![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 4 of 4. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by RosieOGrady on October 1, 2004, at 11:07:50
I have no objections to you posting to me if you should ever want to. I'm sorry I made that request.
I think there was just a misunderstanding. When I see someone posting consecutively I would assume they want to communicate and are available and feel more inclined to post to them rather than inhibited from posting as in Bob's theory. My post meant did you have any more ideas about the subject of thread limits. I was expecting you to ask what I thought also but maybe you are right and I should have offered my opinions first.
Personally I think posting limits are not needed. I never saw a problem with multiple posts or felt inhibited in any way. As a newcomer I feel most inhibited rather by very long threads with only a limited number of participants. It seems like it would be a logical extension of Bob's policy to say there can be no more than 6 consecutive posts by 2 people or 9 consecutive posts by a total of 3 people of 12 consecutive posts by 4 people etc. without the introduction of a new poster. I would not be in favour of that either though. I just don't see a problem.
As far as your need to post in multiple sequences. I can understand that and wondered if you could e-mail yourself a post at a time and then cut and paste them in one post? I e-mail myself sometimes as thoughts occur to me. I offer this suggestion not in any attempt to circumvent either the letter or the spirit of Dr Bob's rule but just as a practical way of accomodating your special needs. I think you are asset to babble and would not like to see you unable to participate.
For people who have a problem following multiple post threads I would suggest the PB Extra
http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/extras.pl
which allows all the post in one thread to be read at once. I have found this useful.
I wish you the best.
Posted by Susan47 on October 1, 2004, at 11:37:53
In reply to Lou: re my no posting request/multiple posts, posted by RosieOGrady on October 1, 2004, at 11:07:50
Personally, I really sympathize with Lou. I've tried writing things and condensing them and then relating them in posts, etc., but I find that just takes away a lot of the excitement of keeping the thoughts flowing and new ideas coming. It just doesn't work for me. I'm sorry if that's a hindrance to others, and I do understand that my idea-style way of communicating can be upsetting and turn others away. I just can't change my own style though, and still be myself; but I guess I could go somewhere else and try. Hmm, Dr. Bob, maybe we could each have three diff. posting names??? :}
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 1, 2004, at 13:39:42
In reply to Lou: re my no posting request/multiple posts, posted by RosieOGrady on October 1, 2004, at 11:07:50
Rosie,
You wrote,[...I have no objections to you posting to me...just a misunderstanding...]
That is great. I feel that misuderstandings can be cleared up.
You wrote,[...6 consecutive posts by 2 people...9 by 3...12 by 4...]. This is an arithmetic progression with the common difference of 3. So the nth term is always the first term, which I will call a, plus the number of the term minus 1, times the common difference. If the first term is a, and the common difference is d, then any term, which we call L, in the progression could be found by using the formula, L=a+(n-1)d.
So if we wanted the 10th term of this arithmetic progression, it would be found by using a for the first term which is 6; the 10th term then is L. and the common difference is d or 3
So the 10th term of the progresion is:
L=a+(n-1)d
L=6+(9)3
L=6+27
L=33
So does it follow that in your suggestion that there could be 33 consecutive posts if 10 people were in the thread?
Rosie, your the greatest.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 1, 2004, at 13:55:44
In reply to Re: Lou: re my no posting request/multiple posts, posted by Susan47 on October 1, 2004, at 11:37:53
Susan47,
You wrote,[...tried condencing and relating...just takes away the thoughts flowing and...ideas comming...can't change...and still be myself...].
You have brought up a very good concept. When one is requiered to change as a condition to be accepted, and the one that is requiered to change can not, then this has the potential to be dehumanizing to the person that the change is requiered upon if that person conforms to the change.
Lou
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.