"Well" and Anarchy

[Karl]

Give me a fucking break.

 

My defense is an attack on him?

 

So am I to stand and let him punch and slap me  about as so pleases a small man with small mind and some power?

 

I have hands off him and not even call on him to prove things when he kept screaming at me for proofs that fit his definations.  I definately declined to prove things which are common sense and but made no sense to someone like him.  I had ask him to go to Davos  for that since that is in his neck of the woods.

 

Hey, totally Random Mr angry dude ;-)

[Marblehead]

Okay.  This board has been on my mind so I will make one more statement.

 

Back when I first joined this site there was no moderation.  None.  The only power was the owner, Sean, and he pretty much only did suspensions and bans,

 

At that time there were a number of young dudes constantly making insults toward other members and even threatening physical violence toward anyone who disagreed with anything they had said.  (I was threatened a couple times and I offered to give them my address whenever they were ready to come to Florida and die.)

 

Sean finally got tired of looking after the ugly members and requested members to perform the tasks of moderation to attend to the violent members.  That was the only goal stated by Sean.

 

Two of the best members this site has ever had, Mal and Stigweard, accepted the challenge.  They performed well but other moderators saw visions of way to get control of other people so they started building on Sean's initial goal.

 

Mal and Stigweard saw where this was headed and protested.  They even tried to do away with moderation.  I was asked to support their effort but as I was not a moderator I was unaware of what they saw coming.  I had to support Sean's initial goal because I agreed with it.  No post of personal insults or threats of violence.  I mean, really, that should have been a no-brainer.

 

Mal and Stigweard stopped posting after the power hogs won out over the True Taoists.  For whatever the reason Sean accepted this new path for his site.  I thought it was a bad decision but I kept it to myself as, afterall, it is his site.

 

So the positions of Administration and Moderation has gradually evolved to the point where this site has now began down a path totally against the Way of Tao and toward, in my opinion, a path of destruction.  I refuse to walk this path.

 

We now have a site that has only the power of the wolf and the sheep have no chance to live a life in peace and contentment.

 

The site has become a fascist dictatorship not much different from Nazi Germany.  The SS are the members who will delete the post of anyone who does not fully agree with what they have said.  No one has freedom of speech in any thread that is "Owned" by another member.  Bullshit will abound.  This will become a site for spreading bullshit and lies.  And there will be no one who has the power to challenge them.

 

Back in the old days I was shocked when I found out that the Personal Practice Forums had "Ownership" powers.  That means that anything any member posted in any of those threads could be deleted by the "Owner".  So I stopped reading those sub-forums.

 

Then, not too long ago it was decided that a new sub-forum should be created, it is called "Wei Wu Wei" so that there would be more space on the site for bullshit and lies where bullshit could be posted unchallenged.  I spoke against the establishing of this sub-forum but was out voted.

 

Now, almost the entire site has "Ownership" controls such that free speech has been denied all the members in any thread that is "Owned" by another member.  If this trend continues it will be a site totally dominated by bullshit and lies and there will be no discussions whatever about the Way of Tao.  I mean, what value is a Taoist site that operates totally counter to the Way of Tao?

 

Sure, people will still talk about masturbation.  How nice.

 

And BTW, the membership had nothing to say regarding these new "Ownership" controls.  The laws were slapped on the members without an opportunity for discussion and I'm feel in my heart that even if it would have been discussed whatever the members had to say would have been nothing more than pissing in the wind.

 

I just don't see how a Taoist can accept these new rules.  And let us not forget, The more laws a society has the more criminals there will be.  The criminals will hide in the mountains in order to avoid capture and punishment.

 

 

At the beginning of this thread I voiced my objections.  I will not speak if there is some power above me who can make it appear that I have said nothing. 

 

Where our path has taken us I now regret not supporting the two best members this site has ever had, Mal and Stigweard. 

 

My hope is that this site return to the path of Tao.

 

Be well and Take care,

Jim  (Marblehead)

[blue eyed snake]

[Chang]

As I have stated previously the idea of "Self ownership" of threads was created with the best of intentions. It was the brainchild of either Dawei or Sean and they have implemented the scheme. In that respect it was very much a case of "I know what is best and you will get it whether you like it or not."

 

The reasoning behind it was to create a system of "self moderation" whereby the influence of a third party (a Moderator) would prove unnecessary. Alas it would appear that they have sown the wind and reaped the whirlwind.

 

At it's best the system prevents abusive behaviour by a member who may post unsavoury comments in anothers thread - the thread owner can simply make them disappear. It does not however prevent the thread owner from posting unsavoury comments in his/her own thread.

 

The whole concept in my view smacks of liberal intellectualism and is the sort of thing a bunch of well intentions students would come up with in a coffee house.

 

But as I have stated previously what has been done can be undone but this would require a sea change in the thinking of both Sean and dawei. Don't hold your breath.

[Marblehead]

Thanks for the response Chang.

 

I have already stated my understanding above.

 

Sean is owner of this site and Dawei is administrator.  I have no power except to welcome new members to the site.

 

Like I said, if this is the path Sean wishes his site to travel down (connotations included with that word) then that is the way it should be.  It's not the Way of Tao but who cares about that?

 

BTW  There has always been a "Report" button for the purpose of reporting abusive (which are personal insults) posts.  That law has always been here.  If more laws are needed then apparently that law has not been enforced.

 

More laws = more criminals = more people running to the mountains to hide.

 

I'm not holding my breath.  But I can still run even though it would be very painful.

[dawei]

As I have stated previously the idea of "Self ownership" of threads was created with the best of intentions. It was the brainchild of either Dawei or Sean and they have implemented the scheme. 

 

I already stated that it was an idea from a member... and that was discussed openly quite a bit... and then many discussions occurred along the way developing and testing with the same member.  

 

http://thedaobums.com/topic/37817-re-the-model-for-a-doable-anarch-lets-alpha-test-it/

[dawei]

Thanks for the response Chang.

 

I have already stated my understanding above.

 

Sean is owner of this site and Dawei is administrator.  I have no power except to welcome new members to the site.

 

Like I said, if this is the path Sean wishes his site to travel down (connotations included with that word) then that is the way it should be.  It's not the Way of Tao but who cares about that?

 

BTW  There has always been a "Report" button for the purpose of reporting abusive (which are personal insults) posts.  That law has always been here.  If more laws are needed then apparently that law has not been enforced.

 

More laws = more criminals = more people running to the mountains to hide.

 

I'm not holding my breath.  But I can still run even though it would be very painful.

 

Can you show me where one of your 4,000 posts, since the implementation about 10 months ago, has some issue?

[Marblehead]

I already stated that it was an idea from a member... and that was discussed openly quite a bit... and then many discussions occurred along the way developing and testing with the same member.  

 

http://thedaobums.com/topic/37817-re-the-model-for-a-doable-anarch-lets-alpha-test-it/

I saw the discussion of the Wei Wu Wei sub-forum becoming "Owner" controlled and I protested to no avail.  I did not see any discussion concerning all of the forums and sub-forums becoming "Owner" controlled.

[Chang]

I already stated that it was an idea from a member... and that was discussed openly quite a bit... and then many discussions occurred along the way developing and testing with the same member.  

 

http://thedaobums.com/topic/37817-re-the-model-for-a-doable-anarch-lets-alpha-test-it/

 

I fear you underestimate your influence in bringing about the present situation. Whilst you may not have provided the seed you have sown and tended it to fruition. It is proving a bitter fruit to many.

[Marblehead]

Can you show me where one of your 4,000 posts, since the implementation about 10 months ago, has some issue?

 

I think I posted once in a PPF because I was requested to do so.

 

I have not posted or even read any of the posts in the Wei Wu Wei sub-forum.

 

As soon as the public announcement was posted that additional sub-forums have "Owner" control I stopped looking at all of those sub-forums as well.

 

This and one other thread in Off Topic are the only threads I have looked at and posted to.

[shanlung]

As I have stated previously the idea of "Self ownership" of threads was created with the best of intentions.  

 

 

Isnt there a saying that the road to hell is path with good and finest of intentions?

 

I recalled celebrating the fall of the Shah of Iran only to see Ayatollahs coming to the front.

And I organised and demonstrated against US in Vietnam and cheered to see them go only to see the birth of Killing Fields

 

We saw the death of Osama which seemed to herald the birth of ISIL

 

I wasn't sure of the destruction of Saddam and Gadaffi and Mubarak, and I think the politicians in Europe will sell their fucking souls to bring them back to life and in power again.

 

Whatever campaign it might be seems to start with book burnings.  Be that in Germany so as not to whip up anti begging bowls so rapes and thefts and assaults forbiddened in order not to frighten the people there. 

 

Whenever I hear kumbayahs being sang, I smell something very very rotten.

[Brian]

Efforts to control and manipulate complex dynamic systems, regardless how sincere or well-intentioned, rarely yield the hoped-for results. This is a cornerstone of my personal philosophy.

 

The DDJ speaks to this as well.

[Marblehead]

Isnt there a saying that the road to hell is path with good and finest of intentions?

Yes.  ... paved with good intentions.

 

I'm not arguing the intentions.  I am arguing the application thereof.

 

My intuition has shown me visions of disaster.  I trust my intuition more than I trust my or any one else's rational thoughts.

[Marblehead]

Efforts to control and manipulate complex dynamic systems, regardless how sincere or well-intentioned, rarely yield the hoped-for results. This is a cornerstone of my personal philosophy.

 

The DDJ speaks to this as well.

 

You know I have no fear of disagreeing with you.  But here I just have to fucking agree with you.

[Chang]

 

 

Whenever I hear kumbayahs being sang, I smell something very very rotten.

 

Just in case some members are unfamiliar with what is meant by kunbayahs being sung - here we go. Feel free to sing along.

 

[Karl]

Man does not live by forum alone.

 

[Brian]

Just in case some members are unfamiliar with what is meant by kunbayahs being sung - here we go. Feel free to sing along.

 

I must say, that is spectacularly bad lip-synching. Perhaps it originated in another language and is really a case of "dubs disease"?

[Karl]

Dubs disease LOL

[shanlung]

 

 

The DDJ speaks to this as well.

For a forum supposedly packed with Taoists and professing Taoist, we all never really on that path or forgotten ..

 

 

 

Chapter 29

Those who wish to take the world and control it

I see that they cannot succeed

The world is a sacred instrument

One cannot control it

The one who controls it will fail

The one who grasps it will lose

Chapter 57

 

Achieve the realm by not meddling.

How do I know it is like that? By this:

The more regulations

The poorer the people.

The more sharp weapons

The more troubled the country.

The cleverer the people

The more distractions.

The wider the knowledge of law,

The more there are thieves and rogues.

Edited January 29, 2016 by shanlung

[Apech]

Man does not live by forum alone.

 

 

Speak for yourself.

[shanlung]

Just in case some members are unfamiliar with what is meant by kunbayahs being sung - here we go. Feel free to sing along.

 

 

 

I was actually singing and leading others in a circle singing this song in the early 70s against the wicked Americans fighting in Vietnam.  Never felt more righteous in my life until the killing fields started.

[Apech]

@ Marblehead : I think your memory of the Mal Stigweard thing is a bit garbled - I lived through that as a mod and they were on opposite sides of debate.  But it's water under the bridge now.

 

Owner permissions:

 

Two points really.  1 ) This idea was never suitable for the main part of the board - especially General Dis.  which is of the nature of a free flowing conversation - regularly off topic or tangential, humour, asides, contributions from a personal perspective, lively ... in other words like an actual human conversation.  There is an argument for certain of the subs.  For instance Taoist Texts where you want everyone to keep strictly to the text under discussion and in the right order of chapters - more control needed.  PPF's - yes of course people should be able to moderate their own records - that makes sense.  Other specialist subs. like Buddhist - well maybe but probably not.

 

2 )  It's clear that the board software doesn't really support this concept properly - because it allows those with owner permissions to hide and change things for which they don't actually have such permissions - i.e. other peoples threads and content.  So in this sense it's only approximately in operation anyway.  It opens the door to those of us who like game play, NLP and all that - which as far as I'm concerned is just a load of mind-fuck which we could do without.

 

Moderation rules used to be very simple - no ad hominem insults.   Add to that some rules about undesirable content, spam, porn, race hate and so on.  That was it really. Then the rules are clear.

 

Had I not sleep walked through the introduction of this I would have raised a voice at the time.  So now I would say to paraphrase Ronald Reagan 'tear down those owner permissions'  ....Please.

[Chang]

The introduction was gradual as these things tend to be and we did not really see what we were getting until it had already arrived. Much like mass immigration.

[Marblehead]

@ Marblehead : I think your memory of the Mal Stigweard thing is a bit garbled - I lived through that as a mod and they were on opposite sides of debate.  But it's water under the bridge now.

Yes, you were there.  You are one of the oldest (membership wise) of our members.  But remember, they were first to be moderators, first to resign, and then they opposed moderation.  Eventually they gave up and left the site.

[Apech]

Yes, you were there.  You are one of the oldest (membership wise) of our members.  But remember, they were first to be moderators, first to resign, and then they opposed moderation.  Eventually they gave up and left the site.

 

 

Yes the first mod team was Mal, Stig, TM ,Trunk and Cat ... Stig resigned - I think that's when I was called up by Mal.

 

Anyway that was then and this is now.    for better or worse.