![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 13 of 13. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Happyflower on January 18, 2007, at 9:13:08
If I instated a "do not post to me" under the previous rules, does the old rules still apply or do the new ones take force?
Because of this new rule, the person I orginally stated this too, maybe because of the new rules, is still trying to communicate with me like last night in chat. Others were there, so I am sure I have proof. But before I do anything, I need to know how the rules apply since they changed after my "do not post". What do I do?.
Posted by Dinah on January 18, 2007, at 9:34:11
In reply to Another question needing an answer please, posted by Happyflower on January 18, 2007, at 9:13:08
I believe the new one are in force. Dr. Bob can correct me if I am wrong.
You should report violations to Dr. Bob by email or via the report this post button. Dr. Bob has requested that reports about chat include a cut and pasted chat screen containing the violations including the fingerprint (string of numbers) at the top of each screen. I don't know if this is required or suggested.
If I understand correctly, Dr. Bob will then decide whether the situation falls under his new guidelines on when he will enforce Please Do Not Posts. I'm not sure the procedure after that, because how is the poster to know whether Dr. Bob will decide to enforce that particular request. I'd be interested to hear the procedure myself.
Posted by Happyflower on January 18, 2007, at 9:41:57
In reply to Re: Another question needing an answer please » Happyflower, posted by Dinah on January 18, 2007, at 9:34:11
I think is also brings out other questions. It is so darn hard to know what to do when they are only "implied" in an annoymous post, and not posted on the site.
So now everyone one who did a "do not post to me" in the past, has to now deal with the issue again? This isn't fair at all. Like I said before, it seems like the rules are not protecting the innocent. And another question, why is it on my shoulders to make sure the rules are followed? Shouldn't I be protected whether or not I say anything? I think this is why it is sooo easy not to follow the rules, kinda like speeding while you drive, because the chances of you getting caught is slim. But it doesn't man it should be ignored either.
Posted by Happyflower on January 18, 2007, at 9:47:46
In reply to Re: Another question needing an answer please, posted by Happyflower on January 18, 2007, at 9:41:57
is that it is so hard to follow procedures that are only implied in some annonymous thread on the board, and not in official rules. Plus they keep changing, how can anyone keep up with it? Maybe we need a permmenent thread on each of the boards where Dr. Bob can alert us to new changes since there seems to be so many (like how many times can you change your posting name). I think that would help alot and make it less confusing. If I knew that posting about my situation on admin, would have resulted in a block just by mentioning it, I wouldn't have posted it in the first place. I was trying to be very civil and I still don't agree with my block.
Posted by Dinah on January 18, 2007, at 9:49:36
In reply to Re: Another question needing an answer please, posted by Happyflower on January 18, 2007, at 9:41:57
There are definitely things I don't understand about the new PDNP rule. Whenever that happens, I rely on precedent by Dr. Bob to understand them. Or by asking questions.
As to things that don't involve Babble, I don't think Dr. Bob can enforce anything there at all, except by prohibiting links to material that would be uncivil if posted.
Posted by Happyflower on January 18, 2007, at 9:54:32
In reply to Re: Another question needing an answer please » Happyflower, posted by Dinah on January 18, 2007, at 9:49:36
> There are definitely things I don't understand about the new PDNP rule. Whenever that happens, I rely on precedent by Dr. Bob to understand them. Or by asking questions.
>
> As to things that don't involve Babble, I don't think Dr. Bob can enforce anything there at all, except by prohibiting links to material that would be uncivil if posted.But don't we get blocked if we say something uncivil about the president or another country, or race, or religion?
Posted by Happyflower on January 18, 2007, at 9:58:15
In reply to Re: Another question needing an answer please » Dinah, posted by Happyflower on January 18, 2007, at 9:54:32
I also wanted to say I am not writing about this to put anyone down, or cause trouble, I truely think things can be improved and that is why I am posting because I want to see some good changes that would benefit the site.
Posted by Honore on January 18, 2007, at 12:17:14
In reply to Re: Another question needing an answer please, posted by Happyflower on January 18, 2007, at 9:41:57
Isn't there an "ignore" feature on the chat, which Happyflower could use, if she finds that Deneb is continuing to address things to her, even by implication?
I don't know how that words, but would that be a partial solution to feeling more comfortable in chat, possibly, HF?
Honore
Posted by Happyflower on January 18, 2007, at 17:40:06
In reply to Re: Another question needing an answer please, posted by Honore on January 18, 2007, at 12:17:14
Yes, I can use ignore, and sometimes I do, or just log out if I have had enough. But should the behavior be allowed to continue anyways?
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 19, 2007, at 22:57:48
In reply to Re: Another question needing an answer please, posted by Happyflower on January 18, 2007, at 9:41:57
> > If I instated a "do not post to me" under the previous rules, does the old rules still apply or do the new ones take force?
>
> I believe the new one are in force.Yes, let's consider that to be the case.
> You should report [what you consider] violations to Dr. Bob by email or via the report this post button. Dr. Bob has requested that reports about chat include a cut and pasted chat screen containing the violations including the fingerprint (string of numbers) at the top of each screen. I don't know if this is required or suggested.
And let's consider that required.
> If I understand correctly, Dr. Bob will then decide whether the situation falls under his new guidelines on when he will enforce Please Do Not Posts. I'm not sure the procedure after that, because how is the poster to know whether Dr. Bob will decide to enforce that particular request. I'd be interested to hear the procedure myself.
>
> DinahSorry, how is which poster to know?
> why is it on my shoulders to make sure the rules are followed? Shouldn't I be protected whether or not I say anything? I think this is why it is sooo easy not to follow the rules, kinda like speeding while you drive, because the chances of you getting caught is slim.
>
> Happyflower1. I'd like to give you the opportunity to let it go. To re-open lines of communication.
2. At the same time, it increases the chances of someone getting "caught", because it's not just relying on the "police".
Bob
Posted by Dinah on January 20, 2007, at 12:48:30
In reply to Re: please do not post to me rules, posted by Dr. Bob on January 19, 2007, at 22:57:48
> I'm not sure the procedure after that, because how is the poster to know whether Dr. Bob will decide to enforce that particular request. I'd be interested to hear the procedure myself.
> >
> > Dinah
>
> Sorry, how is which poster to know?Of course I meant the requestee, the person up for Admin action. It would seem to me that if you make a blanket statement that you don't intend to enforce PDNP's except in situations where you deem it necessary, and in any given situation you deem it necessary, it would seem only fair to warn the requestee of that *before* you start handing out Admin actions.
Posted by Deneb on January 20, 2007, at 16:18:07
In reply to Re: please do not post to me rules, posted by Dr. Bob on January 19, 2007, at 22:57:48
Dr. Bob, what's there to stop people from altering the chat dialogue? I can copy and paste and then just change the words.
How about if we are required to "take a picture" of the screen? Like using the "print screen" key?
To take a picture of the screen on a PC:
Hit the "Print Screen" key, usually at the upper right of the keyboard. Then open "Paint" under accessories. Go to "Edit" and select "Paste".
Deneb*
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 21, 2007, at 2:21:19
In reply to Re: please do not post to me rules, posted by Deneb on January 20, 2007, at 16:18:07
> It would seem to me that if you make a blanket statement that you don't intend to enforce PDNP's except in situations where you deem it necessary, and in any given situation you deem it necessary, it would seem only fair to warn the requestee of that *before* you start handing out Admin actions.
>
> DinahThanks, I think I see what you mean, if A asks B not to post to them, then B should know whether that's going to be enforced or not. Well, I guess they both should know...
The new procedure includes an administrative reply if the request is going to be enforced. Let's make it official:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061228/msgs/724686.html
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#harassed--
> what's there to stop people from altering the chat dialogue?
>
> Deneb*There's now a "fingerprint", as Dinah mentioned:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061228/msgs/723574.html
Like with babblemail.
Bob
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.