![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 17 to 41 of 53. Go back in thread:
Posted by alexandra_k on January 14, 2005, at 15:21:07
In reply to Re: Is that e-mail really private? » All Done, posted by Snoozin on January 14, 2005, at 15:07:01
I would treat babblemail as private unless it was (in my opinion) nasty or concerning. If I thought it was either of those I would pass it on to Dr B to deal with it.
But in general I figure it is private correspondance.
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 14, 2005, at 17:21:45
In reply to Re: BabbleMail from MKB » Gabbix2, posted by Dr. Bob on January 13, 2005, at 23:46:19
I don't see the logic here Dr. Bob and this is why.
A while ago I recieved an e-mail which I wanted to use to validate someone's complaint that a poster was being threateing. You would not allow me to describe the e-mail in any negative way. I was actually blocked for labelling it.
You had suggested that I was permitted to say "It shocked and horrified me"
Well I would not do that. Why? Because by saying that it would have given the sender the Power of knowing that they had succeeded in their attempt to cause me discomfort. And in truth it didn't shock or horrify me, I saw it simply as an attempt to do so.So in order to warn anyone of a possible "situation" with a poster, I would assume the only thing to do would to avoid judging the e-mail and post the contents and let others come to their own conclusion. Anyone who sends an e-mail with "questionable" contents is not going to give permission to share it. And in this case, I was not given the opportunity to respond to the sender personally, or I would have done so.
With all the talk of support and safety on the board I really don't agree with having to hide these incidents from other posters. And if something serious happened again I'm afraid I would have to let fellow babblers know about it, it is my responsibility.To anyone reading I apologize for the euphemisms such as "questionable" and "situation" of course it would have to be something I took very seriously, I do believe that babblemail is private. But as Susan said, sometimes it's tantamount to spam.
Dr. Bob I do very much appreciate the fact that you did not block me when you could have.
It must be all those donations I keep sending you. : )
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 14, 2005, at 17:32:31
In reply to Re: Is that e-mail really private?, posted by alexandra_k on January 14, 2005, at 15:21:07
You know, I do believe Babble Mail is private, and even if I got mail I thought was stupid, or didn't like I most certainly would post it.
I did forward this particular letter to Dr. Bob, however I know that he doesn't notify babblers about these things. When a blocked poster purposely changes their name though, in order to send mail which is falsely accusing, I think they do give up certain babble rights, and I think other posters have a right to be aware of what is going on.
In this instance I thought I was taking a risk too, what I did could just as easily have made me look bad as the sender of the mail, especially if people thought the contents were really no big deal, or if what I did was unethical.
Posted by alexandra_k on January 14, 2005, at 19:16:46
In reply to Re: Is that e-mail really private? All Done » alexandra_k, posted by Gabbix2 on January 14, 2005, at 17:32:31
Yeah. I guess I just would have fowarded it to Dr B and left it at that. That is just what I would have done though...
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 14, 2005, at 19:49:57
In reply to Re: Is that e-mail really private? All Done » Gabbix2, posted by alexandra_k on January 14, 2005, at 19:16:46
> Yeah. I guess I just would have fowarded it to Dr B and left it at that. That is just what I would have done though...
>And you know, had I had more sleep and less P.M.S that may have been where I had left it too.. : )
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 15, 2005, at 4:32:52
In reply to Re: BabbleMail from MKB » Dr. Bob, posted by Gabbix2 on January 14, 2005, at 17:21:45
> I think that privacy is a matter of respect, so the fact you were respectful to Dinah, I'm sure she automatically was respectful back... But when a person starts a correspondence off in a disrespectful tone, then I don't think there can be an expectation of privacy. It's like they gave up that right, or privilege, or expectation -- whatever you want to call it -- when they went outside the bounds of propriety. This of course is only my opinion.
>
> SnoozinBut two wrongs don't make a right...
----
> So in order to warn anyone of a possible "situation" with a poster, I would assume the only thing to do would to avoid judging the e-mail and post the contents and let others come to their own conclusion.
> With all the talk of support and safety on the board I really don't agree with having to hide these incidents from other posters.
>
> Gabbix2It's great to look out for each other, I just think it would've been nice if there had been another way...
Bob
Posted by Dinah on January 15, 2005, at 5:30:45
In reply to Re: BabbleMail from MKB, posted by Dr. Bob on January 15, 2005, at 4:32:52
Would it have been ok to say "I received a babblemail in which this poster admits to being a blocked poster. I have forwarded it to Dr. Bob and expect that he will deal with it." as a way to let people know what was going on since the poster was also posting on the board. Would it have been ok to say *which* blocked poster? If the information could be shared without copying the body of the post, would that be ok?
I was away that day, and you clearly weren't available. It appears that Babble does better under those circumstances with more information so that people feel more comfortable waiting and letting you deal with it. I think that's what Gabbi was trying to do, because I'm sure Gabbi's seen the dynamics here as well as I have.
Posted by crushedout on January 15, 2005, at 9:12:22
In reply to Re: BabbleMail from MKB.. AKA wronged.. » Fallen4MyT, posted by Dinah on January 13, 2005, at 18:48:56
You did just get a raise, Dinah!mmmm sugarmama (in a homer simpson voice).
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 15, 2005, at 13:36:31
In reply to Re: BabbleMail from MKB » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on January 15, 2005, at 5:30:45
> Would it have been ok to say "I received a babblemail in which this poster admits to being a blocked poster. I have forwarded it to Dr. Bob and expect that he will deal with it." as a way to let people know what was going on since the poster was also posting on the board. Would it have been ok to say *which* blocked poster? If the information could be shared without copying the body of the post, would that be ok?
That's definitely better! As far as saying which blocked poster, I don't know, I do ask in the FAQ that people not post information that identifies others without their permission...
Bob
Posted by Dinah on January 15, 2005, at 19:05:35
In reply to Re: BabbleMail from MKB, posted by Dr. Bob on January 15, 2005, at 13:36:31
> As far as saying which blocked poster, I don't know, I do ask in the FAQ that people not post information that identifies others without their permission...
>
> BobMy understanding was that that meant that you weren't to say something like "Superman is really Clark Kent residing in Metropolis with a telephone number of 555-5555", not "Superman is currently posting as Catwoman".
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 15, 2005, at 19:22:19
In reply to Re: BabbleMail from MKB, posted by Dinah on January 15, 2005, at 19:05:35
> > I don't know, I do ask in the FAQ that people not post information that identifies others without their permission...
>
> My understanding was that that meant that you weren't to say something like "Superman is really Clark Kent residing in Metropolis with a telephone number of 555-5555", not "Superman is currently posting as Catwoman".You think the latter should be OK?
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on January 15, 2005, at 19:28:29
In reply to Re: BabbleMail from MKB, posted by Dr. Bob on January 15, 2005, at 19:22:19
How about
>superman told me he is currently posting as catwoman.
I don't see what is wrong with that.
Posted by Dinah on January 15, 2005, at 20:26:32
In reply to Re: BabbleMail from MKB, posted by alexandra_k on January 15, 2005, at 19:28:29
I agree with Alexandra. Particularly if Superman is blocked, or Catwoman didn't follow proper procedures.
It's not a good system to have multiple tiers of knowledge on the board. Particularly not if knowing about Catwoman and Superman might influence how a potential conflict resolves itself.
Posted by alexandra_k on January 15, 2005, at 20:40:25
In reply to Re: BabbleMail from MKB » alexandra_k, posted by Dinah on January 15, 2005, at 20:26:32
Yeah, I agree with Dinah :-)
In SOME situations
I think it could help with conflict resolution.
It could make their hurt understandable in the context in which it occured and people could continue to respond to their thread with a bit more understanding of the situation once they have been blocked again.
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 15, 2005, at 20:46:12
In reply to Re: BabbleMail from MKB » alexandra_k, posted by Dinah on January 15, 2005, at 20:26:32
I suppose I could have handled the situation more elegantly. I'm glad Dinah and Alexandra didn't see anything wrong with my letting people know that MKB was "Wronged". I would never announce that type of information if someone had simply changed their posting name. Due to the fact that her letter was not terribly scary I suppose it wasn't a necessity to post it's contents.
However, if someone I had no prior contact with, (in other words it wasn't a personal spat gotten out of hand) sent correspondence that was threatening abusive, and that poster had a completely different personna on the board I might risk a block and post it's contents in order to warn others.
Posted by alexandra_k on January 15, 2005, at 20:58:38
In reply to Okay, posted by Gabbix2 on January 15, 2005, at 20:46:12
> However, if someone I had no prior contact with, (in other words it wasn't a personal spat gotten out of hand) sent correspondence that was threatening abusive, and that poster had a completely different personna on the board I might risk a block and post it's contents in order to warn others.
If you passed it on to Dr B then wouldn't he deal with it though? I mean if it was really bad then the person would get blocked. And that way you don't risk getting a block yourself...
I have done stuff I regretted...
But sometimes it can be hard to figure what (if anything) one has done wrong.
Good on you for thinking about this :-)
Sorry about your PMS.
Posted by Fallen4MyT on January 15, 2005, at 21:07:01
In reply to Okay, posted by Gabbix2 on January 15, 2005, at 20:46:12
I still do not see anything wrong with your letting us know as I might have posted to WRONGED ...till Dr Bob came in and tended to that matter.
> I suppose I could have handled the situation more elegantly. I'm glad Dinah and Alexandra didn't see anything wrong with my letting people know that MKB was "Wronged". I would never announce that type of information if someone had simply changed their posting name. Due to the fact that her letter was not terribly scary I suppose it wasn't a necessity to post it's contents.
> However, if someone I had no prior contact with, (in other words it wasn't a personal spat gotten out of hand) sent correspondence that was threatening abusive, and that poster had a completely different personna on the board I might risk a block and post it's contents in order to warn others.
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 15, 2005, at 21:39:28
In reply to Re: Okay » Gabbix2, posted by alexandra_k on January 15, 2005, at 20:58:38
>
> If you passed it on to Dr B then wouldn't he deal with it though? I mean if it was really bad then the person would get blocked. And that way you don't risk getting a block yourself...
Me, still thinking about this..Well he may deal with it, by blocking them but still no one else would know what that person had done, and I think that's the point. Not to be vindictive but to prevent others from having to experience it. And in another way, I feel it's almost more fair to post what they said.
If I simply said " I recieved a letter from so and so which alarmed me and I sent it to dr. Bob"
that could mean anything, it's open to interpretation. Perhaps it could be something that wouldn't even bother most people you know?
Meanwhile all the babbleonians are thinking I recieved a death threat or something.
I'm just thankful I'll probably not have to make that decision again.
>
> I have done stuff I regretted...Well I can't say I regret what I did, but I do wonder if there was another way I could have dealt with it that would have been as effective.
> But sometimes it can be hard to figure what (if anything) one has done wrong.
> Good on you for thinking about this :-)Thanks,
> Sorry about your PMS.Chuckle, thanks for that too. : )
>
>
Posted by Dinah on January 15, 2005, at 21:44:07
In reply to Okay, posted by Gabbix2 on January 15, 2005, at 20:46:12
To be honest, I don't have any concern with privacy at all under circumstances like those. I was just trying to see what Dr. Bob found acceptable. I sort of figure you waive your right to privacy under certain circumstances. Fortunately those circumstances are rare. But it's Dr. Bob's board...
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 15, 2005, at 21:54:14
In reply to Re: Okay » Gabbix2, posted by Dinah on January 15, 2005, at 21:44:07
Whew! I'm so glad to know that Dinah, I respect your opinion and though originally I had the same about the right to privacy being waived considering the circumstances, I was starting to second guess myself. As long as that's what you think, than I'm okay with it. Thanks.
Posted by alexandra_k on January 15, 2005, at 21:55:39
In reply to Re: Okay » alexandra_k, posted by Gabbix2 on January 15, 2005, at 21:39:28
Ok, me still thinking about this too...
> Well he may deal with it, by blocking them but still no one else would know what that person had done, and I think that's the point. Not to be vindictive but to prevent others from having to experience it.
But I don't see how it does 'prevent others from having to experience it'. All it does do is produce annoyance / hostility toward the original poster on their return... I do take your point that you weren't into it for revenge or anything like that, but I guess I don't see how it prevents a recurrence...
>And in another way, I feel it's almost more fair to post what they said.
I guess I disagree, I would have just passed it on.
> If I simply said " I recieved a letter from so and so which alarmed me and I sent it to dr. Bob"
> that could mean anything, it's open to interpretation.Yeah, I guess I wouldn't have even said that.
>Perhaps it could be something that wouldn't even bother most people you know?
Oh no, it would have bothered me immensely. Which would be why I would have sent it on.
Hey, I am not meaning to criticise or anything. I don't know what I would have done in the moment. Am just trying to figure it out incase it ever happens to me.
PMS is a b*tch.
Finally got mine back, though. YAY! I never thoguht I'd say that...
(B*tch isn't asterisking)
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 16, 2005, at 0:03:19
In reply to Re: Okay » Gabbix2, posted by alexandra_k on January 15, 2005, at 21:55:39
>
> But I don't see how it does 'prevent others from having to experience it'. All it does do is produce annoyance / hostility toward the original poster on their return...Well I'd specified that I was talking about a babble mail which was abusive or threatening so I'm not speaking of Mkb here. I think making their behaviour known publically would certainly make them think twice about doing it again. And if it creates hostility or annoyance toward them well gee, too bad, that happens sometimes when you're an abuser.
I have an obligation to let people know what I know, that someone has the potential to be abusive, especially here, where many people have been traumatized. If people still choose to interact with that poster that's their perogotive but at least I know people aren't innocently interacting with someone who is dangerous. Anyway this is getting too much into hypotheticals so I'm going to sign off.And yeah, P.M.S is a b*tch, I'm such a stereostype when it comes to P.M.S I can't even get offended at the jokes.
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 16, 2005, at 9:32:14
In reply to Re: Okay » alexandra_k, posted by Gabbix2 on January 16, 2005, at 0:03:19
> It's not a good system to have multiple tiers of knowledge on the board. Particularly not if knowing about Catwoman and Superman might influence how a potential conflict resolves itself.
>
> DinahI agree, but isn't the whole idea of babblemail to create another tier of knowledge? I worry about it being a slippery slope...
--
> I suppose I could have handled the situation more elegantly. I'm glad Dinah and Alexandra didn't see anything wrong with my letting people know that MKB was "Wronged". I would never announce that type of information if someone had simply changed their posting name. Due to the fact that her letter was not terribly scary I suppose it wasn't a necessity to post it's contents.
> > If you passed it on to Dr B then wouldn't he deal with it though?
>
> Me, still thinking about this..
>
> Well he may deal with it, by blocking them but still no one else would know what that person had done, and I think that's the point. Not to be vindictive but to prevent others from having to experience it. And in another way, I feel it's almost more fair to post what they said.
> If I simply said " I recieved a letter from so and so which alarmed me and I sent it to dr. Bob"
> that could mean anything, it's open to interpretation.> I have an obligation to let people know what I know, that someone has the potential to be abusive, especially here, where many people have been traumatized.
>
> Gabbix2Thanks for thinking more about this. What if next time :-) you post something like:
> I received a letter from Catwoman which alarmed me and I sent it to Dr. Bob. It has to do with Superman. If you're interested, babblemail me and we can discuss it more privately.
So people can find out what you know, but you're not making it public?
Bob
Posted by Dinah on January 16, 2005, at 10:25:41
In reply to Re: BabbleMail from Catwoman, posted by Dr. Bob on January 16, 2005, at 9:32:14
It seems so cloak and daggerish. If that's what you want, it's your board. But it seems to me straightforward would be better.
Posted by gardenergirl on January 16, 2005, at 12:07:32
In reply to Re: BabbleMail from Catwoman » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on January 16, 2005, at 10:25:41
I agree. If you are blocking someone who has posted something uncivil, you quote at least part of the post that you are basing your decision on.
I really don't see this as a privacy issue. If someone is blocked and begins posting under another name to get around that, how is it different from posting something uncivil? Both are sanctionable. If you provide the details of the reason for sanction on one, why hide it for the latter?
And if someone changes their posting name, and notifies you per your procedure, they are not sanctionable, and thus, can maintain their privacy.
I think we have a right to know the poster's screen name when someone is circumventing the rules in this manner. As other's have said, it's information that may be vital to protecting yourself from hurt from further uncivil posts.
And frankly, if I were in Gabbi's position, I would not want to have to answer a boatload of Babblemails about the topic if I could just post it.
This could all be simply handled, Dr. Bob, if you would just post both screen names when extending a block for posting under another name.
gg
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.