![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 12 to 36 of 36. Go back in thread:
Posted by pixygoth on November 21, 2003, at 10:10:07
In reply to Re: Hunger Strike till Destroyo's back » madwand, posted by kid47 on November 20, 2003, at 11:20:19
Maybe a place here where dark humour *is* acceptable, maybe with offensiveness rules in certain areas a little bit relaxed... would be a nice idea?
Sometimes the only things I *can* laugh at are dark, slightly icky ones.
And I'm missing Destroyo already...
came to check posts for the last few days and he's gone 8-(
S
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 21, 2003, at 17:11:05
In reply to Re: humour in the face of badness, posted by pixygoth on November 21, 2003, at 10:10:07
> Maybe a place here where dark humour *is* acceptable, maybe with offensiveness rules in certain areas a little bit relaxed... would be a nice idea?
Aren't there already such places elsewhere? Would it need to be here?
Bob
Posted by shar on November 21, 2003, at 22:29:06
In reply to Re: humour in the face of badness, posted by Dr. Bob on November 21, 2003, at 17:11:05
Bob,
Sometimes I wonder, when I encounter Pollyanna-types in their various upbeat, bubbly, aspects-is there a better place for dark humor than this forum?
It's a rhetorical question. I figure they just sucked my mother dry of any serotonin. [dark humor]
Shar
P.S. I don't know if it NEEDS to be here, but I do think it would be most understood and appreciated here.
> > Maybe a place here where dark humour *is* acceptable, maybe with offensiveness rules in certain areas a little bit relaxed... would be a nice idea?
>
> Aren't there already such places elsewhere? Would it need to be here?
>
> Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 22, 2003, at 18:30:23
In reply to Re: humour in the face of badness » Dr. Bob, posted by shar on November 21, 2003, at 22:29:06
> I don't know if it NEEDS to be here, but I do think it would be most understood and appreciated here.
Maybe by some, but might it not be misunderstood (an unappreciated) by others?
Bob
Posted by madwand on November 23, 2003, at 3:27:25
In reply to Re: humour in the face of badness, posted by Dr. Bob on November 22, 2003, at 18:30:23
> > I don't know if it NEEDS to be here, but I do think it would be most understood and appreciated here.
>
> Maybe by some, but might it not be misunderstood (an unappreciated) by others?
>
> BobWell, but then wouldn't those folks just avoid that section of the board (like some folks avoid Admin and some folks avoid Social)?
Think of it like a Jungian Shadow exercise. Rather than trying to "banish" the Shadow, and thus have it erupt unexpectedly (and with varying amounts of damage), give it a designated space.
And yes, there are many other message boards for "dark humor" (or where it does not contravene the rules). But since Babble has much-higher standards of civility than most boards it therefore has a stronger Shadow as well (thus such an outlet needs to be here, as an incorporated part of Babble).
And I don't mean that it should be some kind of no holds barred "out back" where people should go to resolve their differences in a non-civil manner
(that is what email is for <g>). But by allowing the darker impulses to flourish in a relatively non-dangerous manner (dark humor), the overall civility of the board should *increase*.Michael
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 23, 2003, at 17:06:10
In reply to Re: humour in the face of badness » Dr. Bob, posted by madwand on November 23, 2003, at 3:27:25
> > > I don't know if it NEEDS to be here, but I do think it would be most understood and appreciated here.
> >
> > Maybe by some, but might it not be misunderstood (an unappreciated) by others?
>
> Well, but then wouldn't those folks just avoid that section of the board (like some folks avoid Admin and some folks avoid Social)?
> Think of it like a Jungian Shadow exercise. Rather than trying to "banish" the Shadow, and thus have it erupt unexpectedly (and with varying amounts of damage), give it a designated space.
>
> by allowing the darker impulses to flourish in a relatively non-dangerous manner (dark humor), the overall civility of the board should *increase*.Hmm, maybe we should try something like that? But how exactly to allow the darker impulses to flourish in a relatively non-dangerous manner?
Bob
Posted by Dinah on November 23, 2003, at 17:24:25
In reply to Re: humour in the face of badness, posted by Dr. Bob on November 23, 2003, at 17:06:10
Posted by tabitha on November 23, 2003, at 17:28:08
In reply to Re: humour in the face of badness, posted by Dr. Bob on November 23, 2003, at 17:06:10
Well how about these new boards..
- Jokes About Death Babble
- You-Statements and Accusations Babble
- Babble About the One True Church
- Sarcasm and Generalizations Babble
- Bashing World Leaders and Political Parties Babble
- Obscenity and Vulgarity Babble
- Suicide Hoax Babble
- Miscellaneous Incivility BabbleSeems like that would cover it. No more blocks!
Posted by madwand on November 23, 2003, at 17:48:56
In reply to Re: humour in the face of badness, posted by Dr. Bob on November 23, 2003, at 17:06:10
> Hmm, maybe we should try something like that? But how exactly to allow the darker impulses to flourish in a relatively non-dangerous manner?
>
> BobWell as they say in 12 Steps I am sure it will be "progress, not perfection". Definitely a separate board, such as "Shadow-Babble" or "Darkside-Babble". Perhaps even an "extra step" needed to register for it, so they those wandering in off the net don't hit it by mistake (not sure how possible that is with the software).
How the rules should work there is a bit challenging. Direct personal attacks probably should not be allowed. Perhaps there could be a "burn in period" where any PBCs (or their equivalent on that board) that arise out of the new board are "warnings only" and don't count toward a block. This would give the "balance" of the new board time to develop.
Just thinking out loud at the moment. Hopefully we can all "evolve" this into something viable.Michael
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 25, 2003, at 0:55:05
In reply to Re: humour in the face of badness, posted by madwand on November 23, 2003, at 17:48:56
> Well as they say in 12 Steps I am sure it will be "progress, not perfection".
Don't worry, I'd settle for progress! :-)
> Definitely a separate board
Yes, I agree...
> How the rules should work there is a bit challenging. Direct personal attacks probably should not be allowed.
That would be one way to approach it, which types of currently-disallowed posts would become allowed and which would remain disallowed?
Bob
Posted by Dinah on November 25, 2003, at 7:30:30
In reply to Re: humour in the face of badness, posted by Dr. Bob on November 25, 2003, at 0:55:05
Posted by Dinah on November 25, 2003, at 7:31:03
In reply to Re: humour in the face of badness, posted by Dr. Bob on November 25, 2003, at 0:55:05
Posted by shar on November 25, 2003, at 14:00:30
In reply to Re: humour in the face of badness » Dr. Bob, posted by madwand on November 23, 2003, at 3:27:25
......I really like your analysis, the Shadow side, etc. What caught my attention, tho, was the "out back" phrase. And, I thought, wow, maybe we could have a smoking board, too--since, usually these days, that's where us pariahs (I mean, smokers) end up--out back.
......Or, maybe we could have a Psycho Babble Barn board, where we could go smoke in the barn like in olden days (hopeful that we don't burn it down). Those could work for Moonshine, too.
.....just a little humor (yes, I know, very little...)
Shar
> And I don't mean that it should be some kind of no holds barred "out back" where people should go to resolve their differences in a non-civil manner
> (that is what email is for <g>). But by allowing the darker impulses to flourish in a relatively non-dangerous manner (dark humor), the overall civility of the board should *increase*.
>
> Michael
>
>
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 26, 2003, at 0:37:58
In reply to Re: Separate registration? (nm) » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on November 25, 2003, at 7:30:30
Posted by Dinah on November 26, 2003, at 1:59:48
In reply to Re: why not the same? (nm), posted by Dr. Bob on November 26, 2003, at 0:37:58
and depending on content, age restriction?
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 26, 2003, at 22:13:07
In reply to Re: informed consent? » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on November 26, 2003, at 1:59:48
> and depending on content, age restriction?
Sorry, I'm confused. Couldn't one registration process cover different options?
Bob
Posted by pixygoth on November 27, 2003, at 6:11:35
In reply to Re: informed consent?, posted by Dr. Bob on November 26, 2003, at 22:13:07
Wow, I'm so pleased that a comment made in fear of being called sarcastic or something has been taken up so well.
Hope this does happen. I feel, Dr B., that the normal PBCs are *usually* fine, just that perhaps "borderline" cases are the ones to be allowed elsewhere...
The sarcasm above about Suicide-hoax babble, on the other hand, is cruel to me as I really mean this stuff, and also drags up stuff that I thought people were trying to ignore?
Anyway...
S
Posted by Dinah on November 27, 2003, at 7:51:54
In reply to Re: Babble darkside, posted by pixygoth on November 27, 2003, at 6:11:35
I wasn't being sarcastic, and had no fear that Dr. Bob would take it as anything but on face value.
Posted by Dinah on November 27, 2003, at 8:25:15
In reply to Re: informed consent?, posted by Dr. Bob on November 26, 2003, at 22:13:07
Sure one could. Would we all re-register? I don't know what the content of the new board would be, so I don't know how big a deal it would be.
But I post here *because* of the civility guidelines. I like them. And I wouldn't want to accidentally stumble into a board that would make me feel differently about this place or the posters here. So I would prefer that if I accidentally click on this board (or am tempted to peek) I'd get a reminder that I need to request authorization.
And if you don't mind having one board with stuff you don't allow on other boards, and don't require informed consent to get there, why not just allow it on all boards? For example, mild cursing doesn't really bother me, but if you think others would find it offensive, why would it be different to have it on a different board, without requiring that someone consent to being exposed to it.
Perhaps at least a screen when you click on the board that you have to click through to get there.
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 28, 2003, at 6:44:10
In reply to Re: informed consent? » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on November 27, 2003, at 8:25:15
> Would we all re-register? I don't know what the content of the new board would be, so I don't know how big a deal it would be.
Hmm, good point...
> I wouldn't want to accidentally stumble into a board that would make me feel differently about this place or the posters here. So I would prefer that if I accidentally click on this board (or am tempted to peek) I'd get a reminder that I need to request authorization.
Even if there were a separate informed consent (authorization) process, that still would just be to post, not to read...
> Perhaps at least a screen when you click on the board that you have to click through to get there.
An initial screen when someone goes to the board, no matter where they're coming from? And when they go to a main page listing posts, or to a post itself, or both?
> if you don't mind having one board with stuff you don't allow on other boards ... why not just allow it on all boards?
Maybe it would be better if it weren't considered a PB board, with support being a primary goal...
Bob
Posted by pixygoth on November 28, 2003, at 7:09:24
In reply to Re: informed consent?, posted by Dr. Bob on November 28, 2003, at 6:44:10
Can I just add again that dark humour etc. *can* be supportive in a "big picture" kind of way?
Finding other people who must laugh at their problems in order to not be smothered by them is very helpful for me, at least.
S
Posted by Dinah on November 28, 2003, at 8:42:03
In reply to Re: informed consent?, posted by Dr. Bob on November 28, 2003, at 6:44:10
> Even if there were a separate informed consent (authorization) process, that still would just be to post, not to read...
:(
>
> > Perhaps at least a screen when you click on the board that you have to click through to get there.
>
> An initial screen when someone goes to the board, no matter where they're coming from? And when they go to a main page listing posts, or to a post itself, or both?
>
Just the intitial one.> > if you don't mind having one board with stuff you don't allow on other boards ... why not just allow it on all boards?
>
> Maybe it would be better if it weren't considered a PB board, with support being a primary goal...
>
> BobAnd how would that be differentiated?
Posted by Dr. Bob on December 1, 2003, at 9:29:34
In reply to Re: informed consent?, posted by Dinah on November 28, 2003, at 8:42:03
> > Maybe it would be better if it weren't considered a PB board, with support being a primary goal...
>
> And how would that be differentiated?Another good point. Different name, different URL?
Bob
Posted by Dinah on December 1, 2003, at 10:19:59
In reply to Re: informed consent?, posted by Dr. Bob on December 1, 2003, at 9:29:34
> > > Maybe it would be better if it weren't considered a PB board, with support being a primary goal...
> >
> > And how would that be differentiated?
>
> Another good point. Different name, different URL?
>
> Bob
Now you've got my wholehearted approval, for whatever that's worth. :D
Posted by Dr. Bob on December 1, 2003, at 18:21:29
In reply to Re: informed consent?, posted by Dinah on December 1, 2003, at 10:19:59
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.