[Moderation] -- tulku

[Sloppy Zhang]

Prevent undue, excessive offense to other members.

 

I disagree with this because what is excessively offensive to others is incredibly relative, can't be reliably quantified, and so cannot ever be fairly enforced, especially in a spiritual discussion forum.

 

For instance, in the gender threads, some men posted their honest, uncensored opinions and experiences with some women in their lives. Arguably that is part of what spirituality is about- being brutally honest about one's experiences. Understandably some people got offended (women as well as men). But, you know.... when you talk about serious stuff, that's what happens. And mature people who are intent on talking about serious stuff have to prepare to deal with that. If you ask someone to open up, you have to realize that you might not like what you hear, it might affect you, and you might not like it.

 

It's unfortunate that people get offended. It's even more unfortunate if they pass up the opportunity to really delve into that experience, and get to the root of it. Yeah, it's going to be messy and uncomfortable. They're probably going to have to wade through a LOT of shit before they can find something of value. But that's the nature of the game. If you aren't up with that, don't post in the thread.

 

But please, don't expect moderators to censor a thread because it makes you personally uncomfortable. When we start going down that road..... we wind up with these farcical threads. "Oh you banned so and so for making someone uncomfortable, ban that person too, they said this which made me feel uncomfortable."

 

The thing is, scotty, and now tulku, have merely taken the current enforcement style of the "no insult" policy to its logical conclusion.

[Stigweard]

I disagree with this because what is excessively offensive to others is incredibly relative, can't be reliably quantified, and so cannot ever be fairly enforced, especially in a spiritual discussion forum.

 

For instance, in the gender threads, some men posted their honest, uncensored opinions and experiences with some women in their lives. Arguably that is part of what spirituality is about- being brutally honest about one's experiences. Understandably some people got offended (women as well as men). But, you know.... when you talk about serious stuff, that's what happens. And mature people who are intent on talking about serious stuff have to prepare to deal with that. If you ask someone to open up, you have to realize that you might not like what you hear, it might affect you, and you might not like it.

 

It's unfortunate that people get offended. It's even more unfortunate if they pass up the opportunity to really delve into that experience, and get to the root of it. Yeah, it's going to be messy and uncomfortable. They're probably going to have to wade through a LOT of shit before they can find something of value. But that's the nature of the game. If you aren't up with that, don't post in the thread.

 

But please, don't expect moderators to censor a thread because it makes you personally uncomfortable. When we start going down that road..... we wind up with these farcical threads. "Oh you banned so and so for making someone uncomfortable, ban that person too, they said this which made me feel uncomfortable."

 

The thing is, scotty, and now tulku, have merely taken the current enforcement style of the "no insult" policy to its logical conclusion.

Yes you are absolutely right! Offense is a damn hard thing to moderate and I would not expect for a moment that moderators can or should try and moderate this. At best all they can do is try and enforce the "No insult" policy.

 

Because the degree to which people may take offense varies, or that the offense taken may be the result of unjustified prejudice, a number of factors need to be taken into account when applying the “offense principle”, including:

 

• the extent, duration and social value of the speech,
  
• the ease with which the offense can be avoided,
  
• the motives of the speaker,
  
• the number of people offended,
  
• the intensity of the offense, and
  
• the general interest of the community at large.
  

 

But this is NOT to be adjudicated by moderators. What I am suggesting is that we have a forum (this one will do as a defacto for the time being) where on-forum issues about moderation can come to be sorted out and discussed by members. And allow people to get angry and passionate and vocal. Get it out, get it said and heard and get it sorted BY THE MEMBERS.

 

Edited September 9, 2011 by Stigweard

[Mal]

Stig re your reoprt

 

I want you folks to watch this topic FIRST before making any arbitrary decisions.

 

PLEASE!!

 

You know full well our decisions are not arbitrary.

 

Everyone's input is taken into consideration.

[Apech]

As a matter of record I want to point out that Tulku was contacted by the Mod team about his post (which was reported by three other users) before this thread was started. He edited his post as a result of moderator action in line with what the membership wanted.

 

Witch has self-edited without such a request.

 

We are still considering whether any further action is needed.

[Stigweard]

Stig re your reoprt

 

You know full well our decisions are not arbitrary.

 

Everyone's input is taken into consideration.

OK fair point, arbitrary has dual meanings and I certainly didn't mean it in the sense of "random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system." More like "autocratic in the use of authority". Apologies if my poor use of words relayed the wrong intent.

 

 

In terms of the PMs sent, I say "STOP IT!"

 

For goodness sakes let us work it out ourselves in an open discussion, albeit in a quarantined area. We are not children who need your babysitting.

 

The more members are treated in an autocratic fashion the more you will have this business of members acting like children who NEED an autocratic system.

 

The social environment CREATES the way people behave. If you want members to behave in a mature self-moderated fashion then create the social environment that ENCOURAGES that behavior.

[Mal]

The social environment CREATES the way people behave. If you want members to behave in a mature self-moderated fashion then create the social environment that ENCOURAGES that behavior.

 

I agree and I think we are.

 

Our "timings" never "synchronise" we have issues ongoing - but you will understand when I say

 

Go Tigers as I'll never forgive Bennett for leaving my Broncos

 

I'll be drinking this

what can I get ya?

[Stigweard]

I agree and I think we are.

Recent events prove you wrong. Sorry Mal, its true.

 

[tulku]

LOL

 

Personally I think you should have the right to be as provocative as you want and feel. Every member on this forum should have the unalienable right to:

 

• to seek information and ideas;
  
• to receive information and ideas;
  
• to impart information and ideas.
  

The only reasons that moderation actions should be taken is to:

 

• Prevent harm to other members, and
  
• Prevent undue, excessive offense to other members.
  

 

So as far as I am concerned you go and beat your bible or dharma or whatever to your hearts content. You just have to remember that the more you evangelize the more often you will get folks who will stand up and say "Please STFU!"

 

Every time this happens there will be a disturbance on the forum and inevitably someone will slap down an insult and then it becomes a moderation concern.

 

If you are happy with that, and if you are happy with seeing your name pop up for moderation again and again, then fine go your hardest. But if you are wondering why there is so much friction occurring in the posts you are creating than I think you might benefit from having a rethink about the way in which you are posting.

 

If that makes me biased, fine and I will defend my right to express my bias whenever I wish.

 

But I do apologize for making you a scapegoat in a way. I was using you as a means to make a point to the moderators. I actually don't think anyone should be moderated from being provocative, but they have set a precedent and I trying to point this hypocrisy out to them. Please accept my apologies in this regard.

 

 

being provocative is different from being insulting

 

witch was extremely insulting to me and i responded in kind

 

bear the difference in your mind

[tulku]

BTW, I just read Scotty's thread.

 

Scotty was having an argument with other people and these other people complained about him which got him banned.

 

I was having a naught tit-for-tat exchange with Witch and neither of us complained about this exchange.

 

It was other busybodies who made complaints against ME but none made complaints against Witch.

 

Clearly a case of some of Scotty's supporters trying to pull me down in order to save Scotty.

 

This I say to you. I am gonna say what I am gonna say and more importantly,

 

I am gonna do what I am destined to do which is to remove Lust and Sex totally from this world.

 

What can you do about that?

Edited September 9, 2011 by tulku

[doc benway]

If the mods are reading this (and by the good spirits I hope you are), then I want it noted that tulku has voluntarily gone back and edited his posts to remove the offending comments. Thus I retract my earlier request for his suspension.

 

For the record, he did so at my request.

[Jeff]

As a newbie to the forum... I want to thank Tulku & Witch for the mature and healthy discussion in this thread. It is nice to see adults dealing with issues themselves.

 

 

Way too many bad soap operas going on in this forum... Still looking for a good discussion on Taoism...

 

Have a great weekend.

 

[Green Tiger]

As a newbie to the forum... I want to thank Tulku & Witch for the mature and healthy discussion in this thread. It is nice to see adults dealing with issues themselves.

 

 

Way too many bad soap operas going on in this forum... Still looking for a good discussion on Taoism...

 

Have a great weekend.

 

 

Nog! I thought that's why they started the Taoist Discussion forum, but . . . yeah. I would be content re-reading the Flying Phoenix Chi Kung forum over and over though, it is the reason I came to this forum and I will stick around so long as I am still practicing and people are still talking about it.

[Stigweard]

BTW, I just read Scotty's thread.

 

Scotty was having an argument with other people and these other people complained about him which got him banned.

 

I was having a naught tit-for-tat exchange with Witch and neither of us complained about this exchange.

 

It was other busybodies who made complaints against ME but none made complaints against Witch.

 

Clearly a case of some of Scotty's supporters trying to pull me down in order to save Scotty.

 

This I say to you. I am gonna say what I am gonna say and more importantly,

 

I am gonna do what I am destined to do which is to remove Lust and Sex totally from this world.

 

What can you do about that?

tulku, if you were having this discussion via PM or via your personal practice forums than yes it would have been considered a private conversation. But matey you were having it on an OPEN PUBLIC FORUM. Thus the contents, whether you like it or not is the business of everyone on the forum.

 

Whilst it is your right to speak freely, if it threatens harm than I will exercise my right to speak my mind about it and demand that we exercise whatever enforcement at our disposal to moderate your speech.

 

[tulku]

tulku, if you were having this discussion via PM or via your personal practice forums than yes it would have been considered a private conversation. But matey you were having it on an OPEN PUBLIC FORUM. Thus the contents, whether you like it or not is the business of everyone on the forum.

 

Whilst it is your right to speak freely, if it threatens harm than I will exercise my right to speak my mind about it and demand that we exercise whatever enforcement at our disposal to moderate your speech.

 

 

then why didn't you make any complaints regarding Witch's post about shackling, bonding and torturing me?

 

so it is alright for Witch to threaten me but it not right for me to make similar threats back to her?

 

as i said before, stop having double-standards

 

nevertheless, it is an exchange between me and Witch, an exchange which both of us didn't have any personal feelings about.. neither of us feel our conversation was harmful..

 

it is a damn conversation on the internet for gods sakes

 

so if neither witch nor me made a complaint, what right do you have to make a complaint?

 

and if you made a complaint, what right do you have to make a complaint against just one party but ignore the fact that it was the other who perpetuated the tit-for-tat?

 

who gave you the right to decide who is wrong and who is right? you ain't the Mod, Stig.

 

if that is so, you can be sure i will mark all your posts heavily from now on and i will report every single detail in your posts which has the slightest possibility of threatening the harmony of this forum

 

regardless of whether your future posts are to me or to someone else

 

matey, you made the wrong enemy today my friend

 

i can tolerate insults from other people but i can never tolerate peeps having double standards against me

Edited September 9, 2011 by tulku