![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 16 of 16. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 8, 2013, at 8:22:15
Mr. Hsiung,
In regards to your reminder provision, there are 5 additional outstanding notifications from me. You say that it may be good for the community to see my posts do not have to be responded to. But I say to you that you say that you will respond to them or email me with why what is in question is considered to be supportive by you. And I say to you that what do you or anyone else here profit by seeing that my posts do not have to be responded to? Can you not understand that what is allowed to stand can be thought by readers to be promoted by you, for you say that support takes precedence, and not to post anything that could lead one to feel accused or put down, so readers could think that un responded to notifications contain what is supportive in the community and could lead them to think that the community promotes what is in question. If you could post your rationale for thinking that it may be good for the community to see my posts unresponded to in this reminder, then I could have the opportunity to respond to you.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 8, 2013, at 11:11:46
In reply to Lou's reminder to Mr Hsiung-phyveadd, posted by Lou Pilder on July 8, 2013, at 8:22:15
> Mr. Hsiung,
> In regards to your reminder provision, there are 5 additional outstanding notifications from me. You say that it may be good for the community to see my posts do not have to be responded to. But I say to you that you say that you will respond to them or email me with why what is in question is considered to be supportive by you. And I say to you that what do you or anyone else here profit by seeing that my posts do not have to be responded to? Can you not understand that what is allowed to stand can be thought by readers to be promoted by you, for you say that support takes precedence, and not to post anything that could lead one to feel accused or put down, so readers could think that un responded to notifications contain what is supportive in the community and could lead them to think that the community promotes what is in question. If you could post your rationale for thinking that it may be good for the community to see my posts unresponded to in this reminder, then I could have the opportunity to respond to you.
> LouMr Hsiung,
You wrote, [....does your God shied you from the hate of others too?..].
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20130109/msgs/1044469.html
The God that I give service and worship to has the rain fall on the just and the unjust. And when hate is thrown at me here, over and over, psychologists say that one should leave a community where one is subjected to being a scapegoat. But I do have a shield that protects me from anything that is thrown at me here. For when I had an encounter with a Rider on a white horse, He said to me, "Blessed are you when men hate you, and when they shall separate you, and shall reproach you and cast out your name as evil for The Word of God's sake. Rejoice, for your reward is great in heaven."
You see, it is given to me to see right through what Dinah says are posts that are hurtful to me. My God is a Sun and a shield. Not a shield to stop the stones thrown at me, but a shield that protects me from the ignorance of men, the hatred of men, the scapegoating of men. You see, I am trying to stop the hate here, for the Rider said to me, "Lou, he that hates abides in death."
Lou
Posted by Dinah on July 8, 2013, at 11:30:04
In reply to Lou's reminder to Mr Hsiung-abbydndth, posted by Lou Pilder on July 8, 2013, at 11:11:46
I'm very sorry my posts are hurtful to you, Lou. It wasn't my intention. Do I have your story wrong? I thought I was correctly repeating what you've told me over time, and I didn't think you'd find that hurtful.
If I am incorrect about either supposition - that I am reporting what you've told me, or that reporting what you've told me is hurtful, I wish you would tell me. I am trying to be respectful and understand your point of view.
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 8, 2013, at 12:02:28
In reply to Re: Lou's reminder to Mr Hsiung-abbydndth » Lou Pilder, posted by Dinah on July 8, 2013, at 11:30:04
> I'm very sorry my posts are hurtful to you, Lou. It wasn't my intention. Do I have your story wrong? I thought I was correctly repeating what you've told me over time, and I didn't think you'd find that hurtful.
>
> If I am incorrect about either supposition - that I am reporting what you've told me, or that reporting what you've told me is hurtful, I wish you would tell me. I am trying to be respectful and understand your point of view.Dinah,
You are promoting that posters should be *warned* that I have revelation from the God that I give service and worship to. This revelation comes from The Word of God, who was there in the beginning and was God. This is the same God that the Jews give service and worship to. This has the potential for readers to think that they need to be warned of Judaism being what is behind what I write. This has the potential to arouse anti-Semitic feelings and could lead Jews to be victims of anti-Semitic violence, for readers here can be led to believe that what is standing is supportive, for support takes precedence and one match could start a forest fire and Mr Hsiung does not wait to allow that to happen.
The Rider on the white horse is a symbol. A symbol of victory. For in the ancient times, the victorious General rode a white horse leading his army into the city that was defeated with the prisoners in chains behind him. The Rider on the white horse has defeated the world, the flesh and the devil and the prisoners (demons) are in chains as captive. Those demons held others captive and they were in captivity. The Rider led captivity captive. This captivity is what I am here for to have people in depression and addiction delivered from, so captivity will be led captive. That needs a warning?
Lou
Posted by Dinah on July 8, 2013, at 12:48:25
In reply to Lou's reply-the warning » Dinah, posted by Lou Pilder on July 8, 2013, at 12:02:28
I think warning was probably a bad choice of words. Information perhaps?
Nothing at all would be needed if you would be careful of accusations and overgeneralizations. Or if Dr. Bob enforced the rules about accusations and overgeneralizations.
How do you think a parent trying to do their best for their child feels about your posts? Or someone trying very hard to address mental health concerns? How do you think fellow posters feel about your statements that they are pushing drugs that could cause people to murder or commit anti-semitic violence?
If you would be sensitive to that, there would be no need for any of these on board discussions about your posting behaviors. And I imagine any such discussions are painful to you. As your posts can be painful to others.
Which is why I wish Bob would return to the old system of off board notifications and on board civility reminders. It would properly position posters with respect to each other.
Posted by SLS on July 8, 2013, at 12:49:54
In reply to Lou's reply-the warning » Dinah, posted by Lou Pilder on July 8, 2013, at 12:02:28
As I intimated on the Medication forum, I do not think it is civil to pin a post on the board warning people to beware of the postings of a specific personage by name or by inference. It is better that global caveats be written into the FAQ and headings of the forum pages. Of course, these things already exist.
Perhaps the verbiage of the caveats appearing at the top of forum pages should be reworded.
"Don't necessarily believe everything you hear. Your mileage may vary."
Does anyone have a suggestion as to how this can be rewritten?
I have no suggestions.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on July 8, 2013, at 13:03:08
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-the warning » Lou Pilder, posted by Dinah on July 8, 2013, at 12:48:25
> Nothing at all would be needed if you would be careful of accusations and overgeneralizations.
If I were on a zealous mission to save lives, I would also "push the envelope" and see how far I could go without being silenced.
> Or if Dr. Bob enforced the rules about accusations and overgeneralizations.
This is at the crux of the issue. I think the health of Psycho-Babble can be maintained with active moderation.
- Scott
Posted by Dinah on July 8, 2013, at 13:16:31
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-the warning » Dinah, posted by SLS on July 8, 2013, at 13:03:08
Well, hence the suggestion. Because Lou hasn't shown a willingness to do that. And I do understand the reasons for that, even if I don't agree with them.
And I can't stress enough that my suggestion was never for a global warning. It was for a response to an individual (or individuals) who were upset, or likely to be upset. As Dr. Bob said, it was responsive to the original poster, not anti-anyone or anything. I feel a bit frustrated that everyone is referring to it as a suggestion for FAQ's or opening paragraphs. I was just suggesting it as an explanation to try to help people understand so they won't be upset, given in context to individual posters.
And I was very clear that I was only suggesting it because Dr. Bob all but stated firmly that he wasn't going to do anything himself. Absolutely it is Dr. Bob's responsibility, but apparently he isn't going to exercise power in the way we would like. We can wish all we want, but we can't force him to do anything he doesn't wish to do.
The only possibilities are to leave or to try to do something ourselves. And to do something in a way that leads to minimal board disruption. This was my suggestion for doing that. I was never trying to hurt Lou or anyone else. Just trying to come up with a solution that would address the needs and cause minimal disruption to the board.
How is it really different than what we do all the time? If I were to snap at someone, and you knew that I was in the midst of a medication reaction, or had just lost someone dear to me, mightn't you point out that I was going through a bad time and not to take what I said to heart?
I suppose it might be better to do through Babblemail.
Believe it or not, I rather wish the old rules were being followed about complaints as well. If I thought Bob would be responsive at all, I'd harangue him off-board.
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 8, 2013, at 13:18:52
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-the warning » Lou Pilder, posted by Dinah on July 8, 2013, at 12:48:25
> I think warning was probably a bad choice of words. Information perhaps?
>
> Nothing at all would be needed if you would be careful of accusations and overgeneralizations. Or if Dr. Bob enforced the rules about accusations and overgeneralizations.
>
> How do you think a parent trying to do their best for their child feels about your posts? Or someone trying very hard to address mental health concerns? How do you think fellow posters feel about your statements that they are pushing drugs that could cause people to murder or commit anti-semitic violence?
>
> If you would be sensitive to that, there would be no need for any of these on board discussions about your posting behaviors. And I imagine any such discussions are painful to you. As your posts can be painful to others.
>
> Which is why I wish Bob would return to the old system of off board notifications and on board civility reminders. It would properly position posters with respect to each other.Friends,
If you are considering being a discussant in this thread, I am requesting that you read what is in the following link.
Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20110117/msgs/978777.html
Posted by Dinah on July 8, 2013, at 13:25:59
In reply to Lou's request-, posted by Lou Pilder on July 8, 2013, at 13:18:52
I fail to see the relevance Lou.
Anything I feel for you, I feel for you as a person, not as a Jew. I do wish you could that. Are your feelings to me feelings to me as whatevertheheck religion I am? If you can figure it out, please let me know what religion you have negative feelings about on my behalf. I'm relatively sure I'm a heretic in that religion, and therefore you are unfairly stereotyping an entire religion based on one person who isn't really even a good member of it. Or is it all European-Americans you're stereotyping?
Since you seem to think it's impossible to have a reaction to you as a person, with no respect whatsoever to your status as a Jew, then I must assume you are unable to have any feelings for me that aren't tied into my religion or ethnicity (since I'm not quite sure what basis you're claiming anti-Semetism).
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 8, 2013, at 13:46:27
In reply to Lou's request-, posted by Lou Pilder on July 8, 2013, at 13:18:52
> > I think warning was probably a bad choice of words. Information perhaps?
> >
> > Nothing at all would be needed if you would be careful of accusations and overgeneralizations. Or if Dr. Bob enforced the rules about accusations and overgeneralizations.
> >
> > How do you think a parent trying to do their best for their child feels about your posts? Or someone trying very hard to address mental health concerns? How do you think fellow posters feel about your statements that they are pushing drugs that could cause people to murder or commit anti-semitic violence?
> >
> > If you would be sensitive to that, there would be no need for any of these on board discussions about your posting behaviors. And I imagine any such discussions are painful to you. As your posts can be painful to others.
> >
> > Which is why I wish Bob would return to the old system of off board notifications and on board civility reminders. It would properly position posters with respect to each other.
>
> Friends,
> If you are considering being a discussant in this thread, I am requesting that you read what is in the following link.
> Lou
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20110117/msgs/978777.htmlFriends,
If you are considering being a discussant oin this thread, I am requesting that you read he following.
Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20130702/msgs/1046351.html
Posted by Dinah on July 8, 2013, at 13:49:29
In reply to Lou's request-B, posted by Lou Pilder on July 8, 2013, at 13:46:27
Well, since you're the originating poster, I'll respect your request and withdraw from this conversation.
I think it's perfectly ok to ask someone to read something in order to be a participant in your own thread.
Posted by SLS on July 8, 2013, at 14:46:08
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-the warning » SLS, posted by Dinah on July 8, 2013, at 13:16:31
Okay.
Thanks.
I have a better understanding now.
- Scott
> Well, hence the suggestion. Because Lou hasn't shown a willingness to do that. And I do understand the reasons for that, even if I don't agree with them.
>
> And I can't stress enough that my suggestion was never for a global warning. It was for a response to an individual (or individuals) who were upset, or likely to be upset. As Dr. Bob said, it was responsive to the original poster, not anti-anyone or anything. I feel a bit frustrated that everyone is referring to it as a suggestion for FAQ's or opening paragraphs. I was just suggesting it as an explanation to try to help people understand so they won't be upset, given in context to individual posters.
>
> And I was very clear that I was only suggesting it because Dr. Bob all but stated firmly that he wasn't going to do anything himself. Absolutely it is Dr. Bob's responsibility, but apparently he isn't going to exercise power in the way we would like. We can wish all we want, but we can't force him to do anything he doesn't wish to do.
>
> The only possibilities are to leave or to try to do something ourselves. And to do something in a way that leads to minimal board disruption. This was my suggestion for doing that. I was never trying to hurt Lou or anyone else. Just trying to come up with a solution that would address the needs and cause minimal disruption to the board.
>
> How is it really different than what we do all the time? If I were to snap at someone, and you knew that I was in the midst of a medication reaction, or had just lost someone dear to me, mightn't you point out that I was going through a bad time and not to take what I said to heart?
>
> I suppose it might be better to do through Babblemail.
>
> Believe it or not, I rather wish the old rules were being followed about complaints as well. If I thought Bob would be responsive at all, I'd harangue him off-board.
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 8, 2013, at 17:44:31
In reply to Lou's request-B, posted by Lou Pilder on July 8, 2013, at 13:46:27
> > > I think warning was probably a bad choice of words. Information perhaps?
> > >
> > > Nothing at all would be needed if you would be careful of accusations and overgeneralizations. Or if Dr. Bob enforced the rules about accusations and overgeneralizations.
> > >
> > > How do you think a parent trying to do their best for their child feels about your posts? Or someone trying very hard to address mental health concerns? How do you think fellow posters feel about your statements that they are pushing drugs that could cause people to murder or commit anti-semitic violence?
> > >
> > > If you would be sensitive to that, there would be no need for any of these on board discussions about your posting behaviors. And I imagine any such discussions are painful to you. As your posts can be painful to others.
> > >
> > > Which is why I wish Bob would return to the old system of off board notifications and on board civility reminders. It would properly position posters with respect to each other.
> >
> > Friends,
> > If you are considering being a discussant in this thread, I am requesting that you read what is in the following link.
> > Lou
> > http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20110117/msgs/978777.html
>
> Friends,
> If you are considering being a discussant oin this thread, I am requesting that you read he following.
> Lou
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20130702/msgs/1046351.htmlFriends,
If you are making a decision as to drug yourself or your child with mind-altering drugs in collaboration with a psychiatrist/doctor, I urge you to go back through the archives and read what I have posted here. There are videos from psychiatrists and doctors that give information that could help you to make a more-informed decision. And look at my posts that are encounters with the Rider on the white horse. for those words are from the God that the Jews give service and worship to. Those words could be heard by you to open up the door to understanding that
Posted by Dinah on July 8, 2013, at 17:59:16
In reply to Lou's request-C, posted by Lou Pilder on July 8, 2013, at 17:44:31
I like that one better, Lou. I'm not sure what others think, but that one wouldn't bother me.
Posted by Phillipa on July 8, 2013, at 19:02:24
In reply to Re: Lou's request-C, posted by Dinah on July 8, 2013, at 17:59:16
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.