![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
[email protected]Shown: posts 23 to 47 of 222. Go back in thread:
Posted by lil' jimi on May 17, 2004, at 2:01:30
In reply to Re: blocked for 6 weeks » Larry Hoover, posted by Dr. Bob on May 15, 2004, at 11:06:36
Hey, Hsiung!
wha up? check this out, man ... like you just blocked Hoover for six weeks, Right?
.... AND like you also blocked him last time for SIX WEEKS, right ?
see wha i'm sayin?
we thought you had a deal where you crank up the thumb screws ... heh, heh ... i meant ... increased the length of these bans as one's rap sheet gets longer ... ... ... Or has some new policy come in force ... gone out of force?now if you fix things so folks can say I got Hoover a longer ban ... ... i will scream, real loud, and then hold my breath really long ... ... and tell everyone that i think you're a ... ... some kind of bad person ... ... ... because i LIKE hoover, man! ... ... he's like, the coolest, daddy-o!
another thing ... ... since we wouldn't be doing any incivility here at pb ... how come words like "Pedophile" and "Hypocrite" in phrases (in subject line, for cripes sakes already) like "you are a ... " seem to be getting overlooked?
look i gotta a lot of other questions, you know ... but all this ca ca with banning Hoover is just too way out ...
okay listen, get back to me about these questions i'm asking here and we can get to the other ones, okay
1) so do bans increase in severity per incident/non-incident or not ... ... and was there underlying reason for this reprieve for Hoover ... ... like i Am in favor of cutting him some slack, okay? ... ... but ol' mentally challenged me wants to see the internal consistency here ...
and
2) speaking of consistency, the deal with "pedophile" and "hypocrite", huh? ... like what is it, these ain't compliments, man ... ...i'll be listening ...
caio,
~ ol' lil' jimi
Posted by mair on May 17, 2004, at 10:29:30
In reply to Re: Inconsistent Apologizing » Brio D Chimp, posted by Larry Hoover on May 15, 2004, at 10:56:27
...gone the next. I'm sorry I wasn't around when you stopped back in. I'm sorry you haven't been doing well. I'd like to echo everything Scott said so beautifully. Please come back.
Mair
Posted by Dr. Bob on May 18, 2004, at 1:52:59
In reply to Re: Dr. Bob is a hypocrite » Larry Hoover, posted by SLS on May 16, 2004, at 13:28:41
Posted by SLS on May 18, 2004, at 7:15:51
In reply to Re: please keep the subject line civil too thanks (nm), posted by Dr. Bob on May 18, 2004, at 1:52:59
Sorry.
:-)
- Scott
Posted by lil' jimi on May 21, 2004, at 18:12:47
In reply to Re: please keep the subject line civil too thanks (nm), posted by Dr. Bob on May 18, 2004, at 1:52:59
dear rh, md
like, huh?
question number three-o:
are we just now civiling subject lines?
and/or
are we just catching up on an oversight of missing the subject line offenses before?
and/or
something else?still searching for a consistent grasp of the shape of policies-babble here ... ...
hoover man's sentence descrepancy remains a mystery .... .... any light?
love,
~ jim
Posted by Dr. Bob on May 22, 2004, at 0:18:27
In reply to Re: please keep the subject line civil too thanks » Dr. Bob, posted by lil' jimi on May 21, 2004, at 18:12:47
> are we just now civiling subject lines?
No, that's nothing new.
> hoover man's sentence descrepancy remains a mystery .... .... any light?
I think it's good to be flexible sometimes...
Welcome back,
Bob
Posted by lil' jimi on May 25, 2004, at 1:32:09
In reply to Re: subject line, posted by Dr. Bob on May 22, 2004, at 0:18:27
hi dr, bob,
> > are we just now civiling subject lines?
>
> No, that's nothing new.("civiling"? ... ... what a goof i am ... i hadn't noticed that till now ... thanks for understanding me there ... aka 'policing')
here's where i get in trouble see ... ... ...
my (others?) expectations of fairness hinge to a large extent on consistency ... ... and a consistency which may not be humanly attainable ... ... so that perhaps simple oversights might to perceived as tolerated, if not deliberate, unfairness ...
... my case in point being:
i imagined the most immediate sanctions would be triggered by the most immediate, direct, public offense, such as subject lines ... so my expectaions were that the subject lines would be policed first and offenses there would be indicators of offenses within a post ...
(... i am sorry that this is too obvious, but i feel i have to explain myself ... )because of these considerations, i presumed, incorrectly, that offensive terms in subject lines are not being overlooked accidently when the post's content has been cited for incivilty ... ... this is especially so when words such as "pedophile" and "hypocrite" remain in subject lines and persist in threads even after the posts have lead to pbcs and bannings ... ... i get to thinking there's some special status for subject lines ... ... which serves to undermine my (others?) confidence in the consistency of the application of the standards of civility ... or the standards themselves
... ... the challenge is that mere inadvertence can create ammo for a case of there being injustice ...
or is it just me?
> > hoover man's sentence descrepancy remains a mystery .... .... any light?
>
> I think it's good to be flexible sometimes...well, that is a good thing ... ... and i for one would like to see Larry extended every possible flexibility ... ... please?
> Welcome back,
>
> Bobwell, thank you ... ... i appreciate that ...
i still have some more qusetions but they can wait for now ...take care,
~ jim
Posted by Dr. Bob on May 26, 2004, at 9:19:41
In reply to re: subject line » Dr. Bob, posted by lil' jimi on May 25, 2004, at 1:32:09
> my ... expectations of fairness hinge to a large extent on consistency ... ... and a consistency which may not be humanly attainable ... ... so that perhaps simple oversights might to perceived as ... unfairness ...
Yes, it wouldn't be surprising if some posters were particularly sensitive to unfairness.
> > > hoover man's sentence descrepancy remains a mystery .... .... any light?
> >
> > I think it's good to be flexible sometimes...
>
> well, that is a good thing ... ... and i for one would like to see Larry extended every possible flexibility ... ... please?Well, he and I have been in touch. How about if I reduce his block from 6 to 4 weeks?
Bob
Posted by lil' jimi on May 26, 2004, at 10:31:59
In reply to re: unfairness and hoover man's block, posted by Dr. Bob on May 26, 2004, at 9:19:41
hi dr. bob,
thanks for this follow-up.
> > my ... expectations of fairness hinge to a large extent on consistency ... ... and a consistency which may not be humanly attainable ... ... so that perhaps simple oversights might to perceived as ... unfairness ...
>
> Yes, it wouldn't be surprising if some posters were particularly sensitive to unfairness.exactly ... ... we all suffer to different degrees to hypersensitivity to perceived slights ... especially when they are seen as coming from authorities who we need to depend on for our protection ... ...
allow me to commend on your responsive insightfulness ... ... it is reassuring ...
> > > > hoover man's sentence descrepancy remains a mystery .... .... any light?
> > >
> > > I think it's good to be flexible sometimes...
> >
> > well, that is a good thing ... ... and i for one would like to see Larry extended every possible flexibility ... ... please?
>
> Well, he and I have been in touch. How about if I reduce his block from 6 to 4 weeks?
>
> Bobwell, as i am quoted as supporting every benefit for Larry, then of course i, for one of the many, would be personally grateful for any and all Hoover amnesty ... ...
how about we let him off with 3 weeks?
how about we let him off with time served?
... ... and maybe a greater understanding of how you and Lar can get through these situations without having to come down on Lar so hard?BUT i (maybe "we", babblers?) will take what we can get ... ...
i would hope that Lar could speak here for himself ... ... i am not qualified to speak for him ... but since y'all are in touch i will trust that you can hear him even if we can't ... ... yet
thanks,
~ jim
Posted by Susan J on May 26, 2004, at 11:00:10
In reply to re: unfairness and hoover man's block » Dr. Bob, posted by lil' jimi on May 26, 2004, at 10:31:59
Heh heh heh. Cool nick name for Lar. :-) For what it's worth, I'd like to see him back sooner rather than later...his insight is invaluable.
Posted by Dinah on May 26, 2004, at 11:21:16
In reply to re: unfairness and hoover man's block, posted by Dr. Bob on May 26, 2004, at 9:19:41
I'm glad the two of you are in touch. And I'd be delighted to see Lar sooner rather than later.
But especially thanks for making the block reduction public (assuming you decide to do it). The more transparent things are, the safer I feel here.
Posted by FAYEROE on May 26, 2004, at 11:37:53
In reply to re: unfairness and hoover man's block » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on May 26, 2004, at 11:21:16
I too would like to see Larry Hoover's block reduced significantly. Thanks.....
Posted by Wildflower on May 26, 2004, at 12:23:07
In reply to re: unfairness and hoover man's block » Dinah, posted by FAYEROE on May 26, 2004, at 11:37:53
I do believe that Larry's block was uncalled for. He is a trusted and valuable member of this site and his posts have helped so many...including me.
Posted by EmmyS on May 26, 2004, at 12:54:48
In reply to re: unfairness and hoover man's block, posted by Dr. Bob on May 26, 2004, at 9:19:41
I'm against all blocks unless they are for outrageous behavior such as racist comments, encouraging suicide, etc.
Blocking access to a generally supportive environment goes against the idea of this place.
If you feel blocks are required, please consider limiting the duration to something more reasonable and base it on the CURRENT offense only, not on cummulated past behaviors.
Amnesty for Larry.
Emmy
Posted by Susan J on May 26, 2004, at 13:13:50
In reply to re: unfairness and hoover man's block » Dr. Bob, posted by EmmyS on May 26, 2004, at 12:54:48
well said!
> I'm against all blocks unless they are for outrageous behavior such as racist comments, encouraging suicide, etc.
>
> Blocking access to a generally supportive environment goes against the idea of this place.
>
> If you feel blocks are required, please consider limiting the duration to something more reasonable and base it on the CURRENT offense only, not on cummulated past behaviors.
>
> Amnesty for Larry.
>
> Emmy
Posted by spoc on May 26, 2004, at 16:06:23
In reply to re: unfairness and hoover man's block » EmmyS, posted by Susan J on May 26, 2004, at 13:13:50
Seconded, thirded, fourthed and on into infinity... You all put it so well and I agree heartily. I think as the original sentences for Larry have already been serious in relation to any deeds on his part (and in consideration of other overlooked factors) -- and have been at the high end of the spectrum of possible remedies -- that even "time served" really does make sense. Not just because of everything he can bring to this board, but because it really does make sense and seem fair.
The door to other considerations about the matter of blocking and mitigating factors may also then be opened, but that is as it should be. Not only for the sake of what's right, but because this isn't like other boards, and I think effects to mental health really are possible in relation to this stuff. So it's as important as it gets to get it right and take the time to do that.
Posted by lil' jimi on May 26, 2004, at 16:48:54
In reply to re: unfairness and hoover man's block, posted by Dr. Bob on May 26, 2004, at 9:19:41
hey,
have alternatives to blocks been discussed or considered? .... .... PBCs and 'please rephrase' afford flexibility for cautionary advisories ...
could there be a pre-block sanction like a detention or a quarantine? ... ... once a poster had runn up to being blocked (nowadays) instead they might to confined to a detention board for some amount of time ... there they might be able to post their case and all babblers would know that it was a less safe board because of the greater potential of offense from possible offenders
... ... there might be more extensive considerations in some circumstances where they could post there, but not allowed to be posted to ... ?
this is a very primordial idea so far, but i see a potential for greater administrative flexibilty with some more options when push starts to come to shove .... .... maybe?... but i am not suggesting this for Larry at all ... ... every factor in Lar's case suggests to me he should go/have gone free ... long ago ...
anyway.
~ jim
Posted by gabbix2 on May 26, 2004, at 19:08:48
In reply to re: unfairness and hoover man's block, posted by spoc on May 26, 2004, at 16:06:23
Oh I'm late, and all the good things have already been said. I agree with Spoc and L'il Jimi, I think Larry has already spent too much time
being penalized for dubious offences, and deserves
to come back A.S.A.P.
Posted by lil' jimi on May 26, 2004, at 19:59:26
In reply to re: unfairness and hoover man's block » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on May 26, 2004, at 11:21:16
hi dinah,
you wrote:
> The more transparent things are, the safer I feel here.me too.
when things are open and apparent, it is easier to have confidence in the process(es) ...~ jim
Posted by TeeJay on May 26, 2004, at 21:04:26
In reply to Dr. Bob is a hypocrite, posted by Larry Hoover on May 13, 2004, at 10:23:57
What a load of old crap this thread has turned into......it seems to me that Bob has merely let Larry back aboard so he can chastise him further!!!
I've been a reader of this board for some months now with no input and I refuse flatly to input anything here until bob starts acting like a member of this community instead of the leader of some blue eyed, blonde haired master race!!!
Yeah, yeah, be civil, banned, yeah yeah.....yawn..................
You give em hell Larry!!!!!!!!!!
TJ
Posted by Dr. Bob on May 26, 2004, at 21:48:28
In reply to Re: Dr. Bob is a hypocrite, posted by TeeJay on May 26, 2004, at 21:04:26
> Re: Dr. Bob is a hypocrite
Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down. I already asked that the subject line be kept civil, so now I'm going to block you from posting for a week.
If you have any questions or comments about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
or email me, or post a follow-up here after your block is over.
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by shar on May 26, 2004, at 22:11:53
In reply to re: alternatives to blocks » Dr. Bob, posted by lil' jimi on May 26, 2004, at 16:48:54
As far as Larry is concerned, and others I can easily think of (Zen!!!) I would love to see some alternatives. Since I'm not the moderator, I'm not sure how they'd work, but I know valuable contributors when I see them!
Thanks, Jimi, for bringing this up. Maybe the blocks should NOT be cumulative. Unless, they are geared toward disruption, offensiveness, put-downed-ness, etc. Since I am old, I am very aware I would not want to be the one making the decisions. There is like 99% gray in the world (as opposed to black-and-white).
But, it's sort of like "I know porn when I see it" or "I don't know art, but I know what I like" kind of thing.
At any rate, late as usual, I like the idea of something other than a 6-month block for someone who says something 'uncivil' when it is a case of preferred wording or disagreement.
Hope that makes sense.
Shar> hey,
>
> have alternatives to blocks been discussed or considered? .... .... PBCs and 'please rephrase' afford flexibility for cautionary advisories ...
>
> could there be a pre-block sanction like a detention or a quarantine? ... ... once a poster had runn up to being blocked (nowadays) instead they might to confined to a detention board for some amount of time ... there they might be able to post their case and all babblers would know that it was a less safe board because of the greater potential of offense from possible offenders
> ... ... there might be more extensive considerations in some circumstances where they could post there, but not allowed to be posted to ... ?
> this is a very primordial idea so far, but i see a potential for greater administrative flexibilty with some more options when push starts to come to shove .... .... maybe?
>
> ... but i am not suggesting this for Larry at all ... ... every factor in Lar's case suggests to me he should go/have gone free ... long ago ...
>
> anyway.
> ~ jim
>
>
Posted by sienna on May 26, 2004, at 22:33:45
In reply to re: alternatives to blocks--Dr. B and » lil' jimi, posted by shar on May 26, 2004, at 22:11:53
he is wonderful for this place and i miss him.
Sienna
Posted by Sabina on May 27, 2004, at 1:36:45
In reply to re: unfairness and hoover man's block, posted by Dr. Bob on May 26, 2004, at 9:19:41
if you don't want to invest yourself in reading my post in its entirety (which might chafe someone's heinie, i dunno), the upshot is that i think that larry was treated unfairly from the *original* get-go, and that i hope he is allowed to come back immediately, if not sooner.
the following is merely my personal opinion and not all of it pertaining directly to larry's situation but to the subject of blocks and "fairness" in general. feel free to disregard or dispute it at will, as i am providing absolutely no evidence, links, etc., of any kind. unfortunately, i don't have the time or energy to delve back through the period of posts in question to prove my point, nor do i want to make an example of folks who have done nothing to deserve the publicity.
since i've been reading at babble, i can't help but have noticed that some posters seem to receive dramatically more harsh, swift, and vigilant "correction" from dr. bob while others have been able to sweetly apologize their way through periodic PBC after PBC with impunity. i remember (months and months ago, when i was still posting, too) one poster receiving three PBC's over a week's time and her response being along the lines of, "sorry dr. bob. i'm trying to be good" smiley face, et cetera. she's a sweet girl and i wouldn't want her blocked, but i'd like to see some folks i know try that line! anyhoo...
i could speculate and deconstruct all day as to why this kind of thing seems to happen and why it seems to happen to only certain posters, but that's shooting off into a whole different topic. my first and best guess is that minding this board is a dam* big job and there's one, necessarily flawed (as are we all) human being running the whole shebang. didja ever notice how the <insert nationality> ice skating judge gives the <same nationality> ice skaters slightly higher scores than the other teams? i don't think they do it intentionally, it's just that *everyone* has subconscious favorites, just like they have those that get picked on or neglected.
for whatever reason, i honestly believe that some posters get treated more harshly than others. that's not saying that he's bad for doing it or that they deserve it. i just think that it happens. kinda like how i'm short and people stand in front of me at events and i can never see what's going on. things like that just happen. life's not fair and it never will be. fine, i can wear heels and stand on the seats. we can't petition everything. thankfully, for these blocks, we can request reductions.
i have been greatly saddened in the past to see posters that were heavily dependent upon their babble support system be (wrongly, severely) blocked for months for the most abstruse offenses. i would find myself sympathetically wading through admin "please rephrase" threads where posters were trying desperately to find the magic words that would save them from being blocked, but to no avail.
i do believe that, in these instances of "incivility" where there is no argument or obscenity, more could be done to set things right and alleviate frustration as opposed to leaving the poster searching for some "preferred wording" (as shar put it) until (s)he is driven well past the point of frustration in attempts to rephrase and placate until an actual validation for the block begins to exist as the poster's button's are understandably pressed and the situation begins to become exacerbated.
mind you, i am in no way suggesting that dr. bob "plays favorites" with malice aforethought, as that would be tantamount to sadistic given the vulnerable emotional and mental state of many of those who seek comfort and advice here. i would like to think that this latest olive branch toward larry as a sign that dr. bob is willing to concede that perhaps there is always room for improvement. it *is* good to be flexible and i hope that larry will be able to return soon.
i am also very glad that the topic of reduced blocks is out in the open this time. i regret that i still don't feel very comfortable or "at home" here anymore ever since the way things went down last october. we'll see, as time passes, if i continue to feel that way. i still check in from time to time (especially on posts of those folks that i know!), and certainly hope that larry will feel comfortable enough to come back soon. he has much to offer to everyone and has helped me so very much in the past.
Posted by lil' jimi on May 27, 2004, at 9:42:08
In reply to re: unfairness and hoover man's block » Dr. Bob, posted by Sabina on May 27, 2004, at 1:36:45
sabina,
excellent.
and special
for it is so rare to have
such heart-felt sentiments and experience
so well said and
thoughtfully written.
you have made much of what i too have felt
much clearer than i could have.
thank you very much.i especially appreciate your point about the lack of malice by the pb administration (which i find especially well taken and well said), to which i would add, in agreement:
"Never ascribe to malice,
that which can be explained by incompetence."
~ Napoleon Boneparteyours in rabble,
~ jim
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
[email protected]
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.