In the “Is it possible to live without conflict” thread we discussed the idea of all members sharing responsibility for the well-being of the forum by agreeing to moderate (informally, no titles!) when appropriate. Equally distributed rather than hierarchical moderation.
Rather than taking the conventional route of writing a Tablet of Commandments that members should follow, I suggested agreeing on a vision for the forum and then playing it by ear, nudging the forum towards that vision in a way that fit the situation.
Before we begin to discuss the vision, let’s agree that:
Members share responsibility for forum moderation.
A shared vision of the forum sets the tone for moderation.
Suggestions, improvements, hesitations are all welcome!
By “moderation” do you mean we should moderate ourselves for the sake of effective communication, or for the sake of unity? If for unity, why bother? If for the sake of effective communication, why not?
Self-moderate for the well being of everything involved: the participants, the explorations, the learning. Like tending a garden vs. letting it go wild?
Could you give an example of self-moderating? I’m still not sure what you mean. Have you been self-moderating, or is this something you’re going to start doing?
Larry is talking with someone in the forum and the conversation starts to get prickly. Larry’s knee-jerk reaction might be to escape: deflect, avoid, ghost even. All of these serve Larry, make him feel better. But if Larry had agreed to share moderation, he might have continued the conversation in a non-combative way and used the conflict as a learning opportunity for all involved. Larry’s concern for well being would be larger than just himself, it would include the other(s) and the forum itself, since the individual interactions here determine the quality of the forum as a whole.
To summarize, maybe something like: Shared forum moderation is a model in which each individual member nurtures the well being of all members and the forum itself.
Yes, but one would have to be omniscient to know what “the well being of all members and the forum” is. Why not find out why Larry is being prickly instead of presuming to know what he should be?
Yes, but one would have to be omniscient to know what “the well being of all members and the forum” is.
If the vision for the forum is intelligent and taken to heart by members, and if that vision includes regard for the well being of all involved, members and forum, won’t the rest take care of itself?
No omniscience required.
Why not find out why Larry is being prickly instead of presuming to know what he should be?
Sure, if exploring Larry’s prickliness is in sync with the forum vision.
I don’t think the forum needs a vision…it’s just a place where people interested in K’s teaching come to talk about it. If someone gets prickly or pedantic or preachy or presumptuous, they’re revealing themselves. Better revelation than moderation.
I would like to inquire and ask about the topic of banning.
I dont know the guy, but have seen now a few times, this guy named Vishwa or something like that, create new accounts and even highlight the moderator and then I notice his posts are gone, deleted, with him I guess.
What is going on? For those who know him, he highlights James a lot, what did he do to get banned? He seems to want to discuss these things urgently? I am confused on the matter.
I happened to click on some older posts and saw some older posters banned. I guess they crossed the line of decency or something, to be banned?
So what would you think requires banning, what would be the line that needs to be crossed for someone to be banned?
I ask this in reference to our inquiry, exploration into conflict on this forum. Most of us feel it is okay to have conflict, reactions, and try to work them out. So what actually would entail a person to be banned here? What do you think?
Me personally, I want to feel comfortable being myself and not having to worry about being banned if I say something that another doesnt like or agree with. I feel freedom to be myself is very important and if that is restricted in any way, is limited, I feel constricted and cannot be totally myself.
If you’ve never been flagged, you don’t have anything to worry about. I’ve been flagged more times than I can recall, and I usually tone down whatever it was I said.
Thanks for your honesty here ‘Inquiry’ and the assurance I have nothing to worry about unless flagged. Sorry you have been flagged so many times and feel you have to tone it down.
To me, it is just words, I dont know why people get so bent out of shape. We cannot physically hurt another on here, from words on a screen.
I do think it is helpful to try to be respectful and considerate of others, but at the same time, one should be free to question all.
Questioning is one of the most important things I learned from Krishnamurti. And to even question him. Otherwise, his teachings are the same as any religion or philosophy where one just accepts and believes it, which is the most dangerous thing to do.
So I appreciate posters like yourself who will question all, including Krishnamurti.
One might say that forum moderation takes care of itself when there is care for each other, care for the question, and care for ‘the looking’.
Forum moderation breaks down when care has been forgotten, and carelessness takes over (following your earlier metaphor of a garden being neglected).
We are each responsible (not in the sense of an ‘ought’ or a ‘should’, but just factually - because our responses literally create the atmosphere here) for caring, being considerate, etc.
Perhaps the challenge is when we see that carelessness may have taken-over a particular exchange (between two or more participants); and for the person who sees this (essentially a neutral participant, if they can honestly maintain this neutrality) to delicately (care-fully) engage so as to diffuse or objectively reflect the situation (‘reflecting’ to the participants how the garden is being neglected).
One might say that forum moderation takes care of itself when there is care for each other, care for the question, and care for ‘the looking’.
Yes!
Perhaps the challenge is when we see that carelessness may have taken-over a particular exchange (between two or more participants); and for the person who sees this (essentially a neutral participant, if they can honestly maintain this neutrality) to delicately (care-fully) engage so as to diffuse or objectively reflect the situation (‘reflecting’ to the participants how the garden is being neglected).
Good example. Should be done skillfully, with kindness. Might take some practice.
If you want the forum policy on banning, you should speak with Dev.
Imo things like warnings, suspension, and banning should be considered when someone is clearly and persistently harming individual members or the collective.
But it may be the only thing the conditioned brain is capable of, since it is dualistic, which means that everything is either this or that, good/bad, right/wrong, true/false, etc. The conditioned brain is caught, as K said, in the corridor of opposites.
So we can’t help but believe or disbelieve K’s teaching, and this isn’t a problem the conditioned brain can solve, but an actuality to be seen and understood.
In other words, if the conditioned brain is more interested in its conditioning (self-knowledge) than anything else, it is awakening from its reality to actuality.
Words are dangerous . Unfortunately words have dominated the mind. You can see that when someone calls you a dirty name and drives away on the street. Logically words are words but we take that ugly word and turn it against ourselves. The guy is long gone but the mind keeps it alive in us. Why does the mind do that?
As I see it the self image is something like a hot-air pie. If someone comes along and sticks a pin in it, it deflates. It takes a while for it to inflate again. The upside of that experience is that it tells you that you’re carrying around, a hot-air pie!
Words can’t kill one. Although they may deflate the self-image, as Dan says.
If what is said is nonsense - ignore it.
If it touches a nerve - understand why. What one looks at about one’s own reaction is no-one else’s concern - and it is a valuable learning experience.