![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 2 to 26 of 40. Go back in thread:
Posted by Bekka H. on February 25, 2002, at 0:06:04
In reply to Double Standard With Banning Policies, posted by spike4848 on February 24, 2002, at 23:24:15
> Dear Dr. Bob,
>
> Recently Old School and Jason 911 were banned for being "uncivil"
>
> This is your post concerning civility, "Please don't be sarcastic .... put others down, put pressure on others, use language that might offend others, exaggerate or overgeneralize -- et cetera."
>
> I have noticed that several members have made sarcastic and offensive remarking towards Old School and Jason 911 on the Social Board. Your banning seem very arbertary and unjust. I ask that you hold all members to the same standards in the future.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Spike
**********************************************I agree with Spike!!
Posted by Dr. Bob on February 26, 2002, at 0:29:09
In reply to Double Standard With Banning Policies, posted by spike4848 on February 24, 2002, at 23:24:15
> I have noticed that several members have made sarcastic and offensive remarking towards Old School and Jason 911 on the Social Board.
Who? In which posts? You can email me...
Bob
Posted by Mitchell on February 27, 2002, at 23:22:28
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies, posted by Dr. Bob on February 26, 2002, at 0:29:09
> > I have noticed that several members have made sarcastic and offensive remarking towards Old School and Jason 911 on the Social Board.
>
> Who? In which posts? You can email me...
>
> BobIf instructions to not accuse others, not put others down, not be sarcastic and not overly generalize were consistently enforced, how would the following statements be treated?
>I was just over on Admin posting to your popping off at XXX. .. only to find you'd already posted to me here in the same disrespectful way.
>You went off on a rant not only in ignorance of my usage of the word psychic, which is one thing, but--I find this more offensive--in order to do so, you had to ignore the thought behind the whole post.
... Get a grip.>The Cactus Where Your Heart Should Be
>do not make your argument count for nothing with pathetic statements like this.
It makes you look a pointless, young, idiot with nothing good to say.>The idea that we are mostly biology is soooo upsetting to people who've invested lives and careers and selves in the idea that talk can cure.
>There is hardly any place where either-or, black-white thinking is useful or helpful.
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 1, 2002, at 2:28:19
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies, posted by Mitchell on February 27, 2002, at 23:22:28
> > Who? In which posts?
>
> If instructions to not accuse others, not put others down, not be sarcastic and not overly generalize were consistently enforced, how would the following statements be treated? ...Could you include the URLs so I can take a closer look? Thanks,
Bob
Posted by Mitchell on March 1, 2002, at 19:57:10
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies, posted by Dr. Bob on March 1, 2002, at 2:28:19
> Could you include the URLs so I can take a closer look? Thanks,
>
> BobSorry, doctor, that is part of the test. ; )
My purpose for providing only the statements, and not names or URLs, was because I did not want to assist in getting anyone in trouble. The question was not about whether those people would be allowed to post those statements. I am interested in how the instructions provided would apply to the statements.
Of course, context might be part of what you weigh as you exercise discretion. Somewhere in this vast opus, I believe, you said an accusatory statement sometimes is okay when the accusation is founded. So if you, as an administrator, accept the first statement ("popping off at...") as accurate, you might let it go. But my theory is that people do not always understand your perspective of which accusatory, overly general, sarcastic or demeaning statements are acceptable and which are not. Each of the statements I provided could be read, in and of itself, as contrary to one of the instructions. A person who reads these statements in a thread can conclude, rightly or wrongly, that these classes of statements are acceptable. Or cognitive dissonance, arising from a perception of mixed messages, might minimize awareness of the boundaries established by the instructions. Contextual guidance might be lost for discussants who do not fully appreciate your assessment of who was rightly or wrongly accusing another.
If you want to do address the authors of the statements, or to analyze the statements in their context, I found them all in the same psychosocial thread in which you banned a discussant who said claimed to not relate well with the mental health community. If I thoroughly reviewed the board, I could provide others, but my purpose for collecting these examples is not to reinforce your police effort. My interest is to help assess the consistency with which you police your board.
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 1, 2002, at 20:19:05
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies, posted by Mitchell on March 1, 2002, at 19:57:10
Mitchell;
Very well said.I have been humiliated and demeaned by Dr. Bob. 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. Donna wrote in asking for our help. Dr. Bob demeans me publically by saying that the title constituted "pressure" to Donna. How outrageous, for Donna had asked for our opinions. Could you look at the thread in the past one or two pages and comment on this? .fDr. Bob can construe my title to a post as "pressuring Donna to respond, and she wanted us to help, and no one said that she would be cast into prison if she didn't respond, then 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. He is cruel and is not furthering his own sted objectives to give help to one another. Heis using us as an outlet for his sadism. God bless you sir, for you have said wht I would want to say and could not for he fear of being banished by Dr. Bob. Please respond on this board and I will be looking for your reply
Lou Pilder
Posted by Mitchell on March 1, 2002, at 20:48:15
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies » Mitchell, posted by Lou Pilder on March 1, 2002, at 20:19:05
Lou,
Thanks for the complimentary post. I would rather not attempt to judge whether any particular administrative action is right or wrong, but rather discuss the manner in which instructions are applied, and how people can be influenced by those procedures.
Not to pressure you, but if you are interested in how the subject line for which you feel you were disparaged compares to other subject lines that could be perceived as pressuring others, you might find it worth your while to collect examples of the other subject lines. A sample of similar subject lines could provide you an opportunity to compare how, if at all, your subject line or approach was different. You might conclude, as I am tempted to conclude, that individual sentences or statements, per se, are not judged for solely for their content, but also by the administrators' appreciation of the context in which questionable statements are offered.
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 1, 2002, at 21:02:40
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies, posted by Mitchell on March 1, 2002, at 19:57:10
Mitchell;
In that same thread, 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. How outrageous. My adversary was telling the poor women to continue to take the drug even though she was addicted to it and wanted off of it. The manufactures warning says not to take the drug more than 7-10 days. The women, Donna, was asking for help with what to do with her addiction. My advasary tells the board that you can take the drug beyond the 7-10 day warning. You can not take the drug responsibly after the 7-10 days. I have seen the destruction to people from taking this drug beyond the 7-10 days. I do not have to care about someones quest to tell others to disregard the manufactureres warning. WouldI have t care abou someones quest to irradicate all jews? It appeared to me that Dr. Bob was favoring the taking of the drug beyond the 7-10 days for he demeaned me publically an said that I had to respect my adversary's quest for people to ignore common sense and the govts. warning. I do not respect anyone that tells our young people that they can be addicted to a drug. And I do not have to. It appeared in that thread that I was blocked for 2 weeks for my title . Others said that the blocking was because I told my advasary that I did not care about his quest for others to use psychotropic drugs. If evryone has to "care" about what is wrong, then Dr. Bob will have only those left on this board that concuur with his views. Now that would scew his reserch beyond the breaking point and make all of his conclusions gathered from th board invalid. If I hear anyone , anyware, telling me that our young people can ignor the addictive warning to a drug, I will tell him the same thing that I have said here. I do not have to "care " about their quest to ruin the lives of our people.
Lou Pilder
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 1, 2002, at 21:22:07
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies, posted by Mitchell on March 1, 2002, at 20:48:15
Mitchell;
It appears to me that you are tremendously intersted in the arbitrary, caprecious, and desciminatory practices of Dr. Bob on this board relevant to disparging people for what they post. I have taken an inventory of other posts and I am outraged at Dr. Bob's descrimntory attitude towards me. But more than that, it is the unhealthy scolding that he gave me. I am disabled and impaired and I want to share what I can to help people who are suffereing from addiction and other afflictions. The others all have their tremendous problems also. We are all reaching out and Dr. Bob is smashing us down. He has no empathy. He cannot lift anyone up. His tyrannicall scoldings only force others down more into their dispair. He has raped me of my freedom to speak, and even emailed me to rub it in. He said, "Your not going to have freedom of speach here Lou Pilder". Of course, he will say that the ends justify the means. Well so did Hitler. So did Stalin. So do all the tyrants that walk this earth today and make their people suffer in torment. In my city they just erected a giant bell. It is the freedom bell. It reminds us evry day that tyrants have no place in a just society. I am going tomorrow to ring that bell of freedom and if I see my name blocked for ever on this board tomorrow, then I will be proud to be an American.
Lou Pilder
Posted by trouble on March 1, 2002, at 22:06:38
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies » Mitchell, posted by Lou Pilder on March 1, 2002, at 20:19:05
Hi Lou,
I'm not a part of this dialogue but feel duty-bound to point out one of my own post-headings,
since it seems very directive, esp in contrast to your Donna post.
It says
Broaden your argument Old School.The last thing I want to do is call Dr. Bob's attention to my use of language, since I pride myself on its provocative, hard boiled detective leanings, but in the interest of fairness.
Dr. Bob has a formidable task in evaluating the attitudes behind the postings, it takes alot of reading between the lines. I personally don't get the civility thing, but I find the whole contretemps interesting. It's Dr. Bob's project, he calls the shots. But I've read every blocking archive and it's amazing what hasn't been blocked, compared to what's in the archives. At this point I figure I'm still collecting data, and don't know what it's all about.
Now if I was the blocking person I'd upbraid you for having called Dr. Bob sadistic. Name calling is easy to spot, no big debates needed, just hey, if it's libelous, take it out, it's libelous! What good does it do, anyway, saying something like that?
I hope you're not taking this wrong. My therapist keeps telling me I have to learn to give the devil his due in favor of a higher value, so I remain cognizant of what's expected here, while preparing myself mentally for the inevitable comeuppance.
Sorry if you've heard all this before, just felt like explaining myself.
take care,
trouble
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 1, 2002, at 23:23:33
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies, posted by trouble on March 1, 2002, at 22:06:38
Trouble
Dr. Bob allowed his favorites to beat up on me emotionally and psychologicallly. Only when I emailed him to delete those posts would he do it. There are numerous posts of people ridiculing me and equating me with Islamic terroists, skam operators, and cultists. These defaming posts toward me stand today as the outragious attempt by Dr. Bob to humiliate me and cause me great emotional harm and drive me out from this board. It is a coward's way of achieving his ends.It is called "constructive discharge" He doesn't want my thought to be heard on this board and is making a transparant attempt to defame me by trying to make people believe that I am "uncival" or "pressuring people." It is called a pretext ,in law, for his outpouring of his sadistical wrath upon me. What he has done is sadistic. He used me as an outlet for his sadism. He scolded me publicly. He denied me any right to even answer his wrath for he blocked me without a hearing. If you want to allow someone to be arbitrary or caprecious or descriminatory with you, then your sin is greater than his.
Lou Pilder
Posted by trouble on March 2, 2002, at 0:34:28
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies, posted by Lou Pilder on March 1, 2002, at 23:23:33
Lou,
But it seems you have a lot of supporters, I'd think that could make you feel more secure about your continued presence here, as you obviously make a contribution, unconventional it may be.I have yet to see any stated policies on "crossing the line", though I've heard intimations that there is indeed, an irrevocable block. If you can direct me to the information I'd appreciate it.
thanks, trouble
Posted by kiddo on March 2, 2002, at 1:51:47
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies, posted by Lou Pilder on March 1, 2002, at 23:23:33
Lou-
I’m responding to your post to Mitchell and trouble in this one. I’m not sure how you think Dr. Bob discriminates toward you vs. anyone else that has been banned :-) A lot of people on the board are disabled and impaired as well, we all try to offer and receive support from others that have either been there in the past or the present.
I’ve never seen Dr. Bob ‘smashing us down’. If he had no empathy, the sight wouldn’t exist IMO, and as for lifting people up, I’ve seen that as well. If you search the start of the board, you’ll see that. This site has become so large that there’s no way he could respond to all, and if he responded to only some, those he didn’t respond to would accuse him of favoritism.
***Amendment I***
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.I don’t see where Dr. Bob has ‘raped’ you of your Freedom of Speech. Dr. Bob isn’t Congress, therefore, it’s ‘technicalities’.The Ist Amendment guarantees you freedom of speech, however, that Freedom doesn’t automatically guarantee you freedom of consequences in the process of excercising those rights..As with slander, libel, etc., the 1st Amendment says it’s your right to free speech, doesn’t say the victim won’t sue you for every last dime if you do though.
You say Dr. Bob’s favorites were allowed to beat up on you, yet he removed those posts after you emailed him and requested so. I could respond with the fact that 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. Does that mean he’s playing favorites where you are concerned? If you asked and he removed those posts, how could it be an outrageous attempt by Dr. Bob to humiliate, cause you harm, and drive you from the board? YOURS were removed, mine weren’t, maybe he’s trying to drive me out instead…
I wouldn’t call him a coward either, if he wanted you gone, I don’t think you would have been allowed to post this one. I have to disagree with your term sadistic as well. From my knowledge, this is a far cry from sadistic behavior. When he blocks you, he tells you why; I’ve never seen a person blocked without an explanation. Since it’s his board, I guess he has the right to create his own laws as each state has theirs. I’ve not seen wrath imposed either. He’s judge, jury and executioner, there are no hearings. However, I’ve seen him tell ppl to email him privately (since posting isn’t an option). How can sin even be brought into it? He’s the ‘law enforcement’. He forces no one to participate, remain a member, and/or do anything they don’t want to except abide by his rules.
Kiddo
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 2, 2002, at 6:14:32
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies, posted by trouble on March 2, 2002, at 0:34:28
Trouble;
I will certianly be blocked forever on this post.
When you sign on to a Yahoo group, you are told that you can be blocked permanantly without any reason given.
As far as supporters, there were 3 or so people that did exclaim their outrage for me being blocked. One even said that Dr. Bob's blocking of me was not out of concern to maintain "civility" and that his blocking of me was personal toward me. So it was obvious to those that I was mistreated by Dr. Bob. This mistreatment is very harmful to someone that is reaching out to others that have these conditions and are trying to help and get help. He is held to a higher standard in this regard and knows better. But his email to me: "Your not going to have freedom of speech here, Lou Pilder" was unneccesary and had the only purpose to harm me emotionally and psychologically. He knew that I was a champion of free speech for I posted that in defense of "3beers". He knew that if I was descriminated by him that it would outrage me for I had posted that I had come from the time period of the Nazi holocost and that without saying , descrimination toward me would be very hurtful to me. He has seen my posts stating that "All men are created equal". He knows that his arbitrary, caprecious and discriminatory actions toward me would hurt me. He hurt me and got away with it. For as soon as he sees my posts here, he will block me for life from this board.
What he should do is simply email the person that posts and redact the line in question or modify the line. He could even delete the entire post. The public scolding is inhumane to even small children. We are adults with great afflictions . No one should be treated like I was by him. I was brutilized by him. It will take me time to overcome, but if I can overcome other things in my life, then I can overcome this horrible experiance that I have been subjected to here.
Shabot Shalom,
Lou Pilder
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 2, 2002, at 7:27:39
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies » Lou Pilder, posted by kiddo on March 2, 2002, at 1:51:47
Kiddo'
There was a person that parroted the communist dictator, Joseph Stalin, in saying that "Freedom of speech belongs only to those that own the printing press" Was that you?
Stalin also allowed his people to beat and plunder and kill jews openly without admonition. (Pogrims). Just because you accept that Dr. Bob is the judge , jury and executioner, doesn't mean that others have to. Just because you are not hurt by the things that I am hurt by doesn;t mean that I should allow it.
Dr. Bob has a doctor's degree in his field and he knows what hurts people. He knew that I was a champion of free speech for I defened "3 beers". He knew that I would be greatly hurt by his email to me saying that "You will not have freedom of speech here, Lou Pilder" That hurt me and he knew it would hurt me. He knew that I came from the time of the Nazi holocost and that being treated in an arbitrary, or descriminatory or caprecious manner would hurt me. He knew that I had posted that "All men are created equal" and that treating me unequally would hurt me. He knew that anyone that is scolded would be hurt. He knew that by allowing people to ridicule me, that that would hurt me. 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. We are adults with severe afflictions that we didn't get on our own. We do not and can not be held to an arbitray, capricious or descrimintory standaed.Dr. Bob knows that and cannot be held innocent. 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. I was not allowed to defend. My joy of posting was taken from me. I was entrapped.
I will be permantly blocked as soon as Dr. Bob reads this. I will have the sorrow and pain that he has inflicted upon me for a while but I will overcome. For I have overcom greater abuses. I will overcome this horrible unAmerican experiance that I have been subjected to on this board.
Shabott Shalom;
Lou Pilder
Posted by Dinah on March 2, 2002, at 8:34:23
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies, posted by Lou Pilder on March 1, 2002, at 23:23:33
Hi Lou,
I hope you remember that I told you that I hoped I always had the courage to stand up for what I thought was right.
Well, I don't think Dr. Bob is sadistic, and it troubles me to hear him called sadistic. It's clear from my posts that I thought your banning was precipitous and based on a misunderstanding, but I never thought he was sadistic. In fact I have found him to be extraordinarily kind on many occasions. Please read the thread on What to do while you are banned, where Dr. Bob makes clear that no insult is intended.
Dr. Bob did allow you to post again after a week, and I hope you make the best possible use of that privilege, because the ability to post here is a privilege, not a right guaranteed under any constitution.
I admire the Lou Pilder who stuck calmly to his message while firmly remaining civil to those around him. I had wondered if your conduct had something to do with one of the gates you had yet to share with us. You had shared with us gates 1 and 2, forgiveness and love of mankind. While, again, I have no desire to join you on your path, since my own brings me great peace and joy, I do find that the ideas of forgiveness and caritas to be wonderful ideas. They bring to the person forgiving and loving more peace than they bring to the person loved and forgiven.Why don't you come to the Social board and share the rest of your journey. This board is read by many more than those who post, and your message may reach many, even if they don't choose to reply.
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 2, 2002, at 10:34:26
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies » Lou Pilder, posted by Dinah on March 2, 2002, at 8:34:23
Dinah;
Look at the post above this thread from Canine Eater. In that thread, Krazy Kat pours salt into this poor impaired persons wounds. The person is being used by Krazy Kat for KK says to "take a grammer course" The person is obviously impaired( or he wouldn't have come to this board) and KK is allowed to beat up on him. Dr. Bob even blocked Canine eater for another week but let KK demean and degrade this poor fellow. No one has any compassion for Canine eater and others are allowed by Dr. Bob to humiliate him. I was humiliated by Dr. Bob. I was publically scolded by Dr. Bob. I was treated like an animal that should be kicked out. That hurts. It hurts me the same as anyone else. I am inpaired just like all of us here. Why are people like KK allowed to go unscathed and I am scolded arbitrerily? Dr. Bob emailed me and said,"You are not going to have free speech here, Lou Pilder" I was trying to give help to a person on that post that Dr. Bob blocked me from. Is it unlawfull to help? KK is not helping Canaineater and KK's post is unadmonished by Dr. Bob. Could you possibly feel the pain that I am feeling ?
Lou
Posted by Dinah on March 2, 2002, at 10:50:24
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies, posted by Lou Pilder on March 2, 2002, at 10:34:26
>Could you possibly feel the pain that I am feeling ?
> LouOf course I can, Lou. That's why I referred you to the first two gates on your road. Forgiveness and charity are the only things that can ease your pain. Carrying anger can only be hurtful to you. I know it's hard, but I hope you can find the strength to open those two doors.
Incidentally, Krazy Kat is a dear friend of mine. She was angry with an attack on Dr. Bob. I was as well. I am quite fond of Dr. Bob and appreciate his work here.
I don't want to do anything to increase your pain, Lou. But it hurts me when my friends are mentioned in a negative way in a post to me. And it makes me feel somehow responsible.
So I hope you will be respectful enough of my own difficulties that you won't refer to anyone else in your posts to me. We can talk to each other without bringing anyone else into it, can't we?
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 2, 2002, at 11:22:50
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies » Lou Pilder, posted by Dinah on March 2, 2002, at 10:50:24
Dinah;
You say that KK can go unadmonished because she is a friend of yours. You also say that you are fond of Dr. Bob so you will allow him to allow
kk to humiliate Canineater.
When I was a teacher, I turned in a student that I apprehended stealing. The assistant principal said to me, "I am not going to punish her because she lives in my neighborhood." ( now the asst. principal would have punished her if the student was bussed from the other side of the tracks). 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
Posted by Dinah on March 2, 2002, at 11:30:24
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies » Dinah, posted by Lou Pilder on March 2, 2002, at 11:22:50
Lou, I'm sorry but I just don't feel up to this right now. I never said what you accused me of saying and never intended what you accused me of intending. And if you'll remember, I spoke up on your behalf as well. So you know I try to be fair.
I'm sorry for any misunderstanding. I only intended to help. But my attempts don't seem to be helpful to you, so...
Best wishes,
Dinah
Posted by trouble on March 2, 2002, at 11:36:21
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies, posted by Lou Pilder on March 2, 2002, at 6:14:32
Lou,
Thank you for replying so promptly and thoroughly to my inquiries.I will say two things and then let it go:
Your crying wolf is getting a little embarrassing. Your post was not deleted. I just read it, including the huge paragraph predicting its annihilation. That could be taken as showing disrespect to your fellows on this board, we have other fish to fry besides your apocalyptic hysteria. Which I take seriously, it's apparent that you are in agony over something, put please try to sit w/ your feelings today, maybe something new will become apparent. I will think about you all day, Lou, and send you my friendship.
2. Here's where I play Hardball, pal. No one made you give your real name to this community. You chose your handle just like the rest of us. Any public humiliation that results from your involvement is your responsiblity pardner.
trouble
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 2, 2002, at 11:39:14
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies » Lou Pilder, posted by Dinah on March 2, 2002, at 11:30:24
Dinah;
Good luck to you also. You have given me inspiration to remain on this board when you came to my defense 2 weeks ago. Without your post, I would have not come back.
I am going to go back to the first Gate . We all have to return to the first Gate for all of , like sheep, have gone astray.
But there is another Gate that I have not talked about yet. It is a Gate that you dig a hole and bury the rotting corpses in our lives. It is where you cover the rotting corpse with dirt and don't dig it back up again. I am going to bury all of this and cover it over and it will not be seen again. For love covers, for love covers a multitude, for love covers a multitude of sins.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 2, 2002, at 11:54:32
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies, posted by trouble on March 2, 2002, at 11:36:21
Trouble;
If I used a fake name, nothing would be changed. I really do not understand your point here but don't answer me and take away from your day on this for it is not important to me.
I was expecting to be blocked from this board permanatly and I am suprised that it has not happenend yet.
Lou
Posted by kiddo on March 2, 2002, at 11:56:20
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies » kiddo, posted by Lou Pilder on March 2, 2002, at 7:27:39
> Kiddo'
> There was a person that parroted the communist dictator, Joseph Stalin, in saying that "Freedom of speech belongs only to those that own the printing press" Was that you?Nope not me, I 'parrot' no one, I speak my own mind, besides, I think Stalin was wrong with that too, he didn't mention anything about consequences.
> Stalin also allowed his people to beat and plunder and kill jews openly without admonition. (Pogrims). Just because you accept that Dr. Bob is the judge , jury and executioner, doesn't mean that others have to. Just because you are not hurt by the things that I am hurt by doesn;t mean that I should allow it.
No, others don't have to accept anything, but it IS his board. Did I say I wasn't hurt? Because I don't mention it, doesn't mean that never happens. You should know me a little more before you speak my feelings. Thank you.
> Dr. Bob has a doctor's degree in his field and he knows what hurts people. He knew that I was a champion of free speech for I defened "3 beers". He knew that I would be greatly hurt by his email to me saying that "You will not have freedom of speech here, Lou Pilder" That hurt me and he knew it would hurt me. He knew that I came from the time of the Nazi holocost and that being treated in an arbitrary, or descriminatory or caprecious manner would hurt me. He knew that I had posted that "All men are created equal" and that treating me unequally would hurt me. He knew that anyone that is scolded would be hurt. He knew that by allowing people to ridicule me, that that would hurt me. 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. We are adults with severe afflictions that we didn't get on our own. We do not and can not be held to an arbitray, capricious or descrimintory standaed.Dr. Bob knows that and cannot be held innocent. 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. I was not allowed to defend. My joy of posting was taken from me. I was entrapped.He doesn't necessarily know what hurts people. Just as you don't know what hurts me and what doesn't. Something that may hurt one, may not hurt another. Perhaps that's why one person will be banned for something and not another.
> I will be permantly blocked as soon as Dr. Bob reads this. I will have the sorrow and pain that he has inflicted upon me for a while but I will overcome. For I have overcom greater abuses. I will overcome this horrible unAmerican experiance that I have been subjected to on this board.
> Shabott Shalom;
> Lou PilderBut you also said in one of the posts I replied to was that you were going to try and get yourself banned today and be proud to be American when that happened. If you 'know' you'll be banned why did you post it? I can't speak for anything that was said in private email, because it wasn't mine. I didn't see the 'conversation' that took place.
May I ask what 'Shabot Shalom' means?
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 2, 2002, at 12:06:08
In reply to Re: Double Standard With Banning Policies » Lou Pilder, posted by kiddo on March 2, 2002, at 11:56:20
Kiddo;
I did not say that I was going to try to get myself banned today.
Shabott Shalom means:
Shalom means peace (Hebrew)
Shabott is the Sabath
Have peace on this Sabbath
The City of Peace is Jeru Sholom (Jerusalem)
But evry day can be the Sabbath.
Lou
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.