![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 11 to 35 of 50. Go back in thread:
Posted by muffled on November 9, 2010, at 0:26:53
In reply to Re: Along the same lines, posted by alexandra_k on November 8, 2010, at 23:46:37
Yeppers we had some good ol times huh!?
:)
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 9, 2010, at 0:46:35
In reply to Re: Along the same lines, posted by muffled on November 8, 2010, at 14:47:20
> > Battling Dr. Bob on PB Admin?
>
> Bob seems to be saying that ya, there IS NO point in talking to him, cuz it won't work!!!Talking to = battling?
> Every once in awhile he'll say something that makes you *think* he is open to ideas. He's sucked me in many a time.
> But he's NOT.Maybe it's unclear whether I am or not. Which could lead to anxiety.
> if I go to my board and be w/my friends, then I gonna get hurt, or my friends gonna get hurt and just can't stand to see that.
> I a freak, I know it.
> I keep tryin tho.
> I just keep trying hoping I can be good one day.
> Guess it'd take a miracle to turn sh*t into a decency?
> Mebbe my miracle will come.> I have parts of self that consider themselves not very good, tho they desprately wish to be. To be accepted as good.
Maybe the miracle is guilt:
> > guilt is one of the great inventions of nature. For mature guilt lets you know what is unacceptable, and offers you opportunity to do something about it. ... worth can be defined by realistic possibilities
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20100714/msgs/958778.html
> Other parts want to be bad, being bad and uncaring is good, cuz then nothing hurts.
What a nice insight. Being uncaring is safe. There are other ways to be safe from blocks, though: (1) leave automatic asterisking on and (2) have friends who warn you when it might be a good idea to rephrase or apologize.
> Then there is the rational adult.
> Etc.
> I try very hard to not let other stuff leak thru, but occasionally it does.
> Too hard to maintain stasisMaybe Babble is like a big version of you. It also has parts, other stuff leaks through, and stasis is hard to maintain.
Bob
Posted by muffled on November 9, 2010, at 1:09:20
In reply to Re: Along the same lines, posted by Dr. Bob on November 9, 2010, at 0:46:35
Goto go to bed, but wanted to add this cuz it was in my head.
"Maybe Babble is like a big version of you. It also has parts, other stuff leaks through, and stasis is hard to maintain."
What my T is trying to teach me is:
-to accept ALL parts
-to try and have parts communicate better
-to get to know the parts and what they want/need
-to understand that they there for a reason
-that parts shouldn't attack other parts
-that parts shouldn't hurt the body
-to try and not shove parts away, but listen to themStuff like that.
In this way, we should develop better understanding, cooperation, communication, coordination etc.
Yeah, there's fights still and allus will be I suspect, cuz they different and gonna want different things etc. BUT, the point is to NOT banish and further separate parts. The point is to LISTEN and work it out w/them.
Thats how we got split in the first place....was parts got all pushed away.
Banishing, shoving away is NOT good.
Sometimes, a part get outta hand, or be around at wrong time, then ya, we NOW say, we say nicely that they can't be here right ATM and why, but they can come back later. They not banished for long time. Its just we busy and can't deal with them ATM, but we will.
If behaviour gets bad, then we talk bout it. We try and figger why.
We not shove them away (least not so often.....) cuz we learning that that just makes the MORE noisy and fussy.
They be mnore quiet if ya listen.
I didn't beleive T at first, but it TRUE.
It quieter if ya listen.
Sometimes they just scared and want to be heard.
They don't wanna be alone, they scared is all.
Same w/babble. Sometimes people just need to be 'heard'. They not trying to hurt, they just dunno what else to do.
And blocks is an awful mean thing to do to a p[erson whats already hurting and is just reaching out, maybe not in the best way, but maybe the only way they know.
Maybe they scared and hurt and blocks is just shoving them into the dark alone.
:(
How can we help them then?
Posted by Solstice on November 9, 2010, at 1:20:45
In reply to Re: Along the same lines, posted by muffled on November 9, 2010, at 1:09:20
Muffled - when I read what you write... I am struck by what feels to me like exquisite
Poetry
Solstice.
>
> In this way, we should develop better understanding, cooperation, communication, coordination etc.
> Yeah, there's fights still and allus will be I suspect, cuz they different and gonna want different things etc. BUT, the point is to NOT banish and further separate parts. The point is to LISTEN and work it out w/them.
> Thats how we got split in the first place....was parts got all pushed away.
> Banishing, shoving away is NOT good.
> Sometimes, a part get outta hand, or be around at wrong time, then ya, we NOW say, we say nicely that they can't be here right ATM and why, but they can come back later. They not banished for long time. Its just we busy and can't deal with them ATM, but we will.
> If behaviour gets bad, then we talk bout it. We try and figger why.
> We not shove them away (least not so often.....) cuz we learning that that just makes the MORE noisy and fussy.
> They be mnore quiet if ya listen.
> I didn't beleive T at first, but it TRUE.
> It quieter if ya listen.
> Sometimes they just scared and want to be heard.
> They don't wanna be alone, they scared is all.
> Same w/babble. Sometimes people just need to be 'heard'. They not trying to hurt, they just dunno what else to do.
> And blocks is an awful mean thing to do to a p[erson whats already hurting and is just reaching out, maybe not in the best way, but maybe the only way they know.
> Maybe they scared and hurt and blocks is just shoving them into the dark alone.
> :(
> How can we help them then?
>
>
>
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 9, 2010, at 3:29:43
In reply to Re: Along the same lines, posted by muffled on November 9, 2010, at 1:09:20
> > Maybe Babble is like a big version of you. It also has parts, other stuff leaks through, and stasis is hard to maintain.
>
> What my T is trying to teach me is:
> -to accept ALL parts
> -to try and have parts communicate better
> -to get to know the parts and what they want/need
> -to understand that they there for a reason
> -that parts shouldn't attack other parts
> -that parts shouldn't hurt the body
> -to try and not shove parts away, but listen to them
>
> Stuff like that.You got a good T. What I been trying to teach:
> -to accept ALL parts
> -to get to know the parts and what they want/need
> -to understand that they there for a reason
> -to try and not shove parts away, but listen to themeven the parts who are just critical
> -to try and have parts communicate better
> -that parts shouldn't attack other partscivil = better
civil = not attacking> -that parts shouldn't hurt the body
Babble = the body
> Sometimes, a part get outta hand, or be around at wrong time, then ya, we NOW say, we say nicely that they can't be here right ATM and why, but they can come back later. They not banished for long time. Its just we busy and can't deal with them ATM, but we will.
> If behaviour gets bad, then we talk bout it. We try and figger why.
> We not shove them away (least not so often.....) cuz we learning that that just makes the MORE noisy and fussy.
> They be mnore quiet if ya listen.
> I didn't beleive T at first, but it TRUE.
> It quieter if ya listen.
> Sometimes they just scared and want to be heard.
> They don't wanna be alone, they scared is all.
> Same w/babble. Sometimes people just need to be 'heard'. They not trying to hurt, they just dunno what else to do.
> :(
> How can we help them then?Blocks do make some parts more noisy and fussy. :-)
I'm busy a lot. Maybe that's where some kind of Elders Council
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20101014/msgs/969323.html
could come in? They could listen, try and figger why, and decide if the part is quiet and feels safe enough to come back?
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on November 9, 2010, at 6:16:56
In reply to Re: Along the same lines, posted by Dr. Bob on November 9, 2010, at 3:29:43
> civil = better
> civil = not attackingthe trouble is that often the things you choose to label 'uncivil' and block for up to one year aren't obviously worse (to most others) than your suggested alternatives or attacking.
Posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 7:56:14
In reply to Re: Along the same lines, posted by Dr. Bob on November 9, 2010, at 0:46:35
> > Every once in awhile he'll say something that makes you *think* he is open to ideas. He's sucked me in many a time.
> > But he's NOT.
>
> Maybe it's unclear whether I am or not. Which could lead to anxiety.Boy, I agree with that. That may be the cause of some of my biggest complaints at Babble. You seem to allow discussion, without having any intention of changing based on it. Unless a poster is fortunate enough to stumble on the magic phrase that opens your mind to another point of view.
It is *intensely* frustrating to pour effort into something that is futile. If you're going to do something and have set your mind to it, I think I'd prefer you just say so.
I suspect you think of it as keeping the lines of communication open. But perhaps you could come up with a ratings system of how likely it is you'll change your mind.
Posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 8:17:40
In reply to Re: Along the same lines, posted by alexandra_k on November 8, 2010, at 23:46:37
Thanks, Alex, for recognizing that.
It's one of the things I've always loved about you.
Posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 8:36:22
In reply to Re: Along the same lines » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 7:56:14
Moreover, the discussion is nearly always one sided. We have no idea how strongly you feel about an idea, or what your thoughts are about the benefits.
You use a very shrinky approach to those discussions. Which may be useful if you wish to encourage transference reactions (I can't imagine why you would), but is perhaps less useful in nonclinical settings. As much as you use your professional training in running Babble, a discussion of babble policies needs to be a bit more two sided than a therapy session.
I think that may be why I was less angry with you after the New Orleans trip. In person you may be every bit as attached to your ideas (what a nice way I found to describe that - I hope you appreciate it). But you were far more conversational in your style. Maybe you could bring a bit of that to Babble? I think if more people had the experience of speaking with you in person, they'd feel less frustrated.
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 9, 2010, at 10:31:43
In reply to Re: Along the same lines, posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 8:36:22
> You seem to allow discussion, without having any intention of changing based on it. Unless a poster is fortunate enough to stumble on the magic phrase that opens your mind to another point of view.
>
> I suspect you think of it as keeping the lines of communication open. But perhaps you could come up with a ratings system of how likely it is you'll change your mind.All we can do is stumble along together and hope we find the magic that opens the other's mind. I wouldn't know how to rate how likely that is.
> I think that may be why I was less angry with you after the New Orleans trip. In person you may be every bit as attached to your ideas (what a nice way I found to describe that - I hope you appreciate it). But you were far more conversational in your style. Maybe you could bring a bit of that to Babble? I think if more people had the experience of speaking with you in person, they'd feel less frustrated.
Thanks, I do appreciate that.
Maybe they'd feel even less frustrated if we speak on the beach. :-)
Bob
Posted by muffled on November 9, 2010, at 10:54:38
In reply to Re: to stumble on magic, posted by Dr. Bob on November 9, 2010, at 10:31:43
I have a concern.
If the admin here(Bob) actually is reasonably consistantly present, then that is ok.But there comes problems, when the main person who controls so much, shows interest, gets everyone invested, then just POOF(speaking of magic...) disappears for long periods of time...
Now thats not such a prob is it?
The *prob* is, again, the inconsistancy. Cuz then he magically reappears out of the ether and starts suddenly changing things willy nilly.
He hasn't a 'sense' of the community because he is never there.
But the just drops in and thinks he friggin owns the place..(pun intended).
Reminds me of husbands that work away from thier families, the families learn to function as a unit w/o H cuz he not there. Then H comes home on leave(eg) and expects to just be part of the family.
But they have gotten used to it w/o him, and have to rearrange their systems of relating to adapt to his presence.
But then he goes again, and there's a hole :(
So they have to readapt. Then he back, and they readapt, back and forth, back and forth :(
What to do?
Maybe the H can ease in slow. See where things are at FIRST before he barge in w/disciplining the kids etc. Maybe consult w/wife to see where kids are at.
Work TOGETHER.
RESPECTFULLY.
COMMUNICATE.
Knowing the wife DOES have a better sense of the family unit as she is there all the time.
The wife, for her part helps the H understand and accepts him. And yes, corrects him.
My thots.
Posted by Solstice on November 9, 2010, at 15:25:06
In reply to Re: to stumble on magic, posted by Dr. Bob on November 9, 2010, at 10:31:43
Dinah:
> > You seem to allow discussion, without having any intention of changing based on it. Unless a poster is fortunate enough to stumble on the magic phrase that opens your mind to another point of view.> > I suspect you think of it as keeping the lines of communication open. But perhaps you could come up with a ratings system of how likely it is you'll change your mind.
Bob:
> All we can do is stumble along together and hope we find the magic that opens the other's mind. I wouldn't know how to rate how likely that is.
Bob - please re-read Dinah's first sentence.It's not about stumbling along until we find magic to open somebody else's mind to convince them "I'm Right!" I don't think Dinah's talking about changing you, or changing your values for Babble... rather.. I think it's about changing the manner in which those values are upheld. Let's dispense with stumbling along. The community and Bob have common goals.
i) less blocking
ii) less incivility in the first place
iii) incivility is followed by repair
iv) community feels safe
v) membership and posting increases
vi) Babble helps more people
Instead of magical stumbling and mind-changing, why don't we work together to create a structure for handling inevitable incivility in a way that maximizes its decrease, and minimizes community turmoil, disruption, and pain.
Suggestions have been offered by community members. Do you have any intention of addressing these things? If not, please say so... because I don't want to invest my valuable time and energy thinking about it if you have no interest. If you do - then let's get to work.
Solstice
Posted by muffled on November 9, 2010, at 17:04:34
In reply to Re: to stumble on magic - To Bob, posted by Solstice on November 9, 2010, at 15:25:06
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 9, 2010, at 18:59:11
In reply to magic-absentee admin..., posted by muffled on November 9, 2010, at 10:54:38
> But there comes problems, when the main person who controls so much, shows interest, gets everyone invested, then just POOF(speaking of magic...) disappears for long periods of time...
Right, then the challenge is to continue to function without him.
> Reminds me of husbands that work away from thier families, the families learn to function as a unit w/o H cuz he not there. Then H comes home on leave(eg) and expects to just be part of the family.
> But they have gotten used to it w/o him, and have to rearrange their systems of relating to adapt to his presence.And maybe they have feelings about his having been away.
> So they have to readapt. Then he back, and they readapt, back and forth, back and forth :(
> What to do?Rearrange the systems to function without him. And keep them functioning even when he returns.
> Maybe the H can ease in slow. See where things are at FIRST before he barge in w/disciplining the kids etc.
Would he discipline anyone if he came home and the systems were functioning?
> Knowing the wife DOES have a better sense of the family unit as she is there all the time.
> The wife, for her part helps the H understand and accepts him. And yes, corrects him.What if there isn't a wife/mother? Do the kids depend on older siblings? Can they
> Work TOGETHER.
> RESPECTFULLY.
> COMMUNICATE.themselves?
Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 9, 2010, at 19:13:13
In reply to Re: to stumble on magic - To Bob, posted by Solstice on November 9, 2010, at 15:25:06
> It's not about stumbling along until we find magic to open somebody else's mind to convince them "I'm Right!" ... Let's dispense with stumbling along.
I wish it were so easy. :-)
> Instead of magical stumbling and mind-changing, why don't we work together to create a structure for handling inevitable incivility in a way that maximizes its decrease, and minimizes community turmoil, disruption, and pain.
It's not either-or. How do we decide what structure to create? working together = stumbling
> Suggestions have been offered by community members. Do you have any intention of addressing these things? If not, please say so... because I don't want to invest my valuable time and energy thinking about it if you have no interest. If you do - then let's get to work.
I'm addressing Health.
One poster has offered to be a volunteer civility buddy/monitor. Do other posters have any intention of taking responsibility for anything?
Bob
Posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 19:37:07
In reply to Re: to stumble on magic, posted by Dr. Bob on November 9, 2010, at 19:13:13
Monitor? I thought it was civility buddy, not monitor. That would be a different kettle of fish entirely.
Posted by muffled on November 9, 2010, at 19:59:32
In reply to Re: to stumble on magic » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 19:37:07
> Monitor? I thought it was civility buddy, not monitor. That would be a different kettle of fish entirely.
oH Dinah....
Learn from the past...
:(
Posted by Solstice on November 9, 2010, at 23:02:38
In reply to Re: to stumble on magic, posted by Dr. Bob on November 9, 2010, at 19:13:13
> > It's not about stumbling along until we find magic to open somebody else's mind to convince them "I'm Right!" ... Let's dispense with stumbling along.
>
> I wish it were so easy. :-)I haven't run into much that's easy. Didn't mean to imply I thought it would be easy... :-)
> > Instead of magical stumbling and mind-changing, why don't we work together to create a structure for handling inevitable incivility in a way that maximizes its decrease, and minimizes community turmoil, disruption, and pain.
>
> It's not either-or. How do we decide what structure to create? working together = stumblingI sure didn't mean to sound like I think in terms of either-or.. but I don't see much potential for the effectiveness of focusing on hoping to magically stumble into something or holding out for mind-changing powers.
Bob and Community
First.. let me say that I know I'm technically 'new,' and it might seem forward of me to be giving so much input on an issue that long-participating members have struggled with for aeons. Mine is only one voice, and I certainly don't consider mine to be more valuable. But putting together 'systems' is what I know how to do, so I'm just trying to make a contribution to the valiant effort of Babblers to have a more merciful system of managing inevitable incivility.
Bob - the way I was thinking of 'stumbling' is that for as long as it's just a lot of talk and little or no movement toward actually constructing a system, then it's just 'stumbling along.' It's the dynamic of 'all talk...no action... Dr. Bob seems to 'check-out'... enormous blocks for minor infractions continue... lots of people in pain... that is the "stumbling along" I'd suggest we dispense with.
I think the community will have no trouble coming up with ideas for what kind of structure to create. But Bob, if you are not fully participating and interested in the goal, there's no point in Babblers getting their hopes up and investing the time and effort to put something together. I'll offer my ideas. I envision it evolving like anything in its pilot stage.. won't know what works best or how well it works until we start trying it. I'd suggest starting with one piece of the system. Construct it, put it in place, and test-drive it, then tweak it. I'd also suggest that we start with the piece that will give the most bang for its buck.
BLOCKS: Many members have brought up a wholesale "Amnesty" for everyone currently blocked. I am not Jewish but there is a marvelous ancient Israelite law that provided for a wholesale forgiveness of everyone's debt every 7th year - Sabbatical. I think that after putting some provisions in place to handle incivility from that day forward, I think it would invigorate the community for all of those blocked to be 'set free.' There could be some difficulties with that, in that there would be members who've had difficulties in the past regain posting privileges all at once, in a new system. You'll have the best sense of the potential for that to be a problem - so if wholesale release isn't the best idea, then maybe reducing everyone's block to 10% of its original length or something similar would provide for a more gradual influx.
CIVILITY BUDDIES: The only way a wholesale release of Blocks will be successful is if the incivility continues to be managed. A system using Civility Buddies is worth trying. Right now, people can volunteer to be CB's, and members under threat of block can ask for help from CB's. That works great for people who have sufficient insight to realize they need to get assistance. Those folks don't generally end up with these unbelievable blocks, though. Maybe there can be a process where a member cited for incivility chooses i) get a Civility Buddy to walk them through the process of repairing the incivility and making it 'right'; or ii)default to however Bob wants to handle their incivility. This puts the power in the hands of the infractor. Maybe it can be set up for a temporary suspension of posting privileges by CB's until the infractor decides which route to take - and release of of the suspension is contingent on the infractor's cooperation with their Civility Buddy. There are a multitude of ways a Civility Buddy system can work when a potential block is being handled.
ELDER'S COUNCIL: This might be a fabulous dual-purpose group. As already suggested, the Elder's Council could serve to work with Dr. Bob on determining whether a member really has been incivil, developing a more consistent and predictable application of blocks for those who opt out of the CB route, and fill in for Bob when he is absent or unavailable.
These are all just ideas. Others may have better ideas. But it's a starting place. I don't think it has to be set up perfectly. 'Kinks' can be worked out along the way.
I just think it is really, really important that movement take place, and I think whatever the system is, it must satisfy Dr. Bob's objectives for maintaining civility. A syste that circumvents blocking like I've suggested might make it easier for Bob's sometimes narrow latitude on incivility to be better tolerated, less contentious.
> > Suggestions have been offered by community members. Do you have any intention of addressing these things? If not, please say so... because I don't want to invest my valuable time and energy thinking about it if you have no interest. If you do - then let's get to work.
>
> I'm addressing Health.?? I was referring to whether you intend to address the valuable contributions members have made as they attempt to find a way to satisfy your objectives in a manner that is less harsh and punishing than excessive blocks for every little infraction... as in an Elder's Council... a more organized system of Civility Buddies.... the system I described using Mediators. I am not sure where your answer of "Health" fits?
> One poster has offered to be a volunteer civility buddy/monitor. Do other posters have any intention of taking responsibility for anything?
>
> Bob
This community is huge, Bob. I think there needs to be a little more structure to a system handling incivility than asking for volunteers to 'take responsibility' for... what? That's why a system needs to be constructed, so it's got reliable boundaries, and defined roles and processes. It doesn't need to be complicated.. it just needs to work and be flexible enough to be tweaked as we figure out how well it works.Solstice
Posted by Solstice on November 9, 2010, at 23:05:50
In reply to Re: to stumble on magic » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on November 9, 2010, at 19:37:07
> Monitor? I thought it was civility buddy, not monitor. That would be a different kettle of fish entirely.
Dinah - maybe he meant to use a word I'd used - "Mediator." Monitor is indeed a different kettle of fish! :-)
Solstice
Posted by Dinah on November 10, 2010, at 1:00:14
In reply to Re: to stumble on magic » Dinah, posted by Solstice on November 9, 2010, at 23:05:50
You're right. :)
Posted by muffled on November 10, 2010, at 9:24:25
In reply to Re: to stumble on magic » Solstice, posted by Dinah on November 10, 2010, at 1:00:14
Eg. a council of elders.
They would cover for Bob when he gone.
And ultimately then maybe this site would become more 'ours', and not so much just 'His'.
My main problem is with Bobs in and out, and his judgement about some things is not what I like. he's not really that invested in Babble, yet to those who post here, it is 'home', and that is a HUGE thing. People should have some degree of safety and autonomy in their own 'home'. Then they can feel more able to more fully share etc.au·ton·o·my noun
plural au·ton·o·mies
Definition of AUTONOMY
1: the quality or state of being self-governing; especially : the right of self-government
2: self-directing freedom and especially moral independence
3: a self-governing stateA council could override Bob(an effective council would).
The balance of power would shift.
I would have more trust(over time anyways) that a broader group of people might better have the interests of the 'present' community at heart.
I think it might be a challenge for the elders council at times....but it could possibly work.
The ONLY way I would be interested in being a part of all this would be if Bob was willing to relinquish some of his control.
Ultimately, he would be the highest authority still.
And he could be the techie guy as he is good at that.
And then he himself can feel more free to participate somewhat, ask questions, study about topics etc...
Posted by Dinah on November 10, 2010, at 9:41:25
In reply to Solstice got good ideas, posted by muffled on November 10, 2010, at 9:24:25
Deputies covered for Bob when he was gone, and consulted among themselves for a consensus.
I don't recall posters feeling any better about actions.
I see it as more likely that the council would either have to allow everything to retain the good feelings of the more outspoken posters, or would grow to receive the same feelings Bob receives. In my experience, posters are less able to tolerate rage than Dr. Bob is. I think part of the secret of Babble's longevity is Bob's ability to be a container for rage.
I may be cynical, but I can't see people welcoming pbc's or blocks from anyone. Conversely I can't see all posters welcoming a lack of pbc's or blocks either. People tend to feel differently when they feel attacked.
I do agree that Solstice has good ideas.
But I don't believe the site would be better served by Dr. Bob giving over his power to a group. There would just be different problems.
I am members of sites that are entirely group led. There are still splinter factions, huge blowouts and dissolvings of the group.
This isn't utopia.
Posted by Solstice on November 10, 2010, at 14:24:19
In reply to Solstice got good ideas, posted by muffled on November 10, 2010, at 9:24:25
Hi Muffled.. I am so glad to see you contributing your ideas.
> Eg. a council of elders.well.. the credit for the council actually belongs to hyperfocus, I believe :-) I took ideas I've seen from everywhere and just tried to see how they might fit together.
> They would cover for Bob when he gone.
> And ultimately then maybe this site would become more 'ours', and not so much just 'His'.The could cover in his absence. But I think that his ownership of the site is something that we all have to figure out a way to be okay with. In many ways, it is "our" site because without us, it would not exist. But when it comes to final decisions, those things will always belong to Bob. Just as surely as he created the site, he alone has the power to dismantle it.
> My main problem is with Bobs in and out, and his judgement about some things is not what I like.
When Bob is absent, it can feel unstable. No one's at the helm. I think making peace with the reality that we won't agree with every judgment call a leader makes is something we have to do to belong to any group. Any time two people are linked in some way - there will be differences between them. What they think is important... their methods of handling situations... how they feel about things. The key to 'living together' (think of what your therapist says about your parts) is to find a way to co-exist without too much conflict. Sometimes people can reach compromises when they differ. Sometimes they can't, and one person will have to defer to the judgment of the other, even though they don't really want to. That would take place with the formal CB process I have in mind. Posters who got blocked might not agree that their post was incivil. They may think the block is unfair. But if they want the block lifted, they will have to cooperate with a CB who can help them figure out how to think and feel about what happened in a way that helps themn stay within the guidelines and make repair - even if they don't feel like what they said did any harm. You mentioned having a part that sometimes gets disruptive for you, and how you tell that part to step to the background and wait until you have time to give the attention that part's asking for. It's kind of the same with this. We have to defer to Bob's civility guidelines because it is his site. Someone has to set the standard. He gets to make the rules for the 'world' he created. A Babbler that's been blocked is a little like that 'disruptive part' you mentioned. They are told to take a back seat. Then a Civility Buddy can 'sit down with them' and try to help them figure it out.There is just no way to avoid the reality that we have a Leader who has some authority that no one else can have. It's the only way for a group to survive and thrive.
> he's not really that invested in Babble, yet to those who post here, it is 'home',I think he's invested in Babble, but in a very different way than us. He misses out on some things that we enjoy because he is alone at the top. He cannot come to us with his problems. He can't talk with us about his therapy (if he has it). So in that way, it might feel like he's not invested like we are because we open up so much of ourselves here. But, he has a lot of time consuming work he has to do behind-the-scenes that no one sees. Maybe sometimes it feels to him like we aren't as invested as he is.
> People should have some degree of safety and autonomy in their own 'home'. Then they can feel more able to more fully share etc.
I hear you Muff. It doesn't feel safe when you don't know what to expect. There probably isn't a way to eliminate all inconsistencies. But there is a way to create a structure with a high degree of predictability. Since it's less about 'punishment' and more about restoration, I think whatever inconsistencies show up won't feel as threatening. Perfection is not possible, but when the consequences have a cushion, the imperfections will feel less like sharp glass and more like little bumps.> A council could override Bob(an effective council would).
I don't think that would end up working any better than keeping it like it is.
> The balance of power would shift.
I don't think it would be good to shift the power. I think it will work if, perhaps, Bob says "I want Council to develop a classification of incivilities, and recommend the block lengths they think appropriate, and submit it to me for review." Then he could review it, discuss it with Council, tweak it, change it, and send it back to them for further review. It's not about anyone 'getting their way' as much as it's about finding something workable that satisfies Bob's and the members' objectives as closely as possible.
> I would have more trust(over time anyways) that a broader group of people might better have the interests of the 'present' community at heart.I think trust will build over time if the system works. Bob won't look like such a 'bad guy' because blocked members would have the ability to get themselves out of trouble. Not by duking it out with him over the merits of the block, but by putting themselves into the CB process to make reparations.
Thanks again Muff for sharing your thoughts... it will take all of us working together to make it work.Solstice
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 10, 2010, at 15:17:32
In reply to Re: Solstice got good ideas, posted by Solstice on November 10, 2010, at 14:24:19
>
> Hi Muffled.. I am so glad to see you contributing your ideas.
>
>
> > Eg. a council of elders.
>
> well.. the credit for the council actually belongs to hyperfocus, I believe :-) I took ideas I've seen from everywhere and just tried to see how they might fit together.
>
> > They would cover for Bob when he gone.
> > And ultimately then maybe this site would become more 'ours', and not so much just 'His'.
>
> The could cover in his absence. But I think that his ownership of the site is something that we all have to figure out a way to be okay with. In many ways, it is "our" site because without us, it would not exist. But when it comes to final decisions, those things will always belong to Bob. Just as surely as he created the site, he alone has the power to dismantle it.
>
>
> > My main problem is with Bobs in and out, and his judgement about some things is not what I like.
>
>
> When Bob is absent, it can feel unstable. No one's at the helm. I think making peace with the reality that we won't agree with every judgment call a leader makes is something we have to do to belong to any group. Any time two people are linked in some way - there will be differences between them. What they think is important... their methods of handling situations... how they feel about things. The key to 'living together' (think of what your therapist says about your parts) is to find a way to co-exist without too much conflict. Sometimes people can reach compromises when they differ. Sometimes they can't, and one person will have to defer to the judgment of the other, even though they don't really want to. That would take place with the formal CB process I have in mind. Posters who got blocked might not agree that their post was incivil. They may think the block is unfair. But if they want the block lifted, they will have to cooperate with a CB who can help them figure out how to think and feel about what happened in a way that helps themn stay within the guidelines and make repair - even if they don't feel like what they said did any harm. You mentioned having a part that sometimes gets disruptive for you, and how you tell that part to step to the background and wait until you have time to give the attention that part's asking for. It's kind of the same with this. We have to defer to Bob's civility guidelines because it is his site. Someone has to set the standard. He gets to make the rules for the 'world' he created. A Babbler that's been blocked is a little like that 'disruptive part' you mentioned. They are told to take a back seat. Then a Civility Buddy can 'sit down with them' and try to help them figure it out.
>
> There is just no way to avoid the reality that we have a Leader who has some authority that no one else can have. It's the only way for a group to survive and thrive.
>
>
> > he's not really that invested in Babble, yet to those who post here, it is 'home',
>
> I think he's invested in Babble, but in a very different way than us. He misses out on some things that we enjoy because he is alone at the top. He cannot come to us with his problems. He can't talk with us about his therapy (if he has it). So in that way, it might feel like he's not invested like we are because we open up so much of ourselves here. But, he has a lot of time consuming work he has to do behind-the-scenes that no one sees. Maybe sometimes it feels to him like we aren't as invested as he is.
>
>
> > People should have some degree of safety and autonomy in their own 'home'. Then they can feel more able to more fully share etc.
>
>
> I hear you Muff. It doesn't feel safe when you don't know what to expect. There probably isn't a way to eliminate all inconsistencies. But there is a way to create a structure with a high degree of predictability. Since it's less about 'punishment' and more about restoration, I think whatever inconsistencies show up won't feel as threatening. Perfection is not possible, but when the consequences have a cushion, the imperfections will feel less like sharp glass and more like little bumps.
>
>
>
> > A council could override Bob(an effective council would).
>
>
> I don't think that would end up working any better than keeping it like it is.
>
>
> > The balance of power would shift.
>
>
> I don't think it would be good to shift the power. I think it will work if, perhaps, Bob says "I want Council to develop a classification of incivilities, and recommend the block lengths they think appropriate, and submit it to me for review." Then he could review it, discuss it with Council, tweak it, change it, and send it back to them for further review. It's not about anyone 'getting their way' as much as it's about finding something workable that satisfies Bob's and the members' objectives as closely as possible.
>
>
> > I would have more trust(over time anyways) that a broader group of people might better have the interests of the 'present' community at heart.
>
> I think trust will build over time if the system works. Bob won't look like such a 'bad guy' because blocked members would have the ability to get themselves out of trouble. Not by duking it out with him over the merits of the block, but by putting themselves into the CB process to make reparations.
>
>
> Thanks again Muff for sharing your thoughts... it will take all of us working together to make it work.
>
> Solstice
>
Solstice,
You wrote,[...There is just xx yyy to avoid the zzzzzzz that we have a Leader who has some authority that pp qqq else can have. It's the oooo www for a group to survive and thrive...]
I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean here. If you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
1A. Do you think that Mr. Hsiung's authority is absolute? If so, could you post here your rationale for such?
2A.Why is it according to you a reality?
1B. Could there be other ways for a group to survive and thrive that could be unbeknownst to you?
2B. Would my perspective, being from a Jewish perspective,which is different from yours, be automatically deemed to be (redacted by respondent)
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 10, 2010, at 15:30:51
In reply to Lou's request-, posted by Lou Pilder on November 10, 2010, at 15:17:32
> >
> > Hi Muffled.. I am so glad to see you contributing your ideas.
> >
> >
> > > Eg. a council of elders.
> >
> > well.. the credit for the council actually belongs to hyperfocus, I believe :-) I took ideas I've seen from everywhere and just tried to see how they might fit together.
> >
> > > They would cover for Bob when he gone.
> > > And ultimately then maybe this site would become more 'ours', and not so much just 'His'.
> >
> > The could cover in his absence. But I think that his ownership of the site is something that we all have to figure out a way to be okay with. In many ways, it is "our" site because without us, it would not exist. But when it comes to final decisions, those things will always belong to Bob. Just as surely as he created the site, he alone has the power to dismantle it.
> >
> >
> > > My main problem is with Bobs in and out, and his judgement about some things is not what I like.
> >
> >
> > When Bob is absent, it can feel unstable. No one's at the helm. I think making peace with the reality that we won't agree with every judgment call a leader makes is something we have to do to belong to any group. Any time two people are linked in some way - there will be differences between them. What they think is important... their methods of handling situations... how they feel about things. The key to 'living together' (think of what your therapist says about your parts) is to find a way to co-exist without too much conflict. Sometimes people can reach compromises when they differ. Sometimes they can't, and one person will have to defer to the judgment of the other, even though they don't really want to. That would take place with the formal CB process I have in mind. Posters who got blocked might not agree that their post was incivil. They may think the block is unfair. But if they want the block lifted, they will have to cooperate with a CB who can help them figure out how to think and feel about what happened in a way that helps themn stay within the guidelines and make repair - even if they don't feel like what they said did any harm. You mentioned having a part that sometimes gets disruptive for you, and how you tell that part to step to the background and wait until you have time to give the attention that part's asking for. It's kind of the same with this. We have to defer to Bob's civility guidelines because it is his site. Someone has to set the standard. He gets to make the rules for the 'world' he created. A Babbler that's been blocked is a little like that 'disruptive part' you mentioned. They are told to take a back seat. Then a Civility Buddy can 'sit down with them' and try to help them figure it out.
> >
> > There is just no way to avoid the reality that we have a Leader who has some authority that no one else can have. It's the only way for a group to survive and thrive.
> >
> >
> > > he's not really that invested in Babble, yet to those who post here, it is 'home',
> >
> > I think he's invested in Babble, but in a very different way than us. He misses out on some things that we enjoy because he is alone at the top. He cannot come to us with his problems. He can't talk with us about his therapy (if he has it). So in that way, it might feel like he's not invested like we are because we open up so much of ourselves here. But, he has a lot of time consuming work he has to do behind-the-scenes that no one sees. Maybe sometimes it feels to him like we aren't as invested as he is.
> >
> >
> > > People should have some degree of safety and autonomy in their own 'home'. Then they can feel more able to more fully share etc.
> >
> >
> > I hear you Muff. It doesn't feel safe when you don't know what to expect. There probably isn't a way to eliminate all inconsistencies. But there is a way to create a structure with a high degree of predictability. Since it's less about 'punishment' and more about restoration, I think whatever inconsistencies show up won't feel as threatening. Perfection is not possible, but when the consequences have a cushion, the imperfections will feel less like sharp glass and more like little bumps.
> >
> >
> >
> > > A council could override Bob(an effective council would).
> >
> >
> > I don't think that would end up working any better than keeping it like it is.
> >
> >
> > > The balance of power would shift.
> >
> >
> > I don't think it would be good to shift the power. I think it will work if, perhaps, Bob says "I want Council to develop a classification of incivilities, and recommend the block lengths they think appropriate, and submit it to me for review." Then he could review it, discuss it with Council, tweak it, change it, and send it back to them for further review. It's not about anyone 'getting their way' as much as it's about finding something workable that satisfies Bob's and the members' objectives as closely as possible.
> >
> >
> > > I would have more trust(over time anyways) that a broader group of people might better have the interests of the 'present' community at heart.
> >
> > I think trust will build over time if the system works. Bob won't look like such a 'bad guy' because blocked members would have the ability to get themselves out of trouble. Not by duking it out with him over the merits of the block, but by putting themselves into the CB process to make reparations.
> >
> >
> > Thanks again Muff for sharing your thoughts... it will take all of us working together to make it work.
> >
> > Solstice
> >
> Solstice,
> You wrote,[...There is just xx yyy to avoid the zzzzzzz that we have a Leader who has some authority that pp qqq else can have. It's the oooo www for a group to survive and thrive...]
> I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean here. If you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
> 1A. Do you think that Mr. Hsiung's authority is absolute? If so, could you post here your rationale for such?
> 2A.Why is it according to you a reality?
> 1B. Could there be other ways for a group to survive and thrive that could be unbeknownst to you?
> 2B. Would my perspective, being from a Jewish perspective,which is different from yours, be automatically deemed to be (redacted by respondent)
> LouSolstice,
I am not permitted to tell members how they can find information concerning what is prohibited for me to post. This involves the foundation of Judaism and I realize that you may not be aquainted with this situation. Here is a link to outstanding requests from me to Mr. Hsiung that could offer some more information concerning this.
Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20101014/msgs/969449.html
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.