![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 24 of 24. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Ronnjee on March 15, 2014, at 21:17:47
In my most recent experiences here, I experimented with a different style, especially being less confrontational and sarcastic. During this time, I carefully observed many responses to my posts as well as others. In many cases, I've seen examples where specific members who have apparently deemed themselves experts, insistently argue with anything with which they disagree. Their arguments are well-worded, and eloquent, but that pales to their relentlessness. These "experts" don't win arguments or convince anyone; they simply wear the opposition down. Such internet experts are all over the place in forums on various subjects, so it's not just a Babble thing or a psych board thing. I posit that such activity is a possible cause of many people simply not wanting to post, lest they face the consequences.
In light of recent threads regarding trolls, it occurs to me that subtle, well-spoken trolls are still trolls, wolves in sheep's clothing.
I, for one, have been worn down, and have no wish to face the unflappable barrage of BS that occurs all too often here.
Bob, perhaps your civility guidelines need some improvement.
Posted by Phillipa on March 15, 2014, at 22:43:51
In reply to Internet 'Experts' and Decreasing Babble Activity, posted by Ronnjee on March 15, 2014, at 21:17:47
I don't argue. I either ignore or post to another poster on the thread. Phillipa
Posted by SLS on March 15, 2014, at 23:04:08
In reply to Internet 'Experts' and Decreasing Babble Activity, posted by Ronnjee on March 15, 2014, at 21:17:47
What shall we do about this?
- Scott> In my most recent experiences here, I experimented with a different style, especially being less confrontational and sarcastic. During this time, I carefully observed many responses to my posts as well as others. In many cases, I've seen examples where specific members who have apparently deemed themselves experts, insistently argue with anything with which they disagree. Their arguments are well-worded, and eloquent, but that pales to their relentlessness. These "experts" don't win arguments or convince anyone; they simply wear the opposition down. Such internet experts are all over the place in forums on various subjects, so it's not just a Babble thing or a psych board thing. I posit that such activity is a possible cause of many people simply not wanting to post, lest they face the consequences.
>
> In light of recent threads regarding trolls, it occurs to me that subtle, well-spoken trolls are still trolls, wolves in sheep's clothing.
>
> I, for one, have been worn down, and have no wish to face the unflappable barrage of BS that occurs all too often here.
>
> Bob, perhaps your civility guidelines need some improvement.
>
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 16, 2014, at 13:38:11
In reply to Internet 'Experts' and Decreasing Babble Activity, posted by Ronnjee on March 15, 2014, at 21:17:47
> In my most recent experiences here, I experimented with a different style, especially being less confrontational and sarcastic. During this time, I carefully observed many responses to my posts as well as others. In many cases, I've seen examples where specific members who have apparently deemed themselves experts, insistently argue with anything with which they disagree. Their arguments are well-worded, and eloquent, but that pales to their relentlessness. These "experts" don't win arguments or convince anyone; they simply wear the opposition down. Such internet experts are all over the place in forums on various subjects, so it's not just a Babble thing or a psych board thing. I posit that such activity is a possible cause of many people simply not wanting to post, lest they face the consequences.
>
> In light of recent threads regarding trolls, it occurs to me that subtle, well-spoken trolls are still trolls, wolves in sheep's clothing.
>
> I, for one, have been worn down, and have no wish to face the unflappable barrage of BS that occurs all too often here.
>
> Bob, perhaps your civility guidelines need some improvement.
>
Ronnjee,
I am unsure as to how to make out what you are wanting readers to think when they read your post. If you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
A. What are the criteria, if any, that you use to determine if a poster here is deeming themselves to be an expert.
B. What constitutes them being considered by you to be a person that insistently argues?
C. How do you determine if anyone wins an argument?
D. What criteria do you use to determine if the opposition is worn down?
E What are the consequences that you refer to that could happen to those that simply do not want to post, if they did post?
F. By what authority,(redacted by respondent)
Lou
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 16, 2014, at 17:36:03
In reply to Internet 'Experts' and Decreasing Babble Activity, posted by Ronnjee on March 15, 2014, at 21:17:47
> In light of recent threads regarding trolls, it occurs to me that subtle, well-spoken trolls are still trolls, wolves in sheep's clothing.
>
> I, for one, have been worn down, and have no wish to face the unflappable barrage of BS that occurs all too often here.
>
> Bob, perhaps your civility guidelines need some improvement.Deciding what's civil is tricky enough, I'll pass on deciding what's BS.
Posters who'd like help dealing with the unflappable barrage might appreciate a "blinders" feature.
Those who are unflappable themselves might feel up to countering the barrage.
> In my most recent experiences here, I experimented with a different style, especially being less confrontational and sarcastic. During this time, I carefully observed many responses to my posts as well as others. In many cases, I've seen examples where specific members who have apparently deemed themselves experts, insistently argue with anything with which they disagree.
What an interesting experiment. How about the other responses?
Bob
Posted by Phillipa on March 16, 2014, at 20:52:38
In reply to Lou's request-dhuekspurt » Ronnjee, posted by Lou Pilder on March 16, 2014, at 13:38:11
Lou I understand the above mentioned post. Some post as experts, and some don't want to see it should they wear blinders. Personally I ignore or watch to see what happens next. As sometimes good debates results from posts such as mentioned. What do you do? Phillipa
Posted by SLS on March 17, 2014, at 7:23:17
In reply to Lou's request-dhuekspurt » Ronnjee, posted by Lou Pilder on March 16, 2014, at 13:38:11
Hi Lou.
Those are very good questions that I elected not to ask for fear of losing an argument and getting worn down. Your logic is crisper than mine.
I would just add to your questions one regarding trolls. By what criteria does one determine who is a troll, especially when they are well-spoken enough to become wolves in sheep's clothing?
One other comment:
"insistently argue with anything with which they disagree."
Doesn't that sort of follow from logic, especially if one is passionate enough to confront ideas he deems harmful? Of what use is arguing against something with which you agree? Debate? Dialectic? I guess.
- Scott
> Ronnjee,
> I am unsure as to how to make out what you are wanting readers to think when they read your post. If you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
> A. What are the criteria, if any, that you use to determine if a poster here is deeming themselves to be an expert.
> B. What constitutes them being considered by you to be a person that insistently argues?
> C. How do you determine if anyone wins an argument?
> D. What criteria do you use to determine if the opposition is worn down?
> E What are the consequences that you refer to that could happen to those that simply do not want to post, if they did post?
> F. By what authority,(redacted by respondent)
> Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 17, 2014, at 7:53:02
In reply to Logic and trolls, posted by SLS on March 17, 2014, at 7:23:17
> Hi Lou.
>
> Those are very good questions that I elected not to ask for fear of losing an argument and getting worn down. Your logic is crisper than mine.
>
> I would just add to your questions one regarding trolls. By what criteria does one determine who is a troll, especially when they are well-spoken enough to become wolves in sheep's clothing?
>
> One other comment:
>
> "insistently argue with anything with which they disagree."
>
> Doesn't that sort of follow from logic, especially if one is passionate enough to confront ideas he deems harmful? Of what use is arguing against something with which you agree? Debate? Dialectic? I guess.
>
>
> - Scott
>
>
> > Ronnjee,
> > I am unsure as to how to make out what you are wanting readers to think when they read your post. If you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
> > A. What are the criteria, if any, that you use to determine if a poster here is deeming themselves to be an expert.
> > B. What constitutes them being considered by you to be a person that insistently argues?
> > C. How do you determine if anyone wins an argument?
> > D. What criteria do you use to determine if the opposition is worn down?
> > E What are the consequences that you refer to that could happen to those that simply do not want to post, if they did post?
> > F. By what authority,(redacted by respondent)
> > Lou
>
> Scott,
You wrote,[...by what criteria does one use to determine who is a troll...].
That is a good question to add here. By reading what the poster here has posted concerning trolls, which of the following do you think could be a troll by what the poster has posted?
A. Martin Luther KIng jr
B. Louis Farrakhan
C. Dr. Mercola
D. Simon Wiesenthal
E. Jean Jacques RousseauLou
Posted by Ronnjee on March 17, 2014, at 8:34:21
In reply to Lou's reply- Logic and trolls- » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on March 17, 2014, at 7:53:02
Posted by SLS on March 17, 2014, at 8:52:42
In reply to Lou's reply- Logic and trolls- » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on March 17, 2014, at 7:53:02
> Scott,
> You wrote,[...by what criteria does one use to determine who is a troll...].
> That is a good question to add here. By reading what the poster here has posted concerning trolls, which of the following do you think could be a troll by what the poster has posted?
> A. Martin Luther KIng jr
> B. Louis Farrakhan
> C. Dr. Mercola
> D. Simon Wiesenthal
> E. Jean Jacques RousseauLet's put it this way, I personally do not consider A and D to be trolls.
I apologize that I did not answer your question directly.
As best as I can tell, you are not a troll.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on March 17, 2014, at 9:07:14
In reply to Goodbye (nm), posted by Ronnjee on March 17, 2014, at 8:34:21
I'm sorry that you felt the need to leave after providing some of us with reasons to disagree with you.
Why do you think Lou and I responded to your composition by challenging your opinions?
Posting words for others to see can often have consequences. In this case, your words caused me to become animated. If you don't tolerate conflict well, perhaps you ought not to post things that challenge or criticize people, places, and things. For now, if you elect to describe the existence of personages in the Psycho-Babble community who are trolls, I think that it is a reasonable expectation that you will encounter resistance from some members of that community.
You reap what you sow?
- Scott
Posted by Ronnjee on March 17, 2014, at 9:15:18
In reply to Re: Goodbye » Ronnjee, posted by SLS on March 17, 2014, at 9:07:14
Scott, I erred in implying you were a troll, when I really meant to emphatically state that you are a prick.
Posted by SLS on March 17, 2014, at 10:16:32
In reply to Re: Goodbye, posted by Ronnjee on March 17, 2014, at 9:15:18
> Scott, I erred in implying you were a troll, when I really meant to emphatically state that you are a prick.
Despite your advancing age, you still have a lot of growing up to do.
How's that for being a prick?
- Scott
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 18, 2014, at 0:33:12
In reply to Re: Goodbye, posted by Ronnjee on March 17, 2014, at 9:15:18
Posted by 10derheart on March 18, 2014, at 14:55:42
In reply to Re: lol (nm) » Ronnjee, posted by Dr. Bob on March 18, 2014, at 0:33:12
Dr. Bob,
Do I need another eye exam, or a remedial reading course, or did you just post that you are laughing out loud at the post where Ronnjee called Scott a prick?
I am bewildered.
Posted by 10derheart on March 18, 2014, at 15:00:07
In reply to Re: Goodbye » Ronnjee, posted by SLS on March 17, 2014, at 10:16:32
Well, if the owner of this site posts "lol" at the post which you are replying to here, then I will balance the scale by laughing at your retort:
lol
lol
lolThere. Okay, so you guys are clever with words. Cool. Sarcasm and wit *are* funny, even LOL-funny, but at the same time, bickering posters and name-calling aren't so much.
I don't understand...
I shoulda stayed out of it, yet my self control was/is weak. Obviously.
Posted by Phillipa on March 18, 2014, at 20:10:15
In reply to Umm... » Dr. Bob, posted by 10derheart on March 18, 2014, at 14:55:42
Yes looks like he did indeed. Phillipa
Posted by SLS on March 18, 2014, at 21:44:21
In reply to Umm... » Dr. Bob, posted by 10derheart on March 18, 2014, at 14:55:42
> Dr. Bob,
>
> Do I need another eye exam, or a remedial reading course, or did you just post that you are laughing out loud at the post where Ronnjee called Scott a prick?
>
> I am bewildered.I was confused, too. I just figured that Dr. Bob has a special liking for Ronnjee or perhaps an increasing dislike of me. Either way, this is beyond my control. Maybe Dr. Bob didn't want Ronnjee to feel bad and leave the community.
Maybe Dr. Bob doesn't think that my feelings can be hurt.
So far, I haven't lost any sleep over this. Still, I am not invulnerable to hurt or a loss of self-esteem.
For the most part, I have let go of this thing. I must be somewhat hurt, though. I don't feel much affection for Dr. Bob right now. I had already been losing interest in posting prior to Dr. Bob's "lol". I experience a certain amount of indignation.
Tomorrow is another day. We'll see.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on March 18, 2014, at 22:13:59
In reply to Re: Goodbye » SLS, posted by 10derheart on March 18, 2014, at 15:00:07
Are you uncomfortable with witnessing conflict?
Funny, clever, and witty are not words that I would use to describe my motivations in writing my response. Indeed, it was none of those things. I certainly have the assets to be a prick. However, I just don't have the constitution to use those assets indiscriminately. I do make mistakes, though, usually out of being defensive.
It felt good for me to prove that Ronnjee was accurate in his portrayal of me as being a prick.
How might you react to someone who has called you a c_nt? I'm pretty sure that you would react differently from me, simply because you are not me and have less testosterone coursing through your veins.
- Scott
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 20, 2014, at 2:34:36
In reply to Re: Umm... » 10derheart, posted by SLS on March 18, 2014, at 21:44:21
> Maybe Dr. Bob doesn't think that my feelings can be hurt.
>
> So far, I haven't lost any sleep over this. Still, I am not invulnerable to hurt or a loss of self-esteem.
>
> For the most part, I have let go of this thing. I must be somewhat hurt, though. I don't feel much affection for Dr. Bob right now. I had already been losing interest in posting prior to Dr. Bob's "lol". I experience a certain amount of indignation.What made me lol was the idea that "prick" was an improvement over "troll".
Scott, of course I know your feelings can be hurt. I apologize if I came across as not caring about you. I'm glad you've been mostly able to let this go.
Ron, would you consider apologizing, too?
Bob
Posted by SLS on March 20, 2014, at 7:06:03
In reply to Re: my lol, posted by Dr. Bob on March 20, 2014, at 2:34:36
Thanks, Dr. Bob. I am relieved to know that it was not something that I should take personally.
Regarding Ronjee, I don't feel the need to receive an apology from him. Although I think he should be treated like everyone else by you, I would not like to see him get blocked for this particular event. However, as Psycho-Babble is your website to manage, I'm sure your decision will take into consideration what you feel is in the best interests of the whole in addition to the one.
- Scott
Posted by 10derheart on March 20, 2014, at 14:15:38
In reply to Re: my lol, posted by Dr. Bob on March 20, 2014, at 2:34:36
thanks, but still...
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 22, 2014, at 16:01:04
In reply to Re: my lol, posted by Dr. Bob on March 20, 2014, at 2:34:36
> > Maybe Dr. Bob doesn't think that my feelings can be hurt.
> >
> > So far, I haven't lost any sleep over this. Still, I am not invulnerable to hurt or a loss of self-esteem.
> >
> > For the most part, I have let go of this thing. I must be somewhat hurt, though. I don't feel much affection for Dr. Bob right now. I had already been losing interest in posting prior to Dr. Bob's "lol". I experience a certain amount of indignation.
>
> What made me lol was the idea that "prick" was an improvement over "troll".
>
> Scott, of course I know your feelings can be hurt. I apologize if I came across as not caring about you. I'm glad you've been mostly able to let this go.
>
> Ron, would you consider apologizing, too?
>
> BobMr. Hsiung,
You wrote,[...What made me lol was the idea that that "pr*ck" was an improvement over "troll"...].
Psychologists write about those personalities that get laughter or humor from seeing one debased or ridiculed or libeled in a way that insults their character or could induce psychological emotional pain or suffering. You call it {putting down} which is a slang way of saying that someone does something that depreciates another human being. But , my friend, when you are laughing at him, you are laughing at me. For I am a human being also, in the same family as Scott. That family is the humanity family. And it has been revealed to me, that when you insult a family member, you insult all humanity.
It's a little bit funny, this feeling inside. It's not one that I can easily hide. It is a feeling of humanity being on trial here. For if you are allowed to laugh at your guests here for being called what could induce hostile and disagreeable feelings toward Scott, and lead others to think of him as someone to be laughed at, then could not you (redacted by respondent)?
Now you say you're sorry. But does that erase the harm? There are jurisdictions that say that what you have written here could be deemed as a disregard for the mental health of his guests in his web site even with that you wrote that you were sorry, and could see that what you have done as a malicious attempt to cause emotional distress to Scott. Scott could say now that he is OK, but down the road, if and when he reveals this to his psychiatrist, that psychiatrist may see that the harm could be implanted in his mind and the harm could be going on and on and on. And for a psychiatrist to do this to another human being could be considered by a subset of readers as a crime against humanity itself. You say that calling Scott a "pr*ck" is an improvement over calling Scott a "troll". If one libel is not as great as another libel, does that make the one libel go away? And if so, does that not reinforce the libel that is replaced, even more libelous?
There could be a subset of readers that consider what you posted here about Scott is inconsistent with the purpose of your web site and consider that you are intentionally developing hatred toward human beings in many ways. Ways that if readers look at what I have been writing about here, those ways could be revealed to those that are ignorant of how people can be steered into a particular mind-set of hate. And I wonder, wonder, wonder, wonder who; who wrote the book of hate. Do you readers not know that the prohibitions posted to me here by Mr. Hsiung prevent me from posting here the relationship between psychiatry and mass-murder? Do you not know that the prohibitions posted to me here by Mr. Hsiung prevent me from posting my repudiation to the statements here under discussion that are anti-Semitic? And how many people can stay here when they know what can be seen here that is plainly visible? Could not the people that can see what is just in this post written about Scott want to leave and just a few people that (redacted by respondent) stay here?
I am here to purge out the old hatred. For if the hatred toward humanity itself is allowed to abound, then could not what history has shown you come back?
Never again.
Lou
Posted by SLS on March 22, 2014, at 16:16:05
In reply to Lou's response- my lol » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on March 22, 2014, at 16:01:04
> Never again.
God bless.
> Lou
- Scott
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.