![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 508 to 532 of 536. Go back in thread:
Posted by Dinah on June 17, 2005, at 23:43:00
In reply to Re: the next best thing, posted by Dr. Bob on June 17, 2005, at 22:48:03
Dr. Bob!!!
A real conversation! I knew you could do it!
I think I'll enjoy feeling heard for a while before I reply. :)
Posted by Dinah on June 18, 2005, at 0:47:05
In reply to Re: the next best thing, posted by Dr. Bob on June 17, 2005, at 22:48:03
Posted by Dr. Bob on June 18, 2005, at 2:17:18
In reply to (See how little it takes to make me happy?) (nm) » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on June 18, 2005, at 0:47:05
Posted by Dinah on June 20, 2005, at 23:31:21
In reply to Re: the next best thing, posted by Dr. Bob on June 17, 2005, at 22:48:03
> > You hadn't appeared too open to the idea that reading posts on small boards be limited to only those who could post on them, so I was trying for the next best thing.
>
> Great, let's consider that?
Ahhhh... Still basking. In fact, I rather hate to continue the conversation. Wait a second.Ahhhhh.... being heard....
Sigh. Ok.
>
> > > their could be a portal from the main boards to the small boards which could only be entered by altering your registration to mark that you wish to participate in small boards (which would expire if you didn't join a small board in a reasonable length of time). Once within the portal, those who wish to be part of the small boards could read all the small boards. Or whatever.
>
> So it would be OK for them to read a small board, even if it didn't have any openings, as long as they wished to participate = join some small board?That would be a definite step in the right direction. Since it would decrease the chance of someone stumbling into what looked like a situation where they would be welcomed, when in actuality they would not.
> > Karen Kay, for example, apparently brought many people to Babble with her delightful ways. People who later stayed and continued to post. Had Karen Kay been so delightful behind a glass door where others could see, but not join in, would the result had been the same?
>
> Maybe Karen wouldn't have chosen to be behind a glass door. And if she had, maybe that preference for herself would've been more important than bringing more people in. And either way, lots of other delightful people wouldn't be behind glass doors.I'm quite certain you are right. ;) But I should say no more...
> > contrary to your theory, I don't think that people who were charmed by that conversation, but unable to join in, would be as thrilled being told that they couldn't be part of that group, but they could be a part of this other group instead
>
> Of course they wouldn't be thrilled, but maybe they'd stick around a little longer anyway?To be blunt, why? My feelings were hurt when you slapped my hand over the party, and I've been here aeons and understood your position. If my hand were slapped first thing, why would I want to stay around?
> > Plus, my guess is that the set of potential posters who don't post because their posts are googleable ... is greater than the set of people who don't post because they find Social larger than they would wish.
>
> Hmm, those are independent issues, how large a board is and whether it's Googleable...Yes, and one argument is that non-googleable boards would kill two birds with one stone, since you have already gotten feedback that some people would prefer to be able to chat where there conversations weren't open for all to see. But the equally valid argument would be that two independent variables should not be altered at the same time if you are to measure the result on the dependent variable and come to reliable conclusions. (I'm studying chapter 1 for my CLEP, sorry.)
Soooo... let's see. Making the private boards private is still the considerate and polite thing to do. Hmmmm.... Maybe you could also start a PsychoBabble-NonGoogleable board. Where only those who are registered at Babble can read, and where posts are not googleable. That would give you another group where only the googleability and ability to read by non-Babblers would be the independent variable. To compare against private nongoogleable boards. And also against public googleable boards.
>
> > How many people post on Social at any given time, anyway? Your proposed small groups were limited to 25, right? How many different posters are there on Social in this and the last archive? 50? 100? 200?
>
> In Psychology in January, 2580 posts by 110 posters:
Wow!!! I know and like that many people? I am impressed! And yet Psychological feels so warm and cozy... What a testament to the warm and welcoming nature of Babblers.> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050219/msgs/468378.html
>
> > Any benefits size wise to the new groups might depend more on stability and continued posting
>
> Right, but continued posting might depend on comfort level, which might depend on size...
>
> BobAgreed, to a certain extent. I'm willing to concede that there are those who find the main boards intimidating. Even though I also personally feel that the risk involved is more than repaid by the benefits gained. But the point I am unwilling to concede is that there are more polite and less polite (polite in the considerate and thoughtful meaning of the word, not as in meaningless protocol), and more divisive and less divisive, ways of achieving the same goals, and that more polite and less divisive ways are far preferable.
Paying to be part of a private board seems like a good idea as well, especially since it would also allow you to dip your toes into another idea you've been toying with for some time. Except it is likely (and rightly so in some respects, you must admit) to initiate a firestorm from those who legitimately can't pay for one reason or another.
Posted by Dinah on June 20, 2005, at 23:32:19
In reply to Re: :-) (nm) » Dinah, posted by Dr. Bob on June 18, 2005, at 2:17:18
Posted by Dr. Bob on June 21, 2005, at 2:25:35
In reply to Re: the next best thing, posted by Dinah on June 20, 2005, at 23:31:21
> > So it would be OK for them to read a small board, even if it didn't have any openings, as long as they wished to participate = join some small board?
>
> That would be a definite step in the right direction. Since it would decrease the chance of someone stumbling into what looked like a situation where they would be welcomed, when in actuality they would not.What about a notice at the top of the page? Keep reading only if you understand that you may not be able to post to this board, or something like that?
> > > contrary to your theory, I don't think that people who were charmed by that conversation, but unable to join in, would be as thrilled being told that they couldn't be part of that group, but they could be a part of this other group instead
> >
> > Of course they wouldn't be thrilled, but maybe they'd stick around a little longer anyway?
>
> To be blunt, why?Because where there's one charming conversation there are likely to be more?
Bob
Posted by Dinah on June 21, 2005, at 6:00:06
In reply to Re: the next best thing, posted by Dr. Bob on June 21, 2005, at 2:25:35
Shouldn't have bothered.
And I was feeling so good.
Posted by Dr. Bob on June 22, 2005, at 1:13:44
In reply to Sigh. Head against wall. » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on June 21, 2005, at 6:00:06
Posted by Dinah on June 22, 2005, at 1:36:14
In reply to Re: sorry, let's back up? (nm) » Dinah, posted by Dr. Bob on June 22, 2005, at 1:13:44
Posted by Dr. Bob on June 22, 2005, at 21:47:38
In reply to Happy to. How? (nm) » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on June 22, 2005, at 1:36:14
Posted by Dinah on June 23, 2005, at 7:11:48
In reply to Re: what was it I said? (nm) » Dinah, posted by Dr. Bob on June 22, 2005, at 21:47:38
Posted by Dr. Bob on June 26, 2005, at 21:58:32
In reply to Not a thing, Dr. Bob. Really. (nm), posted by Dinah on June 23, 2005, at 7:11:48
Posted by Dinah on June 27, 2005, at 7:46:17
In reply to Re: what happened then? (nm) » Dinah, posted by Dr. Bob on June 26, 2005, at 21:58:32
Not a thing.
I tend to feel dismissed when minor points of my post are highlighted while the message is ignored. That may be your intention, but I realize that it probably isn't. Nevertheless, I end up feeling, at a minimum, frustrated.
I know you're a busy man, and I respect that. But I don't require an immediate answer to my posts. You can wait until you have the time to respond.
It just feels so lopsided, you know? I put a lot of time and effort into both my thoughts and beliefs, and my attempts to communicate them. And into trying to understand yours and others points of view as well. (If you'll notice, I conceded a point in that post.) And in trying to phrase my responses in terms that you might be more likely to respond to. It just doesn't seem like it's worth the effort sometimes.
Other times, like the response before this one, it did feel worth it. That's why I almost wanted to stop there. :)
I do know you can have animated interesting conversations. I also know you don't always have the time to do that.
If you want to go back, the best way I can think of is to go back to the last real post I made.
And to avoid me the hurt of having you ask which post, here it is.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050614/msgs/516381.html
(Incidentally, people aren't all that good at reading the top of the page. Especially if they reach a post through Google, which sends you directly to the post.)
I don't suppose it matters much on this topic anymore. But for future topics, I thought I'd say it anyway.
Posted by Dr. Bob on June 27, 2005, at 15:55:20
In reply to Exactly what I said » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on June 27, 2005, at 7:46:17
> I tend to feel dismissed when minor points of my post are highlighted while the message is ignored.
Sorry, could you clue me in to what the message is?
> Incidentally, people aren't all that good at reading the top of the page. Especially if they reach a post through Google, which sends you directly to the post.
But when it sends you there, it sends you the top of that page, doesn't it?
Bob
Posted by Dinah on June 27, 2005, at 17:26:38
In reply to Re: Exactly what I said, posted by Dr. Bob on June 27, 2005, at 15:55:20
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 6, 2005, at 2:06:20
In reply to Re: the next best thing, posted by Dinah on June 20, 2005, at 23:31:21
> > So it would be OK for them to read a small board, even if it didn't have any openings, as long as they wished to participate = join some small board?
>
> That would be a definite step in the right direction. Since it would decrease the chance of someone stumbling into what looked like a situation where they would be welcomed, when in actuality they would not.Let me try this again. The key is them knowing what they're getting into?
> My feelings were hurt when you slapped my hand over the party
Sorry about that! Can you give me a link? I'd like to take another look...
> Psychological feels so warm and cozy... What a testament to the warm and welcoming nature of Babblers.
Babblers are great! But the same porridge can be just right for some and too hot or too cold for others...
> the point I am unwilling to concede is that there are more polite and less polite (polite in the considerate and thoughtful meaning of the word, not as in meaningless protocol), and more divisive and less divisive, ways of achieving the same goals, and that more polite and less divisive ways are far preferable.
I agree. So the goal is to come up with a more polite and less divisive way?
Bob
Posted by Dinah on July 11, 2005, at 18:48:32
In reply to Re: the next best thing, second try, posted by Dr. Bob on July 6, 2005, at 2:06:20
> > > So it would be OK for them to read a small board, even if it didn't have any openings, as long as they wished to participate = join some small board?
> >
> > That would be a definite step in the right direction. Since it would decrease the chance of someone stumbling into what looked like a situation where they would be welcomed, when in actuality they would not.
>
> Let me try this again. The key is them knowing what they're getting into?That's one key.
>
> > My feelings were hurt when you slapped my hand over the party
>
> Sorry about that! Can you give me a link? I'd like to take another look...N'important. I deserved it. But it still hurt.
>
> > Psychological feels so warm and cozy... What a testament to the warm and welcoming nature of Babblers.
>
> Babblers are great! But the same porridge can be just right for some and too hot or too cold for others...
>
Too true. But why let people smell or taste porridge that may be just right for them, but that they are not allowed to eat?> > the point I am unwilling to concede is that there are more polite and less polite (polite in the considerate and thoughtful meaning of the word, not as in meaningless protocol), and more divisive and less divisive, ways of achieving the same goals, and that more polite and less divisive ways are far preferable.
>
> I agree. So the goal is to come up with a more polite and less divisive way?
>
> BobYes, but from the thread below I would say that you don't appear to me to be all that open to that. I may be wrong, but in what ways are you trying to come up with a more polite and less divisive way?
I really do appreciate your trying again, and I do think you put time and effort into your answer. I don't feel at all dismissed, and I truly appreciate that.
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 12, 2005, at 1:57:53
In reply to Re: the next best thing, second try, posted by Dinah on July 11, 2005, at 18:48:32
> > The key is them knowing what they're getting into?
>
> That's one key.
>
> > the same porridge can be just right for some and too hot or too cold for others...
>
> Too true. But why let people smell or taste porridge that may be just right for them, but that they are not allowed to eat?Another key is that that would be traumatic for them?
> > So the goal is to come up with a more polite and less divisive way?
>
> Yes, but from the thread below I would say that you don't appear to me to be all that open to that. I may be wrong, but in what ways are you trying to come up with a more polite and less divisive way?By trying to keep the discussion open?
> I really do appreciate your trying again, and I do think you put time and effort into your answer. I don't feel at all dismissed, and I truly appreciate that.
I always put time and effort in, but that doesn't guarantee results!
Bob
Posted by Dinah on July 12, 2005, at 4:19:10
In reply to Re: the next best thing, second try, posted by Dr. Bob on July 12, 2005, at 1:57:53
> Another key is that that would be traumatic for them?
I'm not sure I'd use the word traumatic. But hurtful certainly. Rejection hurts. Even impersonal rejection.
>
> > > So the goal is to come up with a more polite and less divisive way?
> >
> > Yes, but from the thread below I would say that you don't appear to me to be all that open to that. I may be wrong, but in what ways are you trying to come up with a more polite and less divisive way?
>
> By trying to keep the discussion open?The trouble is that keeping the discussion open without any real possibility of change only adds another layer of divisiveness to the first. Keeping the discussion open is only helpful if your mind stays equally open. Otherwise, it is just another way of frustrating posters, and in general it would be kinder to say "This is how it will be, and I am not going to change my mind. I hope you can live with my decision, but if not, I'll be sorry to lose you." or something reflective of the reality of the situation. False hope hurts.
>
> > I really do appreciate your trying again, and I do think you put time and effort into your answer. I don't feel at all dismissed, and I truly appreciate that.
>
> I always put time and effort in, but that doesn't guarantee results!
>
> Bob:-) I don't always *perceive* the same effort, but perhaps that is my perception rather than your effort.
Posted by alexandra_k on July 12, 2005, at 4:43:13
In reply to Re: the next best thing, second try » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on July 12, 2005, at 4:19:10
> Keeping the discussion open is only helpful if your mind stays equally open. Otherwise, it is just another way of frustrating posters, and in general it would be kinder to say "This is how it will be, and I am not going to change my mind. I hope you can live with my decision, but if not, I'll be sorry to lose you." or something reflective of the reality of the situation. False hope hurts.
(((Dinah)))
I'm sorry you have been and still are hurting over this.I agree about being open minded when having a discussion. Thats something that both sides need to do. There is the possibility of one person coming around to the other way of seeing it - but who comes around could go either way. Or maybe people will reach a comprimise ;-)
With respect to saying something along the lines of 'thats just the way it is and that is an end to it' I'm afraid I would leave if Dr Bob made frequent use of that. Thats just a little too much my mother. I need reasons. I need someone to try to explain their pov to me. I need to try to understand. Its when people won't do that that I struggle.
I guess you can't please all the people all the time...
Lets just wait and see.
Maybe we will bring him around yet.
Maybe he has something to say that will bring us around.
Maybe we can work out a comprimise.
Posted by Dinah on July 12, 2005, at 4:46:54
In reply to Re: the next best thing, second try » Dinah, posted by alexandra_k on July 12, 2005, at 4:43:13
I think I've come around as much as I'm going to. I've made significant adjustments and accomodations. I've twisted my view of politeness as far as they can go.
I'm not planning to spend my emotional capital trying to roll that boulder up the mountain over and over again.
Posted by Dinah on July 12, 2005, at 4:48:20
In reply to Re: the next best thing, second try » Dinah, posted by alexandra_k on July 12, 2005, at 4:43:13
And sadly, I'm not hurting as much as I once was.
There are those who would say that was a good thing.
I'm not one of them. To me it signifies loss.
I don't expect anyone to understand that, much less Bob.
Posted by alexandra_k on July 12, 2005, at 4:57:19
In reply to Re: the next best thing, second try » alexandra_k, posted by Dinah on July 12, 2005, at 4:46:54
> I think I've come around as much as I'm going to. I've made significant adjustments and accomodations.
Yes, you have :-)
I'm not saying you should abandon your principles - not at all. I just saying to wait and see... Wait and see.
> I'm not planning to spend my emotional capital trying to roll that boulder up the mountain over and over again.No. Trying to effect change can be frustrating. Maybe thats why this doesn't bug me so very much. I'm more interested in trying to understand. Because where I'm at right now your pov makes more sense to me.
So I'll help you. In fact you can just rest on the rock if you like (rocks are good like that) and I don't figure it'll move out from under you at a rapid rate of knots anytime soon ;-)
>And sadly, I'm not hurting as much as I once was.
>There are those who would say that was a good thing.
>I'm not one of them. To me it signifies loss.I'm sorry Dinah.
Sometimes it is best to be a little numb.
It can be a useful coping strategy.
I'm glad you came back. I was getting scaired that you had gone too numb and left us.
Posted by Dinah on July 12, 2005, at 5:05:09
In reply to Re: the next best thing, second try » Dinah, posted by alexandra_k on July 12, 2005, at 4:57:19
To tell you the truth, I think that is a part of it, however good my reasons for being away might appear to be. I hate to admit that because I don't want to hurt anyone, but my therapist says I should bring it up and discuss it here. I'm not so sure that's a good idea.
I think I prefer pretending everything is ok, and hoping that it will be again. That's what usually happens.
Posted by alexandra_k on July 12, 2005, at 5:14:23
In reply to Re: the next best thing, second try » alexandra_k, posted by Dinah on July 12, 2005, at 5:05:09
> I think I prefer pretending everything is ok, and hoping that it will be again. That's what usually happens.
Yes. But maybe supressing it is what leads you to really blow out / go numb when you do.
> To tell you the truth, I think that is a part of it, however good my reasons for being away might appear to be.
Yeah. I did wonder... But making a library really is one of the best excuses not to Babble that I've heard ;-)
>I hate to admit that because I don't want to hurt anyone, but my therapist says I should bring it up and discuss it here. I'm not so sure that's a good idea.
I don't feel hurt in response to that.
I know you hurt a lot sometimes.
I'd like that to not happen anymore.
It is up to you...
But if you want to talk about it I'm here.
And I'm sure others will be too.
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.