Locking threads, discuss it here

[moment]

Earl Grey is suspended for 60 days.

 

This is the remainder of the initial 90 day suspension issued by Trunk (and mentioned in the opening post of this thread) for the personal takedown of members - a behavior he again engaged in, in two separate threads.

 

This is the final warning.
 

Another suspension will not be issued to Earl Grey for this behavior. If he returns from this suspension and again engages in a personal takedown of any member of this community he will be permanently banned.

•  1

steve responded to this

---

 

We must be careful not to store up the teachings as only conceptual understanding lest that conceptual understanding becomes a block to wisdom. The teachings are not ideas to be collected, but a path to be followed.

     - TWR The Tibetan Yogas of Dream and Sleep
 

•  
•  
• PREV
•  
• 1
•  
• 2
•  
• 3
•  
• 4
•  
• Page 4 of 4  

 This topic is now closed to further replies. NOT TRUE HERE!!

[moment]

I guess Earl Grey was reported for being confrontational  on the thread "Mona Lisa mark under lip".

If people have the postings handy, that could be worthy of this uproar, please talk about it here.

 

@cheya 

 

@ilumairen

[ilumairen]

I have briefly unlocked the earl grey moderation thread, for members to voice their thoughts, concerns, and criticisms.

[Nungali]

How is 'personal take down'  defined here ?  Seriously, I dont know , I even looked the term up , there are deconstructive  definitions , a wrestling definition .... I thought  'urban lingo', looked that up but its about picking up people for sex .  I am supposing it has  specific meaning here . 

 

I suppose that topic IS closed to further replies  but not announcements .

 

That is not uncommon; the other site I am on has a suspension log that gives notification of suspensions, periods and reasons . I feel this is important . But they dont allow 'replies' ... it just gets too messy and undermines their authority ... but its a very different site than this one  .

 

Some people  here seem to think its different here and should be done a different way .  Its assumed people and mods  are coming from   a 'different perspective'  ..... but perhaps they are not ?

[Nungali]

... posted this before I read the thread    post above

 

Edited September 22, 2020 by Nungali

[moment]

8 minutes ago, Nungali said:

... posted this before I read the thread above

 

Wow!  Within minutes, of this thread going up!

 

I know the average age of regulars is fairly old, but it is starting to feel like an old people's place now.

This being said by an old man!  LOL

Edited September 22, 2020 by moment

[Nungali]

10 minutes ago, moment said:

Wow!  Within minutes, of this thread going up!

 

I had to edit that .

 

10 minutes ago, moment said:

 

I know the average age of regulars is fairly old, but it is starting to feel like an old people's place now.

This being said by an old man!  LOL

 

?   Why , dont get it .   

 

are the young being bumped off in a daobums reverse coronavirus  situation ?

 

I seem to recall a few kerfuffles where new people that are young complain about some members opinions and info becasue they are 'old' and feel a hierarchy does not support them due to their young  age  (instead of the immaturity present in their claims ,  thinking and / or presentation )  .

 

And it seems a lot of older members have left .

 

Maybe I missed the sarcasm  though ....   and are just old and confused

 

 

 

 

 

[doc benway]

16 minutes ago, Nungali said:

How is 'personal take down'  defined here ?  Seriously, I dont know , I even looked the term up , there are deconstructive  definitions , a wrestling definition .... I thought  'urban lingo', looked that up but its about picking up people for sex .  I am supposing it has  specific meaning here . 

 

I suppose that topic IS closed to further replies  but not announcements .

 

That is not uncommon; the other site I am on has a suspension log that gives notification of suspensions, periods and reasons . I feel this is important . But they dont allow 'replies' ... it just gets too messy and undermines their authority ... but its a very different site than this one  .

 

Some people  here seem to think its different here and should be done a different way .  Its assumed people and mods  are coming from   a 'different perspective'  ..... but perhaps they are not ?

 

If you would like to see how personal takedowns are being defined here, search on Earl Grey’s content. He can’t help himself, it seems. It is pervasive. His time here is a masterclass...  Maybe it’s just method acting, I don’t know... Both of welkin’s recent threads, Earl’s very recent, and hidden by him, takedown of someone asking simple questions in the Cultivator’s Club. Note to self - Maybe I’ll unhide that for educational purposes. 

 

If you can’t see the problem with Earl here for yourself my words won’t help. Maybe a little like the Trump problem in the US, some see him as a problem, some as a friend, some as a leader. No one can help the other to see a different possibility. Five mods agree it’s a problem for the forum.

 

You can all blow it up or move on. I’m tired of discussing Earl. I really tried to understand him and I think I do, but his poor treatment of others, especially the vulnerable, is finished here.

 

And shockingly, he’s got yet another chance...

ttfn 

[EmeraldHead]

Earl Grey has a habit of putting people or things he doesn't like OFF/DOWN! He would throw a lot of people out of this forum and impose some serious rules if he could. He seems to be a stable person by mundane standards but really he seems like Aladeen the dictator in playing games with strangers.

[moment]

6 minutes ago, steve said:

 

If you would like to see how personal takedowns are being defined here, search on Earl Grey’s content. He can’t help himself, it seems. It is pervasive. His time here is a masterclass...  Maybe it’s just method acting, I don’t know... Both of welkin’s recent threads, Earl’s very recent, and hidden by him, takedown of someone asking simple questions in the Cultivator’s Club. Note to self - Maybe I’ll unhide that for educational purposes. 

 

If you can’t see the problem with Earl here for yourself my words won’t help. Maybe a little like the Trump problem in the US, some see him as a problem, some as a friend, some as a leader. No one can help the other to see a different possibility. Five mods agree it’s a problem for the forum.

 

You can all blow it up or move on. I’m tired of discussing Earl. I really tried to understand him and I think I do, but his poor treatment of others, especially the vulnerable, is finished here.

 

And shockingly, he’s got yet another chance...

ttfn 

 

"If you can’t see the problem with Earl here for yourself my words won’t help. Maybe a little like the Trump problem in the US, some see him as a problem, some as a friend, some as a leader. No one can help the other to see a different possibility."

 

What a cheap shot!

[doc benway]

18 minutes ago, moment said:

 

"If you can’t see the problem with Earl here for yourself my words won’t help. Maybe a little like the Trump problem in the US, some see him as a problem, some as a friend, some as a leader. No one can help the other to see a different possibility."

 

What a cheap shot!

 

Why is that?

[Nungali]

20 minutes ago, moment said:

 

"If you can’t see the problem with Earl here for yourself my words won’t help. Maybe a little like the Trump problem in the US, some see him as a problem, some as a friend, some as a leader. No one can help the other to see a different possibility."

 

What a cheap shot!

 

 

I just wanted a definition of a particular action that is against the rules and  that one can be suspended for .  It appears I have to read EG's content  and with   MY  discernment     figure that out myself ?   'ceptin its hidden !

 

But now maybe unhidden for educational purposes  ......  oh dear .     That was my complaint about sweepin stuff under the carpet in the first place !

 

Looks like we have departed from

 

'plain ol speakin'  again

 

 

Spoiler

 

 

... or maybe not  ?

[moment]

6 minutes ago, steve said:

 

Why is that?

 

Comparing EG supporters to Trump supporters?  BTW, I see the possibilities just fine!

You are not dense, so I have to believe you are leading me on, so why would you do that?

Oh well, it is about time to move on.

[doc benway]

My point is we see his behavior differently and explaining and arguing doesn’t seem to change it. It wasn’t intended as an insult. Sorry about that.

 

 

[doc benway]

21 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

 

I just wanted a definition of a particular action that is against the rules and  that one can be suspended for .  It appears I have to read EG's content  and with   MY  discernment     figure that out myself ?

Yes, I believe any reasonable reader should be able to figure it out, if they choose to.

Personal - directed at an individual, as in the derailing of both recent threads started by welkin.

Takedown - as in dismantling, destroying, beating down.

 

Quote

 

   'ceptin its hidden !

Ask Earl about that one 

 

Quote

 

But now maybe unhidden for educational purposes  ......  oh dear .     That was my complaint about sweepin stuff under the carpet in the first place !

Earl hid it for his own reasons.

I’m a bit uncomfortable unhiding it but going to check with the team about that.

 

Quote

 

Looks like we have departed from

 

'plain ol speakin'  again

It’s only as complicated as you make it.

 

Quote

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

... or maybe not  ?

 

[ilumairen]

20 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

 

I just wanted a definition of a particular action that is against the rules and  that one can be suspended for .  It appears I have to read EG's content  and with   MY  discernment     figure that out myself ?   'ceptin its hidden !

 

But now maybe unhidden for educational purposes  ......  oh dear .     That was my complaint about sweepin stuff under the carpet in the first place !

 

Looks like we have departed from

 

'plain ol speakin'  again

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

... or maybe not  ?

:sigh:

 

In plain speak this board has a “insult policy.” It is old, and was repeatedly crossed in the wild west days of the forum but it does exist. Here it is again for anyone who hasn’t read it, or has forgotten it:

 

 

As Sean put it, “Basically No personal attacks.” 

*****

 

You were a participant in the now locked but not hidden Mona Lisa thread, and the member hidden thread which preceded it. 

 

The thread Steve referred to was in eg’s ppd, and hidden by eg.

 

So please slow down a bit on the innuendos.

[liminal_luke]

@moment

 

Here´s a brief excerpt from an Earl Grey post in the Mona Lisa thread I find problematic.

 

If your ego matched your skill, you'd be quiet. 

 

If your actions matched your words, you'd be quiet. 

 

If you knew what's good for you, you'd be quiet. 

 

Can you imagine yourself writing these words?  Does the tone feel respectful or supportive or constructive in any way?  If a member habitually took such a stance vis a vis other members and you were a mod, would you let it go?

 

 

[Nungali]

1 hour ago, ilumairen said:

:sigh:

 

In plain speak this board has a “insult policy.” It is old, and was repeatedly crossed in the wild west days of the forum but it does exist. Here it is again for anyone who hasn’t read it, or has forgotten it:

 

 

As Sean put it, “Basically No personal attacks.” 

*****

 

You were a participant in the now locked but not hidden Mona Lisa thread, and the member hidden thread which preceded it. 

 

The thread Steve referred to was in eg’s ppd, and hidden by eg.

 

But during this last fiasco  Welkin was insulting people left right and centre . I even pointed it out and you said  " sigh ... I know " .

 

I know  more then two  members  that are confused by the standard .

 

1 hour ago, ilumairen said:

 

So please slow down a bit on the innuendos.

 

Okay , I will slow down on both  innuendo and 'plain speakin '  .

 

 

 

 

 

 

[SirPalomides]

This seems like a gross overreaction to me, at least based on the what I see in that Mona Lisa thread. Also worth mentioning that welkin was issuing blanket attacks and condemnations to every member of the forum, and then some special venom for people who responded.

[Cleansox]

We all had choices. 

Not posting, not responding, not reacting. And yet we did. 

 

(Erased the rest, I lost the red thread somewhere in it.) 

[Geof Nanto]

Although I haven’t commented on it, I’ve closely followed this whole Earl Grey versus staff sage from the beginning. And I haven’t commented because I have no clarity on the rights and wrongs of the situation. Also, I haven’t been involved with, or even read most of the discussions in question. All I can say is that I feel for Earl Grey, he is obviously a dedicated practitioner.  We’ve talked via PM in the past and I like him. But so too do I feel for the difficult role the moderators fulfil in trying to do what’s best for the whole forum. It’s no easy thing being a moderator on this forum. In the past volunteers have been scarce because of the flak they cop. It's largely a thankless role. I’d like to keep this team we have now because they obviously carefully consider their actions. They might not be perfect but they are conscientiously doing the best they can.  If I thought I could do better, I’d volunteer to be on staff. But I know I could never function in that role.  

 

Edit: I meant to type “staff saga” in the first line not “staff sage.” I feel tempted to leave it as an interesting variation but also feel such ambiguity is not appropriate here. 

Edited September 23, 2020 by Yueya

[Zhongyongdaoist]

6 hours ago, SirPalomides said:

This seems like a gross overreaction to me, at least based on the what I see in that Mona Lisa thread. Also worth mentioning that welkin was issuing blanket attacks and condemnations to every member of the forum, and then some special venom for people who responded. (Emphasis mine, ZYD)

 

The lack of any visible action in regard to welkin has also been privately expressed to me, but having been a moderator I know that not all moderator action is visible and a lot depends upon the previous history of the individual concerned.  Among other things if no one reported welkin's behavior it is possible that no action would have been taken on him.  It certainly makes the moderator's job easier if they have a specific infraction to look at rather than have to go through several pages of posts just to find examples of bad behavior to see if a person whose behavior has been reported has any mitigating provocation for their actions.

 

Maybe one of the moderators will indulge me and say if there were any reports about welkin's behavior in the thread, and if there were none the lesson is, if you want action to be taken about rudeness in a thread, report it.

 

Zhongyongdaoist

[Nungali]

That is a valid point   BUT ... aside from having a huge personal dislike on 'reporting people'   when the Mods themselves are actively partaking in a thread with clear insults in it  , then,  I thought, they would know  what's going down .  

[old3bob]

remembering a friend:

"...He who knows how to live can walk abroad
Without fear of rhinoceros or tiger.
He will not be wounded in battle.
For in him rhinoceroses can find no place to thrust their horn,
Tigers can find no place to use their claws,
And weapons no place to pierce.
Why is this so? Because he has no place for death to enter."  from Chapter 50

 

 

[ilumairen]

55 minutes ago, Nungali said:

That is a valid point   BUT ... aside from having a huge personal dislike on 'reporting people'   when the Mods themselves are actively partaking in a thread with clear insults in it  , then,  I thought, they would know  what's going down .  

 

 

You were clearly aware at this point in the discussion that there were moderator interactions with Welkin.