contributed articles idea-open for discussion

[zerostao]

i feel that it could be a useful thing-if- the contributed articles section gave the originator of the article/thread in that section- the same level of controls that exist for the originator of the threads in the ppf section. basically being a mod of your own article thread just as anyone with a ppf is their own mod there.

i am a strong supporter of the contributed articles section as a distinct area of this forum.

this area is reserved for original work by our members,

i can see a few obvious pros and cons for this idea'

i am interested to hear any ideas that the bums have about this section.

i had this idea previous and didnt want to push it too hard-becoz- i didnt want to put extra work on an already over-worked engineer, but, now we have 2 technicians who could assist with this-IF- we did decide to tweak it.

[Basher]

Zerostao, I generally think it's a Good Idea, as several posters (like you / Deci) try to start informative type threads.

Which get de-railed by trolls, or decend into arguements, by those that don't agree.

The OP can argue as much as they like, but the reader has to read lots of "drivel" etc, before finding the useful nuggets of information alluded to in the title of the thread.

[zerostao]

Basically a publc ppf?

it would be in public view. but it would still be only for original articles from our members

and not a personal practice journal.

 

Zerostao, I generally think it's a Good Idea, as several posters (like you / Deci) try to start informative type threads.

Which get de-railed by trolls, or decend into arguements, by those that don't agree.

The OP can argue as much as they like, but the reader has to read lots of "drivel" etc, before finding the useful nuggets of information alluded to in the title of the thread.

nicely said

[joeblast]

I think it is a good idea

[BaguaKicksAss]

The setup would look similar to PFFs, each person would have to have their own forum for them to actually be able to mod it. Well or we could just make each person who writes an artical a mod of the articles section, having like 20 mods for that section...

[Basher]

Hi BKA,

wouldn't the 20 mods then have the ability to "edit" each others threads ?

[Apech]

Good idea assuming its thread specific in terms of modding. I would like the mods to insist that the articles are actually original work and not links and quotes from others - which should be moved to general.

[joeblast]

The setup would look similar to PFFs, each person would have to have their own forum for them to actually be able to mod it. Well or we could just make each person who writes an artical a mod of the articles section, having like 20 mods for that section...

is it possible to make the contributed articles section display everything?

 

as in, create subforums for users, but, have each article posted in the subforum generate a link in the overarching contributed articles section? (trying to get 2 birds one stone...)

[Jeff]

If there is no ability to openly discuss the contributed article, why not just have the person put it in their ppf?

 

Contributed articles gives an implied statement of greater "stature" on a topic. If the author only allows positive comments, how would the uninformed reader have a basis for understanding?

 

Regards,

Jeff

[Apech]

If there is no ability to openly discuss the contributed article, why not just have the person put it in their ppf?

 

Contributed articles gives an implied statement of greater "stature" on a topic. If the author only allows positive comments, how would the uninformed reader have a basis for understanding?

 

Regards,

Jeff

 

Its not so much negative/positive comments but I think its ok and perhaps more respectful to restrict comments to comments about the original article and not people raising their own obsessions or whatever. After all we have general, off topic and the pit (for that sort of thing).

[joeblast]

PPFs are not open to the public, and that's part of the request here. But not to open all PPFs to the public...just kicking around ideas. The jist of this is to cut down on trolling in topics sensitive to such, so that productive discussion can take place as opposed to joking banter on it that isnt much on topic.

[Jeff]

Its not so much negative/positive comments but I think its ok and perhaps more respectful to restrict comments to comments about the original article and not people raising their own obsessions or whatever. After all we have general, off topic and the pit (for that sort of thing).

 

If the author was controlling it, would they allow dissent of their opinion (even if it was on point). I believe that there are many who would not.

 

PPFs are not open to the public, and that's part of the request here. But not to open all PPFs to the public...just kicking around ideas. The jist of this is to cut down on trolling in topics sensitive to such, so that productive discussion can take place as opposed to joking banter on it that isnt much on topic.

 

I agree that needless chatter (and heckling) is annoying for the author and the serious reader, but some would consider a counter argument as needless chatter.

[joeblast]

If the author was controlling it, would they allow dissent of their opinion (even if it was on point). I believe that there are many who would not.

 

 

I agree that needless chatter (and heckling) is annoying for the author and the serious reader, but some would consider a counter argument as needless chatter.

For me, what it boils down to, is this: Can the author of a dissenting opinion articulate his dissenting opinion, or is the dissent just going to wind up being a poo-poo'ing of the OP with no real counter argument...and when the counter is addressed, are they just going to keep taking up space in the thread saying basically the same thing over and over again?

 

This is the sort of thing that we're trying to remedy with this. A well articulated dissent can be a great motivator of the conversation and often prompts very good clarifications of the introduced premises. A poorly articulated dissent merely looks like trolling.

[Apech]

If the author was controlling it, would they allow dissent of their opinion (even if it was on point). I believe that there are many who would not.

 

 

I agree that needless chatter (and heckling) is annoying for the author and the serious reader, but some would consider a counter argument as needless chatter.

 

I still see an article submitted by a member - which presumably they have spent time and energy creating and want to share with others and specifically place in the articles section has a different status to a general post. But maybe that's just my view and so I will rest there (knowing I am and always will be right :) ).

[Jeff]

I still see an article submitted by a member - which presumably they have spent time and energy creating and want to share with others and specifically place in the articles section has a different status to a general post. But maybe that's just my view and so I will rest there (knowing I am and always will be right :) ).

 

Think about my concepts in the Christian Mysticism or the Transmission thread. I also "know" that I am right, but would you want me to present the information (left forever more) with no real debate on the topic...

 

I will also rest here...

[Basher]

Well then, OPs can request that mods edit/remove off-topic posts/comments. Simple as that.

 

(Almost) Nobody Loves a "smart-bottom"

(LOL) = Not Laugh Out Loud

[zerostao]

I still see an article submitted by a member - which presumably they have spent time and energy creating and want to share with others and specifically place in the articles section has a different status to a general post. But maybe that's just my view and so I will rest there (knowing I am and always will be right :) ).

that guile thing again

i agree with much , if not all, of your view about Contributed Articles. particularly the originality of the piece and other possible considerations to why a poster would choose to place in the articles section rather than a ppf or the open forums here. any poster could still choose to place an original piece out on the open forums for lively debate.

i also like the idea that a creator of an original article has the option to place it in an articles section with some form of custody assurance of providing safe gaurds against outright attacks or malicious trolling or way off topic remarks.

a personally created work with energy and time invested is a very personal thing and if we do go forward with this idea,

who knows, maybe someone would share content that they otherwise may not have due to the threat of a trolling attack.

i like the idea of the possibility that The Tao Bums Contributed Article section could become a collection containing gems and nuggets exclusive to The Tao Bums site and created by our own members.

[Apech]

Maybe just some macho Stewarding is the answer ... just hide the drivel and let the rest flow?

[BaguaKicksAss]

PPFs are not open to the public, and that's part of the request here. But not to open all PPFs to the public...just kicking around ideas. The jist of this is to cut down on trolling in topics sensitive to such, so that productive discussion can take place as opposed to joking banter on it that isnt much on topic.

 

If they were setup like PFFs it would be easy to make them public.

 

Hi BKA,

wouldn't the 20 mods then have the ability to "edit" each others threads ?

 

Yes of course, but we are all more mature than 10 years old here..... or if not they could lose their mod status? Just an idea. Just giving suggestions that would work with the forum software .

[zerostao]

"If they were setup like PFFs it would be easy to make them" public. "

i am not trying to over work the technicians, so this is encouraging news.

there would be some organizing of the articles already in CA section?

i like the idea of a ppf style mod system as opposed to anyone modding an article that they did not create.

part of the reason this discussion is taking place is that the ppf's are hidden from public view

and the ca's are in public view. i know this has already been mentioned but it is a major point of consideration.

also an article could be about anything and not just a personal practice.

i understand that ppf's are also used for things other than personal practice--but there is a reason we place our posts in a ppf, one of those reasons is the not in public view thing. articles not wishing to be publicly viewed could be placed in a ppf

and articles wanting public view placed in a ca section, so the only change is granting protections that are already given in a ppf to the ca section. i know i am being redundant- hopefully for the sake of clarity

Maybe just some macho Stewarding is the answer ... just hide the drivel and let the rest flow?

this new idea could be a way to allow less stewarding and less modding,

just sayin

[deci belle]

Ouiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii❤

 

Thank you to the mods who developed and presented this idea!

 

It has long been the suggestion of mods in the past for me to start a ppf. But that has always been unacceptable to me because reality is not protected, ultimately. Also, neither the ppf is nor the pit (where an increasing number of my threads are ending up now) are available to un-registered users of this forum.

 

What I do here must be real, or it just isn't an authentic product of reality, so my response to the mods' past suggestions is to state that my practice isn't private. Also, being as they are articles, my content isn't really subject to the ordinary philosophical discussion process.

 

But even more critically, since I cannot control the efforts of trolls and those ruled by an habitual intellectual apparatus (not to mention the recreational philosophers who carry on in their pastime as if they are never going to die and feel bereft whenever they cannot subject everything on this forum to this fun of theirs), I can only disappoint those who actually WANT to read what I write.

 

For a long time my domain has been the Contributed Articles section. That's what I've done from the very start of my tenure here on this forum. Whether people agree or not with my take on reality, and not ever inviting discussion, I have and express a distinct authority on the subject of Complete Reality praxis, having gone all the way myself. I'm just playing the song and telling the story myself~ I don't need any help, thank you. But why anyone would bother to disagree with my content is a mystery to me. It just seems like these people need to steal the show, or just be destructive, for the most part.

 

Either people are able or unable to avail themselves of what I produce here. But still the unhappy ones persist. Therefore it is very frustrating that I simply can no longer post my articles without them being obstructed or outright destroyed by the usual suspects over and over and over. Why the Contributed Articles section was finally and most recently buried in the General discussion section is (not quite) a mystery to me.

 

I would very much like to make the concession of posting in a protected, yet accessible to the un-registered user, Contributed Articles section.

 

Would people be able to submit posts to these threads and the author would then be able to include and/or respond but keep unusable posts from appearing on the protected thread? Or would comments be directed via PM?

[zerostao]

deci,

in a ppf, people can reply if the originator/mod of the ppf has not locked the topic/thread. if the topic is open to receive replies, then the originator/mod could choose to allow the post to stand or to hide it. the originator/mod can also hide entire threads and later could choose to have them re-appear. you could open a ppf just for the purpose of test driving, pushing the buttons etc

 

my idea is to allow these same controls that exist in the ppf already to be extended to the contributed articles area.

i also want to point out that this is an idea and in the initial idea stage, i opened this thread for input of criticism or ideas about this idea. i posted here in tech support becoz , this is where a member can suggest or ask about features on The Tao Bums site.

any final conversations on this idea will take place in the area where mods , engineer, and technicians, sean and trunk would

be involved in.

[thelerner]

Well then, OPs can request that mods edit/remove off-topic posts/comments. Simple as that.

Sounds like a lot of work and worms for the Mods.

Work of deleting posts. Worms of answering irate authors why post was deleted, then listening to counter arguments ...

[deci belle]

If mods did what r v says is so simple according to OPs wishes there would be no need for this thread.

 

Philosophical discussion is one thing, expounding Complete Reality is another.

 

How can mods be objective without first seeing their nature to open their dharma eye and see objective reality?

 

And we don't have any of those yet, to my knowledge.

 

The only time time anyone's thread was cleaned up at a poster's request (not even the OP) on a grand scale with resultant hoopla was when mod Taomeow was corrected by me on mod SereneBlue/Random/Pands'a thread titled Taoist Lineages.

 

To this day, those removed posts in the thread started for me by SereneBlue do not credit SereneBlue for starting the thread. Also, a few of those posts disappeared and are not on either thread. Evidently, I can't talk about the basis of taoist lineages on a thread titled just that if I actually know what I'm talking about (when certain mods are involved, of course).

 

This grand-dame clique is still going strong as evidenced by r v's steamy little mixed message PM to me when I posted on Panda's thread about her recent transmission experience. Evidently I'm not cool enough to post wis zem femme… hah!

 

Fortunately this clique is no longer corrupting the ranks of the moderators at this time.

 

The fact is, the mods are not qualified, in the objective sense, to carry out elimination of posts from my threads which I deem inappropriate. Since the mods cannot be impeccably objective by virtue of maturation of enlightening experience, it is simply too much to ask of them~ not to mention the added workload and drudgery of carrying out the mechanics of their webmastery… non?

 

Believe me, I wish (and have done so for a long time) that what r v's comment says above is actually possible~ but it's not.

[Flolfolil]

...

Edited March 6, 2015 by Flolfolil