![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 22 of 22. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by KAL44 on March 19, 2008, at 23:30:16
I have read a few posts and so I don't know what happened that some were deleted, but it sure sounds like babble is in a crash and burn stage from what I am reading. I understand now that the deputies have more responsibility with Dr. Bob not around much anymore. I am concerned that if someone is a friend or liked, that person might get preferential treatment. I say this as it happened to me in the past - both ways - given back channel cautions of what to do, and then the other way, being blocked for something fairly minor. I am very reluctant to post anymore about much of anything and am paranoid enough now to wonder if I will get blocked for saying what I think and saying something about my experiences.
Posted by Dinah on March 20, 2008, at 0:45:47
In reply to Crash and burn, posted by KAL44 on March 19, 2008, at 23:30:16
I didn't mean what I said quite so literally.
I didn't mean that Dr. Bob wouldn't be around much anymore. While he sometimes isn't, I meant it more in a philosophical way. And I was describing what I'd already seen, in terms of *this* topic. Not an impending change.
Nor has he even validated what I said.
Don't worry. He'll still be around to keep us in line, should we need keeping in line. I just framed it in terms of support. But it works either way.
Given how darn hard I work at being impartial, though, I feel a bit hurt that it appears not to show.
Posted by gardenergirl on March 20, 2008, at 9:59:42
In reply to Re: Crash and burn » KAL44, posted by Dinah on March 20, 2008, at 0:45:47
> Given how darn hard I work at being impartial, though, I feel a bit hurt that it appears not to show.Dinah, don't forget to factor in the quality of the "evidence" that someone in general might be basing such an assumption on. If a person believes a post is uncivil when in actuality it is not according to the site guidelines, then they might interpret no action from the admin. team as something other than an appropriate response (or non-response as it were) to a civil post. Even when that "non-response" is the same approach admin. takes to all civil posts. It's possible the effect of the misunderstanding about the civility of a post on the assumption of favoritism could be minimized if there could be a dialog between the deputy and the poster, but that is not always possible, i.e. if Babblemail is not turned on.
So what can you do? Be true to yourself and your integrity. Answer questions honestly and thoughtfully when asked. Remind yourself that sometimes we hold certain beliefs even in the face of apparently contradicting evidence, for whatever reason, but what's true for one person does not have to be true for anyone else and vice versa.
Dinah, I've seen your integrity in action for years. I have faith in your sense of fairness and how you put it into practice. I apologize to you, however, if my "tippy toeing" along the civility line adds fodder for those who question your judgment. I'm sorry for adding stress to your experience here.
Take care,
gg
Posted by seldomseen on March 20, 2008, at 10:36:38
In reply to Re: Crash and burn » Dinah, posted by gardenergirl on March 20, 2008, at 9:59:42
To me, the deputies are bound by the letter of the civility rules.
Here on Babble there can be a lot of "babble speak" - a particular kind of phrasing that is, according to the babble rules, civil.
Underlying this babblespeak, however, there appears to be a notion of something somewhat different, but that's just my opinion of what can be conveyed.
And, yes, it is, in my opinion, entirely possible to circumvent the spirit of the civility rules.
Unfortunately, the spirit of that "law" is unenforceable as the tone, rhetoric and intent of a post is entirely open to subjective intepretation.
I think if we wanted the deputies to enforce the spirit of the civility rules, then application of the rules would appear much more unequally applied and would create much more strife than the way things are now.
I guess the bottom line is that the site is very clear about several things. One is that even if we feel provoked, we are all still to remain civil.
I think this is one of the cornerstone's of this site not being dominated by arguments and is, overwhelmingly a good thing. Discretion is always the better part of valor.
If we want to post here, then clearly we responsible for sticking to the letter of civility rules. Sticking to the spirit? Well, that is up to the poster.
Just my thoughts
Seldom
Posted by ClearSkies on March 20, 2008, at 10:37:27
In reply to Re: Crash and burn » Dinah, posted by gardenergirl on March 20, 2008, at 9:59:42
> I apologize to you, however, if my "tippy toeing" along the civility line adds fodder for those who question your judgment. I'm sorry for adding stress to your experience here.
>
Interesting comment.
Posted by gardenergirl on March 20, 2008, at 13:19:37
In reply to Re: Crash and burn, posted by ClearSkies on March 20, 2008, at 10:37:27
I probably should have included "alleged" or "so-called" before "tippy-toeing", as that is not my descriptor. Though for the post I made that has allegedly offended at least one, I have to admit I did spend a great deal of time and effort in composing it. I know that the combination of feeling exasperated and wishing to challenge specific statements is one which requires much more editing on my end before I can come up with a civil version of what I wish to express.
And this may have nothing to do with what interested you. :)
gg
Posted by ClearSkies on March 20, 2008, at 16:11:36
In reply to Re: Crash and burn » ClearSkies, posted by gardenergirl on March 20, 2008, at 13:19:37
> I probably should have included "alleged" or "so-called" before "tippy-toeing", as that is not my descriptor. Though for the post I made that has allegedly offended at least one, I have to admit I did spend a great deal of time and effort in composing it. I know that the combination of feeling exasperated and wishing to challenge specific statements is one which requires much more editing on my end before I can come up with a civil version of what I wish to express.
>
> And this may have nothing to do with what interested you. :)
>
> gg
Not at all, GG - that's exactly what interests me. Though not the offended party, I did take note of that post.CS
Posted by Dinah on March 20, 2008, at 18:00:19
In reply to Spirit vs letter of the 'law', posted by seldomseen on March 20, 2008, at 10:36:38
That we are bound by the rules of the site.
I don't even think it would be a good thing for us to start making up rules along the way. It would be easy enough to start PBC'ing anything we found offensive. But IMO, that would lead to far more problems that it would solve.
Posted by Sigismund on March 20, 2008, at 20:02:44
In reply to Spirit vs letter of the 'law', posted by seldomseen on March 20, 2008, at 10:36:38
Thankyou for an enlightening post.
Posted by adelaide curtis on March 20, 2008, at 23:10:02
In reply to Re: Crash and burn » Dinah, posted by gardenergirl on March 20, 2008, at 9:59:42
"Dinah, don't forget to factor in the quality of the "evidence" that someone in general might be basing such an assumption on."
wow...who are these generals? and how come their evidence holds no quality ?
Posted by KAL44 on March 21, 2008, at 22:25:25
In reply to Re: Crash and burn » KAL44, posted by Dinah on March 20, 2008, at 0:45:47
I never named anyone in particular, but it sound like you think I meant you Dianh. I didn't. Oh well. Time for me to go away again and stay away. Having surgery Tuesday anyway and will be out of commission and in no mood to even be around. I tend to get upset by stuff here anyway.
Posted by Dinah on March 22, 2008, at 11:58:20
In reply to Re: Crash and burn » Dinah, posted by KAL44 on March 21, 2008, at 22:25:25
Please don't stay away. It sounds as if you could use some support right now, and I hope that you can find it on Babble.
I didn't necessarily think you were talking about me. It's just that I can't actually speak for anyone but me.
Plus, if a decision is a hard one to make, the deputies tend to come to an agreement. So it isn't always fair to focus on the deputy who actually does something on board. We do this in order to doublecheck our thoughts, and to increase our already scrupulous attempts at making sure that our impressions are in line with the civility rules. So even if you didn't mean me, you might really have, if that makes sense.
Posted by KAL44 on March 22, 2008, at 21:12:19
In reply to Re: Crash and burn » KAL44, posted by Dinah on March 22, 2008, at 11:58:20
I rather felt like everyone was pouncing on me, and so I need to take a break. Actually I am doing fairly well. I am having surgery Tuesday, am off all my meds, and therapy is going extremely well now. So, really I am fine. I tend to get caught up in the stuff of others on the boards, and that can get me down.
Posted by greywolf on March 24, 2008, at 11:17:13
In reply to Thank you for understanding » seldomseen, posted by Dinah on March 20, 2008, at 18:00:19
I took a few months off from these boards to concentrate on therapy and reworking my meds. When I left, controversies involving this board were in full swing, and I come back to see that not much has changed.
I wish everyone could step back and measure how much time and emotion is spent on "administrative" issues in comparison to posts in other areas. It would be nice if everyone's LAST resort was to the admin board, while their first instinct was to spend time in multiple other boards.
I think we sometimes lose sight of how much more important it is to offer support when our knee jerk reaction might be to criticize. Even if criticism is sometimes justified, it is not always warranted.
Greywolf
Posted by Toph on March 24, 2008, at 22:07:30
In reply to Re: Thank you for understanding, posted by greywolf on March 24, 2008, at 11:17:13
> I think we sometimes lose sight of how much more important it is to offer support when our knee jerk reaction might be to criticize. Even if criticism is sometimes justified, it is not always warranted.
>
> GreywolfI would agree on other boards or for Babble in general the purpose is for support. But this board is for administrative issues, so criticism is always warranted.
Posted by greywolf on March 25, 2008, at 4:16:45
In reply to Re: Thank you for understanding, posted by Toph on March 24, 2008, at 21:07:30
>
> > I think we sometimes lose sight of how much more important it is to offer support when our knee jerk reaction might be to criticize. Even if criticism is sometimes justified, it is not always warranted.
> >
> > Greywolf
>
> I would agree on other boards or for Babble in general the purpose is for support. But this board is for administrative issues, so criticism is always warranted.Respectfully, I disagree. In my personal opinion, some of the criticism directed at the deputies and Dr. Bob on this adminstrative board is not warranted even if some posters feel justified in leveling it at them.
What I'm suggesting is restraint. For people to take a few deep breaths and then ask themselves before posting, "Is this REALLY that important? Am I trying to achieve something positive without hurting others? Or am I lashing out on an issue that might not be all that significant in the big picture, simply because I can?"
I think that the more people ask themselves those types of questions before posting, the smaller the administrative forum will become.
Greywolf
Posted by Toph on March 25, 2008, at 11:44:04
In reply to Re: Thank you for understanding, posted by greywolf on March 25, 2008, at 4:16:45
I didn't express well what I wanted to say in responding to you partially because I got hung up with your use of the synonyms warranted and justified. I does bother me that you suggest that if someone feels justifiably wronged that they should restrain from airing their complaint for the better good of Babble when the admin board was expressly created for such a purpose. To the extent that disputes become personal sometimes, I agree that this is a common consequence that should be avoided as much as possible. My disappointment in Bob's handling of this affair, for example, doesn't diminish my belief that he's an interesting guy with which to have dinner. Though he may never say so, I'm fairly certain that he would affirm my right to express my thoughts about his absence during this past few weeks as an appropriate use of this board.
Posted by rskontos on March 25, 2008, at 13:21:07
In reply to Re: Thank you for understanding, posted by Toph on March 25, 2008, at 11:44:04
Toph, I wrestled with responded to greywolf's comment and I am glad you said what you said, as I agreed. I have been upset by the latecomers that have seemed to me to have taken away my rights to express my frustrations to Bob's handling of this affair and the fallout I felt. I have actually be made to feel bad that I ever even posted to this board by posters that just returned and I feel that I have respected the rights of others so much that I keep deleting posts so I don't step on their rights; however I feel that my own rights are not being respected. I respectfully addressed my feelings to Dr Bob and he has now responded to some of these. I hope others that just joined in late will try to respect this and think hard about how some of what they write or state might make some of us feel put down in trying to make ourselves heard. That is all I humbly asked.
Thank you Toph for your responses that were helpful to me to finally find my own voice, respectfully I hope as I don't want to hurt anyone else but need to say what I want to say. If I can't say it here, where else do I say it. I am own these feelings as well Bob, for if this is the wrong way to say any of this , I am truly at a loss. (As I did think long and hard.)
rsk
Posted by greywolf on March 25, 2008, at 19:23:31
In reply to Re: Thank you for understanding, posted by rskontos on March 25, 2008, at 13:21:07
> Toph, I wrestled with responded to greywolf's comment and I am glad you said what you said, as I agreed. I have been upset by the latecomers that have seemed to me to have taken away my rights to express my frustrations to Bob's handling of this affair and the fallout I felt. I have actually be made to feel bad that I ever even posted to this board by posters that just returned and I feel that I have respected the rights of others so much that I keep deleting posts so I don't step on their rights; however I feel that my own rights are not being respected. I respectfully addressed my feelings to Dr Bob and he has now responded to some of these. I hope others that just joined in late will try to respect this and think hard about how some of what they write or state might make some of us feel put down in trying to make ourselves heard. That is all I humbly asked.
>
> Thank you Toph for your responses that were helpful to me to finally find my own voice, respectfully I hope as I don't want to hurt anyone else but need to say what I want to say. If I can't say it here, where else do I say it. I am own these feelings as well Bob, for if this is the wrong way to say any of this , I am truly at a loss. (As I did think long and hard.)
>
> rsk1. Just so you're aware, I'm not a latecomer. I've been around here for a few years now. I took a break of a few months to work on some intensive therapy, and I felt it might be helpful to be away from this and other sources of support while I focused on the struggle.
2. Nothing I wrote was directed in any way at any particular individual.
3. I stand by my view that, without regard to your individual situation, there are certainly times when restraint is appropriate. I think that's particularly the case when things start getting personal or repetitive.
Greywolf
Posted by rskontos on March 25, 2008, at 19:40:06
In reply to Re: Thank you for understanding » rskontos, posted by greywolf on March 25, 2008, at 19:23:31
Greywolf, I believe I stated returned. I realize you have returned. And I still stand by my statement.
rsk
Posted by greywolf on March 25, 2008, at 19:43:37
In reply to Re: Thank you for understanding » greywolf, posted by rskontos on March 25, 2008, at 19:40:06
> Greywolf, I believe I stated returned. I realize you have returned. And I still stand by my statement.
>
> rskOk, thanks.
Greywolf
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 25, 2008, at 21:46:07
In reply to Re: Thank you for understanding, posted by Toph on March 25, 2008, at 11:44:04
> I am concerned that if someone is a friend or liked, that person might get preferential treatment.
>
> KAL44Consistency and fairness have been and will continue to be important here. And posters may be especially sensitive to that because they may know all too well what it's like not to get preferential treatment.
--
> don't forget to factor in the quality of the "evidence" that someone in general might be basing such an assumption on.
I know it's easier in retrospect, but there might have been less risk of others feeling put down if you'd said something like:
> > don't forget to consider the different reasons why someone in general might think something.> Dinah, I've seen your integrity in action for years. I have faith in your sense of fairness and how you put it into practice.
>
> ggI second that -- and feel that way about all the deputies, and the deputies as a team. I'm biased, of course, but I think they do a great job under difficult circumstances, and I sincerely appreciate that.
--
> I wish everyone could step back and measure how much time and emotion is spent on "administrative" issues in comparison to posts in other areas.
>
> I think we sometimes lose sight of how much more important it is to offer support
>
> Greywolf> I does bother me that you suggest that if someone feels justifiably wronged that they should restrain from airing their complaint for the better good of Babble when the admin board was expressly created for such a purpose.
>
> TophI don't think it's either-or. The primary goal here is support and education, but administration supports support and education, so it's important, too.
That said, when and how administrative issues are aired can make a big difference.
As far as things not changing, this board is the Politics of Babble itself, so some degree of controversy is probably inevitable.
--
> Though he may never say so, I'm fairly certain that he would affirm my right to express my thoughts about his absence during this past few weeks as an appropriate use of this board.
>
> TophI would. But please be civil. :-)
Bob
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.