Psycho-Babble Administration Thread 346427

Shown: posts 147 to 171 of 222. Go back in thread:

 

re: hoover man's block reduced

Posted by Dr. Bob on June 12, 2004, at 9:21:21

In reply to re: questions, posted by Dr. Bob on June 10, 2004, at 2:46:06

> I don't think a decision is absolutely necessary until the 4-week point.

Which we're at now. Well, I've reduced it, let's see what happens next. Thanks for your patience,

Bob

 

re:Thanks, Dr. Bob! And a good sign overall. :- ) (nm) » Dr. Bob

Posted by spoc on June 12, 2004, at 9:25:12

In reply to re: hoover man's block reduced, posted by Dr. Bob on June 12, 2004, at 9:21:21

 

re: hoover man's block reduced

Posted by Larry Hoover on June 12, 2004, at 11:39:14

In reply to re: hoover man's block reduced, posted by Dr. Bob on June 12, 2004, at 9:21:21

> > I don't think a decision is absolutely necessary until the 4-week point.
>
> Which we're at now. Well, I've reduced it, let's see what happens next. Thanks for your patience,
>
> Bob

This a test of the Hoover broadcasting system. It is only a test. Do not be alarmed. We now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.

Lar

 

It worked! Thanks, Bob. (nm) » Dr. Bob

Posted by Larry Hoover on June 12, 2004, at 11:57:40

In reply to re: hoover man's block reduced, posted by Dr. Bob on June 12, 2004, at 9:21:21

 

re: hoover man's block reduced

Posted by karen_kay on June 12, 2004, at 13:21:28

In reply to re: hoover man's block reduced, posted by Larry Hoover on June 12, 2004, at 11:39:14

welcome back larry! glad to see you here! :)

 

re: hoover man's block reduced

Posted by tabitha on June 12, 2004, at 13:58:25

In reply to re: hoover man's block reduced, posted by Larry Hoover on June 12, 2004, at 11:39:14


> This a test of the Hoover broadcasting system. It is only a test. Do not be alarmed. We now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.
>
> Lar
>
Now that's a cheerful sight! Good to see you Larry.

 

Great to see you back where you belong. :) (nm) » Larry Hoover

Posted by Dinah on June 12, 2004, at 14:11:39

In reply to re: hoover man's block reduced, posted by Larry Hoover on June 12, 2004, at 11:39:14

 

re:WELCOME LARRY! Hope u can see the red carpet!:) (nm) » Larry Hoover

Posted by spoc on June 12, 2004, at 15:22:41

In reply to re: hoover man's block reduced, posted by Larry Hoover on June 12, 2004, at 11:39:14

 

who's next? » Dr. Bob

Posted by Brio D Chimp on June 12, 2004, at 18:58:38

In reply to re: hoover man's block reduced, posted by Dr. Bob on June 12, 2004, at 9:21:21

> > I don't think a decision is absolutely necessary until the 4-week point.
>
> Which we're at now. Well, I've reduced it, let's see what happens next. Thanks for your patience,
>
> Bob

an apology, no tripling of the block AND a reduction in block time meanwhile NOTHING for anyone else

are some people more important than others?????????

whose turn is it now?

i dont think the answer to favoritism is to create a new favorite.

PS welcome back larry enjoy your new status

 

VERY INSIGHTFUL » Larry Hoover

Posted by Brio D Chimp on June 12, 2004, at 19:08:43

In reply to Dr. Bob is a hypocrite, posted by Larry Hoover on May 13, 2004, at 10:23:57

>
> The inconsistent moderation of this site does not protect me, and lets others get away with more egregious acts of incivility against me, than I have *ever* expressed. References? Why, of course.


>
> The bottom line is that Bob treats me differently than he treats others. According to Bob,
>

>
> I take responsibility for my actions. No one has ever made me post a single word. If I post, and consequences arise, so be it. But I want you to take responsibility too, Bob.
>
> I want you to examine your bias.

>I want you to stop playing favourites.

YEAH ME TOO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I want you to acknowledge the harm done by your negligent moderation. I may be particularly vulnerable (That is mine to deal with. But, considering the population here, it's yours to deal with, too.), but your unfairness has hurt me deeply.

YEAH ME TOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You ought not to treat me more harshly simply because I have asked you to treat us all the same.

THINK THAT'LL EVER HAPPEN???????????????

And you know very clearly what (and who) I'm talking about.

CONGRATSOS ON YOUR SPECIAL TREATMENT FROM BOB !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AT LEAST BOB AIN'T LONELY


 

lil kissy kissy group O MY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by Brio D Chimp on June 12, 2004, at 19:30:45

In reply to re: questions » Dr. Bob, posted by fayeroe on June 10, 2004, at 22:04:50

!
> I'm sorry that you don't have time to answer each poster's questions individually. I feel dis-respected by that. I've felt that before though so it's nothing new. To combine snippets from three different writers into one answer seems to me to be typical of someone not wanting to go to too much trouble concerning something that is important to this board. Here come the I messages. I think you're full of it, Bob. I feel that your arrogance concerning your position of being the "administrator" is going to be your downfall. I believe that you court the little kissy-kissy group and you are threatened by those who don't necessarily fall into line with them. I hope that I'm not perceived as being civil and I truly hope that you are offended. I've given some thought to it and had discussion with colleagues and you just aren't worth the energy this is taking. You did not learn one thing from the other incident...unless it was more ways to be evasive. For all the good people who've left this place, hold on, I'm coming. (Sam the Sham)

 

block reduced - YAHHOOOOOOO (nm)

Posted by AuntieMel on June 12, 2004, at 21:19:31

In reply to re: hoover man's block reduced, posted by Larry Hoover on June 12, 2004, at 11:39:14

 

re: questions

Posted by Dr. Bob on June 13, 2004, at 19:02:24

In reply to re: questions » Dr. Bob, posted by spoc on June 10, 2004, at 9:01:16

> it's hard to spot "reading and re-reading" in action

Ah, OK, I can see that.

> when in the end other violations or prohibited language are so frequently still missed on a thread

Reading and re-reading some posts doesn't mean others won't be missed...

Bob

 

re: research

Posted by Dr. Bob on June 13, 2004, at 19:08:19

In reply to re: questions » Dr. Bob, posted by fayeroe on June 10, 2004, at 8:16:24

> By the way, your "research" using this site was rejected by the IRB, right?

Well, they didn't approve what I submitted, so as I've been saying, this site is not currently considered research. I'm disappointed, but some posters prefer not being involved in research...

Bob

 

re: blocked for 4 weeks » fayeroe

Posted by Dr. Bob on June 13, 2004, at 19:09:45

In reply to re: questions » fayeroe, posted by fayeroe on June 11, 2004, at 8:38:36

> I think you're full of it, Bob.

> I just have that gut feeling that one of your goals is to reduce people to your level

Please don't jump to conclusions about others or post anything that could lead them to feel accused or put down. The last time you were blocked, it was for 2 weeks, so this time I'm making it for 4.

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.

> It's beyond the pale that you can't receive the people who have different views and approaches than yourself.

My philosophy is that civility is important. Unfortunately, that means this site isn't for everyone. But there are plenty of alternatives...

Bob

 

Welcome, Lar, glad you're able to post again (nm)

Posted by shar on June 13, 2004, at 19:38:36

In reply to re: blocked for 4 weeks » fayeroe, posted by Dr. Bob on June 13, 2004, at 19:09:45

 

re: questions » Dr. Bob

Posted by spoc on June 13, 2004, at 19:43:11

In reply to re: questions, posted by Dr. Bob on June 13, 2004, at 19:02:24

> > it's hard to spot "reading and re-reading" in action... when in the end other violations or prohibited language are so frequently still missed on a thread
>
> Reading and re-reading some posts doesn't mean others won't be missed...
>
> Bob

<<<<<< Oh, I guess we meant different things here. When you first wrote about this, I think you were responding to questions about whether or not you also disregard the good in a post when you've spotted a potential incivility. You stated that you do try to understand context, even if it means reading and re-reading. From that I gathered that it could be the thread you were reading (or sometimes re-reading), to understand the context.

 

re: hoover man's block reduced » Larry Hoover

Posted by chemist on June 13, 2004, at 19:58:33

In reply to re: hoover man's block reduced, posted by Larry Hoover on June 12, 2004, at 11:39:14

nice to have you back, lar! all the best, chemist


> > > I don't think a decision is absolutely necessary until the 4-week point.
> >
> > Which we're at now. Well, I've reduced it, let's see what happens next. Thanks for your patience,
> >
> > Bob
>
> This a test of the Hoover broadcasting system. It is only a test. Do not be alarmed. We now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.
>
> Lar
>

 

re: Fayeroe

Posted by spoc on June 14, 2004, at 7:22:59

In reply to re: blocked for 4 weeks » fayeroe, posted by Dr. Bob on June 13, 2004, at 19:09:45

... I know that by design, you were not surprised by your block. And had already self-blocked. But wanted to say hi and hope to see you again someday! Take care!

 

QUESTION for BOB

Posted by Brio D Chimp on June 14, 2004, at 17:49:34

In reply to Re: blocked for 6 weeks » Dr. Bob, posted by NikkiT2 on May 15, 2004, at 14:40:44

Why was I blocked for 24 weeks for asking someone if this incident was true and this poster is allowed to post that it was a fact without any action from you? Do you not think the the person about whom this "fact" is stated might feel accused???????????????

Brio (I ain't no kissy kissy chimp) D Chimp


> Dr Bob.. I do think this one is unfair.. In my eyes it wasn't a joke or sarcastic, but simply stating a fact that we all know to be true.
>
> remember, you don't block for intent, and the words themselves are nothing but fact.
>
> Nikki

 

BOB Check this!!!!!!!!!

Posted by Brio D Chimp on June 14, 2004, at 18:40:54

In reply to Re:Think it's just Troublemaker Showcase Theater:) (nm) » gardenergirl, posted by spoc on June 9, 2004, at 10:57:30

possibly this might make someone or everyone in this thread feel accused. Why no triple block BOB?????
Brio
I ain't no kissy kissy chimp

 

re: blocked for 4 weeks

Posted by TeeJay on June 14, 2004, at 20:37:33

In reply to re: blocked for 4 weeks » fayeroe, posted by Dr. Bob on June 13, 2004, at 19:09:45

> > I think you're full of it, Bob.
>
> > I just have that gut feeling that one of your goals is to reduce people to your level
>
> Please don't jump to conclusions about others or post anything that could lead them to feel accused or put down. The last time you were blocked, it was for 2 weeks, so this time I'm making it for 4.
>
> 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.
>
> > It's beyond the pale that you can't receive the people who have different views and approaches than yourself.
>
> My philosophy is that civility is important. Unfortunately, that means this site isn't for everyone. But there are plenty of alternatives...
>
> Bob

I really see little point in anyone replying to one of your bans by e-mail........you didnt even have the courtesy to reply to my e-mail after you banned me!

Oh and if that remark makes you feel put down or accused, then perhaps you could look inwardly as the actions were YOURS, I'm merely quoting FACT, not expressing an opinion.

TJ

 

re: my e-mail » TeeJay

Posted by Dr. Bob on June 14, 2004, at 21:23:02

In reply to re: blocked for 4 weeks, posted by TeeJay on June 14, 2004, at 20:37:33

> you didnt even have the courtesy to reply to my e-mail after you banned me!

Sorry, was it from the email address you currently have registered? I'm not always able to get to email right away, but I can't even find one from you. I did recently lose some... Could you send it again? Thanks,

Bob

 

Re: QUESTION for BOB » Brio D Chimp

Posted by NikkiT2 on June 15, 2004, at 5:48:16

In reply to QUESTION for BOB, posted by Brio D Chimp on June 14, 2004, at 17:49:34

If you want me blocked, just tell me and I will walk away.. I don't have the energy to care anymore

A kissy kissy Nikki

 

Re: QUESTION for BOB » NikkiT2

Posted by SLS on June 15, 2004, at 5:59:51

In reply to Re: QUESTION for BOB » Brio D Chimp, posted by NikkiT2 on June 15, 2004, at 5:48:16

> If you want me blocked, just tell me and I will walk away.. I don't have the energy to care anymore


Hi Nikki.

I don't think it is productive for you to invest yourself in a conflict that drains you of so much energy and is of so little consequence. Please save your energy to continue posting here regularly. I would feel deprived were you not to.

xxx kissy kissy


- Scott


Go forward in thread:


Show another thread

URL of post in thread:


Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ


[dr. bob] 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.