![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 32 to 56 of 64. Go back in thread:
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 22:50:34
In reply to Re: Lou's summery toDr.Hsiung-procedure to halt thread » Lou Pilder, posted by gardenergirl on November 30, 2004, at 22:04:22
gg,
You wrote,[...12 hour window...].
My revised suggestion had no time period. In my suggestion, a poster could post a halt at any time.
The prpose of the halt,IMO, is to prevent further posts of the same nature.
I think that a try at this could not cause any harm, but others may have differant opinions.
Lou
Posted by verne on November 30, 2004, at 22:53:18
In reply to Re: Spike the Ball, posted by henrietta on November 30, 2004, at 19:08:56
I'm not trivializing The Holocaust but object to a kind of reverse hyper-sensitive racism that bullies others who don't share their beliefs.
We will never run out of reasons to build monuments and memorials to those who were murdered in atrocities. But why stop there? If we are setting aside words, let's set aside half our language for the millions massacred in Cambodia, Laos, Ruwanda and countless other places. And what about the millions of ukranians and gypsies murdered in WWII? Every life is precious. Let's memorialize and remember them ALL.
The Nazis exterminated millions of Communists, Czechs, Greeks, Gypsies, homosexuals, Jehovah's Witnesses, mentally and physically handicapped, Poles, resistance fighters, Russians, Serbs, Socialists, Spanish Republicans, trade unionists, Ukrainians, Yugoslavians, prisoners of war of many nations, and still others whose identity may never be recognized.(1) Their victims, according to one survivor of four different concentration camps, "were of some thirty nationalities, from Nepalese to Andorrans, and of a variety of racial and linguistic stocks ranging from Basques to Buriats and from Ladinos to Lapps".(2) When people were not immediately exterminated, they were sent to work and/or concentration camps. There the prisoners were divided into six penal categories and given patches on their clothing for identification purposes. Ordinary criminals were assigned green; political prisoners wore red; black was worn by asocials (slackers, prostitutes, procurers, etc.); homosexuals wore pink; conscientious objectors wore purple, and the Jewish people wore yellow."
Estimates of Non-Combatant Lives Lost During the Holocaust:
Ukrainians 5.5 - 7 million
Jews (of all countries) 6 million +
Russian POWs 3.3 million +
Russian Civilians 2 million +
Poles 3 million +
Yugoslavians 1.5 million +
Gypsies 200,000 - 500,000
Mentally/Physically Disabled 70,000- 250,000
Homosexuals Tens of thousands
Spanish Republicans Tens of thousands
Jehovah's Witnesses 2,500 - 5,000
Boy and Girl Scouts, Clergy, Communists, Czechs, Deportees, Greeks, Political Prisoners, Other POWs, Resistance Fighters, Serbs, Socialists, Trade Unionists, Others UnknownWhy is it allright when Mel Brooks makes outrageous movies parodying the vilest atrocities - including the Holocaust - but deep offense is taken when the mere word is mentioned elsewhere? Where's the offense with "Blazing Saddles" or "The Producers"?
Would it be politically incorrect to say that I lost a GYPSY relative in the Holocaust and an aunt on the 110th floor on 9/11? Or doesn't that rate?
Being offended has become an art form.
verne
Posted by gardenergirl on November 30, 2004, at 22:56:30
In reply to Lou's reply to garden girl-12 horwndw » gardenergirl, posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 22:50:34
It's hard to say if a trial could cause harm. I just am concerned that posters could "halt" all kinds of threads, causing chaos and confusion. Not to mention hurt feelings.
And call me cynical, but I wonder if people would really change their behavior if someone else called a halt to their thread. I can conceive of how some might continue out of spite.
My own experiment is to personally ask those who are upsetting to me to cease and desist in as civil a way as I can. I haven't had a great deal of reason to use this technique, but so far so good...although I can't take any credit if behavior changes. I think it's perfectly reasonable for others to make a direct and civil request to someone, although the outcome is not guaranteed, of course.
gg
Posted by gardenergirl on November 30, 2004, at 22:59:31
In reply to Lou's reply to garden girl-12 horwndw » gardenergirl, posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 22:50:34
Lou,
I'm not sure if your revised proposal is a revision of this original request:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041109/msgs/421736.htmlor of the first post suggesting a halt.
My comment about a 12 hour window was about the post I linked above. I did not mean to imply to others or to you that you were advocating a 12 hour window on halts.
gg
Posted by Gabbix2 on November 30, 2004, at 23:03:43
In reply to An art form?, posted by verne on November 30, 2004, at 22:53:18
Toph never referred to "a holocaust" he referred to Auchwitz.
Posted by verne on November 30, 2004, at 23:30:45
In reply to Re: An art form? » verne, posted by Gabbix2 on November 30, 2004, at 23:03:43
That would be a different matter. I just assumed by the responses that he had used the word "holocaust". My mistake. I guess I should read the entire thread.
Goes to show, I don't need much thread to hang myself.
verne
Posted by Gabbix2 on November 30, 2004, at 23:53:53
In reply to Re: An art form? » Gabbix2, posted by verne on November 30, 2004, at 23:30:45
>I guess I should read the entire thread.I have done that soooooooooo many times.
I've gotten quite good at apologizing : )
Posted by verne on December 1, 2004, at 1:17:35
In reply to Re: An art form? » verne, posted by Gabbix2 on November 30, 2004, at 23:53:53
Backtracking, I think Toph was simply trying to illustrate how Dr. Bob's blocking policies resembled the way the Nazis selected who would live or die.
I agree completely. I'm also reminded of the Seinfeld character, the "Soup Nazi". I never thought I would meet one in real life until I arrived at this site. Dr. Bob makes the character come to life.
verne
Posted by AuntieMel on December 1, 2004, at 8:53:52
In reply to Re: An art form?, posted by verne on December 1, 2004, at 1:17:35
Please read and reread Noa's response.
Lou isn't the only one with strong personal feelings about this topic. Count me in, too.
Even Toph has rethought what he said. You are right that he was trying to illustrate a point. It's just that there are other ways.
It's one thing to be "right." It is another to insist on being "right" even if you know you are offending someone. I think Toph - to his credit - believes this too.
Posted by Toph on December 1, 2004, at 11:23:44
In reply to Re: An art form? » verne, posted by AuntieMel on December 1, 2004, at 8:53:52
This tread is regrettable for a number of reasons. I regret that I got so frustrated with Bob for not responding promptly to my request that he reconsider his sanction of Susan. This prompted me to use an extreme example of injustice to illustrate my point. Unfortunately, I offended people by comparing a sensitve topic with something so trivial as being unfairly blocked from PB. I hope people believed my apology was sincere.
I regret that I also discounted Lou's offense, dismissing it as "just Lou, crying wolf again." Noa's post set me straight.
While I appreciate verne's support, I regret that others who do not know him as a serious, thoughtful person may misread the points he has attempted to make.
What I do not regret is that the thread was allowed to proceed and was not halted as someone suggested. Without Bob's intervention, it allowed important sensitive issues to be discussed and worked out.
-Toph
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 1, 2004, at 11:44:26
In reply to Regrets, posted by Toph on December 1, 2004, at 11:23:44
Toph,
You wrote,[...I regret tnat I also discounted Lou's offense, dismissing it as "Just Lou crying wolf again"...].
Could you explain what you mean by {Lou''s offense}? and could you also give an example of what you are referring to as {Lou [crying wolf]?}.If you could, then I could have theopportunity to respond accordingly.
Lou
Posted by Toph on December 1, 2004, at 12:35:11
In reply to Lou's response to Toph- » Toph, posted by Lou Pilder on December 1, 2004, at 11:44:26
> Toph,
> You wrote,[...I regret tnat I also discounted Lou's offense, dismissing it as "Just Lou crying wolf again"...].
> Could you explain what you mean by {Lou''s offense}? and could you also give an example of what you are referring to as {Lou [crying wolf]?}.If you could, then I could have theopportunity to respond accordingly.
> LouI'm sorry Lou, I wasn't very clear there, I meant when you objected to my analogy instead of 'Lou's offense'.
Posted by Noa on December 1, 2004, at 15:57:56
In reply to Re: Toph-fer-extrm's reply to, posted by Toph on November 30, 2004, at 8:49:51
Thank you, Toph. I knew you'd understand.
Posted by Noa on December 1, 2004, at 16:02:03
In reply to Re: Toph-fer-extrm's reply to » Noa, posted by NikkiT2 on November 30, 2004, at 12:47:48
Yes--of course that makes sense. And, I agree--I am not sure whether locking threads is a good idea either.
In a case like this, I think clarifying with each other can work, and I think it did.
Posted by Noa on December 1, 2004, at 16:05:48
In reply to Lou's reply to pegasus- » pegasus, posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 15:52:44
>...But could there be some introspection by the posters in the thread, after the halt is posted, that could, perhaps, alter the new posts in the new thread?
Perhaps, but I think introspection can also happen from other strategies, such as in the exchange between me and Toph.
Posted by verne on December 1, 2004, at 17:21:14
In reply to Regrets, posted by Toph on December 1, 2004, at 11:23:44
I wish I hadn't jumped in mid-thread. I was blind drunk and hadn't really read most of the preceding posts.
Toph, thanks for the kind words and understanding. I'm often misunderstood. I can "agree" with someone and still manage to start a fight - especially if I've been drinking. I start shooting from the hip (I've never owned a gun, so believe me when I say that's strictly a metaphor).
I'm sorry if I made things worse for you or offended anybody. I've been wanting to take a break from babble and fell on my sword. Imagine how surprised I was when I still had a babble pulse the next morning.
I think I need a break and would welcome a block. But I shouldn't take others with me or start a riot on my way out.
verne
Posted by Gabbix2 on December 1, 2004, at 19:37:22
In reply to Add my Regrets » Toph, posted by verne on December 1, 2004, at 17:21:14
> I wish I hadn't jumped in mid-thread. I was blind drunk and hadn't really read most of the preceding posts.
>
> Toph, thanks for the kind words and understanding. I'm often misunderstood.It would take a whole lot more than this to make me think you are insensitive. I find your thoughts interesting and often pointedly insightful. No one is here because they are perfect!
Posted by Noa on December 1, 2004, at 20:06:09
In reply to The halting procedure- » Lou Pilder, posted by Lou Pilder on November 30, 2004, at 7:52:02
>I will ask noa's permission to do so first.
I appreciate both the compliment about my post as well as the courtesy you mention of asking permission in order to circulate or publish my post. Truly, I am flattered and I'm glad that I was able to express something in a way that you appreciated.
But I really prefer that my post not be circulated anywhere. It is just something that is part of this conversation here, nothing more really.
Thanks, Lou.
Posted by Jai Narayan on December 1, 2004, at 20:42:02
In reply to Add my Regrets » Toph, posted by verne on December 1, 2004, at 17:21:14
> I wish I hadn't jumped in mid-thread. I was blind drunk and hadn't really read most of the preceding posts.
**okay, verne what were you drinking? Beer? What does blind drunk mean?
>
> I'm sorry if I made things worse for you or offended anybody. I've been wanting to take a break from babble and fell on my sword. Imagine how surprised I was when I still had a babble pulse the next morning.**verne you are so funny. I love this last statement.
>
> I think I need a break and would welcome a block. But I shouldn't take others with me or start a riot on my way out.** you want to start a riot?
My goodness you make me lighten up when I am sad or uptight.
If you need to take a break, I can accept that, I will miss you.
Jai
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 1, 2004, at 21:01:11
In reply to Re: The halting procedure- » Lou Pilder, posted by Noa on December 1, 2004, at 20:06:09
Noa,
I have not sent the post out yet, so I will not do so.
Best regards,
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 1, 2004, at 21:05:27
In reply to Re: Lou's reply to pegasus- » Lou Pilder, posted by Noa on December 1, 2004, at 16:05:48
Noa,
But could not both ways,{halt and exchange} be available? What could have happened if you did not post your post?
Lou
Posted by verne on December 2, 2004, at 0:02:27
In reply to Re: Add my Regrets » verne, posted by Gabbix2 on December 1, 2004, at 19:37:22
no, I really just live and camp in imperfection.
I've been so adrift and down lately, your words were a huge encouragement.
one value of this site is: that when we lose perspective others help us get our bearings.
I have a tendency to only read posts by certain people. Anyway, I usually stop and read your posts. You seem real (is "seem real" an oxymoron?), and authentic.
thanks for the encouragement
verne
Posted by alexandra_k on December 2, 2004, at 0:12:12
In reply to Lou's reply to Noa-hltexcng » Noa, posted by Lou Pilder on December 1, 2004, at 21:05:27
I would have to say that for preference over yet another rule if someone finds something to be offensive, they just say so. People who read the thread will read the post and can then decide for themselves whether they wish to continue the thread, in what manner they wish to do so etc etc until the point at which Dr. B makes a determination.
I think that the intention of the writer is important and that their intentions should be taken into account in determining whether something is acceptable or civil or not.
That is why it can be useful to say 'I thought you were saying something like the following... and here is why I took offense from what I understood you to be saying'. That allows the poster to say - 'oh, yes, on that interpretation of what I was saying I do see how you might be offended by that and I am sorry'. And also the chance to say 'but that wasn't what I intended by what I said, rather I had such and such in mind'.
And then, after considering things from each others point of view, people could just kind of move on.
At least I fail to understand why things don't work that way at times. Perhaps it continues because one of the parties is unwilling or unable to see things from the others point of view.
I would say that the statement that caused offence in this case was intended to be a hyperbolic claim (or an overexaggeration for effect) about someones feelings of a situation on the board.
It wasn't meant to trivialise, rather it was meant to amplify or exaggerate for effect. I don't understand what is so hard to grasp about this.
haven't quite learned to keep my mouth shut yet, but lets see (and let me take note) whether any trouble follows...
I do hope not.
Posted by Toph on December 2, 2004, at 8:41:04
In reply to Another rule... and intentions.., posted by alexandra_k on December 2, 2004, at 0:12:12
That we're still talking about this is a little embarassing for me. You are right, alexandra,if I may say so myself, I intended on making noise to draw attention to how pissed I was at Bob and ended up inadvertently offending people sensitive to the Holocaust. While I now recognize the danger in using inflamatory rhetoric, I like that Babble is filled with interesting people who are impassioned about things, who engage in serious discourse about their health, their world and how best to live in it. Let's not over-regulate this forum so that some voices may be silenced.
-Toph
Posted by henrietta on December 2, 2004, at 9:20:04
In reply to Add my Regrets » Toph, posted by verne on December 1, 2004, at 17:21:14
Ah. You write too well when you're blind drunk. If I'd had a clue (slurred letters?) I think I would have interpreted your post quite differently, I would not have been offended (or at least I would have examined my response a bit more carefully), and I would not have posted yet another regrettable post. For the record: with the exception of my note to Noa the other night, I've regretted every letter I've ever tapped into this frame.
hen
Go forward in 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.