![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 49. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by polarbear206 on July 4, 2007, at 17:46:24
In reply to Blocked for 1 week » Maximus, posted by Deputy Racer on July 4, 2007, at 13:58:37
>
> > Once someone has been on SSRIs/SNRIs, sexuality is impaired and changed forever.
>
> Please don't exaggerate or jump to conclusions. And please be sensitive to those who have relied on these medications in order to function. I notice you received a warning about another issue in the past week, so I'm going to block you for a week this time.
>
> If you have any questions about this policy, or about posting guidelines in general, please read the FAQ, located at http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil Any follow ups should be directed to the Administration board.
>
> Dr Bob has ultimate authority over administrative actions taken at this site, and may choose to revise or reverse any action taken by a deputy.
>
> Deputy RacerMaximus meant no harm. We all are aware that this happens to a majority of people taking these drugs and frankly it is very frustrating. He was venting his personal experience. I think you are being too hard on him and the other post he commented on to me was not meant that way either. Maximus is always considerate and helpful to others and his contributions to babble surely outweigh any presumed negativity on his part.
Polarbear
Posted by Deputy 10derheart on July 4, 2007, at 17:49:04
In reply to Re: Blocked for 1 week » Deputy Racer, posted by polarbear206 on July 4, 2007, at 17:46:24
> Maximus meant no harm.
I am sure he didn't. I'm confident I can speak for Racer, too, in that she didn't issue the warning because of any bad intentions - but instead, to educate on Babble guidelines.
Regardless of a poster's actual (or presumed) intent (which we just can't know with any certainty) the civility guidelines in this area call for certain phrasing, for the good of community as a whole.
> We all are aware that this happens to a majority of people taking these drugs...<
Hmmm...maybe this is another example of what Racer was highlighting? Can you actually know what we *all* are aware of? And can we be aware "this happens to a majority of people?" Unless you have some concrete evidence to support this as a fact...?
Dr. Bob asks us to avoid generalizations, so could you have said something like, "It seems from my experience here and IRL, that most people I know who've taken an SSRI report [fill in whatever side effect]..?" Or whatever is true *for you* without phrasing it as a fact?
> He was venting his personal experience.
Right, and that's exactly what is okay to post, but it wasn't worded that way...it's best to use "I" type statements and describe *your* symptoms and what *you* believe is causing them...
> I think you are being too hard on him
I'm sorry if sometimes our actions come across that way. I can assure you the bottom line intent from all the deputies is to help everyone follow the guidelines.
> and the other post he commented on to me was not meant that way either.
As I said, we can't really know intent, so we try very hard to keep that out of the picture. I was the deputy who gave the PBS, and it was because of a phrase that, IMO, could reasonably have caused the poster it was written about to feel accused or put down, not because I thought Maximus *meant* to do that.
> Maximus is always considerate and helpful to others and his contributions to babble surely outweigh any presumed negativity on his part.
Thanks for writing that about Maximus :-) Again I assure you the deputies aren't presuming any negativity on his part.
Posted by Justherself54 on July 4, 2007, at 19:58:47
In reply to Re: Blocked for 1 week » polarbear206, posted by Deputy 10derheart on July 4, 2007, at 17:49:04
> > Maximus meant no harm.
>
> I am sure he didn't. I'm confident I can speak for Racer, too, in that she didn't issue the warning because of any bad intentions - but instead, to educate on Babble guidelines.
>
> Regardless of a poster's actual (or presumed) intent (which we just can't know with any certainty) the civility guidelines in this area call for certain phrasing, for the good of community as a whole.
>
> > We all are aware that this happens to a majority of people taking these drugs...<
>
> Hmmm...maybe this is another example of what Racer was highlighting? Can you actually know what we *all* are aware of? And can we be aware "this happens to a majority of people?" Unless you have some concrete evidence to support this as a fact...?
>
> Dr. Bob asks us to avoid generalizations, so could you have said something like, "It seems from my experience here and IRL, that most people I know who've taken an SSRI report [fill in whatever side effect]..?" Or whatever is true *for you* without phrasing it as a fact?
>
> > He was venting his personal experience.
>
> Right, and that's exactly what is okay to post, but it wasn't worded that way...it's best to use "I" type statements and describe *your* symptoms and what *you* believe is causing them...
>
> > I think you are being too hard on him
>
> I'm sorry if sometimes our actions come across that way. I can assure you the bottom line intent from all the deputies is to help everyone follow the guidelines.
>
> > and the other post he commented on to me was not meant that way either.
>
> As I said, we can't really know intent, so we try very hard to keep that out of the picture. I was the deputy who gave the PBS, and it was because of a phrase that, IMO, could reasonably have caused the poster it was written about to feel accused or put down, not because I thought Maximus *meant* to do that.
>
> > Maximus is always considerate and helpful to others and his contributions to babble surely outweigh any presumed negativity on his part.
>
> Thanks for writing that about Maximus :-) Again I assure you the deputies aren't presuming any negativity on his part.
>Just my feeling, but Maximus' block seems trivial..so he didn't follow the "I" guideline and made a statement that was construed as a generalization..it's not like he was attacking someone or being rude..then when another poster tried to come to his defense, he was blocked too.
I find this site to be very helpful but this latest block has me wondering if I truly wish to be part of this community..
We come from all walks of life, some fire from from hip when they are passionate about something. It doesn't bother me when someone voices their opinion, even when it is in the form of a generalizaton because even after reading the posting guidelines, some people have trouble articulating in the "I" mode. Let's face it, when you're stressed out and dealing with some of the drugs we have to take, it's a wonder we can articulate at all at times..
Just my opinion..if you get too rigid in enforcing every little statement someone makes in the spirit of open dialog, you will, without a doubt, lose knowledgable members of this community..and that truly would be a shame.
Posted by Phillipa on July 4, 2007, at 21:12:13
In reply to Re: Blocked for 1 week, posted by Justherself54 on July 4, 2007, at 19:58:47
I know quite a few who left because of this as I e-mail with them. I agree with you. Love Phillipa I lost my sexuality on meds yes I did and if I'd known this before hand I might have looked into alternatives first.
Posted by Vlad_Dracul on July 4, 2007, at 21:56:28
In reply to Blocked for 1 week » Maximus, posted by Deputy Racer on July 4, 2007, at 13:58:37
> > Once someone has been on SSRIs/SNRIs, sexuality is impaired and changed forever.
>
> Please don't exaggerate or jump to conclusions.Please, explain to us how the above sentence contains exaggeration?
Posted by Vlad_Dracul on July 4, 2007, at 21:56:29
In reply to Please be civil » linkadge, posted by Deputy Racer on July 4, 2007, at 13:57:14
> > Yet law abiding citicens people who are suffering withdrawl from prescription SSRI's get ZERO support.
> >
> > SSRI's rewire the human brain. When you come off its not just simple withdrawl, its the fact that your brain will not work the same again.
> >
> >
> > They either just believe the drug companies, or just don't want to make trouble.
> >
>
> Please don't exaggerate or jump to conclusions. And please be sensitive to those who have relied on these medications in order to function.Would you like to point out how this gentleman has been uncivil?
Posted by Deputy Racer on July 4, 2007, at 21:56:29
In reply to Re: Blocked for 1 week, posted by linkadge on July 4, 2007, at 17:25:50
> I agree. There was no harm intended. I would say that a very high proportion of patients who have discontinued SSRI's feel that there sexual function has been altered in some way.
I've asked you in the past not to exaggerate or jump to conclusions, and I've also asked that follow ups be directed to the Administration board. At this time, I am going to block you for one week.
While you and Maximus may not have intended harm, the rules here are still clear: it's OK to discuss your own experience with medications, and it's OK to use "I statements" regarding side effects. Saying that these things are true for all people who take these drugs, on the other hand, is an exaggeration, and is not allowed under the site guidelines.
If you or anyone else has any question regarding these guidelines, please read the FAQ, located at http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil Any follow ups really should be directed to the Administration board. Failure to do so may result in a request that board guidelines be followed.
Dr Bob may choose to revise or reverse this action, as with any other administrative action taken by a deputy on this site.
Deputy Racer
Posted by Phillipa on July 4, 2007, at 21:56:30
In reply to Blocked for 1 week » linkadge, posted by Deputy Racer on July 4, 2007, at 19:16:17
I feel SSRI's and SSNRI's although may be necessary they have definitely impaired my sex life as I have none and have had none for three years. My poor husband puts up with this. Love Phillipa
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 4, 2007, at 22:13:29
In reply to Re: Please be civil » Deputy Racer, posted by Vlad_Dracul on July 4, 2007, at 21:56:29
> > > Once someone has been on SSRIs/SNRIs, sexuality is impaired and changed forever.
>
> Please, explain to us how the above sentence contains exaggeration?Their sexuality isn't necessarily impaired and changed, and if it is, it isn't necessarily forever.
> > > Yet law abiding citicens people who are suffering withdrawl from prescription SSRI's get ZERO support.
> > >
> > > SSRI's rewire the human brain. When you come off its not just simple withdrawl, its the fact that your brain will not work the same again.
> > >
> > > They either just believe the drug companies, or just don't want to make trouble.
>
> Would you like to point out how this gentleman has been uncivil?People who suffer withdrawal may get some support. When you come off, your brain may work the same again. And a doctor might not consider the possibility of withdrawal because he or she hasn't had any patients who suffered it.
--
Also, when you're blocked, you're not supposed to post, so I'm going to block this name and double the duration of your other block.
But please don't take this personally, this doesn't mean I don't like you or think you're a bad person.
If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, please first see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#enforce
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by Sigismund on July 4, 2007, at 23:49:40
In reply to Re: Please be civil » Deputy Racer, posted by Vlad_Dracul on July 4, 2007, at 21:56:29
I know the population of psychobabble is said to be unrepresentative, but I cannot recall anyone saying that SSRIs did not damage their sexuality, or that it came back after treatment.
Posted by OzLand on July 5, 2007, at 0:17:15
In reply to Re: Please be civil, posted by Sigismund on July 4, 2007, at 23:49:40
Then I guess I am the oddball. It did not ruin my sexuality; in fact just the opposite. That is all I feel okay about saying.
Posted by Sigismund on July 5, 2007, at 1:12:34
In reply to Re: Please be civil » Sigismund, posted by OzLand on July 5, 2007, at 0:17:15
Oh well, I'll remember your name.
You even live close to me. I'll find out your address.
No really, I'm pleased if that's how it's been for you.
I've heard so many opposing opinions here. I've never taken SSRIs myself.
Posted by Racer on July 5, 2007, at 1:25:48
In reply to Re: Please be civil, posted by Sigismund on July 4, 2007, at 23:49:40
While I was on Paxil, I experienced anorgasmia. Once I stopped it, the anorgasmia went away.
On Effexor, I experienced difficulty reaching orgasm. Cyproheptidine fixed it, and once I stopped the medication, I had no problems. (And it wasn't total anorgasmia, either time. It was possible, just very difficult and mostly unlikely.)
I've taken antidepressants for years. I have taken SSRIs and SNRIs for years, and have no problems with my sexuality. None of the difficulties I had one the drugs has lasted after reducing the drugs to taper off, let alone after stopping.
I take Prozac now. Trust me -- orgasm is not a problem for me.
What's more, I have taken SSRIs and SNRIs for most of the past two decades now. I feel -- honestly, I guess I feel unheard, or unheeded, when I read that something bad happens to "everyone" who takes one of these drugs. They have, several times, saved my life. If you'd like to say that that makes me an outlier, that's fine. You're welcome to say that my experience is totally unrepresentative of the whole. It probably is, since my diagnosis is now chronic depression, rather than garden variety, and I am also officially treatment resistant. But I have known many people who took SSRIs and SNRIs and experienced nothing but the benefits.
And I feel worried when I read posts saying that these medications cause permanent damage. I worry that, if I had seen this sort of thing before starting Paxil all those years ago, I wouldn't have taken it -- and my life might have ended at that point. Despite all the pain those years have had, I would have missed out on so much. I'm afraid that someone in a similar condition might read these posts, and refuse to take a medication which could save them so much misery, and possibly keep them alive.
So, personally, I am grateful that these drugs exist. I dislike their side effects, and I could certainly have lived without the sexual side effects and the weight gain, but you know what? I'm still grateful that these drugs existed, and that I was given them. I would have ended my life if I had not had the relief that these drugs brought.
And when we talk about how rotten some of these drugs are, how about remembering those who have had good results, or whose results were good enough to keep them alive or functional. It may be selfish of me, but I believe that our experiences deserve respect, too.
Racer, posting personally.
Posted by Justherself54 on July 5, 2007, at 6:12:45
In reply to Well... » Sigismund, posted by Racer on July 5, 2007, at 1:25:48
> While I was on Paxil, I experienced anorgasmia. Once I stopped it, the anorgasmia went away.
>
> On Effexor, I experienced difficulty reaching orgasm. Cyproheptidine fixed it, and once I stopped the medication, I had no problems. (And it wasn't total anorgasmia, either time. It was possible, just very difficult and mostly unlikely.)
>
> I've taken antidepressants for years. I have taken SSRIs and SNRIs for years, and have no problems with my sexuality. None of the difficulties I had one the drugs has lasted after reducing the drugs to taper off, let alone after stopping.
>
> I take Prozac now. Trust me -- orgasm is not a problem for me.
>
> What's more, I have taken SSRIs and SNRIs for most of the past two decades now. I feel -- honestly, I guess I feel unheard, or unheeded, when I read that something bad happens to "everyone" who takes one of these drugs. They have, several times, saved my life. If you'd like to say that that makes me an outlier, that's fine. You're welcome to say that my experience is totally unrepresentative of the whole. It probably is, since my diagnosis is now chronic depression, rather than garden variety, and I am also officially treatment resistant. But I have known many people who took SSRIs and SNRIs and experienced nothing but the benefits.
>
> And I feel worried when I read posts saying that these medications cause permanent damage. I worry that, if I had seen this sort of thing before starting Paxil all those years ago, I wouldn't have taken it -- and my life might have ended at that point. Despite all the pain those years have had, I would have missed out on so much. I'm afraid that someone in a similar condition might read these posts, and refuse to take a medication which could save them so much misery, and possibly keep them alive.
>
> So, personally, I am grateful that these drugs exist. I dislike their side effects, and I could certainly have lived without the sexual side effects and the weight gain, but you know what? I'm still grateful that these drugs existed, and that I was given them. I would have ended my life if I had not had the relief that these drugs brought.
>
> And when we talk about how rotten some of these drugs are, how about remembering those who have had good results, or whose results were good enough to keep them alive or functional. It may be selfish of me, but I believe that our experiences deserve respect, too.
>
> Racer, posting personally.I agree with everything that you've posted, many of these drugs have kept me alive..sexual side effects, weight gain and the whole shebang and I'm grateful they are available. I can remember being on a chat board while trying to get the nerve up to take my first serequel..I was terrified I would get tartive kinesia or some other horrible side effect..with the support of members who were taking serequel, it helped relieve some of my fears and it turned out to be a very helpful med for me..
All I've tried to say in my previous post, is when someone makes a generalization, usually in my opionion, out of frustration and anger, can we not respond to them as a community to help them, simply by pointing out their statements are generalizations and perhaps ask them to share their experiences? This is where the experienced members can help direct them to resources they may be unaware of..this route, to me, would be more productive than blocking, which just seems to stir the pot even more..
Once again, I'm talking about generalized statements, not rude or uncivil posts, which do need to be nipped in the bud..
The person who feels his sexuality is ruined forever and the person who feels there is no support for withdrawal from meds are stating what they truly believe..and however disturbing they may be to some readers, that's where the experienced posters should step in and draw them into some constructive dialog if possible..
Posted by zazenducke on July 5, 2007, at 10:41:11
In reply to Re: blocked » Vlad_Dracul, posted by Dr. Bob on July 4, 2007, at 22:13:29
Bobbus,
I do not believe posters should be impaled upon the lance of blockage without evidence.
As you well know there are those who have been blocked mistakenly by you after this sort of vague accusation.
Please present evidence before accusing people of double posting and inflicting punishment upon them.
Your friend
zazenducke
>
> Also, when you're blocked, you're not supposed to post, so I'm going to block this name and double the duration of your other block.
>
> But please don't take this personally, this doesn't mean I don't like you or think you're a bad person.
>
> If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, please first see the FAQ:
>
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#enforce
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bob
Posted by Sigismund on July 5, 2007, at 15:04:00
In reply to Well... » Sigismund, posted by Racer on July 5, 2007, at 1:25:48
Hello Racer
I remember your posts about cypro and SSRIs and am a little take aback that you imply I would discount your experience.
You don't think there is a conflict of something or other for blocking Linkadge on just this issue?
Having said this I really don't care.
I would just like to feel that being here was worth it, both for others and myself, and maybe one day I might.All of the people I recall claiming to have been adversely affected by SSRIs are men.
I wonder if that's right?
Posted by Phillipa on July 5, 2007, at 19:09:14
In reply to Re: Generalizations, posted by Justherself54 on July 5, 2007, at 6:12:45
Linkage is a very experienced poster and has helped many others with his research. I have to step in and say that he's been here before me which was about three years ago now. Love Phillipa
Posted by fayeroe on July 5, 2007, at 21:57:45
In reply to Re: Well... » Racer, posted by Sigismund on July 5, 2007, at 15:04:00
i know lots of women that are adversely affected by SSRIs when it comes to sexual issues.
i wonder sometimes how this site works as being supportive to one's mental/big picture health?
Posted by Phillipa on July 5, 2007, at 22:55:07
In reply to Re: Well... » Sigismund, posted by fayeroe on July 5, 2007, at 21:57:45
You know I was thinking while showering sometimes yes I do think and the topic was meds and s*x. First a lot of issues. One they have studied men and women and men think about sex all the time women not as much that one issue. Another one is your age as when I was a child it was a no no to even utter the word or touch yourself. I was punished once as a three year old for that. So it left an impression on me s*x is bad. They my generation men were superior and women submitted. Ex did as he wanted and got mad when I found out about orgasm after having two kids so I tuned it out. Then came the flower children free s*x everywhere and it was the greatest so a lot of women were allowed to enjoy s*x. And the third concerns people with mental health issues like maybe me and that different dianosis can create different things like the diagnosis of mania spend too much money, phone calls in the middle of the night, flashy clothing and promiscuity. So I feel that there are many causes for great or less sexuality. For me fear was put in me so it was not important for me at all cuddling is important to me. I'm sure a lot of others will have imput. Cultural too. So many variables. Think about it. See I value the quality of my mental health more than s*x where someone else may value it the opposite. No right or wrongs. Just a huge world. And also as we age desire goes down for women when estrogen goes down.And then there are those who have diseases or are injured and can't. So much to think about. Love Phillipa
Posted by confuzyq on July 6, 2007, at 0:30:52
In reply to Re: Generalizations, posted by Justherself54 on July 5, 2007, at 6:12:45
To balance out the other things I tend to focus on on admin, I'll say that this "reprimand" I can understand, on strictly *procedural* counts, not anything whatsoever about the poster or his intentions. Unless -- as someone said, these long-term effects were shown in several established sources as facts.
Someone new here and not knowing the drill, conventions and relationships of the meds boards could be scared out of their wits at these notions... Which many may feel is fact but I gather consists of anecdotal evidence only. We have to be so careful not to unintentionally discourage others in trying to fight what is killing them.
I am way less experienced about this stuff than most med board posters, but still, I think it is so essential to phrase these things as anecdotal only. (I didn't read any more of the thread than appears here on admin.) And in this kind of case, to me it is clearly no judgment or disparagement of the poster, just a technical violation, such as a speeding ticket would be.
Yes, it may be important for even newbies here to hear about the range of caveats; but not to first encounter them as proven, universally accepted facts. True that the dynamics of this board are such that often opinion presented as fact is balanced out by the opinions and experiences and factual offerings of others; but absolute reliance on that -- especially on threads about subjects that recur often -- can't be counted upon. And would constitute a lot of responsibility and pressure on everyone otherwise.
Lastly, I imagine that the further we get entrenched in our inability to fix what's broke, lasting depression, etc.; the less we can really be sure what part the drugs play in impeding sexuality, and what part is merely due to growing frustration and other ramifications of not being able to "fix it" yet....
> > While I was on Paxil, I experienced anorgasmia. Once I stopped it, the anorgasmia went away.
> >
> > On Effexor, I experienced difficulty reaching orgasm. Cyproheptidine fixed it, and once I stopped the medication, I had no problems. (And it wasn't total anorgasmia, either time. It was possible, just very difficult and mostly unlikely.)
> >
> > I've taken antidepressants for years. I have taken SSRIs and SNRIs for years, and have no problems with my sexuality. None of the difficulties I had one the drugs has lasted after reducing the drugs to taper off, let alone after stopping.
> >
> > I take Prozac now. Trust me -- orgasm is not a problem for me.
> >
> > What's more, I have taken SSRIs and SNRIs for most of the past two decades now. I feel -- honestly, I guess I feel unheard, or unheeded, when I read that something bad happens to "everyone" who takes one of these drugs. They have, several times, saved my life. If you'd like to say that that makes me an outlier, that's fine. You're welcome to say that my experience is totally unrepresentative of the whole. It probably is, since my diagnosis is now chronic depression, rather than garden variety, and I am also officially treatment resistant. But I have known many people who took SSRIs and SNRIs and experienced nothing but the benefits.
> >
> > And I feel worried when I read posts saying that these medications cause permanent damage. I worry that, if I had seen this sort of thing before starting Paxil all those years ago, I wouldn't have taken it -- and my life might have ended at that point. Despite all the pain those years have had, I would have missed out on so much. I'm afraid that someone in a similar condition might read these posts, and refuse to take a medication which could save them so much misery, and possibly keep them alive.
> >
> > So, personally, I am grateful that these drugs exist. I dislike their side effects, and I could certainly have lived without the sexual side effects and the weight gain, but you know what? I'm still grateful that these drugs existed, and that I was given them. I would have ended my life if I had not had the relief that these drugs brought.
> >
> > And when we talk about how rotten some of these drugs are, how about remembering those who have had good results, or whose results were good enough to keep them alive or functional. It may be selfish of me, but I believe that our experiences deserve respect, too.
> >
> > Racer, posting personally.
>
> I agree with everything that you've posted, many of these drugs have kept me alive..sexual side effects, weight gain and the whole shebang and I'm grateful they are available. I can remember being on a chat board while trying to get the nerve up to take my first serequel..I was terrified I would get tartive kinesia or some other horrible side effect..with the support of members who were taking serequel, it helped relieve some of my fears and it turned out to be a very helpful med for me..
>
> All I've tried to say in my previous post, is when someone makes a generalization, usually in my opionion, out of frustration and anger, can we not respond to them as a community to help them, simply by pointing out their statements are generalizations and perhaps ask them to share their experiences? This is where the experienced members can help direct them to resources they may be unaware of..this route, to me, would be more productive than blocking, which just seems to stir the pot even more..
>
> Once again, I'm talking about generalized statements, not rude or uncivil posts, which do need to be nipped in the bud..
>
> The person who feels his sexuality is ruined forever and the person who feels there is no support for withdrawal from meds are stating what they truly believe..and however disturbing they may be to some readers, that's where the experienced posters should step in and draw them into some constructive dialog if possible..
>
>
Posted by fayeroe on July 6, 2007, at 7:03:35
In reply to Re: Generalizations, posted by confuzyq on July 6, 2007, at 0:30:52
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 6, 2007, at 17:40:01
In reply to Re: Generalizations, posted by confuzyq on July 6, 2007, at 0:30:52
> when someone makes a generalization, usually in my opionion, out of frustration and anger, can we not respond to them as a community to help them, simply by pointing out their statements are generalizations and perhaps ask them to share their experiences? ... this route, to me, would be more productive than blocking
>
> Justherself54I agree, it would be best to prevent blocks.
> And in this kind of case, to me it is clearly no judgment or disparagement of the poster, just a technical violation, such as a speeding ticket would be.
>
> confuzyqIn all cases, actually...
Bob
Posted by zeugma on July 8, 2007, at 16:47:48
In reply to Re: blocking, posted by Dr. Bob on July 6, 2007, at 17:40:01
> >
>
> > And in this kind of case, to me it is clearly no judgment or disparagement of the poster, just a technical violation, such as a speeding ticket would be.
> >
> > confuzyq
>
> In all cases, actually...
>
> Bob>>Speeding tickets are not given for 'technical' violations.
A police officer who fails to read a defendant his Miranda Rights will have the subsequent confession thrown out on technical grounds.
But there is nothing 'technical' about being given a ticket for breaking the speed limit.
Substantive law and procedural (or 'technical')law are utterly distinct.
One involves an offense. The other does not.
Whitewashing this distinction only serves the purpose of obfuscation.
-z
Posted by confuzyq on July 8, 2007, at 18:01:50
In reply to false analogy » Dr. Bob, posted by zeugma on July 8, 2007, at 16:47:48
...that was my own bad analogy. :-( I think the only part of it that Bob was commenting on was the "...no judgment or disparagement of the poster" part (claiming that reprimands never are).
> >
> > > And in this kind of case, to me it is clearly no judgment or disparagement of the poster, just a technical violation, such as a speeding ticket would be.
> > >
> > > confuzyq
> >
> > In all cases, actually...
> >
> > Bob>>
>
> Speeding tickets are not given for 'technical' violations.
>
> A police officer who fails to read a defendant his Miranda Rights will have the subsequent confession thrown out on technical grounds.
>
> But there is nothing 'technical' about being given a ticket for breaking the speed limit.
>
> Substantive law and procedural (or 'technical')law are utterly distinct.
>
> One involves an offense. The other does not.
>
> Whitewashing this distinction only serves the purpose of obfuscation.
>
> -z
>
>
Posted by muffled on July 8, 2007, at 18:12:48
In reply to Re: blocking, posted by Dr. Bob on July 6, 2007, at 17:40:01
> > when someone makes a generalization, usually in my opionion, out of frustration and anger, can we not respond to them as a community to help them, simply by pointing out their statements are generalizations and perhaps ask them to share their experiences? ... this route, to me, would be more productive than blocking
> I agree, it would be best to prevent blocks.**but not always easy...
>
> > And in this kind of case, to me it is clearly no judgment or disparagement of the poster, just a technical violation, such as a speeding ticket would be.**no judgement????oh I FEEL judged when I was blocked...
I was bad. So I was blocked. Bad me.Punished. I said f*rt one time :-( BLOCKED. Hurt, hurt, hurt, cuz it was so unexpected. Tried to post, but couldn't, didn't know why????felt ashamed when I realized I was blocked.
Its not like a speeding ticket, that just a fine...
Here you are made to feel shame and are isolated and muffled from speaking. Only place is chat, IF there's someone there. Or whats worse, is when you read the post of a hurting friend and wanto respond to and can't :-(> In all cases, actually...
>
> Bob:-(
M
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.