Re the model for a doable anarch: let's alpha test it

[dawei]

hmm, sounds like the ability to create a post, similar to Personal section where the creator has complete editing rights over the whole thread.   Interesting.  Might be hard to program.

 

CCA's where the conversation is controlled by the creator.  

 

Yea... this sounds like the PPD.   

 

The difference between this proposed section and the PPF is that PPF is about what's of interest to a particular owner.  I post a lot of notes for myself there regarding Chen taiji, e.g..  No one will read it who is not practicing that.  So the audience for a PPF is very limited.  But this section would have all subjects -- and each and every one of them would be safe for the OP to explore, no one will have the right to challenge anything there, at the penalty of instant and permanent ban if the OP so chooses.  I don't know if it's doable technically but if it was, I would give each OP the mod controls in this section, just like in the PPF, but for purposes of the thread you create only.

 

Oh, and of course anything that is against the rules of the forum in general would be still moderated by the regular mods.  E.g. no one would be allowed to start a thread dedicated to harassing, belittling, attacking, or threatening another member. 

 

I think I do get the difference... it is simply a general PPD.  The technical problem is the OP having the reigns.   This gets done in the PPD because each person becomes a 'mod' of that PPD (I know you probably know this but speaking out loud so others understand)...  so they have control over every thread.

 

It could be jury rigged now, by creating a topic (in General area) and in the introduction telling people to hit the link to the same thread in the Personal section.  Each time someone puts a comment in the General thread put in a Please don't & redirect after it.  Maybe they'd learn .. or not. 

 

Not as clean as a real Controlled Conversation Area, but doable now. 

 

This seems the closest method to get it.  I would say that anyone who wants to do it, would have a sub-forum put in their PPD... maybe they are all the same name for identification.

 

Then there is a general running thread with a post to a new topic in the persons PPD Sub-... the OP would have the reigns.

 

The only other way is to create an entirely second set of PPDs and assign people each to an area they control... but it still isn't quite a single forum area idea.

 

On one hand we've lost people because they've gotten angry (and abusive) when their threads were high jacked.  On the other , when its a good topic in the General area, having someone delete or even change someone else's post is treading dangerous ground, unless they're clearly aware thats the risk of answering in the CCA area. 

 

I would think another reason this works better in the PPD is that staff is generally not expected to monitor that as much as the PPD owner really controls it as they like.

[Taomeow]

I see the difficulties. 

 

Alpha test, results negative so far.   A Deflate No Spirit section is impossible to uphold.  Just one rule -- respond with something  non-contentious, constructive, contemplative, harmoniously resonating -- or with nothing at all -- is THE rule that bends out of shape some people who obediently follow ten thousand other rules every day everywhere.  One rule -- but a rule that would make it impossible to hurt another human being.  Interesting input from all, big thank-you to all respondents.

 

How difficult can it be to say nothing at all when you have nothing good to say?..

 

Yet if there's no way to enforce it, people who live for to assert themselves at someone else's expense will make sure they banish the very thought of any place under the sun where they can't.  

 

A negative result is a result -- a scientists who thinks otherwise is biased from the start.  I'm not.  If it is shown clearly that this is impossible to do, I'll just take it to where it's possible to do.  I am mostly interested in the technicalities of such an endeavor -- its morality is clear to me as it is.  It's a moral thing to do, to not deflate someone else's spirit.  No-brainer, nothing to test.  But whether someone who doesn't believe in it can be shaped, by a One Rule place, into accepting this One moral standard -- that's under scrutiny.  Any result is a result. 

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

can we make a PPD with unrestricted "moderation" powers for all (signed up) members?

Furthermore, is it possible to chart and keep track of who is using what mod-power and when/where in this Alpha-Anarch PPD?

[dawei]

Just one rule -- respond with something  non-contentious, constructive, contemplative, harmoniously resonating -- or with nothing at all -- is THE rule that bends out of shape some people who obediently follow ten thousand other rules every day everywhere.  One rule -- but a rule that would make it impossible to hurt another human being.  Interesting input from all, big thank-you to all respondents.

 

How difficult can it be to say nothing at all when you have nothing good to say?..

 

Yet if there's no way to enforce it, people who live for to assert themselves at someone else's expense will make sure they banish the very thought of any place under the sun where they can't.  

 

Enforcement will always be an THE issue.

 

I reflected on what you said about the Women's Cultivation area and I was wondering it it wouldn't of been better (in hindsight) to leave it as a PPD...  it would of been better controlled but I hoped visibility was an asset.  I'm not sure anymore.

 

I wonder if 'doable anarch' is destined to become yet another oxymoron... more below.

 

can we make a PPD with unrestricted "moderation" powers for all (signed up) members?

 

Furthermore, is it possible to chart and keep track of who is using what mod-power and when/where in this Alpha-Anarch PPD?

 

That sounds like Lord of the Flies on TDB.  

 

Create a subforum where everyone is MOD and there is a free-for-all where you could end up deleting anyone else's posts in the end 

 

There is a board-wide 'mod' log... but that creates more work to monitor it... but yes, we can see what is going on.

 

I've been a part of something similar at two sites:

Failed:  An anything-goes section.  Any member could go in.  We said there were 'no rules'... it was shut down in one week...  I guess we opened the doors to Armageddon 

 

Worked:  A password entry is needed.  You also have to stand on one foot and touch your nose and recite as many sins you have committed in your life and predict how many more you will do...  The password doesn't seem to work until this is done 

 

So it can work.

 

In my mind, here would be the conditions:

1. It has to get approved by Sean 

2. Maybe need a Grand Puba assigned to oversee things... I really don't want staff taxed with it

3. Define rules and reporting and how it is handled.

 

I didn't really understand the concept at first and was at about 99% 'fuhgeddaboudit'...  I can now see the point of it... and maybe am at the mid-point...   which means if members want to continue then I'd need to do Step 1 above.  

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

That sounds like Lord of the Flies on TDB.  

 

Create a subforum where everyone is MOD and there is a free-for-all where you could end up deleting anyone else's posts in the end 

 

There is a board-wide 'mod' log... but that creates more work to monitor it... but yes, we can see what is going on.

 

I've been a part of something similar at two sites:

Failed:  An anything-goes section.  Any member could go in.  We said there were 'no rules'... it was shut down in one week...  I guess we opened the doors to Armageddon 

 

Worked:  A password entry is needed.  You also have to stand on one foot and touch your nose and recite as many sins you have committed in your life and predict how many more you will do...  The password doesn't seem to work until this is done 

 

So it can work.

 

In my mind, here would be the conditions:

1. It has to get approved by Sean 

2. Maybe need a Grand Puba assigned to oversee things... I really don't want staff taxed with it

3. Define rules and reporting and how it is handled.

 

I didn't really understand the concept at first and was at about 99% 'fuhgeddaboudit'...  I can now see the point of it... and maybe am at the mid-point...   which means if members want to continue then I'd need to do Step 1 above.  

 

 

It's all work, and every (signed up) member has to participate in the workload.

 

Everyone who uses or abuses their mod power has to own up to it as well and/or make amends.

 

We need someone to maintain mod-log monitering to ensure that every instance of mod-ly power be recorded and acknowledged.

 

Every instance of mod-power will have to be scrutinized (like a court room affair) by all (signed up) members of the alpha-anarchy test. members can, of course, opt out, but they are assumed to be opted in as their anarch responsibility.

 

 

Anarchy is about responsibility, not about abusing power, or even having power what so ever.  It is above all else, a matter of Equity.

 

Global/universal equality means no hierarchy or mods and admins.  it also means if you fuck up, you must appeal to your peers or accept whatever punishment fits your abuse of your power.

[thelerner]

I think Thelerner offered a possible tech approach, which I however didn't understand.    I will try posting the link to this thread in the Forum and Tech Support, see what mods might say.  

I started my idea here.  We'll see how well it works.

 ie..

*Note this is a Controlled Forum Topic (experiment)

Please direct all responses to the link below.

 

please do not post here: use this link: http://thedaobums.co...iment/?p=614157

 

Note responses added to this link will get a message, saying Yo send all posts to the link in the OP. 

Yet doing so is purely volunteery and should be done knowing that posts are controlled and edited by the OP's writer who wants a discussion that they can control and keep on track.   Hopefully not to abuse, except for this one, cause its mine and its mostly bogus.

 

Note this was originally we should be able to eat babies, but that was getting to dark even for me, so its puppies.   I think we should be able to puppies.  I'd like to be able to go into a McDonalds and order a Big Max, or Burger King and get a Wagger w/ cheese.  I think you should be able to pick the breed of your hot dog and every order should come with hushed puppies.

 

*direct all responses to http://thedaobums.co...iment/?p=614157

[dawei]

Every instance of mod-power will have to be scrutinized (like a court room affair) by all (signed up) members of the alpha-anarchy test. members can, of course, opt out, but they are assumed to be opted in as their anarch responsibility.

 

By who? WHo is finding those instances?  

 

I get what you mean... but the enforcement aspect is not clear in my mind

 

Anarchy is about responsibility, not about abusing power, or even having power what so ever.  It is above all else, a matter of Equity.

 

Global/universal equality means no hierarchy or mods and admins.  it also means if you fuck up, you must appeal to your peers or accept whatever punishment fits your abuse of your power.

 

I think you actually cleared up something for me... but it makes it more difficult.

 

Everyone is moderating everyone?

 

If someone deletes your post.... it is gone. How do you appeal or show it was deleted?

 

Appeal to a tribal council ?  Then vote who gets put off the Dao Island?  

 

How many votes confirm putting someone on a boat and lighting a fire to it?  (I'm really ready for the TV series Viking to come back) 

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

as an anarch community we will elect who will be tasked with what job in maintaining a peaceful-but-openly-free environment.

It might be by terms, it might be by rotation, it might be by sovereignty.  we'll vote on it.

And no electoral college bullshit - every individual vote counts equally.


As for post deletion, there ought be a process to involve the community and decide how the post should be addressed; deletion yea or nay.

We need an archiver of moderation activities to keep track of the un-announced deletions and edits.
We need a "chieftian" or "sage" for guidance in our anarchy-related practices (not as an authority figure per say, but as an authority on the subject none-the-less; experience and seniority and such).
We need entertainers and storytellers.
We need teachers.
we need a few billion dollars to establish a physical equivelant, but that's over time and not an immediate need. 

Edited March 14, 2015 by Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan

[dawei]

as an anarch community we will elect who will be tasked with what job in maintaining a peaceful-but-openly-free environment.

 

It might be by terms, it might be by rotation, it might be by sovereignty.  we'll vote on it.

 

And no electoral college bullshit - every individual vote counts equally.

 

 

As for post deletion, there ought be a process to involve the community and decide how the post should be addressed; deletion yea or nay.

 

We need an archiver of moderation activities to keep track of the un-announced deletions and edits.

We need a "chieftian" or "sage" for guidance in our anarchy-related practices (not as an authority figure per say, but as an authority on the subject none-the-less; experience and seniority and such).

We need entertainers and storytellers.

We need teachers.

we need a few billion dollars to establish a physical equivelant, but that's over time and not an immediate need. 

 

For the sake of conversation.... this can continue...

 

But what you describe is an-all-together-another-website...  not feasible within an existing TDB site... as I know it.

 

This may be getting too big in concept and maybe there is a need to re-focus is how to integrate it to this site.

[Marblehead]

Anarchy is simple.  Do what you can do.  Don't fuck with anyone.  Don't let anyone fuck with you.

[dawei]

Anarchy is simple.

 

Simple enough.

 

  Do what you can do. 

 

Ok... I get it.

 

Don't fuck with anyone.

 

Sounds good.

 

  Don't let anyone fuck with you.

 

 

Is that now when we hear ...."LETS GET READY TO RUMBLE ...." 

 

[dogson]

That video clip is a total case in point...wow... "let's get ready to rumble" in our culture is synonymous with "let's do it!" but it's actually saying, "let's get ready to FIGHT."

 

This is why I'm skeptical about this idea... the idea of doing anything has become synonymous with fighting in our psyche.

[Marblehead]

Is that now when we hear ...."LETS GET READY TO RUMBLE ...." 

That's different.  Actually, it cycles around to point Two:  Do what you can do.  (Willing participants.)

[Marblehead]

That video clip is a total case in point...wow... "let's get ready to rumble" in our culture is synonymous with "let's do it!" but it's actually saying, "let's get ready to FIGHT."

 

This is why I'm skeptical about this idea... the idea of doing anything has become synonymous with fighting in our psyche.

I understand your feelings regarding this.  Problem is that there are many on this planet who will take advantage of others in a heartbeat.  We need either present ourself as someone who is not to be messed with or we need be able to defend ourself when the need arises.

 

Now, if everyone were true anarchists these conditions would never arise.

[soaring crane]

 

Ground rules for anarchy? You gotta' be BSing me!

I find it a challenge to identify a system with more totalitarian tendencies than anarchism.

[Daeluin]

Just one rule -- respond with something  non-contentious, constructive, contemplative, harmoniously resonating -- or with nothing at all -- is THE rule that bends out of shape some people who obediently follow ten thousand other rules every day everywhere.  One rule -- but a rule that would make it impossible to hurt another human being. 

 

How difficult can it be to say nothing at all when you have nothing good to say?..

 

This is great. And the principle here is resonant with Liu Yiming's principle of creation within control leading from post-celestial to pre-celestial refinement. I used that principle to show how the post-celestial ming of destiny can be intentionally refined into the pre-celestial energy body free of destiny in the Working With Destiny thread.

 

 

 

Then there are the Ways of conquest within generation and of generation within conquest. Conquest within generation is the postcelestial Way of following the course. Generation within conquest is the precelestial Way of inverting the course.

 

If students are able to know generation and conquest, and to understand inverting and following the course, they can bring the principles of the five agents to achievement.

 

 

So when someone says something we disagree with - that disagreement is a reaction, and will typically cause a closing off and separation. If then someone says something, usually it is attached to maintaining that polarity and will manifest in a controlling 5 phase dynamic.

 

The trick is to avoid closing off, to hone in on where and how we feel reactive and keep that spot open, dissolve it and use it to create new energy there to prevent that closure from occurring. This is resting upon what controls us and to transfrom that sense of control into a sense of one-ness through the process of creative energy. This is a dynamic of transformation, change, evolution, and it is important to realize that the heart of this process is one of tearing down the walls of one's personal fortress.

 

This is hard to control. It is very likely a poster may use this dynamic correctly and attempt to be part of the family, only to have the energy they bring reacted to by the OP's own inability to be open to certain energies, even though those energies may not be attempting to control, but only to nurture and transform themselves so that they fit in.

 

I have an easier time envisioning a forum dedicated to careful moderation with an emphasis upon this dynamic.... than a place where the OP can control things however they like. The former enforces unbiased growth, the later enforces creation of cliques.

Edited March 15, 2015 by Daeluin

[Daeluin]

I suppose another catch of properly applying the principle of generation within conquest is the idea of over-generation. We had a previous member who would post nothing but creative posts, but they were so enormous that they dominated those threads without allowing a healthy cycling of energies.

 

So it is important to generate within the constraints of the particular topic, but to correctly apply this principle is to drive momentum towards pre-celestial refinement. As such the generation within conquest needs to avoid creating in directions that travel too far away from the topic (the root), as this prevents the heart of the OP from being nurtured.

 

Perhaps the OP and forum mods could vote on whether or not certain posts are helping to create the desired balance or not, and this is what would determine if a person could continue posting in a thread. If their posts take the person to the edge of what we might call the circle of balance, they have one remaining posting opportunity to bring them back into balance, but once they are deemed out of balance, they are prohibited from posting.

[dawei]

This is hard to control. It is very likely a poster may use this dynamic correctly and attempt to be part of the family, only to have the energy they bring reacted to by the OP's own inability to be open to certain energies, even though those energies may not be attempting to control, but only to nurture and transform themselves so that they fit in.

 

I have an easier time envisioning a forum dedicated to careful moderation with an emphasis upon this dynamic.... than a place where the OP can control things however they like. The former enforces unbiased growth, the later enforces creation of cliques.

 

 

Perhaps the OP and forum mods could vote on whether or not certain posts are helping to create the desired balance or not, and this is what would determine if a person could continue posting in a thread. If their posts take the person to the edge of what we might call the circle of balance, they have one remaining posting opportunity to bring them back into balance, but once they are deemed out of balance, they are prohibited from posting.

 

I think these comments are along the lines of why I'm getting stuck at understanding how this is really any freer than the normal posting area... reducing it down to one rule is still a rule of conformity... and if you don't conform, your not allowed to post(?)... that seems like less freedom.

[soaring crane]

I think these comments are along the lines of why I'm getting stuck at understanding how this is really any freer than the normal posting area... reducing it down to one rule is still a rule of conformity... and if you don't conform, your not allowed to post(?)... that seems like less freedom.

Precisely. One rule. Break it and you're banned. Guaranteed someone would post something in the gray area and then it's back to the committee...

[Daeluin]

That's why I'm trying to tie this rule to principle, and to explore how this principle might be maintained somewhat organically.

 

Forums are like target practice. The OP sets up a target so people can aim at it. Some people do this and have fun. Others want to have fun without having to aim at the target, and they just do as they please.

 

The option I was exploring would allow posters to post so long as they are aiming at the target and nurturing harmony, regardless of what else their post does. If they aim deliberately outside of the target, they are taking themselves out of the thread all on their own - we just need a way to identify this that allows the principle of anarchy to remain in operation. If people want to leave the conversation and start another one that is up to them, but it seems there is interest here for those who wish to remain on topic to have that option without those who don't disabling its momentum.

 

The more specific system I mentioned might start with the OP and or mods, of this specialized forum, to vote on how well a post nurtures balance within the realm of the topic. In most cases it would take multiple postings to get one to the edge of this realm where they would be in danger of being banned from further posting in this specific thread, and they would be able to see where their momentum leads after each post. Perhaps this could be made more anarchy-like by allowing all people to vote, but in order to get a sense of how well this works I'd recommend a more controlled environment to start with.

 

The idea would be to tweak this method to arrive in the range of the desired amount of protection for the natural flow of the OP, allowing unexpected creative unfoldings but preventing natural disasters.

 

We all know how humanity tends to laugh in the face of natural balances. Just look at what lottery winners do with their money. A system like this would merely aim at pointing people at the point of balance, making it necessary for them to change and adapt rather than simply controlling from a fixed perspective.

[Taomeow]

No committees.  One rule and the rule of one. 

 

Monarchy has always been the only model of doable anarchy in human history, as much as anyone raised on the ideals of democracy may be loath to realize.  This is what TDB is, incidentally.  One owner, one sovereign, and one rule -- the mandate of heaven.  In a fractal fashion I want to see if this model can be extended to a small subsection which would consist of any number of fiefdoms, with one overlord over one thread in each.  The thread he or she creates.  

 

One king, one queen, one tyrant, one totalitarian dictator.  Not a pack, not a gang, not a stampede.  One owner, one thread to own.  Not all that horrible if you think about it?  And bam you're banned would apply to one topic only.  How horrible can it be?  You are banned from Birds And Bees Thread, but this does not mean you are banned from the Mice And Men thread by the same OP in the same section -- and most certainly not from anywhere else on TDB.  What's so intolerable about Birds And Bees proceeding without you derailing, attacking, sarcastically invalidating, etc., what the OP wants to discuss with other Birds And Bees aficionados?  You're allergic to bees, you want to chase them away?  No you can't.  We get honey where you get your allergies, so please protect yourself and go elsewhere.  Or the Queen Bee of the topic will expedite your departure.

 

THAT kind of an idea. 

Edited March 15, 2015 by Taomeow

[Daeluin]

I think these comments are along the lines of why I'm getting stuck at understanding how this is really any freer than the normal posting area... reducing it down to one rule is still a rule of conformity... and if you don't conform, your not allowed to post(?)... that seems like less freedom.

 

To return to dao we must conform to dao.

 

When creation unfolds at first it doesn't conform, but quickly finds it needs to, and balance is found between new expression and maintaining connection to the supporting foundation.

 

When creation avoids conformity we get demons.

 

What Taomeow describes is what creates War between countries.

[Taomeow]

Nah, the ax to grind someone might bring (like, e.g., the one you brought into this-here thread) would be taken away, is all.     

[Taomeow]

Just as an aside, reading a lot about Huna right now and Ho'o'ponono (radical forgiveness), I practice this technique of just saying "I love you" continuously, feeling it, and taking 100% responsibility for everything that comes into my experience. It's amazing, and it also has a leveling effect, in the sense that when I'm absorbed in that consciousness and that intent, I really don't have any desire to put my opinion forth anymore. I've been thinking about that a lot - about how "I love you" neutralizes all these thoughts and opinions about things, and how perhaps the nature of ideas and developing and gathering information is by its own nature contentious. 

 

I've come across a similar practice proposed by a Tibetan buddhist. The very first thought with which you meet another creature, human or ant, must be "I wish you happiness," however it only works if it is the very first thought, not an afterthought.  In other words, if that's your spontaneous reaction to meeting another being. 

 

Is that how it happens for you -- or do you think whatever first thought and then self-correct to "I love you?"  I've tried this, and I beleive there's a difference between spontaneous benevolence which does indeed change the world for the better, and self-policing for benevolence, the latter being a form of repression of your own real current state that does not benefit the world and is long term damaging to the practitioner.

 

However, practice makes perfect.  A thread where you either come at the default setting on "I love you" and "I wish you happiness" toward the OP or else don't go there at all could be a start?  What do you reckon?   

[Daeluin]

Nah, the ax to grind someone might bring (like, e.g., the one you brought into this-here thread) would be taken away, is all.     

 

Right. But we're each already sovereigns of our own countries, and when we have some other monarch take away our ax to grind, we tend to treat it as a direct oppositional encounter.

 

Perhaps we can post in another thread by that sovereign, but unless we've dealt with any feeling of opposition to this person, our posts (regardless of their words) might continue to transmit an oppositional momentum.

 

The ax I brought was an interest to accomplish your goal without creating an oppositional dynamic. Someone here had a quote in their footer, people will forget what you said, but won't forget how you made them feel. I find this incredibly poignant, more so because people always tend to look at the words to explain the feelings, making it difficult to ever actually resolve the feelings.

 

So my solution was to allow a scenario where seemingly natural consequences would give a person a feeling of how well their posts are contributing to the heart of the topic. If I make three posts in a topic, and continuously get anonymous reflection that I am not nurturing the topic, then if I end up getting banned, I don't have anyone to point a finger at in answer to my hurt ego except myself.

 

I think this is an important consideration, but perhaps not one easy to pull off.

 

In any case, I sense the ax I brought might not be welcome, so I intend to withdraw, unless directed otherwise.