![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
[email protected]Shown: posts 26 to 50 of 73. Go back in thread:
Posted by spoc on April 27, 2004, at 11:19:37
In reply to Re: Invisibility » Fallen4MyT, posted by rainyday on April 27, 2004, at 10:58:32
See how easy this stuff happens -- for instance, Rainyday, I just posted >> to you above and I'm the only one you didn't answer, ha ha! BUT although I assume that was a fluke, I would also never mean to say that everyone is obligated to answer someone who directs a post to them.
FYI, the (nm) to you above was just this:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20040307/msgs/339246.html
Posted by Dinah on April 27, 2004, at 11:54:32
In reply to Re: Invisibility about invisibility » rainyday, posted by spoc on April 27, 2004, at 11:19:37
Now, for instance, in that example, I might well have assumed that it was a no response needed sort of post. Which leads to a new suggestion for those who might feel that way. Some posts sound as if they have a final ring to them, and don't require a response. Others seem like a comment that also aren't inviting further comment. So if you want to increase the chance of getting a reply maybe it's a good idea to include a question in your post. Either a question to the individual you are responding to or a general question.
I've found that in general, I have a hard time finding the end of a conversation. But a question is a clear indication that this is not meant to be an ending sort of statement.
Wow, it feels weird to microanalyze things. But interesting.
Another suggestion. I think that to each of us, our posts are our babies. We put a piece of ourselves in them and send them off into cyberspace, hoping for the best. Hoping they'll find acceptance. While none of us consider *anyone* else's posts in the same fashion.
So my solution has been to just send so many of the little dickens out there so that I know some will fall flat and some will find a comfortable welcome. And enough that I rarely even remember the individual posts, so I'm not overly concerned about their futures. Every once in a while, I post something and then follow its progress with fear and anticipation. But that hurts a bit and is very anxiety provoking. I try not to get too attached to my posts.
Posted by rainyday on April 27, 2004, at 12:11:06
In reply to Re: Invisibility about invisibility » rainyday, posted by spoc on April 27, 2004, at 11:19:37
I got it (finally)! A bit thick in the head today.
Posted by karen_kay on April 27, 2004, at 13:18:05
In reply to Re: Invisibility about invisibility » spoc, posted by rainyday on April 27, 2004, at 12:11:06
if you notice from the post i start below to kid that says, "hey kid" i started a post to him, yet didn't respond as of yet. however, i responded to ivan micheal. in a day or so, i'll respond to kid. yet, in my response to ivan michael, i made reference to kid's post. (and everyone here knows how much i adore kid, so there's my point precisely).. sheesh, now i really feel bad, so i have to think of something to say to kid... good grief! how can i even top being put in jail on a monday? anyway....
i jump around often. i don't mean to. i'm easily distracted. i can't help that. and i pick and choose the posts i respond to. and i read most posts. but, i don't respond to every post. if i did, i would spend even more time than i do at babble (if that's even possible). it doesn't mean that i don't care any less for the particular poster. i just means that i jump around often. and i don't expect each and every person to respond to me. i often feel bad when people do respond to me, as i can't always get back to them. which is why i try not to start too many threads any more. because i know i can't get back to each individual person.
when i first started posting, i was concerned with the same thing. however, you soon realize you shouldn't be. it's not a matter of people not liking eachother. i like everyone here. i don't purposely not post to anyone. EVER! i just spend way too much time here. and i feel especially rude answering some people and not others. so, i hope that if i answer some, and casually ignore others (much like my problems, hmmm funny how babble mimics real life in that way, isn't it??) somehow i won't feel bad...and it's not that i ignore really, i just write in such a way that i don't really answer or ask questons really. and so when i respond to one person, it actually responds to everyone..
anyway, i always feel bad. always. so, i could devote all of my time to babble. or i could not post at all. or, i could answer some and then make a blanket thank you (which still to me seems rude). or, i can just do what i do, which is to jump around, get to what i have time for and hope no one feels hurt. i try to talk to everyone. i don't ever neglect anyone, i think. if you honestly feel i do, please bring it to my attention, so i can feel bad, even moreso than i already do at this point. i honestlyl feel everyone plays by the same rules i do. i don't think anyone else ignores any other poster on purpose. sometimes i just don't have anything to say about something. i wish sometimes i could pull something insightful out of my butt, however it doesn't always come to me. and again, if it did, i'd be here all the time. and i've never posted anything where i've felt people never posted back recently. maybe it's because people do post back, or perhaps because i just don't have anything important to say. and i kill threads all the time. but, i'd rather kill threads than have someone else kill them.
Posted by rainyday on April 27, 2004, at 13:52:33
In reply to note to all!! i'm rude!, posted by karen_kay on April 27, 2004, at 13:18:05
You have struck a nerve there! But you're not in the least bit rude. I lose track of threads and I'm not certain there is a protocol - or should be - about responding to all who respond to a post. That might be a question for Emily Post!
If anything, you are exceptionally compassionate. Rude is not a word I would EVER use to describe you. Adorable, definitely: but you already know that!
Just think of the few truly offensive posts that crop up now and then - they are caught swiftly and it's obvious to me that we are all looking out for each other.
rainyday
Posted by gardenergirl on April 27, 2004, at 14:26:01
In reply to Re: Invisibility, posted by Fallen4MyT on April 27, 2004, at 10:35:39
Fallen4myT,
I'm wondering, since my post was pretty much describing my own habits, if your reply is directed to me?gg
Posted by NikkiT2 on April 27, 2004, at 15:57:53
In reply to Re: Invisibility, posted by Fallen4MyT on April 27, 2004, at 10:35:39
Its all part of my social phobia.. its so much easier for me to just talk to those I know, than put myself wide open and post to someone I don't know. But then, I very rarely post here anymore.. when I do it tends ot be on PB2000, where I know the guys very well - but even then, I am so often unable to find words, I simply don't post.
I guess I'm an oldie wimp.. just because I've been here 5 years or so, doesn't mean I'm still not terrified to jump in into conversations etc. And yes, I agree there *are* cliques, and their posts tend to go way over my head... but in my opinion, they tend to be the "medium" timers as I think of them.
So, I don't post to be mean.. I don't post simply as I'm scared or feeling unsafe!
Nikki
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 27, 2004, at 16:01:55
In reply to Re: Invisibility about invisibility » rainyday, posted by spoc on April 27, 2004, at 11:19:37
> I think people who have been here a long time or are "established" ... don't think about what may be happening to some of the other people... people ... pay little attention to what happens right under their noses.
> people keep talking *around* someone on a thread (often when what they said was something you can be sure would've been responded to if another name accompanied it; and not infrequently when it was even >> directed to someone specific).
>
> Benefit of the doubt can be given that people don't *realize* they do it, but not about *whether* they do it.> I've ... tried to join in speaking about the thing or giggling about it ... and people will still go around a person, clinking their glasses over their head.
> I just posted >> to you above and I'm the only one you didn't answer
I'm sorry if you've felt neglected here, but I need to ask you not to post anything that could lead others to feel accused. It tends to be more civil to talk about how you feel than what others do, for example, by using I-statements.
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 redirect a follow-up to Psycho-Babble Administration.
Posting something about your own issues and their possible role in your reaction might be an interesting exercise -- and might help others respond to you supportively.
----
> this place is supposed to be a little different, and not require people (who may not be up to it) to struggle as hard to be heard and known as they may have to elsewhere.
Someone may or may not have to struggle here. A supportive environment helps, but doesn't necessarily make things easy.
> this ... may just not be a good medium for all... some may do better if they fixed their problems first, but then they probably wouldn't need to be here period, so it's another paradox. Of course nothing can work for everyone, that's just the way it is.
This definitely is not a good medium for all. But it might be a good enough medium if someone's problems are "fixed" enough...
Bob
Posted by spoc on April 27, 2004, at 17:05:08
In reply to Re: please be civil » spoc, posted by Dr. Bob on April 27, 2004, at 16:01:55
> I'm sorry if you've felt neglected here, but I need to ask you not to post anything that could lead others to feel accused....
<<<< This is one of the selective applications of a PBC, because it is not typical that one is issued when only general board matters are being discussed. This subject may be more sensitive for you than some, but consistency in applying the principles should still be used. Monumental debates and disagreements have taken place on this board at times, with people expressing much disillusionment about it *and* general poster habits. People rarely get PBC-ed unless someone disses or alludes to a particular person. Inconsistent application is not a new or unique thing for someone to point out, but it warrants the explanations that are requested.
> It tends to be more civil to talk about how you feel than what others do, for example, by using I-statements...>
<<<<< I walked the fine line, balanced what I said, did not get personal, and did not come off like it's made to look with those clips.
Posted by Fallen4MyT on April 27, 2004, at 18:40:50
In reply to Re: please be civil, posted by spoc on April 27, 2004, at 17:05:08
Spoc I am lost as to how you were uncivil..One could make a case for why saying WE are wrong OR our perception is not right that in itself could be seen as attacking those of us who have or do feel shunned. A LOT of people have said that...we all cant be wrong...I could name about 7 people's screen names (BUT WON'T) who never miss a reply to one another's posts this is what I am talking about...yet they miss or ignore a post STARTED by another poster..thats a clique to my knowledge. I too do not reply to all posts and all threads..no time AND not enough knowledge in some areas and so on....and I do not do "me too". I do not think everyone needs to post to every thread...as Dr Bob I think it was stated that can cause stress..or maybe it was a screen name I dont know who said it..say a social anxiety but being honest with oneself some people may need to look at themselves a bit more and see if they may be ignoring others just to post to a few close buddies...I cannot see that as good for anyone..Just my opinion
> > I'm sorry if you've felt neglected here, but I need to ask you not to post anything that could lead others to feel accused....
>
> <<<< This is one of the selective applications of a PBC, because it is not typical that one is issued when only general board matters are being discussed. This subject may be more sensitive for you than some, but consistency in applying the principles should still be used. Monumental debates and disagreements have taken place on this board at times, with people expressing much disillusionment about it *and* general poster habits. People rarely get PBC-ed unless someone disses or alludes to a particular person. Inconsistent application is not a new or unique thing for someone to point out, but it warrants the explanations that are requested.
>
> > It tends to be more civil to talk about how you feel than what others do, for example, by using I-statements...>
>
> <<<<< I walked the fine line, balanced what I said, did not get personal, and did not come off like it's made to look with those clips.
Posted by Fallen4MyT on April 27, 2004, at 18:55:15
In reply to Re: Invisibility » Fallen4MyT, posted by rainyday on April 27, 2004, at 10:58:32
We are a lot alike in that :-) . But if I see a thread someone started that nobody posted to I will drop in andsay something rather than say chat in threads with those I am closest too...some threads sit...no reply but mine..thats sad
> I think there is validity to this too.
>
> Maybe some people are just chattier than others? I know I can't stop my fingers sometimes. I think I am looking at who's "talking" to each other. If there's a lot going back and forth and I don't have anything different to say, I stay quiet instead of posting a "me too"!
>
Posted by Fallen4MyT on April 27, 2004, at 18:59:23
In reply to i know for me.., posted by NikkiT2 on April 27, 2004, at 15:57:53
I am sorry you suffer from that and can totally understand...I speak in genral terms as well as a few established posters who I am glad you see also have cliques,,I would rather one admit to the cliques than deny they exist it makes me feel put down for my perception. thxs :)
> Its all part of my social phobia.. its so much easier for me to just talk to those I know, than put myself wide open and post to someone I don't know. But then, I very rarely post here anymore.. when I do it tends ot be on PB2000, where I know the guys very well - but even then, I am so often unable to find words, I simply don't post.
>
> I guess I'm an oldie wimp.. just because I've been here 5 years or so, doesn't mean I'm still not terrified to jump in into conversations etc. And yes, I agree there *are* cliques, and their posts tend to go way over my head... but in my opinion, they tend to be the "medium" timers as I think of them.
>
> So, I don't post to be mean.. I don't post simply as I'm scared or feeling unsafe!
>
> Nikki
Posted by Fallen4MyT on April 27, 2004, at 19:02:09
In reply to Re: Invisibility » Fallen4MyT, posted by gardenergirl on April 27, 2004, at 14:26:01
GG, I tend to doubt it because I do not recall your exact reply or post right now...I tend to read a few posts then reply ..or go back and do one by one to direct people
> Fallen4myT,
> I'm wondering, since my post was pretty much describing my own habits, if your reply is directed to me?
>
> gg
Posted by Fallen4MyT on April 27, 2004, at 19:06:02
In reply to Re: underthecs, Fallen4MyT, lonelygirl, and spoc, posted by All Done on April 27, 2004, at 1:54:50
All Done I am not talking about replies to all posts or even MY posts...just a trend I am seeing in here where some people can post...and get zero reply to a new thread and someone else can post the same kind of post and get quarenteed at least a reply by 7-10 regular posters..same thread topic just different author
> To all,
>
> I'm kind of at a loss here. It makes me sad to know that you feel this way and I want to post to try to make you all feel less invisible, but I'm not exactly sure how to go about it. Part of me feels like I should apologize if I was one of the offenders (if so, I am truly sorry). The other part of me wants to give reasons why I don't always post (time is my major issue and when I do have time, I will admit, sometimes I post to those I've had previous interactions with first).
>
> I realize there are plenty of reasons you feel this way but I also realize there are plenty of reasons you shouldn't feel this way (Dinah did a pretty good job with the latter). So, the best advice I can give is probably the hardest. Just keep jumping in where you can and eventually, I bet it won't feel the same anymore. I have found Babble to be a wonderful place to interact and make friends. Ironically, though, sometimes it is necessary to have thick skin while waiting for replies.
>
> I hope you all know we all appreciate your presence here and no one wants you to feel like an outsider.
>
> Take care,
> All Done
Posted by Fallen4MyT on April 27, 2004, at 19:18:41
In reply to Re: Invisibility, posted by Fallen4MyT on April 27, 2004, at 10:35:39
A thought here..IF one has a strong reaction to this whole topic maybe there is a good reason for it? A good thought to ponder. I really do not think people would post on this so often if it was ALL IN "THEIR" heads...and thats what I myself feel when I see some people have such a strong reaction to this topic as if it is taboo to speak of it...I still feel sorry for the others who post and get no reply. Maybe I am a softy....
Also IF SAY..someone said to me on this topic..IS IT ME? I AM SORRY IF SO...I would be walking into a gauntlet to reply and get the ole civility deal...ALL *I* personally hope to see out of this is much consideration to all NEW AND OLD. Its really not a bad issue to think about...and frankly I feel at a loss to people who are posting reasons and apologies if its them..the intent is not for that but for some self examination and that MAY in the end help someone down the line get support from YOU when they need it. Thats all
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 27, 2004, at 19:42:26
In reply to out on a civility limb on cliques and invisable, posted by Fallen4MyT on April 27, 2004, at 19:18:41
> I could name about 7 people's screen names (BUT WON'T) who never miss a reply to one another's posts this is what I am talking about...yet they miss or ignore a post STARTED by another poster..thats a clique to my knowledge.
I'm glad Spoc's getting support, and I'm sorry if you've felt neglected here, but I also need to ask you not to post anything that could lead others to feel accused -- which can happen even if names aren't named.
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 redirect a follow-up to Psycho-Babble Administration.
Posting something about your own issues and their possible role in your reaction might be an interesting exercise -- and might help others respond to you supportively.
----
> some people may need to look at themselves a bit more and see if they may be ignoring others just to post to a few close buddies...I cannot see that as good for anyone..
It could be good for them and their buddies. And being obligated to respond to others could be felt as pressure.
> I really do not think people would post on this so often if it was ALL IN "THEIR" heads...and thats what I myself feel when I see some people have such a strong reaction to this topic as if it is taboo to speak of it...
It might not all be in their heads, but reactions to others can be complicated and at least sometimes influenced by their history, etc... And it's not the topic that's taboo, it's the way of speaking of it.
> frankly I feel at a loss to people who are posting reasons and apologies if its them..the intent is not for that but for some self examination
Maybe people are feeling accused, self-examining, and thinking it might be them?
Bob
Posted by spoc on April 27, 2004, at 19:51:27
In reply to Re: Invisibility » Fallen4MyT, posted by gardenergirl on April 27, 2004, at 14:26:01
I also wanted to make sure people know that not as much attention to all posters was being suggested as some may have gathered. And much of the point is “posting around” people -– not posting, leaving, and forgetting; but staying on a thread and going around them during it. And if it’s someone you haven’t ‘spoken’ to yet, and they are popping up (maybe in several places), and perhaps at times trying to talk to you in particular (they may not even know the ins and outs of that), it’s just nice to try to be aware of it. And I’d think people would want to be, so it didn’t seem like a bad idea to point it out.
I could see where going beyond that could feel at times like "mercy posting" that some may not always be up to (and I do not mean that sarcastically). And it's of course discretionary (but, it *is* the way to get to know different people; and as much as we may feel we've already found them all, realistically we know there are other great ones for us out there). Either way, it would be courteous to always watch out for the "go-around" mentioned above.
It wasn't implied that people have a duty to remember every place all over the entire board they have posted, so they can check back; nor that they should respond to every single person who ever posts to them, especially if they know each other. And infrequent posters should of course never be expected to change and post more or to more people. No one meant it that way. I don’t have expectations on that level here or in real life, and it’s feeling rather foreign at this point, and wasn't supposed to be all about me in particular at all.
It was supposed to be only about a simple principle of human nature and a suggestion that as part of the largely poster-perpetuated “value added” community here, people may want to be cognizant of this kind of thing. It would be too bad if everything gets attributed exclusively to things like over-sensitivity, overreaction, or attachment to one's own posts. Those as well as everything else mentioned so far are true at times, but there are other aspects, and it could have just been enlightening and useful to look at. But it may be too complicated for many reasons, from people not being able to see it if it is there, to those in agreement being hesitant that discussing it could exacerbate things.
I have more thoughts on it all, but am not sure how much more I should or will post to this. The subject may fall flat and just upset or irritate, maybe including Dr. Bob. And it's uncomfortable to proceed under that, especially if it just isn’t going to be seen as a possibly constructive thing. But either way, just wanted to clarify that the issue wasn’t expectations of the kind of exceptional attentiveness mentioned above, in case that is what continues to be addressed.
Thanks everyone for posting your comments and interpretations.
Posted by Fallen4MyT on April 27, 2004, at 19:55:34
In reply to Re: please be civil » Fallen4MyT, posted by Dr. Bob on April 27, 2004, at 19:42:26
Dr Bob sez:
<Maybe people are feeling accused, self-examining, and thinking it might be them?Bob >
Maybe they are,,,and maybe it is them and then maybe it isn't. So wouldn't saying to me, spoc, underethics and some other posters what we see and feel is not the case or real also uncivil and kind of gaslighting???..I feel ATTACKED when I am told "this is not so" to me on something I and others *see AND FEEL* and post about. I do not see civil flags in those cases. Those posts DO lead me to feel put down. It's fine to say..I do not see it that way ...but......I do not think it is civil as defined to say..That is not the case etc..The subject does seem taboo as no matter how one replies on THIS end it gets tagged
Posted by karen_kay on April 27, 2004, at 19:56:54
In reply to Re: note to all!! i'm rude! » karen_kay, posted by rainyday on April 27, 2004, at 13:52:33
well, (clearing throat) if you must know, i was so concerned about the babble etiquette, that i started a thread on it a while back.... while it doesn't apply to answering posters, it applies to answering those who reply to you (which is even a concern i have, see i have a hard time doing even that.... i don't discriminate...i just have a hard time answering people... and ducky... if you are reading, i know, i have yet to get back to you too :( that's next on my list!!!
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20040324/msgs/327868.html
Posted by Fallen4MyT on April 27, 2004, at 19:57:34
In reply to out on a civility limb on cliques and invisable, posted by Fallen4MyT on April 27, 2004, at 19:18:41
Posted by spoc on April 27, 2004, at 20:06:33
In reply to Re: please be civil » Fallen4MyT, posted by Dr. Bob on April 27, 2004, at 19:42:26
> I'm glad Spoc's getting support, and I'm sorry if you've felt neglected here...
I am not comfortable with it being assumed that this is all about me. I would like to know where you get that -- you don't usually express conclusions about *why* you think a poster is expressing a certain viewpoint. I wouldn't claim I haven't felt any of this but it's the kind of thing I'd post to regardless, and that's in fact how I ended up here in the first place. I hold positions and make observations everywhere I look and go, even if they are unrelated to me. Maybe this assumption is what triggered the incivility call -- that something which is only beefing for one's own sake may lead to reading things into the tone.
> .. but I also need to ask you not to post anything that could lead others to feel accused -- which can happen even if names aren't named. >
<<<<< Can we watch for uniform application of this now? That neither the board nor poster habits in general may be discussed in negative or "room for improvement" lights? If not an explanation would be helpful.
Posted by Fallen4MyT on April 27, 2004, at 20:07:46
In reply to Re: Invisibility, posted by spoc on April 27, 2004, at 19:51:27
WELL SAID..I GOT IT AND POSTED CLOSE TO THE SAME NOT AS SMOOTH AND SMART AS YOU
> I also wanted to make sure people know that not as much attention to all posters was being suggested as some may have gathered. And much of the point is “posting around” people -– not posting, leaving, and forgetting; but staying on a thread and going around them during it. And if it’s someone you haven’t ‘spoken’ to yet, and they are popping up (maybe in several places), and perhaps at times trying to talk to you in particular (they may not even know the ins and outs of that), it’s just nice to try to be aware of it. And I’d think people would want to be, so it didn’t seem like a bad idea to point it out.
>
> I could see where going beyond that could feel at times like "mercy posting" that some may not always be up to (and I do not mean that sarcastically). And it's of course discretionary (but, it *is* the way to get to know different people; and as much as we may feel we've already found them all, realistically we know there are other great ones for us out there). Either way, it would be courteous to always watch out for the "go-around" mentioned above.
>
> It wasn't implied that people have a duty to remember every place all over the entire board they have posted, so they can check back; nor that they should respond to every single person who ever posts to them, especially if they know each other. And infrequent posters should of course never be expected to change and post more or to more people. No one meant it that way. I don’t have expectations on that level here or in real life, and it’s feeling rather foreign at this point, and wasn't supposed to be all about me in particular at all.
>
> It was supposed to be only about a simple principle of human nature and a suggestion that as part of the largely poster-perpetuated “value added” community here, people may want to be cognizant of this kind of thing. It would be too bad if everything gets attributed exclusively to things like over-sensitivity, overreaction, or attachment to one's own posts. Those as well as everything else mentioned so far are true at times, but there are other aspects, and it could have just been enlightening and useful to look at. But it may be too complicated for many reasons, from people not being able to see it if it is there, to those in agreement being hesitant that discussing it could exacerbate things.
>
> I have more thoughts on it all, but am not sure how much more I should or will post to this. The subject may fall flat and just upset or irritate, maybe including Dr. Bob. And it's uncomfortable to proceed under that, especially if it just isn’t going to be seen as a possibly constructive thing. But either way, just wanted to clarify that the issue wasn’t expectations of the kind of exceptional attentiveness mentioned above, in case that is what continues to be addressed.
>
> Thanks everyone for posting your comments and interpretations.
>
>
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 27, 2004, at 20:29:14
In reply to Re: please be civil » Dr. Bob, posted by Fallen4MyT on April 27, 2004, at 19:55:34
> wouldn't saying to me, spoc, underethics and some other posters what we see and feel is not the case or real also uncivil and kind of gaslighting???..
Your feelings are your feelings, it's hard for others to argue with how you feel. Which is one of the advantages of I-statements. Disagreeing with what you see, however, I'd consider to be having a different point of view, which in general I think would be fine.
Sorry, I know it gets complicated here sometimes, knowing what's OK to say how...
Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 27, 2004, at 20:30:35
In reply to Re: Invisibility, posted by spoc on April 27, 2004, at 19:51:27
> much of the point is “posting around” people -– not posting, leaving, and forgetting; but staying on a thread and going around them during it.
Keeping in mind that the idea here is not to post anything that could lead others to feel accused, could you please rephrase that?
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 redirect a follow-up to Psycho-Babble Administration.
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by spoc on April 27, 2004, at 20:34:07
In reply to Re: please be civil » Dr. Bob, posted by Fallen4MyT on April 27, 2004, at 19:55:34
<<<< First, remember that things were going smoothly and no one was upset until calls were made that make it seem like people should be upset.
> Maybe they are,,,and maybe it is them and then maybe it isn't. So wouldn't saying to me, spoc, underethics and some other posters what we see and feel is not the case or real also uncivil and kind of gaslighting???..
<<<< And again acknowledging human nature that exists everywhere, we know the people reading all this and agreeing with it would mostly be afraid to get involved if they are uncomfortable already. And that is not an insult to anyone, we shouldn't have to deny natural (and general) laws here.
> I feel ATTACKED when I am told "this is not so" to me on something I and others *see AND FEEL* and post about. I do not see civil flags in those cases. Those posts DO lead me to feel put down. ..The subject does seem taboo as no matter how one replies on THIS end it gets tagged >
<<<<< This kind of subject is easy to take the path of least resistance on, because it *is* uncomfortable to many. Bouts of good-intentioned, unconscious white-washing of any subsequent points could easily lead to a final spin that everyone feels bad for the oversensitive posters who assessed things inaccurately just because their feelings were hurt. Think about it.
The position taken here *is* the minority position, or at least the minority *vocalized* opinion. And by definition those are hard positions to get equal consideration for, but that doesn't mean the points are invalid.
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Social | 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.