Hijacking Threads - New Policy Under Consideration

[adept]

Thanks for opening this topic up Stigweard, I think it needed to be done.

I am one who has voiced concern repeatedly on the highjacking of threads by Vaj and his cohorts.

So much so, that I think I have only hurt myself and my own feelings in the process.

The last few days I've had chance to think things over.

The Tao Bums is a wonderful place, populated with some great folks.

It would be a shame if it was ruined by a minority who constantly claim superiority over others viewpoints and experiences.

I think this new policy ought to be brought in, to protect members who may be put off from posting.

[Sloppy Zhang]

It would be a shame if it was ruined by a minority who constantly claim superiority over others viewpoints and experiences.

 

Is it really that the people in question think they are superior?

 

Or is it that other people just can't stand to see someone who has powerful convictions and leave them alone?

 

I just don't see what other people have against the members in question.

Edited July 23, 2010 by Sloppy Zhang

[Marblehead]

I will have difficulty speaking to this subject because I actually hold to both sides of the equation.

 

I think it is only natural for a thread to go off topic after a couple days and everything that anyone had to say to the topic has been said. Afterall, Tao flows naturally, and if it was natural for the discussion to go off into some other direction then it is still within the realm of acceptability. Our thoughts cause association with other thoughts and if the flow is a natural progression from one to another then I personally think that this is good.

 

And we must consider that the topic may have brought an enduring question to mind for one of the members and this was the perfect opportunity to bring forward this question for consideration by others.

 

However, I do not accept personal insults in any form, no matter how well disguised. This is, IMO, totally unnecessary and very destructive.

 

Nor do I accept intentionally taking a topic of discussion off topic for the purpose of preaching an alternative view. Here I am speaking directly to the concept of intentionally forcing Buddhist dogma into a thread that was created for the purpose of discussing a Taoist concept. And please believe me, I would feel the same way if a thread were opened for discussing a Buddhist concept and a member tried to minimalize the concept with Taoist dogma.

 

And for any member to degrade any other member because of their belief system is totally unacceptable. It is the best way to loose membership on a forum.

 

I think this is a great forum because it is so very open to a vast variety of subject matters. To cut others down because of their views is a perfect sign of immaturity and insecurity.

 

So yes, allow the threads to take their "natural" course. But no, no personal insults or intentionally derailing a thread from its subject matter until the thread has reach full circle.

 

Peace & Love!

[Marblehead]

BTW

 

I think this discussion should not be directed to an individual or to a small group of individuals. It is, afterall, a consideration for a general rule pertaining to the operation of the forum.

 

We all have our opinions and oftentimes the opinions of two individuals are going to be at the opposite extremes of a continuum.

 

Let's try to keep this discussion in general terms and not point fingers, Okay?

 

Peace & Love!

[三江源]

I agree with Stig completely about the amount of members who will give up on the board out of irritation and boredom with the repetetive sea of bickering and unpleasant "LOL" ing at others points of views that I have noticed, which tastes bad and drives me out of those threads.

 

How about an initial plea for overposting to stop, and the level of reactivity to be self monitored.

 

One would hope a request for self moderation would yield results. If not, then it will be unavoidable to conclude that those members dont hold the balance of the board as their concern, and are very highly driven to forward their own agendas. In which case I think it is for the good of all for the mods to do the parenting thing and give a boundary, as you would to a child who doesnt know when to stop.

 

Actually I think it is impressive that the mods have opened up a discussion considering what to do about this issue..... it would be disapointing if this board turned into a trivial chat board, or a dead wood forest with many threads no - one in their right mind would ever be able to plough through for relevancy.

[DarthBane]

So again, I don't think moderator action is really necessary. I think people need to take a step back, and look at what it is they are doing, and look at what it is they are posting. Are you posting a response to a person's comment within the context of the thread? Or are you bringing up someone's past history into the thread?

 

I agree. I think one should also consider how what one writes will be recieved. Sometimes someones view is so different from yours that its best to take a step back and not initiate anything. I mean whats the point? It would only start a flame war.

Edited July 23, 2010 by Guest

[Mal]

Good sugestions everyone, Thank you.

 

Please keep them coming

[DarthBane]

 

Actually I think it is impressive that the mods have opened up a discussion considering what to do about this issue..... it would be disapointing if this board turned into a trivial chat board, or a dead wood forest with many threads no - one in their right mind would ever be able to plough through for relevancy.

 

Sorry cat, i am not picking on you in particular, just a thought.

 

Most forums are like this:

1. People who have read books only and consider themselves teachers.

2. Some of these regurgitate material from books

3. Some conclusions are wild and most likely not real conclusions.

4. Most cannot get their head to understand others pwerspectives. To do so would just hurt too much in their noggins.

 

My statement is all forums are really trivial. You dont know what you are really getting unless you have a good experience elsewhere built up. Sorry the truth hurts. Its doesnt make forums bad, just that you have to consider that if you dont know everyting about the subject; about 90-95% are not going to know the answers to your questons either and may give some random answer.

[三江源]

Hi there Pink Light. I speak from my own experience of this forum, where I know a number of very well informed fellow practitioners whose experiences and findings I enjoy hearing and have often and often found very very helpful.

 

"Trivial" is of course relative, and I guess we all ignore here what we find trivial, my sense is there has been less to ignore here over the years than most places on the net about spiritual matters.

 

I agree with you about your 1- 4 and I find the regurgitators and dogma pushers tiresome, they are easily identifiable and easily skipped past.

 

There are some genuine practitioners here though, and it is a great place to be in contact with them. For that I am very very grateful and I fully join with Stig and Mal et al to keep this forum the helpful resource and community it has been to many people.

 

I feel loyal to Sean who started this site, loyal to the intention he held for there to be a place for sharing and discussing what we practice and examining what we are doing, and sharing our findings.

[DarthBane]

Hi there Pink Light. I speak from my own experience of this forum, where I know a number of very well informed fellow practitioners whose experiences and findings I enjoy hearing and have often and often found very very helpful.

 

"Trivial" is of course relative, and I guess we all ignore here what we find trivial, my sense is there has been less to ignore here over the years than most places on the net about spiritual matters.

 

I agree with you about your 1- 4 and I find the regurgitators and dogma pushers tiresome, they are easily identifiable and easily skipped past.

 

There are some genuine practitioners here though, and it is a great place to be in contact with them. For that I am very very grateful and I fully join with Stig and Mal et al to keep this forum the helpful resource and community it has been to many people.

 

I feel loyal to Sean who started this site, loyal to the intention he held for there to be a place for sharing and discussing what we practice and examining what we are doing, and sharing our findings.

 

I agree I feel loyal to the community also. It just seems like a slap in the face when the regurgitators think they are assisting. Rather than humor, it really is trolling to instigate a flame war.

[RiverSnake]

Yes, this thread needed to be done. I've noticed a degree of strife on the forum that could be easily allocated to nothingness with simple self moderation.

[Marblehead]

I'm just wondering if I could hijack this thread and lead it into a discussion of some off-the-wall subject like Taoist Philosophy.

 

Maybe I'll give it a try.

 

Peace & Love!

[Stigweard]

I am bumping this back up because we have recently seen another case where someone could be overly attempting to hijack threads with their own agenda.

 

I am loathe to lightly implement "more rules" ... as far as I am concerned, in the spirit of Laozi, moderators should not interfere with the normal activities of members.

 

But it can be seen that this type of behavior creates a discordant atmosphere in topics and it is only on those grounds that I would consider this new policy as appropriate.

 

So this is once again under serious consideration. What say you?

[idquest]

I am bumping this back up because we have recently seen another case where someone could be overly attempting to hijack threads with their own agenda.

 

I am loathe to lightly implement "more rules" ... as far as I am concerned, in the spirit of Laozi, moderators should not interfere with the normal activities of members.

 

But it can be seen that this type of behavior creates a discordant atmosphere in topics and it is only on those grounds that I would consider this new policy as appropriate.

 

So this is once again under serious consideration. What say you?

I'd say that if an OP or an active contributor to the topic asks explicitly in the thread (not PM) not to hijack and such requrest(s) are ignored then moderation could be justified. The ground for the moderation would be a notion that if a hijacker is serious about their ideas they can always open a new thread and discuss their ideas there. So the initiative / requrest to moderate should be from participants, not the moderators.

[Marblehead]

So this is once again under serious consideration. What say you?

 

I think that as long as there are members speaking to the opening post/thread subject it should not be allowed to be hijacked.

 

However, I do think that moderation of this should take place in the background via PM and not directly in the thread. And, of course, I think it would require a complaint by a member before any moderation take place.