Posted by Dr. Bob on March 3, 2002, at 5:44:22
In reply to Lou 's apology to Christophrejmc, posted by Lou Pilder on March 2, 2002, at 19:09:28
> Of course, context might be part of what you weigh as you exercise discretion.
It might, indeed. :-)
> But my theory is that people do not always understand your perspective of which ... statements are acceptable and which are not.
They may not. Do you have any suggestions? At some point I think I have to fall back on what Potter Stewart said...
----
> I have been humiliated and demeaned by Dr. Bob.
I'm sorry if you've felt humiliated and demeaned, but I meant only to explain what I was doing and why.
> I was blocked for 1 week for the title of my post. It was, "We need to hear from Donna." Now the context was that our discussion could no go any further without more clarification from Donn.
That would've been fine. "Our discussion cannot go any further without more clarification from Donna." IMO, "need" created pressure.
> this extreme legalism is very harmfull to all of us for no one can talk without the fear of banishment and a scolding by Dr. Bob.
But my theory is that if there's no "fear" of consequences, then the talk will be less supportive and educational.
> Dr. Bob again scolds me publically when I told my advasary that "I did not care about his quest to get people to take psychotropic drugs. Dr. Bob says that I have to care about his quest.I do?
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20020215/msgs/94315.html
If you don't care about something someone else cares about, that's up to you. Just don't say so here. That's not civil.
> My adversary was telling the poor women...
When you start thinking of someone as your adversary, that's another time to consider not responding. At least not right away.
> the arbitrary, caprecious, and desciminatory practices of Dr. Bob on this board relevant to disparging people for what they postNot civil.
> He said, "Your not going to have freedom of speach here Lou Pilder".
> Lou PilderIn an email or in the post I referred to above?
--------
> I emailed Dr. Bob two or three times to remove portions of 1 post . He neither removed that portion, nor did he reply to my email.
> KiddoReally, did I not even reply? Sorry about that. Could you email me again?
--------
> He allowed a person to tell the group "not to listen to him" He called me a chateten and accused me of trying to bring people into a cult. That person went unadmonished by Dr. Bob.
Hmm, maybe I shouldn't have let that go. Can you give me the URL?
> No one has to guess at what another will think of what they say and then be subjected to the forced blocking for what they said.
You don't have to try to guess at how others might react, but if you do, you're probably less likely to be blocked...
> The assistant principal favored the girl like you are favoring KK and Dr. Bob. This is abhorant to me. It is an outrage to every person on this board .
> Lou PilderNot civil.
--------
> Your crying wolf is getting a little embarrassing... we have other fish to fry besides your apocalyptic hysteria.
> troubleNot civil, either.
--------
> I apologise and retract any negative commments that I made that were directed to Dr. Bob and the others on this board. I spoke rashly and I am sorry for doing so. I am asking Dr. Bob and the others to forgive me for what I said. I came to this board for I thought that it was the best place for people that wanted to discuss their afflictions and desparations. I still feel that way and have met some wonderfull people on this board who also share that purpose. I hope that we can all make ,at least, one step forward from all of our postings.
> Lou PilderThanks for your apologies. I'm not going to block you now, but if you're uncivil again (in my subjective opinion), then I will, but it'll be for a month, not forever.
Bob
PS: If you're unsure what I'll think, feel free to run it by me in an email first.
poster:Dr. Bob
thread:3144
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20011216/msgs/3245.html