![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 15 of 15. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Twinleaf on August 7, 2014, at 22:50:37
In reply to Re: The Hsiung-Pilder discussion, posted by bryte on August 7, 2014, at 0:03:40
These lengthy discussions on Administration leave a very unfortunate impression. Posts written with a clear hope of increasing communication and understanding are met with a seemingly endless series of slightly alternative points of view which completely disregard the intent of the original messages. These alternatives do not appear to be selected for their relevance or meaningfulness. Instead, they appear to be chosen almost randomly for their ability to frustrate and confuse. They clearly do have the effect of increasing the confusion and frustration of the original posters, and, I strongly suspect, result in an ever-increasing sense that they, and their contributions, are not valued enough to be responded to.
Exchanges like these leave the impression of being willfully obfuscating, in situations where one would hope and expect to see respectful, enlightening and empathic responses. Very sadly, they leave a strong (although possibly inaccurate) impression of emotional disconnection, passive-aggressive hostility and narcissism. This may be why such an extraordinary number of posters have left this site in a very disillusioned and distressed state of mind. For people who come to this site suffering from anxiety and depression, perhaps for the first time, and who are looking for reasonable understanding and responsiveness, it unfortunately appears to keep turning out that there is no-one "there" here.
Posted by Dr. Bob on August 8, 2014, at 1:33:35
In reply to Re: The Hsiung-Pilder discussion, posted by Twinleaf on August 7, 2014, at 22:50:37
> completely disregard the intent
> willfully obfuscating
> emotional disconnection, passive-aggressive hostility and narcissism
Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down.
More information about posting policies and tips on alternative ways to express yourself, including a link to a nice post by Dinah on I-statements, are in the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#enforceFollow-ups regarding these issues, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by Twinleaf on August 8, 2014, at 7:11:23
In reply to Re: The Hsiung-Pilder discussion, posted by Twinleaf on August 7, 2014, at 22:50:37
I did not say that any of these things were factually true. I don't know whether they are or not. I said that some of the phrases and ways of replying left that impression ON ME. I posted on this topic, as have several others, because I assume that you do not mean to give a negative impression, and do not have negative intentions. I used phrases such as "give the impression", "seemingly", "appear" and "possibly incorrectly" to make it clear that these are my reactions only. I tried to make it as clear as possible that this was an "I-message".
I find it distressing that you quote Dinah on civility, as it seemed as if she was one of the people who eventually left in an extreme state of distress over just the kind of failed communication I am attempting to draw attention to.
Posted by Phillipa on August 8, 2014, at 9:46:26
In reply to Re: The Hsiung-Pilder discussion, posted by Twinleaf on August 7, 2014, at 22:50:37
I disagree respectfully. Seems the folks with med questions utilize that board. This seems to be for those that have been around for a while. Just my impression. Phillipa
Posted by Twinleaf on August 8, 2014, at 11:46:49
In reply to Re: The Hsiung-Pilder discussion » Twinleaf, posted by Phillipa on August 8, 2014, at 9:46:26
I agree with you ,Phillipa - newcomers rarely post here. My concern was (and is) that they will read here as part of becoming more informed about the site as a whole.
I felt that they might come to the conclusion that the communication style does not meet their needs, and decide against participating altogether.
Posted by Bryte on August 8, 2014, at 21:53:44
In reply to Re: please be civil » Twinleaf, posted by Dr. Bob on August 8, 2014, at 1:33:35
> > completely disregard the intent
>
> > willfully obfuscating
>
> > emotional disconnection, passive-aggressive hostility and narcissism
>
> Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down.
>
> More information about posting policies and tips on alternative ways to express yourself, including a link to a nice post by Dinah on I-statements, are in the FAQ:
>
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#enforce
>
> Follow-ups regarding these issues, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
>
> Thanks,
>
> BobHate much?
Posted by Lou Pilder on August 9, 2014, at 6:53:00
In reply to Re: capricious leadership » Dr. Bob, posted by Bryte on August 8, 2014, at 21:53:44
> > > completely disregard the intent
> >
> > > willfully obfuscating
> >
> > > emotional disconnection, passive-aggressive hostility and narcissism
> >
> > Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down.
> >
> > More information about posting policies and tips on alternative ways to express yourself, including a link to a nice post by Dinah on I-statements, are in the FAQ:
> >
> > http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
> > http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#enforce
> >
> > Follow-ups regarding these issues, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Bob
>
> Hate much?
>
> Bryte,
You wrote, [...Hate much?...]
I am unsure as to what you are wanting readers to think. If you could post answers to the following, then I could respond accordingly.
Mr. Hsiung posts to not post what could lead one to feel accused or put down here.
True or False:
A. Mr. Hsiung's sanction to Twinleaf is capricious
B. Mr. Hsiung is not concerned as to if his sanction could cause Twinleaf to feel that he is throwing a stone at her
C. Mr. Hsiung's sanction of Twinleaf is showing that his stated reasoning for allowing of statements that defame me and that could arouse hatred toward the Jews is a pretext to advance anti-Semitic hate here by leaving statements of that nature un repudiated where they are originally posted here.
D. Mr. Hsiung's sanction of Twinleaf shows that he really has not shifted his philosophy at all and that one here is not to post what could accuse or put down someone.
E. The {Hate} is hatred toward humanity itself, for sanctioning of Twinleaf, while leaving the anti-Semitic statements and defamatory statements toward me here to stand un repudiated where they are originally posted, shows a disregard for the equal protection of the rules here which could be capricious enforcement of the rules by Mr. Hsiung and his deputies of record.
F. Fill in:
Lou, the {Hate} in my statement, is:
Lou _____________________________________________
Posted by herpills on August 9, 2014, at 10:02:38
In reply to Re: please be civil » Twinleaf, posted by Dr. Bob on August 8, 2014, at 1:33:35
Posted by Bryte on August 9, 2014, at 13:15:47
In reply to Lou's request-gtmlk? » Bryte, posted by Lou Pilder on August 9, 2014, at 6:53:00
F. ...: ambiguous
Posted by Phillipa on August 9, 2014, at 20:26:19
In reply to Lou's request-gtmlk? » Bryte, posted by Lou Pilder on August 9, 2014, at 6:53:00
Lou how do you know Twinleaf is female? Phillipa
Posted by Dr. Bob on August 11, 2014, at 2:38:18
In reply to Re: The Hsiung-Pilder discussion, posted by Twinleaf on August 8, 2014, at 7:11:23
> I did not say that any of these things were factually true. I don't know whether they are or not. I said that some of the phrases and ways of replying left that impression ON ME. ... I used phrases such as "give the impression", "seemingly", "appear" and "possibly incorrectly" to make it clear that these are my reactions only. I tried to make it as clear as possible that this was an "I-message".
Have you read Dinah's post? "Dr. Bob gives the impression of having gone overboard" is not an I-statement.
Bob
Posted by Twinleaf on August 11, 2014, at 7:41:47
In reply to Re: The Hsiung-Twinleaf discussion, posted by Dr. Bob on August 11, 2014, at 2:38:18
You appear to me to be demonstrating the type of communication style which I felt viewers might react negatively to:.changing the topic slightly and then only responding to the changed version.
It seemed to me that Dinah left, because at a time of immense personal stress over the sudden loss of her therapist of 20 yearss, she did not feel that she found the understanding and support that she hoped for here. I said that I found it distressing to see her mentioned in a thread whose topic was that very thing - communication failure as it appears to me on this board. I don't know whether Dinah's message was an "I- message" or not; it certainly could have been. You seem to have shifted the focus away from my distress about the communication failure which apparently contributed to Dinah's leaving towards a focus on interpreting Dinah's own communication style. Now there are two areas of communicative stress between you and me, where before there was only one.
Returning to my own communication to you, I emphasized that my impressions weren't, and never could be, judgements of you. I do not know you, but I assume that your intent is to be helpful., and to communicate in a skillful manner which relieves misunderstandings. However, I do feel that altering the topic, even slightly, unfortunately leads to more misunderstandings, rather than less.
If I am correct in my basic positive assumptions about your constructive intentions, how about responding directly to the real concerns that I have expressed?
Posted by Dr. Bob on August 12, 2014, at 0:38:49
In reply to Re: The Hsiung-Twinleaf discussion, posted by Twinleaf on August 11, 2014, at 7:41:47
> You seem to have shifted the focus away from my distress about the communication failure which apparently contributed to Dinah's leaving towards a focus on interpreting Dinah's own communication style.
Yes, I shifted the focus from your distress. I shifted it to your uncivil communication style.
You posted earlier that:
> I find it distressing that you quote Dinah on civility
I wondered if you had read what I "quoted", her nice post on I-statements:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20040112/msgs/320097.html
Please read it. You may learn something about I-statements. Using a phrase such as "give the impression" does not make a you-statement an I-statement.
I wonder if you have read the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
Please read it: You may learn something about I-statements. Using a phrase such as "I feel" does not make a you-statement an I-statement. In the FAQ, I give the example:
"I feel Dr. Bob has gone overboard"
In my post to you, I gave a similar example with a phrase you used:
"Dr. Bob gives the impression of having gone overboard"
That was an example of a you-statement worded as an I-statement. Dinah did not post it. I was not focusing on Dinah's communication style. I was focusing on your communication style. You communication style was uncivil.
I hope this post is more clear.
Bob
Posted by Twinleaf on August 12, 2014, at 7:12:47
In reply to Re: The Hsiung-Twinleaf discussion, posted by Dr. Bob on August 12, 2014, at 0:38:49
The shifting of focus was the communication style which I identified as being both personally stressful and a source of concern for potential newcomers. From what I have read here, many others share this reaction.
I requested that you communicate with me in a direct manner, without shifting the focus away from this concern. Since you apparently do not having any interest in doing that, I have no further interest in additional attempts at communicating with you.
This forum once held so much promise as a constructive force in the lives of people dealing with anxiety and depression. Now, Psychobabble itself has become a source of stress - a clear liability to those in the process of regaining their health. I am saddened and extremely disappointed to witness the extraordinary degree of deterioration and failed promise which has occurred here.
Posted by Bryte on August 12, 2014, at 23:47:22
In reply to Re: The Hsiung-Twinleaf discussion, posted by Dr. Bob on August 12, 2014, at 0:38:49
This I-statement business is far, far removed from any standard form in popular narrative. Stance is assumed in most popular narrative. Even elementary readers in most Western cultures are widely presumed to be capable of recognizing implicit stance. When one speaks or writes, we adjudge from context whether they are speaking from their personal perspective or the perspective of subject-area authority. Adherence to a hackneyed I-statement form implies statements not wrapped among first-person verb clauses are simply untrue. They are not.
If someone says something seems a certain way, it seems that way. If someone says it seems the opposite, it also seems the opposite. It seems different to different people and we don't need to remind each other every time we open our mouths or peck at the keyboard that we are speaking only about our own perspective. Maybe we are. Maybe others share our perspective. We don't need to remind readers with each statement we utter that we have not polled a statistically significant sample of a representative population.
This I-statement business is not necesarily good for groups. It can diminish groups by isolating individuals. It diminishes narrative.
The demand that every statement be couched as "it's just little ole me, but I feeeeeel as if..." can diminish groups by emaciating the individual of confidence they otherwise can share with a group.
It resembles a pop-psychology fad that assumes a grand new discovery that could cure all miscommunication if only everyone would comply. It couches the leader with the grand fix-all idea as a hero ready to rescue poor victims from their own self-inflicted injuries. It provides a convenient dodge to allow authoritarian allusions to process that embody a false promise to the group - the false promise that everything could have been so much better if only group had done what leader said.
It is more an exaggeration of perceived benefits associated with an atypical communication form rarely used in popular discourse than moderation of mutually supportive discourse. It may best serve someone as an idealized belief that a group can be made compliant to a preconceived notion of civilization. It may be seen as a thinly veiled therapeutic effort rather than a well-considered, realistic attempt to enhance communication among diverse individuals.
At best, I-statements may be useful as an occasional device and then perhaps in discourse with younger, immature or particularly narcissistic correspondents unskilled at empathetic correspondence. But we do not know that exposing feelings encourages empathy among those unable or unwilling to empathize. I-statements can just as well serve as a device to demand that others cater to one's feelings.
We have been shown no empirical evidence that narrative limited to strictly crafted I-statements enhances group correspondence. We do not know the demand for I-statements is not an attempt to repair damage caused by misguided or ill-informed interventions by a self-described outsider in otherwise self-directed large-group processes.
We do not know those interventions have not caused more harm than good. We might not care to assume the "let me know if this hurts" system for reporting adverse events has gathered reliable evidence of the frequency or cause of adverse events in the group.
We have no way of knowing whether the real motivation for demanding I-statements is an attempt to gain acceptance among professional peers - including perhaps performances directed at an inner concept of what one believes would impress professional peers.
We have nothing other than personal assertions as proof that the persistent demands for I-statements are an intelligently considered attempt to provide a quasi-therapeutic milieu hosted by a charitable individual who otherwise is either uninterested in welcoming fellow benefactors or is unable to find peer-level partners who would join him in facilitating a charitable endeavor by someone we might otherwise believe to be a well-qualified benefactor.
I made this, but you already know that.
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.