because they don't feel welcome, or get their feelings hurt, likely outnumber the ones who leave because of Bob.
And people might not start posting if a board seems contentious.
I've always been very strong in arguing against "disappearing" posts. But after hanging out on a few (non mental health related) sites, I have grown to see the upside of it. The site stays more on topic. For those who are very regular posters, it might be way more upsetting. But for those who are considering posting, it might be encouraging.
Posted by raisinb on May 5, 2009, at 13:46:56
In reply to There are pros and cons, posted by Dinah on May 5, 2009, at 12:42:56
I think what Dinah says here is important. Sometimes I hang out on the Craigslist psychology board. The things people say to each other on there demonstrate what can happen if civility rules don't exist.
Again, if the rules are inconsistently enforced, that's different.
Posted by Dr. Bob on May 5, 2009, at 20:50:21
In reply to Re: posters must now upgrade, posted by alexandra_k on May 5, 2009, at 12:05:54
> a number of posters have explicitly stated that that is why they move on. Something about the draconian blocking system and your just making the wheels go round when people offer concrete suggestions of how you can have a more humane system.
I'm interested in suggestions. Two heads are better than one. But when it comes to the system, I have more power and posters have less, change can be slow, and you don't always get what you want:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20090302/msgs/893534.html
Or, posters can be the change they wish to see. Do they wish to see fewer blocks? Posters have the power to help other posters avoid them. Friends don't let friends get blocked.
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on May 6, 2009, at 3:27:07
In reply to Re: posters must now upgrade, posted by Dr. Bob on May 5, 2009, at 20:50:21
> Friends don't let friends get blocked.
What an *ssh*l* thing to say. HAVEN"T WE JUST BEEN THROUGH THIS. For f*cks sake.
Posted by alexandra_k on May 6, 2009, at 10:40:04
In reply to Re: posters must now upgrade, posted by Dr. Bob on May 5, 2009, at 20:50:21
> I'm interested in suggestions.Funny how you keep saying that then keep on basically ignoring them.
> Two heads are better than one.You might want to really think about whether you believe this.
> But when it comes to the system, I have more power and posters have less
No. You have ALL and posters have NONE. You 'you have options you have choices you have power' remarks remind me of when I was a little kid and by brother would get my hand and hit me in the head with it and go 'Mum Alex is hitting herself in the head again - stop it Alex' like I was doing it voluntarily but really of course it was completely out of my hands. Posters haven't been asking you about what it is that YOU think it means to be a friend. Posters have been saying to you (as have professionals) that your blocks do more harm than good. So: Challenge for you. If you really do give a sh*t about what is best for the boards (rather than expressing power just because you can) then why don't you trial a different system and see. Or... Do you take this same approach to medication management too? - Do what I say because I know best. What reason do you have? Oh... Bob has a theory...
> change can be slow, and you don't always get what you want:
Yeah. Change can be non-existent and posters leave. You get what you want though. Smaller boards. The posters you basically hand pick. Well done Bob. Quite the kingdom.
> Or, posters can be the change they wish to see.
How can I be a one month max blocking system? Trying really hard to visualize this... Having trouble. Do you even understand what it is that people have been saying to you? Speak English? Are you getting stuff from the post-modernist essay generator or something??
> Do they wish to see fewer blocks?
What the f*ck do YOU think people have been saying?
> Posters have the power to help other posters avoid them. Friends don't let friends get blocked.
Yes Bob. Friends say 'Okay Nazi let me shoot that Jew so I can avoid your having to shoot me'. Friends say 'get your N*gg*r *ss up and to the back of the bus'. For f*cks sake.
The wheels go round.
And what I really don't understand... Is how there is anyone here playing with Bob at all. I mean... There really is some serious pathology behind all this. That is the only thing that could explain it. I don't think there is a difference between Bob wilfully ignoring and simply being incapable. Get help Bob. I'm outta here. Can't believe I didn't see this sooner. Get help. If you really care about these boards you gotta take someone besides yourself (e.g., professionals) seriously. Get help.
Posted by alexandra_k on May 6, 2009, at 11:09:52
In reply to Re: posters must now upgrade, posted by alexandra_k on May 6, 2009, at 3:27:07
> > Friends don't let friends get blocked.
I mean really, what the hell is this supposed to mean? That you have figured out the rationale behind your blocks and it as as follows: The posters who get blocked don't have friends here.
Oh, I see, that is why Nikki didn't get blocked for saying 'sh*t' unasterisked in a post you redirected (so you must have read it) whereas Zen does, and Muffled gets blocked for saying 'f*rt' without an asterisk. You think that Nikki had friends here (that had this miraculous power to affect whether you blocked her or not) whereas Muffled and Zen did not?
Gee, I must really have no friends here given the number of times I've been blocked. It isn't Bob choosing to block me after all, it comes down to my not having friends here, I see. So much for all the friends I thought I had... Dinah and Muffled and Zen and Nikki and more than I can name, really.
What a f*ck*ng *ssh*l* thing to say. Surely you didn't mean it like this... But I've given up trying to work out what is going on in your f*ck*ng head anymore.
Been there done that. I'm done. Through. I won't ask you to block me because then you will ask who is my friend (like friendship can be sorted by simply asking people). Most of my friends wouldn't play that little game thats for sure (I'd have more trouble respecting them if they did).
Fayerody is a very good friend. I showed my respect to her by allowing her block. Would Socrates 'friends' have been better friends if they hadn't stupidly and futily (if that is a word) persuaded him to avoid his sentence?
You don't know what friendship is. I thought we had established that already. How dare you.
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.