![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 33. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 5, 2004, at 7:40:22
Dr. Hsiung,
I have reviewed your reply to me about my request for a determination as to the acceptability or not of the two posts in question that I sunbmitted to you posted by NIkki T2.
In your reply tp me, I could not determine if you had determined if the posts were or were not acceptable here in relation tot he guidlines of the forum. You wrote something about if there are more than one post by the poster in question that you may comment on one of them. But does that mean that the other 2 posts that I had asked you to comment on, that I could find no comment from you spacifffically about those particular posts, are acceptable or not acceptable here in relation to the guidlines of the forum?
Lou PIlder
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 5, 2004, at 15:47:23
In reply to Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung, posted by Lou Pilder on November 5, 2004, at 7:40:22
> I have reviewed your reply to me about my request for a determination...
Sorry, which reply to which request?
Bob
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 7, 2004, at 11:39:59
In reply to Re: Lou's request, posted by Dr. Bob on November 5, 2004, at 15:47:23
Dr. Hsiung,
I wrote to you in this thread that I could not determine if you had written a determination as to the acceptability or not in relation to the guidlines of the forum for two posts directed to me by NikkiT2. In that post from me to you, which is the original post in this thread, I also wrote,in regards to your reply to me that I reviewed,[...Does that mean that the other two posts that I had asked you to comment on...are acceptable or not...in relation to the guidlines of the forum...?].
One of your replies to me concerning the acceptability of the two posts on question as to my not being able to find a determination as to if they are acceptable or not was:
[...if addressing...one of a number of posts, is enough to deciede what to do, then I may leave it at that...].
One of my requests, in light of your replies to me, could be cleared up, to me at least, if you could clarify this by you telling me if:
A. any of your replies to me means that you will not give a determination as to if the posts in question are acceptable or not
B. any of your replies to me means that the posts are both not acceptable here in relation to the guidlines of the forum
C. any of your replies to me means that the posts are both acceptable here in relation to the guidlines of the forum
D. any of your replies to me means that there is a split of the two posts as to one being acceptable and the other not acceptablr
E. None of the above
G. a combination of the above
The following posts may or may not be relavant to this discussion.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041027/msgs/410280.html
In that post from me to you there is a correction to the first link given in a nother post. The correction is:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041012/msgs/403873.html
Lou Pilder
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 7, 2004, at 12:53:36
In reply to Re: Lou's request, posted by Dr. Bob on November 5, 2004, at 15:47:23
Dr. Hsiung,
I am requesting the determination in question because I feel that the determination in question has a great need to me, at least, to be made to the entire forum. I feel that some people have expressed already in posts here that if you do not put PBC to the post, then many people here could think that the post is acceptable, and there is no PCB for the two posts by NikkiT2 to me,that I can find, (not the post by NIkkiT2 that was not directed to me spacifically,or the post by NikkiT2 that was directed to me in regards to her to not post to me which she did even though I had requested her not to post to me).
I have reviewed your replies to my requests for you to write a determination for those posts by NikkiT2 to me and I think that they could mean that they are undetermined as to being acceptable or not in relation to the guidlines of the forum. And if I think that they are undertermined by you, then I feel that there is the potential for others to think that those posts in question are also undetermined, or could also think that if you have not put a PBC to those posts that they could think that the posts are acceptable to be written here.
I feel that if I do not see a determination as to one way or the other, then posters here could write similar posts directed at me, for there is the postential that others could also not see a dtermination given by you and think that if they see your absence of a PCB to the post means that it is acceptable, which I would rather not have directed at me for the two posts are causing me much distress because I can not determine if you have determined them to be acceptable or not. The one about [...don't tell me, I was being antisemitic by being upset with my husband because my husband has a jewish great aunt...], if left by you so that I, or others, do not know if you are considering the post to be acceptable or not in relation to the guidlines of the forum, could mean, but not necessarrily, that you endorse the acceptability of people writing posts like that to me. And if you do endorse that others can write a post directed to me like that post, could you clarify how the guidlines of the forum could allow a post like that to be directed at me? Others here think that if you do not put a PBC to the post, that it is acceptable which could cause others to direct those type of posts to me and cause me serious emotional distress. I feel that a mental health forum could have a guidline to make those type of posts unacceptable, if there is no guidline as to the present, but some of the posters here have written that unless you put a PBC toward the post that they think the post could be acceptable. I do not think that the post is acceptable even though others here think that it could be acceptable because you have not put a PBC toward those two posts in question.
The other post, that has in it,[...you are evil...] is equally distresing to me, and there is no PBC to it so others could think on that basis, that the post is acceptable. If the post is acceptable, I feel that others here could direct similar posts to me by using the format of putting in front of the statement,[I would tell you] and the after the statement, [but I won't]. I have not seen a PBC concerning that statement by the poster to me and if it is acceptable here to use that format, then I feel that that there is the potential that some posters could then direct those type of statements to me and possibly feel that they can have acceptability by you to do so, and others that are only reading, but not posting, could have the potential to think that the posts are acceptable.
Lou Pilder
Posted by NikkiT2 on November 7, 2004, at 13:05:44
In reply to Re: Lou's request » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on November 7, 2004, at 12:53:36
Lou,
Please do not post my words without posting full sentences.
Copying only part of a sentence has the ability for words to be taken VERY much out of context.
Thankyou
Nikki
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 7, 2004, at 13:22:32
In reply to Re: Lou's request » Lou Pilder, posted by NikkiT2 on November 7, 2004, at 13:05:44
> Lou,
>
> Please do not post my words without posting full sentences.
>
> Copying only part of a sentence has the ability for words to be taken VERY much out of context.
>
> Thankyou
>
> Nikki
NikkiT2,
In looking above to what you wrote to me, I think that this has come up before and Dr. Hsiung wrote a post about this. The following is Dr. Hsiungs post.
Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20030221/msgs/212741.html
Posted by NikkiT2 on November 7, 2004, at 13:59:14
In reply to Lou's response to NikkiT2, posted by Lou Pilder on November 7, 2004, at 13:22:32
I wasn't invoking a rule Lou, and I wasn't involving any ruling from Dr Bob, I was simply asking you. And I had hoped that you would respect my wishes.
I'm really really trying to open some dialogue with you to put a stop to all of this. I know you are awaiting Dr Bobs answer, but it appears it is not forthcoming. In this case it is up to *us* to move on from this, and I m hoping very much that you are as willing to do this as I am.
Thats all
Nikki
Posted by Lou PIlder on November 7, 2004, at 15:11:32
In reply to Re: Lou's response to NikkiT2, posted by NikkiT2 on November 7, 2004, at 13:59:14
> I wasn't invoking a rule Lou, and I wasn't involving any ruling from Dr Bob, I was simply asking you. And I had hoped that you would respect my wishes.
>
> I'm really really trying to open some dialogue with you to put a stop to all of this. I know you are awaiting Dr Bobs answer, but it appears it is not forthcoming. In this case it is up to *us* to move on from this, and I m hoping very much that you are as willing to do this as I am.
>
> Thats all
>
> NikkiNikkiT2,
I think that we might have a misunderstanding here. I will try to use the style of writing that uses a full sentance in our dialog, but I can not assure that all of my posts would be the way that you request them to be.
How about if we try this;
(A) I will try to use the style of writing that you request me to use, and if (B)I do not in some case, could you ask me to clarify the statement and I will clarify it so that if there is something that could be misunderstood, the clarification from me could clear that up?
In your text above, you write that you would like to open dialog with me. I am always willing to open up dialog with you or others. What dialog would you like to open up?
Lou
Posted by Sad Sara on November 7, 2004, at 15:21:56
In reply to Re: Lou's request » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on November 7, 2004, at 12:53:36
I don't want to put words in Dr. Bobs mouth, but it's starting to be painful to watch this now... and he has been trying to convey that it has been enough discussions around this in this post:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041027/msgs/412311.htmlI interpret that post as: you two make up between you.
Nikki has said sorry for what she said, which means that she does not find it acceptable what she said herself. Everyone(correct me if I am wrong) has agreed as far as I have seen that it is not acceptable to say something like that... AND everyone (correct me if I am wrong) has forgiven Nikki for saying it, knows that she did not mean it and said it out of anger and frustration. Please, forgiving someone is also to accept that it has happened and put it behind as past.
She is practically begging to you about taking this discussion with HER, instead of through a third party. She is willing to, everyone (correct me if I am wrong) think it would be great if you two could just make up between you two and go on to other quests in life.
I think that in the light of all this, dr. Bob does NOT feel like it is a need for him.
And don't you think it should be possible for two grown up persons to make peace between each other?
Posted by NikkiT2 on November 7, 2004, at 15:57:13
In reply to Re: Lou's response to NikkiT2 » NikkiT2, posted by Lou PIlder on November 7, 2004, at 15:11:32
I think others have said it best Lou.
I know and accept that I hurt you. I admit that I should not have said certain things in my two posts directed toward you, and I am sorry for it.
I hope you are able to understand how I was hurt also, and that we can simply draw a line under all of this and move on.
Respectfully
Nikki
Posted by Noa on November 7, 2004, at 16:10:12
In reply to Re: Lou's response to NikkiT2 » Lou PIlder, posted by NikkiT2 on November 7, 2004, at 15:57:13
Nikki. Wow. I am really impressed that you are able to do this.
Posted by fayeroe on November 7, 2004, at 20:34:35
In reply to Re: Lou's response to NikkiT2 » Lou PIlder, posted by NikkiT2 on November 7, 2004, at 15:57:13
Nikki!!! Good for you!! You're a better person for this and I applaud you!! Pat
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 7, 2004, at 21:03:06
In reply to Re: Lou's request, posted by Dr. Bob on November 5, 2004, at 15:47:23
> > I have reviewed your reply to me about my request for a determination...
>
> Sorry, which reply to which request?
>
> BobDR. Hsiung,
In your request to me in the above post from you to me, you asked, [...which reply to which post...?]
I feel that we may have a misunderstanding and I would like for us to clear up any misunderstanding.
You asked me which reply to which post? The posts in question that I made a request to you about that I do not know if you have made a determination as to if the posts are acceptable or not in relation to the guidlines of the forum are listed below. In those links that are titled,[..Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung...] there is a link to the post in question that I am requesting from you a determination as to the acceptability of the post here.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041012/msgs/403973.html
and,
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041012/msgs/404334.html
Lou Pilder
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 7, 2004, at 21:40:30
In reply to Re: Lou's request, posted by Dr. Bob on November 5, 2004, at 15:47:23
Dr. Hsiung,
In continuing with my summery to clear up any misunderstandings, you asked me, [...which reply...?].
The reply that I was writing about is the reply from you to me that wrote,[...but if addressing part of a post or one of a number of posts, is enough to decide what to do, then I may leave it alone...].
I feel that you reply here does not , at least to me, give a determination as to the acceptability or not here for the posts in question. Your reply writes that , IMO, that you addressed one post in a number of posts, or part of a post and left either the other part or the other posts alone without comment from you. This leaves more than one, IMO, interpretation for what you did. Of the interpretations that I think has the potential to be thought by examining this statement from you is that :
A. Since you wrote that one part of the post is uncivil, that the other part is not acceptable either.
B. Since you wrote that one part is uncivil that the other part may , or may not, also be uncivil.
In relation to [...one of a number of posts...], some interpretations that IMO could have the potential for others to think are as follows.
C. Since you wrote that part of a post by this poster is uncivil, then only that part is uncivil and all the rest of the posters posts in that number of posts in that thread are acceptable
D. Since you wrote that part of a post is uncivil, then IMO I believe that there is the potential for some others to think that only that part is uncivil and posts by that poster in question outside of that thread are not a part of your writing that one part of one post in another thread is uncivil.
If you could clarify as to if other posts or parts of the same post are uncivil because you wrote that one part of a post is uncivil, then I could have a better understanding of your reply to me.
Lou Pilder
Posted by fayeroe on November 7, 2004, at 21:51:20
In reply to Re: Lou's response to NikkiT2 » Lou PIlder, posted by NikkiT2 on November 7, 2004, at 15:57:13
Nikki said: I know and accept that I hurt you. I admit that I should not have said certain things in my two posts directed toward you, and I am sorry for it.
Lou, how in the h*ll do you explain ignoring this post? After all the time you've taken up with this, all the space you've used and after so many people have simply thrown up their hands in dismay........HOW can you not answer this post? I know you don't like to answer questions, so if you want to fritter away some of the last remaining goodwill you have here.......do as you usually do and either ask me for a clarification or just ignore this. Instead of answering Nikki's post, you're still after a frigging determination!!! This is totally beyond the pale. I will never, ever again try to hep you.
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 7, 2004, at 22:10:01
In reply to Re: Lou's response to NikkiT2 » NikkiT2, posted by fayeroe on November 7, 2004, at 21:51:20
Friends,
It is written here that [...how the (expletive)..can you ignore ...?].
It is not my intention to ignore the post in question. I have not replied to it yet because my reply will be very lengthly and I need more time to compose my reply. I also appreciate the reply from Nikki to me and feel very good about it. But our relationship goes back several years and I would like to cover all of that so I will need more time to reply.
Lou
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 8, 2004, at 2:08:48
In reply to Lou's summery to Dr. Hsiung » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on November 7, 2004, at 21:03:06
> The posts in question that I made a request to you about that I do not know if you have made a determination as to if the posts are acceptable or not in relation to the guidlines of the forum are listed below.
She's apologized:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041027/msgs/412979.html
So IMO, whether they're acceptable is moot. I'd like to focus on moving forward now...
Bob
Posted by fayeroe on November 8, 2004, at 9:40:51
In reply to Lou's clarification to responding, posted by Lou Pilder on November 7, 2004, at 22:10:01
Lou wrote:Friends,
It is written here that [...how the (expletive)..can you ignore ...?].
It is not my intention to ignore the post in question. I have not replied to it yet because my reply will be very lengthly and I need more time to compose my reply. I also appreciate the reply from Nikki to me and feel very good about it. But our relationship goes back several years and I would like to cover all of that so I will need more time to reply.
LouLou, I do not believe that Nikki is referring to years of posts. I believe that she is talking about what has been happening recently. That you would say that you're going to cover all of the several years of posts means to me that there will be more time taken up...more space used.....and more people will turn away from you. I feel that you've got your chance and you're going to use your usual tactics to obscure issues and get more attention. Well, Lou, I think the time has come to put up or shut up. Pat....yes, I feel the authority hovering...but I had to say it. It's time this board was used for something other than this nonsense that has taken over.
Posted by mair on November 8, 2004, at 12:42:28
In reply to Re: Lou's summery, posted by Dr. Bob on November 8, 2004, at 2:08:48
Posted by fayeroe on November 8, 2004, at 14:00:37
In reply to Has Lou Ever Apologized to Nikki? (nm), posted by mair on November 8, 2004, at 12:42:28
Mair, the way I see it is if Lou apologized to Nikki, that would end his reign on the board right now. He's have to take something else up and he's not willing to do that. Nikki showed that she is sincere and only wants what is best for the board by apologizing to Lou.
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 8, 2004, at 15:04:01
In reply to Re: Lou's clarification to responding, posted by fayeroe on November 8, 2004, at 9:40:51
fayeroe,
You wrote,[...board was used for something other than this nonsense...].
Could you clarify what you are referring to as "nonsense"? If you could, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 8, 2004, at 15:16:56
In reply to Re: Lou's clarification to responding, posted by fayeroe on November 8, 2004, at 9:40:51
fayeroe,
You wrote, [...Lou,....more people will turn away from you...your usual tactics to obscure issues...get more attention...].
It is not my intention to [...get more attention...]. Could you clarify what you mean by "usual tactics" ? If you could, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
Lou
Posted by fayeroe on November 8, 2004, at 15:22:39
In reply to Lou's reply to fayeroe » fayeroe, posted by Lou Pilder on November 8, 2004, at 15:04:01
Lou, I'm pretty sure you know the definition of nonsense. You talk, in 2003, of buying and selling thousands of stocks, etc. etc.....so I feel confident that you know what I mean.
Posted by fayeroe on November 8, 2004, at 15:24:00
In reply to Lou's reply to fayeroe-ptafyutoigma » fayeroe, posted by Lou Pilder on November 8, 2004, at 15:16:56
I'll only respond to one post at a time, Lou. And I just responded to one.
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 8, 2004, at 15:28:33
In reply to Re: Has Lou Ever Apologized to Nikki? » mair, posted by fayeroe on November 8, 2004, at 14:00:37
In regards to the following being posted here: [...if Lou apologised...that would {end his reign}...he's have to take something else up...he's not willing to do that...].
I have no idea what is meant by {end his reign} or the part about {take something else up}. I would like to hear from anyone if they could expalin what they think these statements mean.
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.