Posted by crushedout on December 14, 2003, at 12:40:16
In reply to Re: yes, posted by kara lynne on December 14, 2003, at 12:18:47
well, my outrage was toward dr. bob, and although to be perfectly frank, he was very opaque in explaining to me why i was blocked (both online and off), it seems that part wasn't what did it. i think it was my assertion that the poster's posts had been offensive and making inappropriate assumptions about people. now, one question that folks haven't addressed is why *i* was blocked and others weren't, when in a later thread, people kind of let him have it way more than i did (you guys know what i'm talking about? i think the thread started as "mind's eye" or something). perhaps the distinction was that he *asked* for the criticism when they did it.
i'm certainly not advocating for those others to *also* be blocked, since i agreed wholeheartedly with what they wrote. i'm just trying to understand why *i* was blocked and they weren't.
my previous pbc was for a much more glaring violation, now that i look back at it. but i was new at the time and didn't understand the rules at all.
here it is, if you must see it (i'm a little embarrassed by it, because i may have been overreacting, but also please remember i was new):
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20031011/msgs/268926.html
(i can't believe i'm laying out my crime history for all to see! i hope this can't be used against me in a court of law.)
> No need to be embarrassed, it gets confusing sometimes. Yes, I saw that post. While I don't think it was block-worthy it seems to be a typical example of a post that will inevitably get blocked: a reasonable reaction to feeling insulted, eg. But what had you said before that that warranted your pbc? Because in that post I still don't understand the specific crime--that you found something 'outrageous and offensive'?
>
> I'm just wondering what rule was violated.
poster:crushedout
thread:288655
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20031120/msgs/289647.html