![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 23 to 47 of 47. Go back in thread:
Posted by special_k on April 16, 2006, at 21:00:09
In reply to I love to discuss politics.., posted by NikkiT2 on April 16, 2006, at 5:00:40
> but quickly learned this isn't the right place for me to do it.
how come?
because you don't want to upset people you care about over here?
because you are worried about being blocked?> So, I do it elsewhere.. Somewhere with no civility guidelines, but you know what. I *really* wish there were, as politics cannot be discussed without emotions it seems.
yeah. maybe what is needed is... a middle ground. there need to be SOME guidelines (IMO) but not as strict as we have here (IMO)...
or is it that you like to talk about UK / European politics too and here the main focus is on US politics?
Posted by special_k on April 16, 2006, at 21:08:45
In reply to Re: Civility IRL, productivity and good relationsh » special_k, posted by gardenergirl on April 15, 2006, at 23:02:02
> Actually, I've found myself a bit surprised that more posts have not been blocked or PBC'd there based on the guidelines.
Okay. Do you think more posts should be blocked / PBC'd because you think more posts should be blocked / PBC'd... Or do you think more posts should be blocked / PBC'd as a matter of consistency because of what the guidelines say?
(What I mean is do you think there should be more blockings to match the guidelines or do you think the guidelines should be revised down so less people are / should be blocked)?
> There's an appropriate time and place for many behaviors and inappropriate times and places for them as well.
And you think the things people get blocked / PBC'd for are inappropriate (in a civilityDICT) sense rather than inappropriate (in a 'according to current guidelines) sense...
> I don't agree that it's impossible to have an engaging and informative discussion about politics while staying within the current guidelines.
Not impossible... But seems to be too tricky for most.
> You know, I love to discuss politics,Er... But you don't really. You very rarely post to the politics board. How come?
>I've called the senior Senator from my state a very bad word recently...
Right. I'm not advocating that we can call people bad words on the politics board...
> Instead, I could post that he tends to vote strictly along party lines, which I don't like.
Ah I see. So you can talk about what led you to conclude that the bad word applies to him. Though according to current guidelines I don't think you are allowed to say what you don't like so much as say what you would prefer him to do...
Tis a natural tendancy to point out what is wrong with the present situation
(what one perceives to be wrong clearly)
BEFORE going on to say what you prefer him to do.
yup yup yup...
Posted by greywolf on April 16, 2006, at 22:36:27
In reply to Civility IRL, productivity and good relationships., posted by madeline on April 15, 2006, at 8:38:56
Isn't the first rule of civility club that you don't argue about civility club?My lonely, personal opinion--expressed without regard to any particular other poster(s)--is (1) that civility guidelines are inherently difficult to enforce, and (2) that civility guidelines are particularly necessary for a website that supports people, some of whom are experiencing pain and unhappiness.
Consequently, while one would hope that common sense prevails in all circumstances, and that too close scrutiny would not be applied simply for the sake of finding violations of the civility rules, the nature of these boards suggests a need to err on the side of caution--both in the administration of the rules and in expression of disagreement with the rules or rules enforcement.
Posted by special_k on April 16, 2006, at 22:59:19
In reply to Re: Civility IRL, productivity and good relationships., posted by greywolf on April 16, 2006, at 22:36:27
hey :-)
> Isn't the first rule of civility club that you don't argue about civility club?heh heh. would you mind terribly if i made an argument1 and argument2 distinction... ;-)
(seriously though thats pretty funny)
:-)> My lonely, personal opinion--expressed without regard to any particular other poster(s)--is (1) that civility guidelines are inherently difficult to enforce,
i agree.
> and (2) that civility guidelines are particularly necessary for a website that supports people, some of whom are experiencing pain and unhappiness.
i agree.
> Consequently, while one would hope that common sense prevails in all circumstances,yes indeedie
> and that too close scrutiny would not be applied simply for the sake of finding violations of the civility rules,
yes of course
> the nature of these boards suggests a need to err on the side of caution--both in the administration of the rules and in expression of disagreement with the rules or rules enforcement.
ooh.
err on the side of caution in the sense of blocking people incase they were intending to be incivilDICT or do you mean err on the side of caution in the sense of being charitable to the poster and not blocking them unless they unquestionably stepped over the line? because bob seems to be thinking former and i'm trying to advocate the latter.why? i guess bob is focusing on the harm to the community of uncivilityDICT on the boards. but who is gonna be harmed if declan didn't get blocked for two weeks?
i have refocused... on the harm to the poster who is blocked. a two week banishment. and what for? because there is a tendency for people from the us to take politics personally. not that anybody did in this instance i don't think. you know declan wasn't even talking about us politics! that is the ironic thing. he was worrying about australia. but the default assumption... priming is going on...
re expressing disagreement...
i express disagreement and people ignore me.
so yeah...
i guess i'm glad people are following along.
not so glad people have been feeling hurt...
but are people feeling hurt...
or are people feeling pissed?
have i overstepped the line?
depends... i honestly don't know. i honestly don't know. bob says he doesn't make admin decisions on the basis of how people feel. but that is b*llshit.
so what i'm wondering is what kinds of feelings...
and whose feelings...lets just see.
because we all know bob can be charitable at times.
so what will he choose to do...
he will probably be trying to figure what might be best for the boards...
hard to say.
Posted by Dinah on April 17, 2006, at 9:32:55
In reply to Re: Civility IRL, productivity and good relationships., posted by special_k on April 16, 2006, at 22:59:19
> but are people feeling hurt...
>
> or are people feeling pissed?Does that mean you don't mind the latter? I'm not trying to be confrontative. I'm just really saddened and confused by what's been going on here lately. I just really really don't understand. I just really really am upset by the fact that I don't seem to know Special K at all. I guess I shouldn't be. I should just realize that I need to adjust my mental image of you, or get to know you as Special K. Or maybe even be glad that you are feeling comfortable enough to show more of yourself here. I'll have to work hard on that attitude adjustment.
But in the meantime, I mind the latter as much as I mind the former. Because the goal here is mutual support. And feeling p*ssed off, and thinking that the other poster doesn't mind or even sort of wants to be p*ssing people off doesn't help me to achieve that goal on my end.
I'm not saying that's what you're saying. I'm saying that that's how I hear what you're saying, and if I'm wrong I'd rather have the misunderstanding clarified than to operate on my current understanding.
I got the idea from one of your posts that you think that you tried being "nice" and that didn't work in achieving your goals. And I heard the implication that what you're doing right now is trying another approach.
Do you *really* think that other approach will work? Do you really think that making people angry will bring about your desired change? How do you think that will happen? What would be the sequence of events from people being p*ssed off to greater freedom of speech on the Politics board?
If that's your intent I truly wish to know, so that I will maybe be less discombobulated by the sudden changes in how I percieve you. And again, if I'm mistaken, I'd really like to have my perception corrected.
I have to say that I see a far more probable chain of events that doesn't include your achieving your desired goal, if I'm understanding that goal correctly. And I am regretful if what I foresee comes to pass.
I guess it depends a lot on Dr. Bob and how he interprets things. Although I don't think I ever remembering him changing a rule under those circumstances. Can you remember any times where he has?
Posted by verne on April 17, 2006, at 10:40:24
In reply to Re: Civility IRL, productivity and good relationsh » special_k, posted by Dinah on April 17, 2006, at 9:32:55
I haven't been able to follow this entire thread and have little more to offer. Just wanted to thank Dinah for identifying what's important.
I think it's possible to have different views without argument and disagreement. Imagine the difference between an art museum and a debate club. At the art museum we may see things differently but there's no reason to "disagree".
On the other hand, a debating society's purpose is to find disagreement in everything and practice winning the argument. That's a good exercise for those going into law, or a profession where that's needed, but not so helpful in a community where mutual support is the goal.
And even if we carry the day and score enough points to "win" the argument. What have we really won? The loser probably hasn't even changed their mind.
The earth, that we passionately argued rotates around the sun, didn't change course because someone thought otherwise. And after we crushed any opposing points of view, the earth didn't rotate in the proper direction with any more authority.
And even if truth did accidentally break out during an argument aren't there better ways to arrive at the truth?
I don't see much difference between debate and boxing. They both involve winning a fight.
Verne
Posted by ClearSkies on April 17, 2006, at 11:02:22
In reply to Thanks DINAH » Dinah, posted by verne on April 17, 2006, at 10:40:24
You must have a clear head today! Joke, joke, my friend.
I think you summarized it beautifully, where I let my words get all tripped up.
ClearSkies
Posted by special_k on April 17, 2006, at 18:41:51
In reply to Thanks Verne, posted by ClearSkies on April 17, 2006, at 11:02:22
But there can be a difference between fighting and sparring...
I don't know that I can continue the analogy.
Everyone keeps on about support. That is one aim. But nobody seems to mention the other aim: education.
Probably it meant education in the sense of 'I've been taking this anti p and now i have a rash on my neck help'.
But education re learning about what people think. I thought that was the point of the politics board. To really discuss these things.
'Winning' or 'losing' doesn't come into it.
I don't know who I am.
What I meant by my comment is several points...
Just get passed over.
About giving phillipa and Gnepig the benefit of the doubt.
About giving that guy who posted a link which has a link to obtain illegal meds - about giving him the benefit of the doubt too. A warning. Block him if he does it again.Like the first time I ever posted a concern to admin. And that was ignored until I
WENT OFF
And oh then he bothers to read it.
It isn't so nice. But that is life. You have to make a bit of noise so it is better for the boards to take you seriously rather than ignore you.
Of course we probably will get blocked.
We know this.
Isn't our intention but...Not aiming to piss people off.
Aiming to get people wound up a little
(To get the threads moving along)
And they are moving along
This is turning into quite an issue - eh?It will be better for the boards for him not to ignore that
Sooner or later...
Or maybe I'll just get blocked and it will be dropped like a hotcake.
Like the issue of trigger warnings was after the blocking of Larry
Take out strategic people via blocks.
hrm
Posted by special_k on April 17, 2006, at 19:03:29
In reply to Re:, posted by special_k on April 17, 2006, at 18:41:51
but of course the point is getting lost...
why don;'t nikki and gg post to the politics board if they like to discuss politics thats what i want to know
people are terrified of getting blocked :-(
IMHO bob needs to back right off
end the reign of terror
etc
Posted by zeugma on April 17, 2006, at 19:28:55
In reply to Re:, posted by special_k on April 17, 2006, at 19:03:29
well not to lose the point...
whose support?
whose education?'Support' in politics makes me think about going to the local HQ of the political party of your choice and scheming how you can gerrymander the district so as to ensure the victory of your party in the next election. Not what is desired, evidently.
'Education', well, it would be great to get the Iranian perspective on the current imbroglio about nukes, as well as thoughts on how Iran's long term strategic goals were facilitated by the fall of Saddam Hussein. it would be great if we were diplomats, spies, or lobbyists in training and wanted to get perspectives 'from the ground' on what was going on.
And civility... well, surely the more educated we are in others' perspectives the more we have a true community? Or maybe not.
-z
Posted by NikkiT2 on April 17, 2006, at 22:43:07
In reply to Re: I love to discuss politics.. » NikkiT2, posted by special_k on April 16, 2006, at 21:00:09
No.. its not the fear of getting blocked..Its hard to explain, but I don't feel this is the right place for me to discuss politics. Also, the US bias is WAY too strong for me.
I do understand why the political board was set up - like the faith board, its to keep it off the other boards.. but, I don't think PB is the right place for such discussions.
Hopefully I'll find somewhere with that middle ground, as unmoderated is getting rather too ugly..
Nikki
Posted by special_k on April 18, 2006, at 8:59:54
In reply to Re: I love to discuss politics.. » special_k, posted by NikkiT2 on April 17, 2006, at 22:43:07
> No.. its not the fear of getting blocked..Its hard to explain, but I don't feel this is the right place for me to discuss politics. Also, the US bias is WAY too strong for me.
yeah. maybe pressure to be extra careful with what you say?
(that people do tend to take things as personal criticisms when it isn't even about them)?
yeah. us bias is putting me off rather too...> I do understand why the political board was set up - like the faith board, its to keep it off the other boards.. but, I don't think PB is the right place for such discussions.
:-)
i think that is a shame
> Hopefully I'll find somewhere with that middle ground, as unmoderated is getting rather too ugly..i hope that...
this place could be that place.
that is my hope.but yeah doc bob needs to chill
not overreact to people taking things overly personally
start to get some other poeples in the world posting to politics toomore canadians
more aussies
more people round the worldi don't think that is going to happen anytime soon when ther eis such a bias for reading 'anti americanism' into most statements...
Posted by NikkiT2 on April 18, 2006, at 9:21:02
In reply to Re: I love to discuss politics.., posted by special_k on April 18, 2006, at 8:59:54
Actually,
Having read your reply and pondered.. No, its not the "fear", the having to watch what I say.. it has nothing to do with Bob and how it runs this place.
Its the PEOPLE here that make it different for me. I don't feel there are many here (though there are some), that I *wish* to discuss politics with..
Its hard to explain, and I'm not 100% sure i want to!
Nikki
Posted by special_k on April 18, 2006, at 9:29:15
In reply to Re: I love to discuss politics.., posted by NikkiT2 on April 18, 2006, at 9:21:02
> Actually,
> Having read your reply and pondered.. No, its not the "fear", the having to watch what I say.. it has nothing to do with Bob and how it runs this place.okay. i am actually interested in what you think (i mean to say i'm not trying to put words into your mouth)
> Its the PEOPLE here that make it different for me. I don't feel there are many here (though there are some), that I *wish* to discuss politics with..
> Its hard to explain, and I'm not 100% sure i want to!okay. maybe... people you really care about have very different views to you and you are afraid you would offend them / upset them if you expressed your opinions?
Posted by NikkiT2 on April 18, 2006, at 11:33:12
In reply to Re: I love to discuss politics.. » NikkiT2, posted by special_k on April 18, 2006, at 9:29:15
>okay. maybe... people you really care about have very different views to you and you are afraid you would offend them / upset them if you expressed your opinions?
No. its definately not that, as I often discuss politics with people I really care about.. I was bought up "discussing" politics with my dad, who loved to take an opposing view just for the fun of the debate. To discuss politics with people who agree with you is dull, as how can learn, and even *shock horror*, change your views.. I love to debate and discuss (and if nothing else I learn a hell of alot about US politics *L*).
Maybe, part of it (pondering as I write) is that I am worried about peoples reactions to me disagreeing with them? Does that make sense?
One other point that has just sprung into my mind, is about PB being *everything* to *all* people, and how maybe it should stick at what its good at ("support and education", and I so wish I could have italicised those words!).
Hmm..
Nikki
Posted by Dinah on April 18, 2006, at 13:00:10
In reply to Re: I love to discuss politics.., posted by NikkiT2 on April 18, 2006, at 11:33:12
Hey! My dad did that too!
But they were so much *just* discussions. They'd have fit the civility guidelines here just fine.
It was funny, because if he began to convince you of the merits of his point, he'd subtly shift to another stance.
I miss him.
Not that he didn't have his moments of being uncivil about politicians, to be fair, that he didn't mind sharing with people he knew to be of similar mind. But his livelier discussions were kept to ideas and kept civil.
Posted by NikkiT2 on April 18, 2006, at 13:15:57
In reply to Re: I love to discuss politics.. » NikkiT2, posted by Dinah on April 18, 2006, at 13:00:10
Sounds like my Dad yeah.
I miss him terribly too. He would have been 70 yesterday. Wow.
*hugs you*
Going back to topic..
I guess what I am trying to say, is its NOT about civility, but my perceived ideas of other peoples feelings!
Nikki x
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 18, 2006, at 23:06:27
In reply to Re:, posted by special_k on April 17, 2006, at 19:03:29
> people are terrified of getting blocked :-(
>
> end the reign of terrorI'm sorry if you've been feeling terrified here. And if you've been feeling unsupported. But I'm glad you felt able to stand up for what you thought was right. Hope to see you back in a couple weeks,
Bob
Posted by Estella on May 6, 2006, at 23:12:18
In reply to Re: Civility IRL, productivity and good relationsh » special_k, posted by Dinah on April 17, 2006, at 9:32:55
>I just really really don't understand. I just really really am upset by the fact that I don't seem to know Special K at all. I guess I shouldn't be. I should just realize that I need to adjust my mental image of you, or get to know you as Special K. Or maybe even be glad that you are feeling comfortable enough to show more of yourself here. I'll have to work hard on that attitude adjustment.
ah the smooth voice of being within the civility rules
i don't like you very much either right now
its not okay to suggest that someone recovering from anorexia is fat even when that was implied in her post (and how was the respondant to know she was recovering from anorexia)
but its okay to suggest that parts are... not liked.
yeah of course it is.
yeah whatever. f*ck you. i don't like you very much either. you only talk to me when i spend a lot of time talking to you processing stuff with you
what have you done to reach out for me?
ever?
nothing
you only talk to me when i am prepared to talk you f*cking round and round and round
and you are allowed to throw little tantrums about me not posting to you anymore even when i haven't f*cking done anything to you
yeah well whatever
you can have this back now thanks.
Posted by Dinah on May 7, 2006, at 2:53:37
In reply to Re: Civility IRL, productivity and good relationsh » Dinah, posted by Estella on May 6, 2006, at 23:12:18
I think I probably didn't express myself clearly. I rarely mean more than exactly what I say. But perhaps I didn't express what I meant to say as well as I could.
I'm sorry if my post hurt you. That wasn't my intention.
Dinah
Posted by zeugma on May 7, 2006, at 7:31:03
In reply to Re: Civility IRL, productivity and good relationsh » Dinah, posted by Estella on May 6, 2006, at 23:12:18
this post is purely an attempt to dissipate conflict, and anything i say is purely my own perception.
>I just really really don't understand. I just really really am upset by the fact that I don't seem to know Special K at all. I guess I shouldn't be. I should just realize that I need to adjust my mental image of you, or get to know you as Special K. Or maybe even be glad that you are feeling comfortable enough to show more of yourself here. I'll have to work hard on that attitude adjustment.>
the above strikes me as sincere and not something designed to provoke ill will. It is often difficult to like, sincerely like, others. For myself, I keep trying to understand the concept of civility, and maybe it is the bare minimum necessary for people to get along. for Dinah it is clearly more, and while that may be too much to reasonably expect (I don't know, i can be quite unreasonable about some things so my interpretations are not sacrosanct) the goal is a laudable one.
>
>
>
> i don't like you very much either right now>>it didn't sound like Dinah was disliking you.
>
> its not okay to suggest that someone recovering from anorexia is fat even when that was implied in her post (and how was the respondant to know she was recovering from anorexia)
>
> but its okay to suggest that parts are... not liked.>>tact. But this is an IRL issue, that i have some experience with.
One criterion of civility, that i think was made by Auntie Mel, was that you wouldn't want to say anything about an individual that would be insulting if said to their face. hence, Dinah's comments about gossip in an earlier discussion. there are people IRL i know who are a mixture of good and bad traits. i try to focus on the good, and am reluctant to speak badly of anyone who has done a good turn to me, regardless of other character elements present. i suppose that is loyalty, not civility. civility to me is a bare minimum. i'll try again.
encouraging an anorexic to slim down further is telling the person to destroy him- or herself. saying he or she is fat (if she or he is anorexic- if she or he is not then it may be rude) is equivalent to that and advances the same end. not even uncivil, i would say it is - i dont know what to call it, what do you call someone who is trying to destroy you?
it did not sound like what dinah was saying sounded like an encouragement to further split up parts.
unfortuately, many posters whom i greatly admire (chemist, larry, special k) have been the ones most severely hurt by the rules here. (there are many others of course, whom i admire equally well but who may have been hurt in a slightly different way. i don't wish to slight those posters, i see a diference but there may well be none. let's just say then that those are three who come immediately to mind.)
always legitimate to feel hurt. the problem is that rules are one thing, judgment another. my own judgments are very idiosyncratic. idiosyncrasy is a value-neutral term IMO.
this is a diverse group and an idiosyncratic one. idiosyncrasy for me is appreciated. a value-neutral term in itself, but subjectively valued by me. dinah seems compelled by her idiosyncrasy to understand special k, a laudable desire.
i have a lot of experience with these issues IRL. it only takes a few misunderstandings to nullify numerous successes. the misunderstandings can be very destructive.
-z
Posted by Dinah on May 7, 2006, at 8:47:36
In reply to Re: Civility IRL, productivity and good relationsh, posted by zeugma on May 7, 2006, at 7:31:03
Thank you, zeugma.
Posted by Estella on May 8, 2006, at 8:53:28
In reply to Re: Civility IRL, productivity and good relationsh » Estella, posted by Dinah on May 7, 2006, at 2:53:37
normally i have no trouble giving you the benefit of the doubt
giving most posters here the benefit of the doubt
but especially you
i was / am hurting a lot
and my judgement went out the window
i thought you were being sarcastic
carefully selecting your comments
my judgement was out of wack
i'm sorry
i thought you were attacking me
i'm sorry> I'm sorry if my post hurt you. That wasn't my intention.
and what was mine?
well...
comes back to not being fit for human company
and the reason i must be blocked
and so forthand its become a cycle
with every block i escalate
and i can't see a resolution to this
time won't help
because IMO time just makes it worse
more time to rail and all
more time in isolation and all
so its time for me to leave
really
i'm sorry that i hurt you
i don't really mean to
but sometimes...
hurting people will lash out
and comes back to the reason i must be blocked and so forthi'm sorry dinah.
know that i respect you
always
judgement just goes out the window sometimes...
first time that one has happened to me
with youbut i'm really very sorry
goodbye.
Posted by Estella on May 8, 2006, at 9:37:38
In reply to Re: Civility IRL, productivity and good relationsh » Dinah, posted by Estella on May 6, 2006, at 23:12:18
because what i said wasn't true. i do like you very much indeed. i was mad was all.
and you have indeed done a lot of reaching out to me and talking to me. and the number of times you probably felt like you have been talking me round and round...
Posted by Dinah on May 8, 2006, at 16:53:24
In reply to Re: Civility IRL, productivity and good relationsh » Dinah, posted by Estella on May 8, 2006, at 8:53:28
Thank you again, Estella.
I do understand.
I think you need to do whatever's best for you, but maybe if you have a bit of time to get some emotional distance you'll feel more comfortable posting here again. I know you've posted many times about how helpful Babble is to you, and I'd hate to see you lose that. And of course, I'd hate to not see you again.
If you do need some time away, you know my email address. I know I'm a lousy email correspondent, but I'll try my best.
This is the end of the 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.