![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 13 to 37 of 72. Go back in thread:
Posted by Racer on May 2, 2006, at 12:54:46
In reply to Accusing another Poster, posted by verne on May 1, 2006, at 21:11:01
> "Quite aside from the civility guidelines here, it seems a bit hypocritical to say, "all white Southerners are alike."
>
> Is accusing a poster of being hypocritical civil?
>I really wasn't trying to say that BrianBoru was hypocritical, although I can see that I expressed myself badly. I was trying to point out, though, that it could certainly come across as hypocrisy when someone who suggests that he was victimized because of his race then applies a similar sort of generalization to another race. I was trying to ask him to turn what he was saying around, and think about how he would feel if the same sort of thinking was applied to him.
I guess I was trying to say that The Golden Rule might come into play in the thread in question.
I'm very sorry if BrianBoru interprets what I wrote in the same way you apparently have, Verne.
Posted by Estella on May 8, 2006, at 18:35:42
In reply to Re: Accusing another Poster » verne, posted by Racer on May 2, 2006, at 12:54:46
verne's interpretation reminded me of bob's interpretation regarding hypocracy and nuclear weapons.
i was trying to get at the golden rule too.
Posted by Racer on May 9, 2006, at 20:55:24
In reply to Re: Accusing another Poster, posted by Estella on May 8, 2006, at 18:35:42
Posted by Estella on May 9, 2006, at 21:28:27
In reply to Thank you for your support (nm) » Estella, posted by Racer on May 9, 2006, at 20:55:24
I don't think you should get blocked for what you said.
I think your intention was clear.
And it was good.I'm just trying to point out that it is analogous to what I said...
I don't think I should have gotten blocked for what I said.
I think my intention was clear.
And it was good.I wasn't trying to be supportive exactly...
But I certainly wasn't trying to be unsupportive.I wasn't trying to advocate that you get blocked...
I was trying to point out that if you don't think you should get blocked...
Then to be consistent you shouldn't think I should have been blocked either...When Scambuster was here he was pointing out a few things that people didn't like. He didn't exactly point them out in a way that was easy to take... But people moved on in and (the way it seemed to me) Tried to get him tied in verbal knots tried to get him to step out of line so he would be blocked. So he would stop saying those things. So he would be silenced.
And I perceived the same thing to be happening with me. People trying to get me to be silent. Giving me warnings aka 'you better shut up or you are going to be blocked for a long time'.
Nobody was supportive to me
Nobody was supportive to my pain
They were more interested in getting me labeled as uncivil
They were more interested in getting me blocked
They were more interested in getting me to shut up.And that is my perception.
And my perception may have been out of kilter...
And maybe it was...
But if it was... It was because I was so very upset.
I was so very upset.And so there is your hurt...
And there is my hurt...But IMHO what one must really worry about...
Is deputies acting from their hurt
Because they have the power to
Whereas posters acting from their hurt
Get blocked.I don't think people should be blocked.
But IMHO
Deputies need to know about people hurting...
And how to support them to deescalate the situation
And if a deputy moves in and labels incivilities...
And escalates the situation to a block to silence the other person then IMHO that is an abuse of power..And I don't know what went on
My perceptions are screwey 'cause I was hurtingBut you live you learn etc.
Posted by Dinah on May 10, 2006, at 8:38:09
In reply to Re: Thank you for your support » Racer, posted by Estella on May 9, 2006, at 21:28:27
Just so you, and others, know. The deputies have worked out an agreement where we try very hard not to act in threads we're involved in. Either a neutral party takes it on, or we wait for Dr. Bob. And neither neutral deputies nor Bob necessarily see things in the same light we do. I guess if there's a real conflagration going on, we might have to do something, but try to do it as neutrally as possible, and try to leave posts involving us for someone else.
If *our* feelings are hurt, we have the same recourse any other posters have. I was in an email dispute with Dr. Bob over my feelings being hurt not too long ago. (No, not you, Estella.) And I lost. And I'm a wee bit angry about it. Just like any other poster.
Posted by gardenergirl on May 10, 2006, at 10:50:45
In reply to Re: Thank you for your support » Estella, posted by Dinah on May 10, 2006, at 8:38:09
Posted by verne on May 10, 2006, at 22:14:13
In reply to Re: Accusing another Poster, posted by Estella on May 8, 2006, at 18:35:42
Thanks for your support. Let's join in an alliance of mutual support and defend each other from outsiders?
If someone ruffles your feathers, I'll run to your aid and undermine the *inquisitors* and then thank the bejesus out of you. Isn't that the way it's done? Just the thank the f*ck out of your friend!
Did you ever see the wonderful film: "Quest For Fire"? Next to "Unfaithful", it's the most *beautiful* movie I"ve ever seen.
Unfaithful is the absolutely most sensual, beautiful movie. I don't even like Richard Gere or Diane Lane much - that's how much I love this movie!
But Quest. Not Lara Croft. The fake elephants are stupid (but unimportant) otherwise this film hurt me and touched me. I guess if something hurts you, it touches you.
It's just a two-star low-budget affair. (I mean, people spent time their spare time in small African jails instead of luxury trailors. That's filming in Africa.)
Another poster is sort of riding me on politcal, can you come and lend your "support"? Just throw in something "supportive" and we'll shut 'em up!
ove erve
Posted by verne on May 10, 2006, at 22:16:45
In reply to Quest For Fire, posted by verne on May 10, 2006, at 22:14:13
The correct link for "Quest For Fire" and "Unfaithful" are:
Posted by verne on May 10, 2006, at 22:18:40
In reply to CORRECT LINKS, posted by verne on May 10, 2006, at 22:16:45
The default links are insane. Not anywhere close to what might have been thought, dreamed, or intuited. Just a postscript.
i'm outta here
Posted by Estella on May 11, 2006, at 3:37:14
In reply to Re: CORRECT LINKS, posted by verne on May 10, 2006, at 22:18:40
?
My interpretations are screwey...
But I interpreted sarcasm.
Then...
I thought about it some more and I'm not sure how to interpret it.
But given the context...
I figure Racer is probably pissed with me about now...If you perceive people as supporting one another...
Is that what you find?
That you feel like people are mutually turning on you?Because you feel out of the circle of support?
I used to post supportive posts to you.
At least... I used to try.But I don't know that you liked them.
So I've fairly much stopped doing it.
I avoid you mostly truth be told.
Because a lot of the time I feel like my posts to you only result in more hurt / upset.I'm sorry.
Posted by Estella on May 11, 2006, at 3:38:01
In reply to Re: CORRECT LINKS, posted by Estella on May 11, 2006, at 3:37:14
though no more sarcasm than i used when i thanked her for her support a couple weeks ago.
sigh.
anybody seeing a cycle here?
Posted by verne on May 11, 2006, at 7:46:33
In reply to Re: CORRECT LINKS, posted by Estella on May 11, 2006, at 3:38:01
I'm sorry Estella.
My only problem is the round-about "thank you for your support" sort of stuff. (not you)
"thank you for support" in direct opposition to a bit of contention I raised. Nowhere does anyone really talk about my concerns.
It just turns into anothe SUPPORT FEST and ALLIANCES. Geez, someone is cranky with so-and-so, let's just lend our support rather than even think about what's going on.
These, "Thank You For Your Support" are just daggers of NON SUPPORT into whoever happens to be on the other end.
So, in the end, not really supportive at all.
I'm not your biggest fan, I know you're not mine - our relationship isn't the issue. I come back to: "THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT". How is that supportive, hanging by itself without no explanation? It's more UNSUPPORTIVE and DIVISIVE.
Anyway, I'm tired of this crap. You started to get real lately but went back to the drbob "supportive" thing. You won't get anything real from me when you go that route.
I'm so done with this place. I don't value this site any more or less because I'm DONE with it, please don't value it more because you are INVOLVED IN IT. Let's not let that cloud our perception.
Can I get blocked for life if I say I dislike the way you argue crap from every which way? Please let me be blocked. F*ck Support, what do you call the extensive and labored aruging you call posting? Is that making people feel better somehow? Crap, you don't even know which side your arguing half the f*cking time!
So, please don't bring up SUPPORT. That's not what you do. Be honest with yourself.
I respect you for finally coming clean and telling everybody to take a flying leap last week. Now you're being careful again and basically pedalling the babble pc crap.
I'm sorry I've been hard on you. I don't know you enough to dislike you so let's skip that problem and get down to - I just hate long argumentive posts about nothing from boths sides of nothing.
Clear that up and we're fine.
verne
Posted by verne on May 11, 2006, at 9:24:16
In reply to Re: CORRECT LINKS, posted by verne on May 11, 2006, at 7:46:33
Dr Bob, could you take a flying leap? I mean this in the most unsupportive, derisive, way possible.
I mean, by leap, just go f*ck yourself, not like jump off something.
Now that I'm blocked forever, I just wanted to say you have a wonderful site that helps oodles of people. I really don't have a problem with you personally and I'd probably admit liking you if someone held my foot to a fire. (actually you're fine in my book, with or without the fire)
As Toph, would say, I'm "falling on my sword" - and what better place than the administrative forum. (I'll let others add Shakespeare and weep in the appropriate places, I just don't know much WS)
So when I say, "take a flying leap", I mean it in the best possible way. You know, the *sword* thing and all (for me, not you). Please don't take this literally, I'm fine, talked with two pastors this morning, stable, got lots of appointments, I'm set yet not kidding myself.
love to all,
Verne
Posted by Dinah on May 11, 2006, at 9:33:36
In reply to Re: CORRECT LINKS, posted by verne on May 11, 2006, at 7:46:33
> Can I get blocked for life if I say I dislike the way you argue crap from every which way?
Not for life, but you've been asked to follow the civility guidelines before, so I'm afraid I'm going to have to block you. I'll let Dr. Bob apply his new formula to determine the length of the block.
Follow-ups regarding these issues as well as replies to the above posts should of course themselves be civil.
Dinah, acting as deputy for Dr. Bob
Posted by Dinah on May 11, 2006, at 9:37:04
In reply to Blocked » verne, posted by Dinah on May 11, 2006, at 9:33:36
Dr. Bob can always overturn and reverse or adjust deputy actions. If you have any concerns about this administrative action, you can email Dr. Bob, whose address is at the bottom of this page.
Posted by Estella on May 11, 2006, at 10:25:45
In reply to Blocked » verne, posted by Dinah on May 11, 2006, at 9:33:36
> > Can I get blocked for life if I say I dislike the way you argue crap from every which way?
Just for the record I'm not feeling hurt or accused or put down or anything like that in response to the above statement. And I'd rather Verne wasn't blocked over it because I'd rather he get to still hang around and talk about this stuff some more.
I don't mean that to be unsupportive of Dinah's decision...
But I am having a little trouble with the blocking system etc.
And I'm just saying that what he said doesn't upset me.
I do argue things every which way.
Fact.
And I don't see that as a bad thing.
IMHO it is a good thing to be able to consider the arguments on both sides.
Verne mightn't like it
But IMO he is entitled to his opinion.
And I'm not taking it personally.
Posted by Estella on May 11, 2006, at 10:43:45
In reply to Re: CORRECT LINKS, posted by verne on May 11, 2006, at 7:46:33
> "thank you for support" in direct opposition to a bit of contention I raised.
> It just turns into anothe SUPPORT FEST and ALLIANCES. Geez, someone is cranky with so-and-so, let's just lend our support rather than even think about what's going on.
Ah. I think I get what you mean. I think sometimes people struggle with what is being said... And they feel a bit unsafe / insecure / nervous about what is said. And so people do offer support to one another. And I guess one thing that does... Is that sometimes it might well appear that it is about supportive alliances. And that those supportive alliances are really about being unsupportive to the person who is trying to get people thinking...
> Nowhere does anyone really talk about my concerns.
Which concerns?
> You started to get real lately...You mean because I acted out of anger?
> but went back to the drbob "supportive" thing.
Because I realised I said things that hurt people I cared about. I don't know how things go with your daughter... My guess would be that if you act out of anger... And hurt her... Then you kind of have some repairing to do. IMHO it isn't about acting on Dr Bob's instruction that we support each other... It was about my appreciating that I hurt my friends.
> I'm so done with this place. I don't value this site any more or less because I'm DONE with it, please don't value it more because you are INVOLVED IN IT. Let's not let that cloud our perception.You are involved. You are here. You read. You post. You read.
Sounds to me like you FEEL like an outsider here....
And that you PERCEIVE you are an outsider here....I guess what I wonder about that is how much of it is fulfilling what you expect to happen. You think people won't accept you so you tend to interpret their comments as being unsupportive of you.
Like I said... I tried offering support to you... But I couldn't figure how to do that in a way that led to your feeling happier or appreciating my efforts rather than feeling unhappy with me or perceiving me to be attacking or hurting or something like that.
And I didn't want to upset you... So I figured I didn't know how to reach out to you and I had better leave you alone.
By "real" do you mean expressing your feelings?
Are people "more real" to you when they are expressing your feelings (ie of anger etc)?
> Can I get blocked for life if I say I dislike the way you argue crap from every which way?I hope not.
It is a skill I learned. To try and consider the best arguments from both sides and hence come to a considered opinion. Of course the arguments that are most intuitively compelling varies as a function of how one is feeling (among other things) but oh well fact: people have psychology.
In the words of Wittgenstein...
The aim is not to spare other people the trouble of thinking but rather to stimulate them to thoughts of their own.
> what do you call the extensive and labored aruging you call posting?
maybe also but never just. i have lots of posts. not all of them are arguments. perhaps you are focusing on that which you do not like...
>Is that making people feel better somehow?
are your posts making people feel better somehow? i thought you agreed that isn't the only thing of importance...
> Crap, you don't even know which side your arguing half the f*cking time!
Maybe that is because I'm not trying to argue a side. maybe it is because i am sharing thoughts / arguments and people can take what they will...
> So, please don't bring up SUPPORT. That's not what you do. Be honest with yourself.its what i do sometimes.
and i think it is probably what you do sometimes too.
> I just hate long argumentive posts about nothing from boths sides of nothing.
>
> Clear that up and we're fine.you are of course free to ignore my posts if they are not to your taste.
Posted by Dinah on May 11, 2006, at 11:11:00
In reply to Re: CORRECT LINKS » verne, posted by Estella on May 11, 2006, at 10:43:45
You know, people do manage to spur their own selves to thinking on occasion. :) And can be nudged into thinking about what you want them to think about with just a few gentle open ended questions.
Think of us as responsive riding horses rather than mules?
I always get a bit offended when I think someone thinks they need to prod or spur me to think. And when I'm offended I tend to think the opposite of what people wish for me to think.
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. And if so, I apologize.
Posted by gardenergirl on May 11, 2006, at 13:31:04
In reply to Re: Blocked, posted by Estella on May 11, 2006, at 10:25:45
I'm glad you don't feel accused or put down by verne's post. It's never a fun feeling to feel that way in my experience.
I just wanted to point something out. This may or may not be relevant to your post, but anyway, here it is.
Although Dinah cited one part of the post when she blocked verne, that doesn't necessarily mean that the quoted section was the sole reason for the block. It appeared to me that another section of the post was not about/directed to just you, per se. Thus, if one is considering whether a person could feel accused or put down by verne's post, there are more "people in Bob's head" as you've put it ;) than just the person the post replied to, in this case you.
From my own perspective, when I write a "blocked" post in response to a post which contains multiple statements which could be considered uncivil, it can be difficult to know exactly what to quote from the post. I don't want to hammer out a laundry list of quotes, but I also don't want my choice to imply that one statement might be more "block-worthy" than another when there more than one in a post. Similarly, when there are multiple posts which could be cited in a block, it can appear that the posts that don't get cited are acceptable under civility guidelines when they might not be.
Just wanted to share this. It could be totally extraneous, and if so, feel fee to ignore. :)
gg
Posted by Larry Hoover on May 11, 2006, at 13:39:02
In reply to verne's block » Estella, posted by gardenergirl on May 11, 2006, at 13:31:04
> I also don't want my choice to imply that one statement might be more "block-worthy" than another when there more than one in a post. Similarly, when there are multiple posts which could be cited in a block, it can appear that the posts that don't get cited are acceptable under civility guidelines when they might not be.
GG, it is not extraneous to note these extra facts. It is my belief that extra information of this sort is an important thing for the deputy/Bob to acknowledge. It could be simply put, as a subordinate clause. Nothing fancy required. Better noted, methinks, than silent.
Lar
Posted by Declan on May 11, 2006, at 15:24:50
In reply to No Offense, posted by verne on May 11, 2006, at 9:24:16
Posted by zazenduck on May 11, 2006, at 17:56:48
In reply to He's done it!!!! (nm) » verne, posted by Declan on May 11, 2006, at 15:24:50
I hope your block is everything you want it to be :)
Posted by Estella on May 11, 2006, at 20:05:30
In reply to Re: CORRECT LINKS » Estella, posted by Dinah on May 11, 2006, at 11:11:00
it was a quote from wittgenstein.
> You know, people do manage to spur their own selves to thinking on occasion.
of course.
i didn't mean that people weren't thinking.
i meant that i was providing some material to think about.urgency.
sometimes i feel a sense of urgency.
sometimes it feels like things get talked around and talked around...
mostly so things will be forgotten about and put away.
i didn't want that to happen.
i'm sorry
Posted by Estella on May 11, 2006, at 20:24:30
In reply to verne's block » Estella, posted by gardenergirl on May 11, 2006, at 13:31:04
> It appeared to me that another section of the post was not about/directed to just you, per se. Thus, if one is considering whether a person could feel accused or put down by verne's post, there are more "people in Bob's head" as you've put it ;) than just the person the post replied to, in this case you.
Right. I suppose that people *might* feel offended.
What was Verne saying?
My understanding... The thing that really sticks out for me...
Is that he feels like an outsider here.
He doesn't really feel like part of things.
He interprets the support
As being negatively directed
Against the person who is disagreeing with the person who is offering support.
And so he thinks the support is phoneyAnd yet...
He must want to fit in to a certain degree 'cause he is / was still here...
Maybe Verne isn't so clear on how much he is seeing the boards the way they "really" are vs how much he is projecting out on to the boards.He gets blocked because he didn't get that distinction hence he thought the boards were a certain way hence he says things out of anger...
And people could help him...
Or maybe they don't get the distinction either
Hence they might well feel all offended
And try and get Verne blocked.:-(
(This isn't meant to be unsupportive of gg I'm just trying to say something about why I think a block harms more than helps in this kind of situation. Couldn't deputies (and other posters) step in and try and help so that others are less likely to feel offended? So that a hurting person doesn't have to be blocked? And how long is he going to get for that anyway? What if I said that other posters being blocked... Is something that offends and hurts me?)
And when Verne comes back (if he comes back) then what has he learned?
He has learned that he has to shut the hell up if he wants to not get blocked. And hence IMHO he is even more likely to lash out and rebel.
Because sometimes people prefer pre emptive strike to hanging ones head to ones likely fate
And again... How is this helping?
Posted by NikkiT2 on May 12, 2006, at 3:48:32
In reply to Re: verne's block » gardenergirl, posted by Estella on May 11, 2006, at 20:24:30
>Couldn't deputies (and other posters) step in and try and help so that others are less likely to feel offended?
but, we're not therapists, or pdocs or psychologists here ( as a rule). We're not trained in conflict resolution.
Sometimes, I guess, people need to take responsibility for their own actions..
Personally, I would rather feel safe here with things the way they are.. Safe from knowing I cannot be attacked.
have you ever had a "cyber stalker"? Someone who discovers websites you post on, follows you there and continually posts personal information about you and incredibly upsetting abusive messages? I have, for many many years... But here I always knew was safe, as if he ever found me here (which luckily he didn't, as I used my RT name, not my commonly known virtual-name) I knew I would be protected by the rules and blocks.
I guess the problems is.. there are a chunk of us who like it here as it is, yet there is another chunk who want PB to be *their* way.. This has happened regularly over the years I have been here (and seen it just about all other sites I use that "have rules").
I'm tired of PB these days.. I find the arguing of so many small points to be very very tiring. And you know what, its making me forget the good points and the goo people.. Which is very sad
Nikki
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.