![[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 December 7, 2006, at 16:12:02
DR. Hsiung,
I am requesting that you post here if you agree or not with what deputy/member gardenergirl has posted to me pertaining your policy/rules here.
I am unsure as to if you are saying that before you review a proposed post by me according to the TOS here, that I send it to someone else first.
The deputy/member writes that I can, because you would not know if I sent it to someone else first or not.
My question is if you would consider what the deputy/member, gardenergirl, has written to me to do, as to constitute advocating that I commit deceit?
Lou Pilder
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061202/msgs/710831.html
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 7, 2006, at 16:27:26
In reply to Lou's request to DR. Hsiung-, posted by Lou Pilder on December 7, 2006, at 16:12:02
Dr. Hsiung,
The deputy/member ends her post to me with,[...consider this response(to you){from a deputy}...]
Could this, then, be considered as policy here?
I am asking if you agree that it is policy if a deputy advocates something here and writes in a manner that one could have the potential IMO to think that it is board policy.
I would like to understand the policy and rules here so that I can abide by them and be able to post within the policy/rules here.
If this is the policy , then does that mean that your request to me to ask someone else first before I submit a proposed post to you for review does not have to be followed by me so that I can ignore your request to have someone else see the post for review first?
Lou Pilder
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 7, 2006, at 16:38:15
In reply to Lou's request to DR. Hsiung-B, posted by Lou Pilder on December 7, 2006, at 16:27:26
Dr. Hsiung,
Then the deputy/member writes,[...I doubt that that's what could be standing in the way of you getting the clarification...]
I would like to have clarified as to if I can ignore your request (requirement?) to me to send a post to someone else first before I send it to you for a determination as to if it is acceptable or not according to your new rules that were made when I rejoined the forum.
I am requesting what ,then, is standing in the way for me to have clarification of this.
Lou Pilder
Posted by kid47 on December 7, 2006, at 18:49:05
In reply to Lou's request to DR. Hsiung-C, posted by Lou Pilder on December 7, 2006, at 16:38:15
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 7, 2006, at 19:24:46
In reply to Lou's request to DR. Hsiung-C, posted by Lou Pilder on December 7, 2006, at 16:38:15
Dr. Hsiung,
If you are going to respond to my request here, I would like for you to consider the following.
There is the question here as to if your request to me is also a {requirement). I think that it is, for your request to others to rephrase a post is a requirement, not something that can be ignored.
So I consider your request to me to send it to someone else first, to be also in that mode. That is why I am asking you for clarification. It is because there could be two ways by some members here to look at your request to me and I am unsure as to if you are rescinding your request to me or not as a requirement for me to send you the post in advance for a determination for acceptability.
There are others here that think that your request to me could be ignored by me. I can understand their thinking that, for the deputy/member writes that you would not know if I asked someone else first or not.
But I have a higher standard to consider, and in the past I have rejected other's offers to circumvent your rules, and I do not want to circumvent this rule here in question,if it is a rule.
I do not want to send the post to you and give you the false impression that I have asked someone else first. I am asking for your review and only your review of the post in question, for your TOS writes that members can always send posts to you in advance, and I am a member here like others and do not want any additional terms or conditions made to me that others are not subjected to.
Lou Pilder
Posted by Dinah on December 7, 2006, at 19:29:02
In reply to Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-D, posted by Lou Pilder on December 7, 2006, at 19:24:46
I think Lou should be able to contact you for civility reviews without having to ask someone else first.
He might need to recognize that you can't get to his requests immediately, or even within two days.
But you're the best person to answer complex civility determinations anyway.
Posted by gardenergirl on December 7, 2006, at 19:41:01
In reply to Dr. Bob, For what it's worth, posted by Dinah on December 7, 2006, at 19:29:02
Or a simple solution would be for Lou to just go ahead and send it to someone, get an opinion, and then send it to Dr. Bob for his "final answer". I'm really not sure what's been getting in the way of Lou going ahead and following Dr. Bob's request. I would imagine if there were something that was really important to me to post, I'd go ahead and get the ball rolling on getting it posted.
gg, who would never take it upon herself to set board policy, as that would not be within the scope of her role as deputy. But who instead tries, in her role as deputy, to help out fellow posters by answering administrative questions as best she can.
And who also answers Lou's questions by posting as a deputy since he requested she not post to him for whatever reason.
Posted by gardenergirl on December 7, 2006, at 19:42:43
In reply to Dr. Bob, For what it's worth, posted by Dinah on December 7, 2006, at 19:29:02
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 7, 2006, at 19:48:30
In reply to Dr. Bob, For what it's worth, posted by Dinah on December 7, 2006, at 19:29:02
Friends,
Dinah has written to Dr Hsiung that she thinks that I have a valid request to ask Dr. Hsiung for a review os a post ahead of me posting it. She writes that he is the best person to answer the question that I have.
But there is much more to this than that. You see, I could easily circumvent this entire matter and just send it to him without asking anyone first, could I not? But if I was to do that, my concience would object to giving Dr. Hsiung the false impression that I asked someone else first, when I had not. In your opinions, would that be good for the community as a whole?
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 7, 2006, at 20:03:17
In reply to Re: Dr. Bob, For what it's worth, posted by gardenergirl on December 7, 2006, at 19:41:01
FRiends,
It is written here,[...a ..solution could be for Lou to send it to someone else first...to get.. it posted].
I am asking that the TOS here be made equal to me as others. I could submit to being subjected to a different standard here, for the FAQ does not write that one send it to someone else first, in order to have the post's ball rolling, as the deputy/member suggests. But I ask, would that be good for the community as a whole?
Try and see it my way. I ask, what purpose is there to have me ask someone else first when others are not asked that in the FAQ? If you could answer that, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 7, 2006, at 20:10:03
In reply to Re: Dr. Bob, For what it's worth, posted by gardenergirl on December 7, 2006, at 19:41:01
Friends,
It is written here,[...answers Lou's questions as a deputy >since< he has posted to PDNP to him...].
I think that even though there is the stipulation, I ask: could one can still respond to aspects of a post as a member?
Lou
Posted by Dr. Bob on December 8, 2006, at 14:01:09
In reply to Lou's request to DR. Hsiung-, posted by Lou Pilder on December 7, 2006, at 16:12:02
> My question is if you would consider what the deputy/member, gardenergirl, has written to me to do, as to constitute advocating that I commit deceit?
Why do you ask?
Bob
Posted by zazenduckie on December 8, 2006, at 15:44:30
In reply to Re: Lou's request, posted by Dr. Bob on December 8, 2006, at 14:01:09
> > My question is if you would consider what the deputy/member, gardenergirl, has written to me to do, as to constitute advocating that I commit deceit?
>
> Why do you ask?
>
> Bob
>I don't even know how to spell subourning perjury but by golly I think it would be uncivil and I'd demand an impeachment hearing if you thought that was the case!
Actually Lou has a long record of not trying to go around your rules and my guess would be that he doesn't want to commit deceit and is checking with you first before following her advice. Why didn't you answer the question?
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 8, 2006, at 15:50:54
In reply to Re: Lou's request, posted by Dr. Bob on December 8, 2006, at 14:01:09
> > My question is if you would consider what the deputy/member, gardenergirl, has written to me to do, as to constitute advocating that I commit deceit?
>
> Why do you ask?
>
> Bob
Dr. Hsiung,
The question that I had involves administration policy/rules here. In order to for me answer you question, I would need a great amount of time to do research to bring up many related posts here.
I am not wanting at this time to have an answer from you about the question that I had to you that you are asking me why I asked you, and would like to withdraw the question that I had to you. If you post here that you would want to continue this discussion, that would be fine and I will continue.
Lou Pilder>
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 8, 2006, at 16:31:56
In reply to I don't know about Lou » Dr. Bob, posted by zazenduckie on December 8, 2006, at 15:44:30
Friends,
It is written here,[...Lou has a long record of trying not to go around your (Dr.Hsiung's) rules...checking with you before following her advice...Why didn't you answer the question...].
ZZDuk has brought up many issues before us now. And it is much more IMO than just this one issue here. For me to contribute in this thread could have me need to cite many posts of the past- practice.
ZZDuk writes what can be seen by her/him. I ask that if you are going to contribute to this discussion that you consider the following in your post as to what the deputy/member wrote;
A. the deputy/member writes,[...Yes you can send it to (Dr. Hsiung)..he has no way of knowing whether you sent it to anyone else beforehand or not...]
B.that she is using to base that statement on her confidence in her common sense
C. that she write that she is certain it is not a requirement for me to send it to someone else first before I send it to Dr. Hsiung
D.that she is certain that I would not have any administrative action toward me if I did
E and that I am to please consider her response to me as a response from a deputy to help me understand the rules.
This {response from a >deputy< makes a great difference than if her response was from her as a member. She later wrote something like that her response had to be as a deputy because I had issued a PDNP . If that is the case, then I think that this issue is moot and I have asked Dr. Hsiung to consider my request to allow me to withdraw the question in question, because as a member it is an opinion, that is diferent than from a deputy concerning board policy.
So I ask that you consider these statements in any post here that you would like to contribute.
Thanks,
Lou
Posted by gardenergirl on December 8, 2006, at 17:58:17
In reply to I don't know about Lou » Dr. Bob, posted by zazenduckie on December 8, 2006, at 15:44:30
> > > My question is if you would consider what the deputy/member, gardenergirl, has written to me to do, as to constitute advocating that I commit deceit?
> >
> > Why do you ask?
> >
> > Bob
> >
>
> I don't even know how to spell subourning perjury but by golly I think it would be uncivil and I'd demand an impeachment hearing if you thought that was the case!I'm kicking myself even as I type this, but I just have to ask... are you saying that you interpret this post http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061202/msgs/710831.html , particularly where I write "Yes, you can send it to Dr. Bob. Frankly, he has no way of knowing whether you sent it to anyone else beforehand or not" as advice from me to Lou regarding what he should do, and that said "advice" would be uncivil?
>
> Actually Lou has a long record of not trying to go around your rules and my guess would be that he doesn't want to commit deceit and is checking with you first before following her advice. Why didn't you answer the question?Exactly which "advice" are you referring to? There's also this "advice" http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061202/msgs/711276.html "Or a simple solution would be for Lou to just go ahead and send it to someone, get an opinion, and then send it to Dr. Bob for his "final answer"."
Oh and by the way, feel free to demand an "impeachment hearing" whenever you like. Please be aware, however, that you'd be demanding something that does not exist in Babble procedures. So you might wish to consider demanding that "impeachment hearings" exist before demanding that one be held. Just a thought.
gg
Posted by gardenergirl on December 8, 2006, at 18:13:13
In reply to Lou's response to aspects of ZZDuk's post, posted by Lou Pilder on December 8, 2006, at 16:31:56
> and I have asked Dr. Hsiung to consider my request to allow me to withdraw the question in question, because as a member it is an opinion, that is diferent than from a deputy concerning board policy.
Just to clarify in case anyone wonders, there's no rule or precedent that says that a poster must request Dr. Bob "allow" them to withdraw a request. Anyone can withdraw a request at any time. It's their request, after all, not Dr. Bob's.
gg
Posted by zazenduckie on December 8, 2006, at 18:30:47
In reply to Are you saying my post was not civil? » zazenduckie, posted by gardenergirl on December 8, 2006, at 17:58:17
Did you see my post asking what you meant when you posted "There goes that hope...KABOOM nm" ? It was in another thread.
Since the only hope I recall speaking of was that ASV was not really dead, was that the hope you were referring to? I know you said my idea about looking for a death record made sense (or something like that) and to let you know what I found out. But I said I didn't want to do that. Are you saying that you yourself have some definitive proof that ASV is really dead? I was very puzzled by your post and you never answered my question.
> > > > My question is if you would consider what the deputy/member, gardenergirl, has written to me to do, as to constitute advocating that I commit deceit?
> > >
> > > Why do you ask?
> > >
> > > Bob
> > >
............................................
I don't even know how to spell subourning perjury but by golly I think it would (IF Bob's answer was yes that you were advocating Lou commit deceit) be uncivil and I'd demand an impeachment hearing IF you (Bob) thought that was the case!That was what I meant.
..................................
>
> I'm kicking myself even as I type this, but I just have to ask... are you saying that you interpret this post http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061202/msgs/710831.html , particularly where I write "Yes, you can send it to Dr. Bob. Frankly, he has no way of knowing whether you sent it to anyone else beforehand or not" as advice from me to Lou regarding what he should do, and that said "advice" would be uncivil?
.................
No I didn't express any personal opinion of that at all.
...............
> >
> > Actually Lou has a long record of not trying to go around your rules and my guess would be that he doesn't want to commit deceit and is checking with you first before following her advice. Why didn't you answer the question?
>
> Exactly which "advice" are you referring to? There's also this "advice" http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061202/msgs/711276.html "Or a simple solution would be for Lou to just go ahead and send it to someone, get an opinion, and then send it to Dr. Bob for his "final answer"."
>
> Oh and by the way, feel free to demand an "impeachment hearing" whenever you like. Please be aware, however, that you'd be demanding something that does not exist in Babble procedures. So you might wish to consider demanding that "impeachment hearings" exist before demanding that one be held. Just a thought.
>
....................
GG dear are you supposed to be writing a thesis? I hate to depart from my purely admistrative speculations and suggestions ...but GOOD GRIEF are you actually spending time on advising me about Babble impeachment hearings?
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 8, 2006, at 18:31:38
In reply to Are you saying my post was not civil? » zazenduckie, posted by gardenergirl on December 8, 2006, at 17:58:17
Friends,
It is written here,[...a simple solution would be for Lou to just go ahead and send it to someone...]
But I ask, would it not be just as simple a solution for Dr. Hsiung to reply to my request as to if it is a requirement to me or not to send it to someone else first?
You see, I replied to something like that more than once here in other threads. It is my great conviction that imposing any additional stipulation to one person than to others is not good for the community as a whole and IMO could have the potential to be considered to constitute discrimination. For I believe that any terms and conditions of the terms of service are to be for all the members here. The FAQ here writes that members here can always send a post to Dr. Hsiung for review. I am a member here and I would like to send the post in question for review beforehand without sending to someone else first. The issue involves as to if I can or can not as per DR. Hsiung's request to send it to someone else first. I am asking if it is a request or a requirement from him. This is because I am unsure if it is or not.
The questions here in the dialog with me and DR. Hsiung could add another step to me to have an answer to the question as to if it is a requirement to me or not to send it to someone else first. Is not gardenergirl's answer not an answer now from the administration as a deputy since she has posted that my request to PDNP, is as a member's opinion?
I would like to post here in accordance with the rules and policy and I am asking what those rules and policies are , for I am unsure as to that. I also would like equal treatment and I think that what the TOS in the FAQ is to all members which does not have members here ask another first before sending the post for acceptibility beforehand.
Here is one post to that.
Lou
http:www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061202/msgs/711284.html
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 8, 2006, at 18:44:18
In reply to Re: Lou's request, posted by Dr. Bob on December 8, 2006, at 14:01:09
> > My question is if you would consider what the deputy/member, gardenergirl, has written to me to do, as to constitute advocating that I commit deceit?
>
> Why do you ask?
>
> Bob
> DR. Hsiung,
In accordance with board procedures as alerted to me by deputy/member gardenergirl, anyone can withdraw a request.
I think that since deputy/member gardenergirl has explained that she was not intending, for her reason given, to reply to me with the statements in question as a deputy, but as a member, that I withdraw my request to you concerning that because the statements are not from the administration and I consider them moot now.
Thanks,
Lou Pilder
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061202/msgs/711645.html.
Posted by gardenergirl on December 8, 2006, at 18:51:51
In reply to Hi GG ...a question and an answer » gardenergirl, posted by zazenduckie on December 8, 2006, at 18:30:47
> Did you see my post asking what you meant when you posted "There goes that hope...KABOOM nm" ? It was in another thread.
>
> Since the only hope I recall speaking of was that ASV was not really dead, was that the hope you were referring to? I know you said my idea about looking for a death record made sense (or something like that) and to let you know what I found out. But I said I didn't want to do that. Are you saying that you yourself have some definitive proof that ASV is really dead? I was very puzzled by your post and you never answered my question.Wow, um... Geez. Um. Lordy.
It was my own wish expressed privately.
I didn't reply to your question because it didn't occur to me that you might be reading it as being about you and having so much more meaning than it did. I assumed the question was along the lines of when you ask me how Barbaro is doing.
> > > > > My question is if you would consider what the deputy/member, gardenergirl, has written to me to do, as to constitute advocating that I commit deceit?
> > > >
> > > > Why do you ask?
> > > >
> > > > Bob
> > > >
> ............................................
> I don't even know how to spell subourning perjury but by golly I think it would (IF Bob's answer was yes that you were advocating Lou commit deceit) be uncivil and I'd demand an impeachment hearing IF you (Bob) thought that was the case!
>
> That was what I meant.
>
> ..................................
> >
> > I'm kicking myself even as I type this, but I just have to ask... are you saying that you interpret this post http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061202/msgs/710831.html , particularly where I write "Yes, you can send it to Dr. Bob. Frankly, he has no way of knowing whether you sent it to anyone else beforehand or not" as advice from me to Lou regarding what he should do, and that said "advice" would be uncivil?
> .................
> No I didn't express any personal opinion of that at all.So this, "I think it would (IF Bob's answer was yes that you were advocating Lou commit deceit) be uncivil and I'd demand an impeachment hearing IF you (Bob) thought that was the case!" is someone else's opinion?
> > >
> > > Actually Lou has a long record of not trying to go around your rules and my guess would be that he doesn't want to commit deceit and is checking with you first before following her advice. Why didn't you answer the question?
> >
> > Exactly which "advice" are you referring to? There's also this "advice" http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061202/msgs/711276.html "Or a simple solution would be for Lou to just go ahead and send it to someone, get an opinion, and then send it to Dr. Bob for his "final answer"."
> >Didja miss this one?
> > Oh and by the way, feel free to demand an "impeachment hearing" whenever you like. Please be aware, however, that you'd be demanding something that does not exist in Babble procedures. So you might wish to consider demanding that "impeachment hearings" exist before demanding that one be held. Just a thought.
> >
> ....................
> GG dear are you supposed to be writing a thesis? I hate to depart from my purely admistrative speculations and suggestions ...but GOOD GRIEF are you actually spending time on advising me about Babble impeachment hearings?Heck no, I'm not writing a thesis. I've already completed the MA. Now don't you go worrying about me and how I spend my time. But thanks for your concern.
Pat pat pat pat.
Posted by gardenergirl on December 8, 2006, at 18:58:47
In reply to Lou withdraws his request to Dr. Hsiung » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on December 8, 2006, at 18:44:18
> ... because the statements are not from the administration and I consider them moot now.
So would the opinion of all babblers render the request moot?I feel quite worthless now, at least as just plan gg. Gosh, my words make things moot? Heck, what's the point in my posting anything else at all?
I sure hope no one else ever feels this way here. It's yucky.
gg
Posted by zazenduckie on December 8, 2006, at 19:08:53
In reply to Re: Hi GG ...a question and an answer » zazenduckie, posted by gardenergirl on December 8, 2006, at 18:51:51
>
> So this, "I think it would (IF Bob's answer was yes that you were advocating Lou commit deceit) be uncivil and I'd demand an impeachment hearing IF you (Bob) thought that was the case!" is someone else's opinion?
>
> > > >
> > > > Actually Lou has a long record of not trying to go around your rules and my guess would be that he doesn't want to commit deceit and is checking with you first before following her advice. Why didn't you answer the question?
> > >
> > > Exactly which "advice" are you referring to? There's also this "advice" http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061202/msgs/711276.html "Or a simple solution would be for Lou to just go ahead and send it to someone, get an opinion, and then send it to Dr. Bob for his "final answer"."
> > >
>
> Didja miss this one?I was referring to whatever advice Lou was asking for a determination on from Bob. If Bob thought it was a suggestion to be deceitful I assumed Lou would not want to follow it.
> Heck no, I'm not writing a thesis. I've already completed the MA.OOps sorry!
Now don't you go worrying about me and how I spend my time. But thanks for your concern.
>
> Pat pat pat pat.Hey careful there That's not my head
Thanks for clearing up the other post.
Posted by zazenduckie on December 8, 2006, at 19:17:22
In reply to Are we all moot?, posted by gardenergirl on December 8, 2006, at 18:58:47
Posted by henrietta on December 8, 2006, at 19:17:58
In reply to Re: Hi GG ...a question and an answer » zazenduckie, posted by gardenergirl on December 8, 2006, at 18:51:51
"It was my own wish expressed privately. "
It was expressed openly on a public board. I don't understand what you mean by saying it was expressed "privately". Can you elaborate?
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.