![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 25 to 49 of 173. Go back in thread:
Posted by Jen Star on July 7, 2005, at 18:43:36
In reply to **Boycotting Board** re: Larry Hover's Block.., posted by jay on July 5, 2005, at 13:36:24
well,
I'm afraid I'm not up for joining a boycott, although I know you have the best intentions for Larry. I just enjoy posting too much to deliberately block myself!But it's obvious that Larry (if you're reading!) -- you have lots of supporters here. I can't think of another time when people banded together like this to protest a block. I hope you see that the board has not forgotten you, and that people are eager for you to return.
take care, and we'll hear from you in a few weeks! :)
JenStar
Posted by Phillipa on July 7, 2005, at 19:06:51
In reply to Larry, you are clearly loved here! :) » jay, posted by Jen Star on July 7, 2005, at 18:43:36
Larry, I still hope Dr. Bob reconsiders and you come back sooner. All those posts! Fondly, Phillipa
Posted by jay on July 7, 2005, at 23:08:15
In reply to Re:I wish I knew how to start a web site, posted by alexandra_k on July 7, 2005, at 18:35:47
> I have a website!
> (a little minimalist at this point)
> go to freewebpages.com and you can start up a website.
>
> I've been thinking about what you have been saying, Jay. And I guess I never thought of it as a show of support rather than an attempt to effect change. I really do admire that you would do something like that. Really.
>
> But... I'm also glad that you have decided to stay. I'd be really sad if you left. And I really hope that Larry decided to come back too.
Hey AK...thank you so much..I am really flattered that you saw beneath the skin what my motives where. Maybe I am/was naive, but I really am an idealist..very stubborn..lol. I guess after meeting Larry IRL, seeing his pain in his words, I felt I had to try something. I honestly dislike conflict and such..but as you know, sometimes you must try to stand up for what you feel is a wrong. I am really happy, though, so many stood up for Lar. Now, I just wish Bob would very deeply rethink his stance considering all of the voices.Anyhow...thanks again so kindly :-)
Best,
Jay
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 8, 2005, at 0:03:30
In reply to Re: more ignorance » henrietta, posted by AuntieMel on July 6, 2005, at 9:04:11
> Looking further down the thread, you can see where Dinah told Larry that she *thought* it didn't require harassment, but it wasn't definitive, and it was as a poster, not a deputy.
>
> Later Dinah was more definite in asking him to honor the DNP - and he did.Hmm, can you send me links?
> I am having a hard time understanding why you think 6 weeks is appropriate.
Because last time it was 6 weeks.
> if I read the rules and they said no sidewalk skipping on rainy days and the sun was shining then I would assume it was ok to skip.
And if it were partly cloudy? :-)
Bob
Posted by gabbii on July 8, 2005, at 9:20:14
In reply to Re:I wish I knew how to start a web site » alexandra_k, posted by jay on July 7, 2005, at 23:08:15
> I guess after meeting Larry IRL, seeing his pain in his words, I felt I had to try.
I appreciate the fact that you care about Lar,
but a little more discretion as to what is said off board, and re interpreted on board is advised here.
Posted by AuntieMel on July 8, 2005, at 9:29:47
In reply to Re: sidewalk skipping, posted by Dr. Bob on July 8, 2005, at 0:03:30
> Looking further down the thread, you can see where Dinah told Larry that she *thought* it didn't require harassment, but it wasn't definitive, and it was as a poster, not a deputy.
>
> Later Dinah was more definite in asking him to honor the DNP - and he did.Sure, no sweat!!!
The first one:
" I don't think Dr. Bob has required harassment to be present to uphold the do not post requirement. The only thing I remember him saying is that you can't DNP in response to a post that was to someone else entirely and didn't affect you, and I'm not even sure of that. It's just a vague recollection.He seems to be allowing and upholding DNP requests in a broad range of circumstances.
Just fyi, and Dr. Bob will correct me (I'm sure) if I'm wrong."
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050530/msgs/511843.html
The second one:
"Dinah here, acting as deputy to Dr. Bob.Please do not directly reply to those who have asked you not to post to them. Direct replies do not require the checking of the "previous poster" box.
Dr. Bob, is of course, the final arbiter of rules, and you should contact him about any questions you might have, or to override any deputy decisions."
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050530/msgs/511949.html
After which, though confused, he quit.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050530/msgs/511952.html
I'd try to respond more, but right now I'm so mad I best be silent.
Posted by AuntieMel on July 8, 2005, at 10:15:48
In reply to Re: sidewalk skipping, posted by Dr. Bob on July 8, 2005, at 0:03:30
Where I come from it's not considered a rainy day until it rains. So partly cloudy and sunny are the same thing. How many times is it completely cloud free anyway?
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 8, 2005, at 10:28:56
In reply to Re: sidewalk skipping you betcha » Dr. Bob, posted by AuntieMel on July 8, 2005, at 9:29:47
> The first one:
>
> > I don't think Dr. Bob has required harassment to be present to uphold the do not post requirement. The only thing I remember him saying is that you can't DNP in response to a post that was to someone else entirely and didn't affect you, and I'm not even sure of that. It's just a vague recollection.
> >
> > He seems to be allowing and upholding DNP requests in a broad range of circumstances.
> >
> > Just fyi, and Dr. Bob will correct me (I'm sure) if I'm wrong.
>
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050530/msgs/511843.htmlThanks for the links. It was after the above clarification that he posted this:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050530/msgs/511944.html
Which was the post that led to my blocking him (and that Dinah had responded to with her second post).
Again, I value Larry, too, and hope this doesn't keep him from returning.
Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 8, 2005, at 10:33:07
In reply to Re: sidewalk skipping and rain » Dr. Bob, posted by AuntieMel on July 8, 2005, at 10:15:48
> Where I come from it's not considered a rainy day until it rains. So partly cloudy and sunny are the same thing. How many times is it completely cloud free anyway?
Does a certain amount of rain need to fall for the day to be considered rainy? And completely cloudy and sunny would be the same thing, too? :-)
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on July 8, 2005, at 11:05:05
In reply to Re:I wish I knew how to start a web site » alexandra_k, posted by jay on July 7, 2005, at 23:08:15
Hey there. You are welcome. I can be quite an idealist too. In fact I think we have even noticed before that quite a few of our ideals are the same. It is just that we go about reaching them quite differently. You are a social worker and I am a philosopher, for instance :-)
I don't like conflict either...
Especially when people get hurt :-(
Posted by AuntieMel on July 8, 2005, at 12:23:40
In reply to Re: Larry Hover's Block, posted by Dr. Bob on July 8, 2005, at 10:28:56
You are repeating what I just said. The first one was an unofficial post from Dinah - not acting as deputy, trying to sort out what the rule was. If you read it, you can see that it wasn't worded as "This is how it works now', but had a lot of 'i think' and 'i remember' and 'just a vague recollection' and so-on. Vague. Hardly what I would call a clarification.
> > The first one:
> >
> > > I don't think Dr. Bob has required harassment to be present to uphold the do not post requirement. The only thing I remember him saying is that you can't DNP in response to a post that was to someone else entirely and didn't affect you, and I'm not even sure of that. It's just a vague recollection.
> > >
> > > He seems to be allowing and upholding DNP requests in a broad range of circumstances.
> > >
> > > Just fyi, and Dr. Bob will correct me (I'm sure) if I'm wrong.
> >
> > http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050530/msgs/511843.html
>
> Thanks for the links. It was after the above clarification that he posted this:
>
>Sure this was posted after the first vague comments. But this post was the post of a person in pain trying to explain himself. The vast majority was to a general audience about the points in her post. Was he just supposed to not respond at all? Crawl into a corner?
The only parts that *might* be considered answering to here were 'I'm sorry." and "Fine, I shan't forget"
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050530/msgs/511944.html
>> Which was the post that led to my blocking him (and that Dinah had responded to with her second post).
Exactly. Dinah responded to that one in an official manner, and there were no more posts after that. In my opinion, that's where it should have stayed.
>
> Again, I value Larry, too, and hope this doesn't keep him from returning.
>I hope so, too. But I doubt he comes back, from what I'm hearing. And I can't say that I blame him.
This whole thing has got me so ticked off - but if I say more right now, I'll get blocked. I prefer to leave under my own steam, thank you.
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 8, 2005, at 13:28:12
In reply to Re: sidewalk skipping and rain, posted by Dr. Bob on July 8, 2005, at 10:33:07
Friends,
It is written in this thread a lot about what others think is a blocking of Larry Hoover that they would like recinded. Some even write about what could have the potential to mean that some others are considering leaving, or boycotting this forum.
But let me ask you that are posting here to consider the following if you are going to post to this thread.
A. Was there not a great effort by some here to get Dr. Hsiung to make some kind of rule to prohibit me from requesting clarification from others here?
B. And was not the [...do not post to me ...]rule a rule that could have the potential for some others to think that it was made to accommodate other's wishes to in some way prevent me from requesting clarification, if you go back and examine the origin of the rule ?
C. Could you consider, as to why, that I do not post to anyone here unless they direct a post to me with my name?
D. Could you consider if the rule is made for the members of the forum, or are the members made for the rule?
E. Could you consider if the rule is a sound mental-health practice?
F. Could you consider if the rule is a rule that will be good for the community as a whole? If so, could you reserch the origin of the concept of .[...good for the community as a whole...]as to how it has been used historically and by who?
Lou
Posted by AuntieMel on July 8, 2005, at 15:03:01
In reply to Re: Larry Hover's Block, posted by AuntieMel on July 8, 2005, at 12:23:40
and I may just bow out of the debate for a spell. I found out today my best friend has cancer. He's over in the UK and I'm stuck here. I'm going to crawl into bed for a week.
Posted by gardenergirl on July 8, 2005, at 15:25:01
In reply to Re: Larry Hover's Block ^^^ above for dr. bob ^^^, posted by AuntieMel on July 8, 2005, at 15:03:01
Posted by TamaraJ on July 8, 2005, at 15:25:40
In reply to Re: Larry Hover's Block ^^^ above for dr. bob ^^^, posted by AuntieMel on July 8, 2005, at 15:03:01
For your efforts, diplomacy and way with words, and just for being you. I am sorry about your friend. It can't be easy for you, especially being so far away when I am sure all you want to do is wrap your arms around your friend and comfort and support them as only a good friend can do. Strength to you, AuntieMel, and to your friend as well. My thoughts are with you.
Posted by AuntieMel on July 8, 2005, at 15:31:06
In reply to (((AuntieMel))) » AuntieMel, posted by TamaraJ on July 8, 2005, at 15:25:40
but right now i'm not feeling strong
Posted by so on July 8, 2005, at 15:45:53
In reply to **Boycotting Board** re: Larry Hover's Block.., posted by jay on July 5, 2005, at 13:36:24
It is wonderful that people react when somebody popular is the subject of a perceived unfairness. But there are others who have long been the subject of similar situations who have received little support from frequent flyers on this board. It is likely that there are scores of potentially valuable contributors who either refuse to participate or who participate only in a stance of protest because of longstanding policies at this particular forum.
Posted by AuntieMel on July 8, 2005, at 15:56:00
In reply to Re: **Boycotting Board** re: Larry Hover's Block.., posted by so on July 8, 2005, at 15:45:53
I've seen (and done) as much protesting when the person isn't as popular.
Posted by so on July 8, 2005, at 16:10:47
In reply to Re: **Boycotting Board** re: Larry Hover's Block.., posted by so on July 8, 2005, at 15:45:53
I find no basis to acknowledge untruth in my statements.
That one person represents that they have has protested particular administrative actions against any particular less popular member does not contravene the statement that, "there are others who have long been the subject of similar situations who have received little support from frequent flyers on this board." The ones who one writer asserts to have supported might not be the same ones who received little support.
Whether or not a particular member has on one or more occassions supported less popular members during an administrative contraversy does not inform the truth of the statement that, "It is likely that there are scores of potentially valuable contributors who either refuse to participate or who participate only in a stance of protest because of longstanding policies at this particular forum."
Posted by gabbii on July 8, 2005, at 18:18:33
In reply to Truth, posted by so on July 8, 2005, at 16:10:47
I'm not disagreeing with what you are saying So,
actually there was a block I thought was very unfair just a few months ago, and only two people posted about it.
I just wanted to add that sometimes there isn't as much protest when people aren't as "Popular" or who post as much as Larry does simply because not as many people are aware that they have been blocked.
If someone posts on most of the boards, when they dissappear other posters want to find out why. However, obviously if someone isn't as well known, they can dissappear for weeks at a time and no one knows it's because of an administrative decision.
Posted by Jen Star on July 8, 2005, at 20:48:13
In reply to Re: **Boycotting Board** re: Larry Hover's Block.., posted by so on July 8, 2005, at 15:45:53
It is interesting, isn't it? It makes me wonder about popularity, and what it takes to become such a beloved poster. I think it has a lot to do with the amount of time spent here (months, years!) and the amount of helpful posts that people share. I believe Larry has helped multitudes of people with his posts and insight. People seem to miss him because he's become close to them, helpful, and a friend.
I think other people are not missed as much during blocks b/c they have not developed such strong mutual relationships with others here or haven't bonded so closely with other babblers.
Do you see it differently?
JenStar
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 9, 2005, at 1:25:34
In reply to Re: Larry Hover's Block, posted by AuntieMel on July 8, 2005, at 12:23:40
> The first one was an unofficial post from Dinah - not acting as deputy, trying to sort out what the rule was. If you read it, you can see that it wasn't worded as "This is how it works now', but had a lot of 'i think' and 'i remember' and 'just a vague recollection' and so-on. Vague. Hardly what I would call a clarification.
>
> > > > I don't think Dr. Bob has required harassment to be present to uphold the do not post requirement. The only thing I remember him saying is that you can't DNP in response to a post that was to someone else entirely and didn't affect you, and I'm not even sure of that. It's just a vague recollection.
> > > >
> > > > He seems to be allowing and upholding DNP requests in a broad range of circumstances.
> > > >
> > > > Just fyi, and Dr. Bob will correct me (I'm sure) if I'm wrong.True, she didn't say she was posting as a deputy. But IMO, she still did add clarity. And I didn't correct anything.
> this post was the post of a person in pain trying to explain himself. The vast majority was to a general audience about the points in her post. Was he just supposed to not respond at all? Crawl into a corner?
>
> > > http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050530/msgs/511944.htmlThe vast majority was fine. And not responding isn't necessarily crawling into a corner.
> > the post that led to my blocking him (and that Dinah had responded to with her second post).
>
> Exactly. Dinah responded to that one in an official mannerHmm, if someone posts through a DNP once, do you think I should remind them of the DNP or block them? If it's an uncivil post, I remind them, but with this issue, my feeling has been "no" means "no", not "only one more time".
> I doubt he comes back, from what I'm hearing. And I can't say that I blame him.
I wouldn't blame him, either, but it would be a loss for the community. And if he does return, is there some way to try to keep this from happening again?
> This whole thing has got me so ticked off - but if I say more right now, I'll get blocked. I prefer to leave under my own steam, thank you.
I'm sorry this has also been hard for others. I value them, too, and hope they don't leave, either!
Bob
Posted by Sarah T. on July 9, 2005, at 1:29:29
In reply to Re: **Boycotting Board** re: Larry Hover's Block.. » so, posted by Jen Star on July 8, 2005, at 20:48:13
> It is interesting, isn't it? It makes me wonder about popularity, and what it takes to become such a beloved poster. I think it has a lot to do with the amount of time spent here (months, years!) and the amount of helpful posts that people share. I believe Larry has helped multitudes of people with his posts and insight. People seem to miss him because he's become close to them, helpful, and a friend.>>> JenStar
Hi JenStar,
I agree with you. Larry is the embodiment of what Psychobabble is all about -- or what it's *supposed* to be about: EDUCATION and SUPPORT. We protest his block NOT because he's popular, but because of his unique qualities that, incidentally, have made him popular.Like many of us, Larry has had a very difficult life. From what I understand, he still struggles with mental and physical illness; yet, in spite of his illnesses, he reaches out to help others in a constructive, healthy, exemplary way. He does NOT use his illness as an excuse to misbehave or act crazy. If his difficulties became too great to bear, I am convinced that he would go to a therapist and/or a psychopharmacologist for help instead of "acting out" and tormenting others on a message board. I have NEVER seen him harass anyone and, in spite of his vast, encyclopedic knowledge, I have never seen him behave in a supercilious or "holier than thou" manner or engage in vigilantism.
For those of us who struggle daily with mental and physical pain, merely getting up in the morning can seem like a daunting task. We constantly search for answers, for a way out of our distress. One way to do that is through medicines. Another way is through talk therapy, where we can verbalize our feelings. But the true path out of our misery is to rise above it by helping others, and that is exactly what Larry does, sharing his knowledge and offering support.
Larry's block is pointless, senseless and incomprehensible, and it says more about the blocker than it does about the blocked.
Posted by All Done on July 9, 2005, at 2:53:15
In reply to Re: **Boycotting Board** re: Larry Hover's Block.. » Jen Star, posted by Sarah T. on July 9, 2005, at 1:29:29
> Larry's block is pointless, senseless and incomprehensible, and it says more about the blocker than it does about the blocked.
>
>Sarah,
I don't disagree with many of the things you've said about Larry. I just wonder if you would think that a block was "pointless, senseless and incomprehensible" if you had repeatedly asked someone not to post to you (for whatever reason), yet the poster continued to do so anyway.
Laurie
Posted by TofuEmmy on July 9, 2005, at 6:57:01
In reply to Re: Larry Hover's Block, posted by Dr. Bob on July 9, 2005, at 1:25:34
"And if he does return, is there some way to try to keep this from happening again?"
Absolutely -- I won't be coming back to Babble.
My pals all know how to reach me.
em
P.S. Sarah - thank you for your honesty. I'm sure you said what a lot of people were thinking.
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.