![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 13 to 37 of 56. Go back in thread:
Posted by Phillipa on March 26, 2011, at 0:43:09
In reply to Re: No-one has mentioned....., posted by Twinleaf on March 26, 2011, at 0:04:58
Twinleaf thanks for rewording in such a kind way!!!!! Phillipa
Posted by Dinah on March 26, 2011, at 9:23:52
In reply to Re: No-one has mentioned....., posted by Twinleaf on March 26, 2011, at 0:04:58
I have largely LEFT Babble because of the *absence* of administrative presence and because of the behavior of posters towards each other with no timely intervention of administration. I've continued posting on Psychology because as yet the lack of administrative intervention there has not been a major issue.
There are lots of places on the internet where people are free to say whatever they like. I'm sorry to see a place like Babble was go away. But unless there's timely administration here, the environment I loved is already gone.
As far as Racer's lack of involvement on Babble goes, Dr. Bob has indicated to me that he won't accept me back as deputy unless I cease to post. I don't really see myself wanting to volunteer deputize where I am not part of the community.
It's what Dr. Bob *wants*, and it's not fair to blame Racer for that. Of course, some deputies have found it difficult or impossible to continue to post given the pressures that deputies sometimes fall under. I don't think negativity towards lack of involvement that is, in part, a result of past negativity to deputies is likely to encourage participation by deputies even if it were allowed by Dr. Bob. Which at present I understand it is not.
Perhaps a positive interest directed to Racer as to why she is no longer an active poster at Babble would be more likely to elicit a positive response.
Posted by Dinah on March 26, 2011, at 9:50:29
In reply to Re: No-one has mentioned..... » Twinleaf, posted by Dinah on March 26, 2011, at 9:23:52
Not everyone is aware of the *same* "truths".
That's life. There is seldom one truth. There are facts and there is everything we build on the facts. The facts are that Babble is less active at at a time when there is less administrative involvement than ever. But that there is less contentiousness over administration. And that at this moment, though not at all moments since active administration ceased, there is a minimum of conflict.
What truths anyone erects from those facts may be as much about the thinker as about the subject of the thought.
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 26, 2011, at 10:36:08
In reply to Re: No-one has mentioned....., posted by Twinleaf on March 26, 2011, at 0:04:58
> overly frequent civility warnings, excessive blocking and a general lack of sensitivity towards the feelings of the community
> it does appear, to me, insensitive
Hi, everyone,
I'd like Twinleaf to remain an active member of the Babble community. If you do, too, please encourage her to avoid another block by rephrasing or apologizing. Perhaps you could also volunteer to help her avoid future blocks by being her civility buddy:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#buddies
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by sigismund on March 26, 2011, at 14:07:56
In reply to Re: another opportunity to support Twinleaf, posted by Dr. Bob on March 26, 2011, at 10:36:08
You would remember Scott coming to the same impression about the administration as well.
I'm sorry that this is happening to Twinleaf. I was not aware that describing something or someone as insensitive was uncivil.
This kind of required public retraction........I understand it from one point of view, and from another it feels really unhelpful (is that civil?) and proves her point that some people are subject to greater scrutiny than others. That isn't so odd either. Perhaps some people should be subject to greater scrutiny. But why her? That's what I've never understood.
Posted by sigismund on March 26, 2011, at 14:21:59
In reply to Re: opportunity to support Twinleaf, posted by Dr. Bob on March 25, 2011, at 23:35:35
>> Racer has carried out punitive administrative actions for him. This has made a particularly cold, harsh impression, as she no longer cares to be a part of the community.
I consider Racer one of my friends. But it is true that, for whatever reason, she is no longer posting and to that extent is no longer part of the community. And she has carried out administrative actions for Bob. If Twinleaf found that to feel cold and harsh, well, that is how she found it. I really don't see the problem.
I would ask Bob to quietly reflect on Scott's excellent posts about administration here.
It has to be said that on at least one occasion when Racer came, there really should have been no argument. I certainly had none with her then.
Posted by Deneb on March 26, 2011, at 18:13:36
In reply to Re: another opportunity to support Twinleaf, posted by Dr. Bob on March 26, 2011, at 10:36:08
Hi Twinleaf,
I can be your civility buddy if you want me to. I don't want you to get blocked.
Posted by obsidian on March 26, 2011, at 18:27:52
In reply to Re: another opportunity to support Twinleaf, posted by Dr. Bob on March 26, 2011, at 10:36:08
Just let it go
Posted by sigismund on March 26, 2011, at 18:46:34
In reply to Re: No-one has mentioned....., posted by Twinleaf on March 26, 2011, at 0:04:58
>I think everyone's aware that overly frequent civility warnings, excessive blocking and a general lack of sensitivity towards the feelings of the community have been the major causes behind Babble's collapse.
Maybe you are not allowed to say that, especially when there is so much truth in it?
Not for everyone though. Just for some.
I remember when Bob was surprised when I suggested it appeared as if he wanted to block some people for life. It's strange, what is obvious to some is not obvious to others.
Posted by Phillipa on March 26, 2011, at 21:57:08
In reply to Re: No-one has mentioned....., posted by sigismund on March 26, 2011, at 18:46:34
Came back to say I feel demeaned like begging to have Twinleaf rephase again. To me in my humble opinion she has said nothing wrong. Anyone insulted? Hurt? Humiliated? If Racer isn't active my feeling only that she might not be either. Of course personally I can't speak for her. Maybe it might help if she were to post how she feels. Speaking for others to me only isn't right. We all have a voice may she voice hers? Seems fair to me but I could be wrong I am a lot. Phillipa
Posted by Twinleaf on March 26, 2011, at 23:29:18
In reply to Re: No-one has mentioned....., posted by Phillipa on March 26, 2011, at 21:57:08
Thank you so much for your support, everyone.
I think that it would be hard to find a person who cares about the well-being of Babble more than I do. This is the basic context in which all of my posts have been written. I am not alone; perhaps a dozen others have written the same things. None of them have been blocked for doing so
On the separate issue of Racer: I have always enjoyed her
posts, and have missed her presence. The latest block was most needed and welcome - no argument there! And definitely no criticism of Racer meant. Uncoupling the deputies' social and administrative functions did make the latter appear harsher to me. That's all.I have written what I believe to be the truth in both instances. If I rephrase so as to change the meaning, I will be lying, and you will all know it. What could possibly be the purpose in that? And, more to the point, why get rid of a caring, supportive poster like me? The fact that I care enough to identify problem areas honestly should be counted as an asset.
Posted by sigismund on March 26, 2011, at 23:29:54
In reply to Re: No-one has mentioned....., posted by Phillipa on March 26, 2011, at 21:57:08
I've always felt that these kids of procedures are designed to make those within the enclosure feel more virtuous.
I had hoped that now there were fewer inside, that these procedures would fade away.
Posted by Phillipa on March 27, 2011, at 0:23:41
In reply to Re: No-one has mentioned....., posted by sigismund on March 26, 2011, at 23:29:54
Twinleaf I support your beliefs. Phillipa
Posted by Dinah on March 27, 2011, at 6:35:33
In reply to Re: No-one has mentioned....., posted by Phillipa on March 27, 2011, at 0:23:41
How did you feel when people supported some of the beliefs that were expressed about you when people were speaking their "truths"?
Is it a way that you wish for Racer to feel?
It was my understanding that it wasn't very pleasant for you. Do you imagine it's very pleasant for Racer?
Posted by Dinah on March 27, 2011, at 6:40:02
In reply to Re: No-one has mentioned....., posted by Phillipa on March 26, 2011, at 21:57:08
> Anyone insulted? Hurt? Humiliated? If Racer isn't active my feeling only that she might not be either. Of course personally I can't speak for her. Maybe it might help if she were to post how she feels.
In fact, I seem to recall that exact argument being made when you didn't respond to the "truths" being spoken about you.
Do you believe it a valid argument? Should those who remain silent when they feel hurt not be given the same courtesy of respect and kindness that the more vocal ought to receive?
Should I not have spoken up on your behalf? I'm trying to hear what your preferences would be if it were to happen again.
Posted by Dinah on March 27, 2011, at 6:42:07
In reply to Re: opportunity to support Twinleaf, posted by sigismund on March 26, 2011, at 14:21:59
So Sigi, I'm to understand that you have no problem if someone were to say that they perceive you to be insensitive, cold and harsh? As long as they say it's just their perception?
I congratulate you on your resilience.
I don't believe such a strong constitution is universal however.
Perhaps Dr. Bob could keep note of who wouldn't mind such comments.
Posted by Dinah on March 27, 2011, at 7:04:54
In reply to Re: No-one has mentioned....., posted by Twinleaf on March 26, 2011, at 23:29:18
Admittedly if your main intent is to call Racer insensitive, cold and harsh, it would be impossible to rephrase or withdraw without lying.
An alternative to lying might be discretion in what is initially said. No one was talking about Racer when this topic opened. You introduced her into the topic and said something that I think would have hurt me had it been said about me.
If you had felt the overwhelming need to bring this up, you could have merely said that you thought the recent dearth of administrative involvement was healthy for Babble, and that you found administrative involvement a deterrent to a healthy and robust community. Or that you found posters working things out together preferable to administration sweeping in out of nowhere. If you really wanted to point out that you found Racer insensitive, harsh and cold, you could do so in a private email to Dr. Bob. Just as you likely wouldn't say that you found a poster silly or stupid, it might not be a good idea to not say that someone who volunteers her time for no remuneration of any sort is harsh or insensitive. Do you operate from the assumption that anyone associated with administration isn't entitled to the same discretion you would show towards a poster? Or that they perhaps are not human and have no feelings? If so, is it possible that this might be the common underlying theme here, rather than your love of Babble and desire to see it flourish?
You might think of it as a logic problem. "I believe I should be able to say whatever I like about administration without being blocked." + "Dr. Bob believes that administration is entitled to the same respect that posters deserve, and statements negative about members of administration will lead to a block by Dr. Bob." = "Dr. Bob will block me and feel totally justified in doing so." + "Dr. Bob will block me in what I consider to be a totally unjustified manner."
As an example of course. Your actual thoughts may differ. But is it possible that a different approach to showing your love of Babble might lead to a more desirable outcome?
If you wish to address with Dr. Bob the fact that he only wants deputies who don't post, that's a fair topic. But could it not be done without naming Racer? Could it not be done from the standpoint of positiveness? As in "I think active participants in Babble make for the perception of warmer deputies and may be less resented by some of us. I oppose your policy of not allowing them."? Does that not make the same point but while running a much slighter risk of hurting anyone's feelings?
Although it must be said that deputies are smart enough to figure out remarks like that, and it does hurt. But it has the extra added advantage to the poster, in that it allows them to keep posting and to keep saying things that deputies are smart enough to figure out, and that may hurt.
So... Being more discreet in saying things that may hurt deputies has a double advantage. You don't get blocked, and you can continue to say them! Win win.
Posted by Dinah on March 27, 2011, at 7:20:12
In reply to Re: another opportunity to support Twinleaf, posted by Dr. Bob on March 26, 2011, at 10:36:08
You could have a board devoted to having people say whether they mind people saying whatever they like about them, so long as they believe it to be true. Without any commentary other than what level of comment they might object to - stated in an abstract and civil manner.
Then whenever something is said about people who don't mind it, you can, instead of a pbc, simply post a link to their post stating they don't mind it. So that others aren't upset on their behalf.
*And* if posters who said they wouldn't mind it are later offended, you could point out that it had been ok'd by that poster.
In fact, you could do it yourself. If Poster A says they don't think there is anything wrong with Poster X saying something about Poster Y, you could consider it a declaration that they don't mind a similar statement made by poster X or Poster B about themselves. And of course, if Poster X doesn't feel they've said anything wrong, then you could consider it a declaration that they are fine with such statements directed towards themselves.
Sort of a Golden Rule application.
Then there would be something on record stating that some posters would mind, and no one could claim that it was arbitrary for you to administrate with regard to those posters. It would be easier to discover for the more robust posters to realize who isn't feeling quite as robust as they are.
For the record, I don't like such things being said about me. Rather particularly out of the blue. But even within the blue, I must say.
Posted by Dinah on March 27, 2011, at 7:32:21
In reply to An alternative to lying. » Twinleaf, posted by Dinah on March 27, 2011, at 7:04:54
If your intent was not to hurt Racer. And if you don't consider it a win win situation to be able to continue to say things that might hurt her without being blocked, you could without even a hint of lying say something like "My intention was never to hurt Racer, and I deeply regret if my words did so." Without of course, reiterating the thing you're being asked to apologize for or stating again that you believe it to be true. Which would sort of negate the expressed regret, wouldn't it?
Sort of like "I really never meant to hurt "Q" by saying that "Q" is a great big ninny. I really regret if saying that "Q" had all the wit of a cheese sandwich left too long in the sun hurt "Q"'s feelings. But the simple truth is that "Q" is quite stupid and I really can't say that he isn't".
"I never meant to hurt Racer, and I regret if my words were hurtful to her." PERIOD. No lying, and it's possible it could be a perfectly true and acceptable expression of regret.
Posted by obsidian on March 27, 2011, at 9:46:00
In reply to And of course..., posted by Dinah on March 27, 2011, at 7:32:21
and so I do wonder why I bother to even scan what's new on administration. It's a bit like slowing down to see an accident on the highway.
I think this perpetual fault finding and criticism flourishes with an audience.
I mean truly, does twinleaf? do you twinleaf? believe that it is perfectly acceptable to criticize/insult another poster, particularly with an absence of information?
Do you really feel justified in doing so?Who cares what "the truth" is. It's really irrelevant.
so, again, I wish we could just "let it go". I believe these types of posts are provocation, pure and simple.
and I...have reacted too much.
done now.
Posted by Dinah on March 27, 2011, at 9:50:20
In reply to I am so tired of this......, posted by obsidian on March 27, 2011, at 9:46:00
I became aware of this thread and thought I was strong enough after nearly three months to stay detached.
I think it's just not in me, under these circumstances, to stay detached.
Since there's nothing really I can do, I should just stay away.
Posted by obsidian on March 27, 2011, at 10:15:24
In reply to me too... » obsidian, posted by Dinah on March 27, 2011, at 9:50:20
> I became aware of this thread and thought I was strong enough after nearly three months to stay detached.
It's hard to when you care about something.
> I think it's just not in me, under these circumstances, to stay detached.
there's something in the protest? maybe?
I've got an urge to fight too.> Since there's nothing really I can do, I should just stay away.
if you think it's best for you of course
take care
Posted by Dinah on March 27, 2011, at 10:51:45
In reply to Re: me too... » Dinah, posted by obsidian on March 27, 2011, at 10:15:24
My therapist says that given my history, he'd be more concerned about me if I didn't feel unable to say nothing.
I don't think one person saying something uncivil pushes my buttons. That I can dismiss, I think. It's when other people jump in and either join in or start saying that it was the truth, or it was ok to say, that I get reminded of exactly what that feels like. I made absolutely no distinction between the active tormentors in school, and those who supported them. And I always blamed the teachers as much as I blamed the tormentors, because their silence was complicity. It allowed it to happen. And to speak the truth, I felt a fair amount of hatred towards those who said nothing at all. I can understand that they were afraid, or embarrassed. But that didn't make their silence ok. I can understand, but I don't necessarily forgive any but the single one who years later asked my forgiveness for saying nothing. I honored and respected those who, without being in any way confrontational to my tormentors, showed kindness and acceptance, and let it be generally understood that it wasn't ok that I was being tormented, without perhaps actually saying so.
I can't be any of those people. Not the ones who said things, not the ones who supported those who said things, and not the ones who said nothing at all.
It's even worse for me when it's someone else. When it's me, I have the armor of dislike.
"Whatever you do to the least of my brothers, so you do unto me." doesn't really go far enough, to me. "Do whatever you like to me, but leave my brothers and sisters, least to greatest, the h*ll alone. What sort of person do you think I am to stand quiet?"
But that's me and my truth, heavily influenced by my experiences. I recognize this isn't middle school. But I also see similarities and experience feelings of impotence and rage.
And I think I'm more ok with how I am than I would be with changing. Yes, it causes me pain. But not nearly as much pain as changing to accept it would cause. I'd rather feel hurt than shame.
Posted by Twinleaf on March 27, 2011, at 11:01:28
In reply to Re: No-one has mentioned....., posted by Twinleaf on March 26, 2011, at 23:29:18
I can see that I chose my words poorly, initially. Although I was speaking only about how an administrative action made me feel, I can see that Racer might have felt hurt by that choice of words. That is why I posted that clarification, "and definitely no criticism of Racer (was) meant" I cannot take the next step and apologize for critical feelings and thoughts about Racer which I never had. That would be lying.
I did not in any way condemn administrative actions as a whole. I said that I felt that "overly frequent" pcbs and
"excessive" blocking had been harmful to Babble. I consider thoughtfully applied administrative actions to be essential to
this site's smooth, safe running - just not " overly
frequent" or "excessive" ones. Several other posters, including SLS, have offered nearly identical assessments of the reasons for the extreme decline in posting. None of them were threatened with a block, as is being done to me.
Posted by sigismund on March 27, 2011, at 12:35:12
In reply to Re: opportunity to support Twinleaf » sigismund, posted by Dinah on March 27, 2011, at 6:42:07
>So Sigi, I'm to understand that you have no problem if someone were to say that they perceive you to be insensitive, cold and harsh?
Dinah, of course I would be devastated. But Twinleaf didn't say that. Twinleaf said 'This made etc etc', which while having a connection through Racer, refers more to the administration of Babble, but not quite that either because it is the contrast between Racer's absence and the penalties applying which come from Bob.
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.