![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 6 of 6. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 4, 2009, at 10:35:26
To the administration;
I submitted a notification a few days ago that is outstanding. This is not the same as the one that is outstanding that I posted a reminder to that can be seen on this board above.
Lou Pilder
Posted by Dinah on July 5, 2009, at 10:24:56
In reply to Lou's reminder of outstanding notification, posted by Lou Pilder on July 4, 2009, at 10:35:26
We are checking with Dr. Bob about something, and I sent a reminder to him this morning.
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 5, 2009, at 11:06:38
In reply to Re: Lou's reminder of outstanding notification » Lou Pilder, posted by Dinah on July 5, 2009, at 10:24:56
> We are checking with Dr. Bob about something, and I sent a reminder to him this morning.
Dinah,
You wrote,[...to him...]
I am unsure as to what your reply to me means. For after reading it there are many concerns that I have that unless you clarify them, I could think many things from reading your reply to me.
Could you post here what the connection there is, if there is a connection, with the notification being outstanding and if checking with Mr. Hsiung is what is causing the notification being outstanding and what you are wanting to check? Since you write that {we} are checking, could you post here the reason that could cause all the deputies to check with Mr. Hsiung about whatever it is that is wanting to be checked that is not given here? If you could, then I could know or not if the notifications then are contingent or not on Mr. Hsiung respomding to your checking with him or all checking with him. And if that is so, then could you email me with your own reply concerning what you would do on your own in regards to the outstanding notifications if you did not check with Mr. Hsiung? If you could, then that could clarify to me what you are wanting to mean here.
Lou Pilder
Posted by Dinah on July 5, 2009, at 11:33:20
In reply to Lou's request for clarification » Dinah, posted by Lou Pilder on July 5, 2009, at 11:06:38
We'll get back to you as soon as possible.
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 5, 2009, at 13:48:32
In reply to Re: Lou's request for clarification » Lou Pilder, posted by Dinah on July 5, 2009, at 11:33:20
> We'll get back to you as soon as possible.
Dinah,
You wrote,[...as soon as possible...].
I am unnsure as to what your reply to me could mean. This is because I do not know what in your thinking {possible] could mean. If you could list the criteria that make it possible, along with the criteria that make it not possible, then I could have the clarification that I am seeking so that I could understand what you are wanting to mean here and post a response in accordance with the facts known.
LouFriends,
If you are interested in this ongoing situation, I invite by email to show you the rest of what this ongoing situation involves. Then you could have more infomation IMO to make your own determination as to
You could also make your own determination IMO concerning the standards here and I could show you what other psychiatrsts/psychologists say concerning the use of standards in a community, in particular but not limited to, the standard that a time delay is significant as posted by an administrator here.
If you do not believe in what I have been posting and/or do not want to email, then reject this opportunity now. But if you do believe in what I have been writing about and could email me, please accept this opportunity to know what may be unbeknownst to you now.
Lou
lpilder_1188@fuse.net
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 5, 2009, at 15:40:00
In reply to Lou's request for clarification-urchnz » Dinah, posted by Lou Pilder on July 5, 2009, at 13:48:32
> > We'll get back to you as soon as possible.
>
> Dinah,
> You wrote,[...as soon as possible...].
> I am unnsure as to what your reply to me could mean. This is because I do not know what in your thinking {possible] could mean. If you could list the criteria that make it possible, along with the criteria that make it not possible, then I could have the clarification that I am seeking so that I could understand what you are wanting to mean here and post a response in accordance with the facts known.
> Lou
>
> Friends,
> If you are interested in this ongoing situation, I invite by email to show you the rest of what this ongoing situation involves. Then you could have more infomation IMO to make your own determination as to
> You could also make your own determination IMO concerning the standards here and I could show you what other psychiatrsts/psychologists say concerning the use of standards in a community, in particular but not limited to, the standard that a time delay is significant as posted by an administrator here.
> If you do not believe in what I have been posting and/or do not want to email, then reject this opportunity now. But if you do believe in what I have been writing about and could email me, please accept this opportunity to know what may be unbeknownst to you now.
> Lou
> lpilder_1188@fuse.net
>
Friends,
I also invite those that may not agree with what I am writing about to email if they like to see further into the aspects of this ongoing situation. I would like to email with anyone concerning this ongoing situation even if they are not members.
If you do so, I would like for you to have the aspects of the following link to use in any email to me.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20070702/msgs/776479.html
Now there is precedent here that two days is a reasonable time lapse.
Lou
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.