Suggestion - Printable Version

+- Bring4th (
+-- Forum: Bring4th Meta (
+--- Forum: Meta Forum (
+--- Thread: Suggestion (/showthread.php?tid=8987)

Pages: 1 2

RE: Suggestion - native - 04-18-2014

(04-17-2014, 04:54 PM)Melissa Wrote:  For me it's not about less or more but about the quality, consistency and dynamics of moderation. which is always of influence on a forum. When I read all the posts here in this thread it -again- only confirms that those aspects might need a little polishing.

What aspects are you speaking of then? Examples?

While we do have issues that will always exist related to communication, things have functioned well here. Boundaries will always be questionably crossed, and I personally wouldn't want a referee coming in and blowing a whistle over each little spat. We need to learn to work our own problems out I think.

I should clarify. The idea of quality and consistency would suggest that there hasn't been enough moderation, so that would lead to more moderation. I'm certainly interested in making sure people have their concerns heard, but I'm not sure we should be so concerned if something slips through the cracks. Things happen and we move on.

RE: Suggestion - Phoenix - 04-18-2014

(04-17-2014, 08:37 PM)Bring4th_Plenum Wrote:  I also stressed in my PM to you that for the purposes of group learning/discussion, that it is really really helpful to resist the urge to redact one's posts, once they have been made public. One is free to change one's mind (especially if you feel that you might have overstepped the mark), but for the purposes of interaction, it is a more honest approach (in my view) to let your words stand, and update your viewpoint either in an edit or later on in the thread. The reason being that other users have taken the time to read your original post, think on it, and then post replies to it - with quotes included or not. Out of respect for others having spent time reading your original words, and giving consideration to them, the discussion is best facilitated by having an intact record of the events as they happened.

These are the words of someone who has never faced any paranoia or neuroses in their entire life.

Anyway, in regards to the point of the thread. The reason this thread is diffuse and undirected is because it began that way.

Melissa, perhaps you could define:

A) What the moderators currently do, and specifically where you see a lack in the 'regulation' of this forum, and why these things are due to the moderation of the forum rather than to other causes.

B) Rather than nominating people for a task which includes a lot of responsibility that they may not want perhaps i) nominate yourself or ii) with the permission of the people involved take a group vote on the subject.

RE: Suggestion - Horuseus - 04-18-2014

(04-17-2014, 08:37 PM)Bring4th_Plenum Wrote:  That is, if a thread is initiated by a user, and then the OP deletes their post, then it would give the false impression that the person who posted second had started that thread.

Not sure about MyBB (Software this forum uses), however on my own forum which runs phpBB the delete function becomes unavailable if/once a thread has replies, or a post is made after said post.

Anyway, it's more of a minor annoyance than anything else. Looks like you've bigger issues to worry about the way this thread is heading Lol.

RE: Suggestion - Great Central Sun - 04-18-2014

I've never had any qualms with the moderators.

I used to be on a forum that wouldn't let you delete your post after a few minutes, like ever. You couldn't even change it after a few minutes. It was image heavy, and this kept the users from removing images that kept the board going.

RE: Suggestion - Melissa - 04-18-2014

I'm not inclined to address why I personally believe things are not functioning well, as I've done so awhile ago. Isis' example speaks volumes, imo.

Well, I'm going to think of a few more suggestions, see how that goes Wink much forum-shadow, so wow.

RE: Suggestion - Unbound - 04-18-2014

(04-18-2014, 05:36 AM)Melissa Wrote:  Fang & Tanner (&Reeay) you do realize that it wasn't just meant as a nice gesture of sorts? I'm quite serious about it; considering the forums current condition, and I wouldn't go around naming people at random. Plus, the timing is perfect, for each of you; based on how I've experienced you here. With the three of you joining the current mods it could actually work as a team, which would result in generating a glorious 'creative' impulse. As a member I feel part of L\L research too, we all are, imo. But there doesn't seem much interest in the forum, that's why it's especially important that members have a vote in who becomes a mod. And why self-moderation is also required. Well, I could go on and on about it but I hope you'll think about it because I'm quite sure it'll work wonders.

Well, the real fulcrum upon which this idea turns is the current moderators. While I agree with a "democratic" approach to decisions as to who should have influence over a public forum the idea and decision is ultimately at the hands of those who are currently at the helm. As I said, I do have the idea in mind but there has been no apparent desire or prerogative on the part of the current team to add any more members, which is certainly their right to do so as they are individuals on this forum just as anyone else, even if they engage in a management sort of role.

So, that being said, I think it is great that you are posting suggestions and ideas and about your concerns because I feel like there is often a lot of "accept it or move on" kind of responses that arise from almost every discussion like this and that, imo, is not actually a very accepting or progressive approach to the matter, although valid. I agree that we should, as 'the people' of the forum, have some say as to how the 'power' of the moderators is organized but at the same time there is a very, very delicate balance in that a system with too many changing influences can quickly develop internal chaos.

Considering all that, the moderators have not actually posted any opinions towards your actual suggestion so I am as clueless as anyone as to what their collective intentions are in this regard.

RE: Suggestion - Melissa - 04-18-2014

Well, to clarify my intentions I'd have to say that it's a bit paradoxical because the suggestion wouldn't have occured to me if there was no reason to, on the other hand it isn't meant to rehash about the reasons why. It's merely an attempt to gravitate towards a more positive 'solution' or ideas/opinions that could be beneficial. I have no desire to become a mod myself because I know myself well enough to see that it doesn't suit me very well, honestly, I'd suck at it. lol.

Thanks for your considerate response, Tanner. Though I don't really understand why you're 'holding back' by waiting/asking for a response,
instead of going; 'yeah, I'd make a great mod! Whoohoo!' Well, something like that Tongue

RE: Suggestion - Unbound - 04-18-2014

I suppose that is because I do not really know how "good" of a mod I would be aha Really, I just see it that the addition of any mods to the team needs to first be addressed by the mods themselves before anything else. It doesn't matter what I think of my own capabilities if there is no 'opening' or desire to explore that. Maybe I would be a good mod, or maybe I would drive everyone nuts aha I can't be sure but since the current mods have not expressed an opinion on the matter the whole idea is at a stalemate regardless.

That being said, all progress begins with ideas and suggestions, so I think this is fruitful to at least bring it in to the general awareness.

RE: Suggestion - Melissa - 04-18-2014

Yes, it certainly does matter what you think of your own capabilities. It's one of the reasons I mentioned you, regardless of there currently being an opening or not, it could be worthwile to explore the idea anyways. Or experiment with it. We're all free to do that. Wink

RE: Suggestion - Unbound - 04-18-2014

Well, if you want my honest opinion, I am not sure my philosophy always lines up with that of L/L Research and that is one of the main reasons for my reluctance. While I do not doubt my ability to moderate a forum, I consider it a little different for this forum because I am already so emotionally invested in the going-ons of the forum and I know that results in some biases on my part. I would have to learn to step outside my biases if I was to be effective, imo.

RE: Suggestion - Melissa - 04-18-2014

In that case it could be fruitful for balancing love/wisdom, which I believe to be quite beneficial for you, while exploring new grounds and, if need be; creating a different 'comfort zone' to operate from, or, come to the conclusion that it doesn't suit you and see how that works. I see only see fruits here, but I also have the tendency to drive people nuts with my ideas, so if it's any kind of annoying, do tell me.

RE: Suggestion - isis - 04-18-2014


(if only she hadn't joined the axis of evil)

RE: Suggestion - reeay - 04-18-2014

Thank you for your consideration. I made a little bio/promotion video so members here can see me in action trying to maintain order and 'peace':

and a little campaign video for extra:

RE: Suggestion - isis - 04-18-2014

[Image: keep-calm-and-respect-my-authoritah-1.png]

RE: Suggestion - native - 04-18-2014

(04-18-2014, 12:02 PM)Melissa Wrote:  Well, I'm going to think of a few more suggestions, see how that goes Wink much forum-shadow, so wow.

Not sure if the shadow comment was meant for me, but I've been speaking generally about this forum's troubles and they weren't necessarily directed towards you..ya turd! Tongue

RE: Suggestion - Parsons - 04-19-2014

I will throw in my two cents and say I would much rather prefer Tanner NOT *become a moderator. My opinion is as a moderator, he would potentially need to stifle his viewpoint because he would be an 'authoritah' figure and would in some way represent L/L. I value his unfettered opinion.

To make a poor analogy, I see him more 'law inspirer' rather than a law-enforcer.

*Edit: Grammar

RE: Suggestion - Melissa - 04-19-2014

Perhaps the defenition of a moderator is a little outdated. Moderating 2.0 in accordance with the loo ftw.

Reeay, lol, you're welcome.

Icaro, if you're not sure then certainly. Also, I think our shadow friends will only grow taller when we continue to talk in general instead of adressing things one-on-one, which also adds a more personal note. You know, like actual conversation. Since it tends to stir things up but it rarely gets a follow-up for cl(e)arification. Like now Wink it's a wonderful catalyst, of course, but perhaps also a little 'outdated'. The turdness, by the way, is quite endearing but I'd appreciate Melissa, Mel or M. Thanky!

RE: Suggestion - Unbound - 04-19-2014

(04-19-2014, 02:52 AM)Parsons Wrote:  I will throw in my two cents and say I would much rather prefer Tanner NOT becoming a moderator. My opinion is as a moderator, he would potentially need to stifle his viewpoint because he would be an 'authoritah' figure and would in some way represent L/L. I value his unfettered opinion.

To make a poor analogy, I see him more 'law inspirer' rather than a law-enforcer.

The laws are written by the heart and the choice to follow them. One can only show the beauty of order as inspiration if order is desired to be shown to the world.

Actually, I think you caught me, and really this is the core reason why I am reluctant to ever become a moderator (not that it has as such been a possibility aha).

RE: Suggestion - Fang - 04-20-2014

An alternative to inquiring if the site can be altered to allow users to delete their posts is just to put more time and thought into what is posted so the complete removal of content isn't desired.

RE: Suggestion - zenmaster - 04-20-2014

(04-20-2014, 01:02 AM)Fang Wrote:  An alternative to inquiring if the site can be altered to allow users to delete their posts is just to put more time and thought into what is posted so the complete removal of content isn't desired.

novel idea... "redacted" after someone bothers to consider what they wrote seems to be the preferred approach, however. I've had to delete responses due to people not wanting what they posted to be public. "please don't quote me"

RE: Suggestion - Melissa - 04-20-2014

I think there's A LOT of time and thought poored into posts already. At least, that's how it reads. Spontaneous posting asks for a delete button lol, accidental multiple posts too, not to mention free will.

RE: Suggestion - isis - 04-20-2014

(04-20-2014, 01:02 AM)Fang Wrote:  An alternative to inquiring if the site can be altered to allow users to delete their posts is just to put more time and thought into what is posted so the complete removal of content isn't desired.
idk if i've ever "removed" a post bc i didn't put enough time & thought into what was posted. i removed 1 not too long ago bc i realized some1 had already quoted what i quoted. & the time before that Sun Ray asked me to remove a post bc it contained a pic of her. & last night i posted a post that said nothing but "<removed>" just to encourage the mods to let clutter be cleaned (even w/o a request)'s sad thinking u'll be getting to read something from some1 then seeing that it says nothing. blank posts rn't allowed for a reason

garry said he'll be seeing if gary & others will approve of changing the rule...but i thought that mayb a record is left of what the post said b4 the edit & removing the post may remove that & that may b why they don't want to do it

RE: Suggestion - Ashim - 04-20-2014

Deleting a post is akin to attempting to avoid catalyst.
You can't 'delete' stuff like that.
There will be a copy somewhere.

RE: Suggestion - Steppingfeet - 04-22-2014

About the post deletion question.... isis asked Plenum that question [edit: isis actually used the "report" feature on her own post (the one she wanted deleted) in order to get the moderators' attention]. Plenum wrote Austin and I asking about the policy. This was a decision made by the moderator team early on in the website’s history, before Plenum was a mod.

In response to Plenum’s request via isis, I explained the rationale to him (which he has conveyed really well here But when Plenum turned around and wrote isis in response, one of his first PM's as an acting mod, he said the “too much power” thing.

Austin and I both said, “Huh?” I’m not sure out of what region of time/space orifices that Plenum pulled that response, but it was in no way representative of our actual thinking. It simply is not a matter of “too much power”. It’s a matter of forum integrity and an attempt to curb the swiss cheese effect, as Plenum described in his post linked to above.

Plenum, am I making this up?

RE: Suggestion - Steppingfeet - 04-22-2014

Hello Melissa,

I still have active pain as a result of your contribution to our previous path-crossing. It’s like a wound that’s still sore. My first inclination, as a result, is simply to retreat/disengage from the tumult of social discord. The capacity for people to act disharmoniously towards others, and my ineffectiveness in creating clarity, is painful to me. I just want to be away from it. But I don’t have that luxury.

During your previous and quite vocal unhappiness with a moderator decision, I went way beyond my comfort zone in attempting to work with you. Admittedly my response was not perfect – I did get the tiniest bit salty, I am sorry that I said, “Really, that is your question” – but in light of a situation wherein an attack was launched against my self, loved ones close to me, and this beautiful organization, I exercised a considerable degree of availability and patience in attempting to respond to each of your questions.

Austin did likewise. So did Lana. You however didn’t seem interested in actual conflict resolution through communication. Rather, you stuck to your message and did not deviate: “down with moderators”.

It seems in this thread you are expressing the same message: your seemingly chronic discontent with the mods. I’m having trouble understanding you, Melissa. I don’t know how to relate to you or to meet your interests. If I could serve you in some way, I would. I’m really sorry, sister, I’m not particularly inclined to attempt this failed dance with you again, but the official capacity of this position requires it.

I just attended my first Buddhist intensive meditation retreat over the weekend. The entire event had rules and limitations. The use of the meditation hall had policies for its proper use.

Every system, every entity, every thing in the manifest universe has its rules, protocols, structure, balances, limitations, boundaries, etc. Including the planet, and the solar system, and your particular mind, body, and spirit. (Mindful that I’m speaking to a metaphysically inclined community: I’m aware that all boundaries are ultimately conventions and are transcended by, or transparent to, the infinity out of which all things arise.)

Craigslist, for instance, is a radically free community that seems to pretty much tolerate any content of posting, but it, too, has rules. I took the following from the FAQ section of Craiglist a couple years back. The question regards why a post was deleted. Craigslist’s response:

Quote:A word about your Freedom of Speech:

Sorry dude, the constitution only says that the Government cannot interfere with your free speech. It does not say that any private organization has to publish anything you come up with. Craigslist is a private site, just like your home is. They publish things that people want to say on the web. They call the shots on what they will or will not publish for people. You can stand on a street corner and yell whatever the constitution permits you to, but if you want someone to publish it for you then you have to play ball with them.

Craigslist can decide that your little blast is more than they will tolerate and remove it... And/or eject/block you to prevent further problems. Very simply craigslist can say: "not here".

L/L Research is a system, one geared toward service. Look at the two websites and all the ways we try to help, and empower, seekers. The Bring4th forums are an extension of that , and are no exception to that. This system has rules. Those rules are described in the guidelines. The moderators exist to enforce those rules, as leniently, gently, and compassionately as possible with an eye toward supporting and serving the community, and not toward control.

We acted just that way in the case of the meerie thread – a post was made that absolutely shattered the first guideline. It was subject to immediate deletion. We acted then as we have in the past in the event someone so blatantly broke the first and most important rule. (Though in fact that was the worst example we’ve ever seen – no one has so overtly intended to create injury, discord, and confusion.) The decision we made was in accord with the guidelines and was consistent with all past moderation.

I don’t know what to tell you, Melissa. Earlier on we had sought to help you. You had issued a grievance about sexist remarks made in the chatroom and in a thread, and we took action on your behalf and on behalf of the guidelines. Austin even thanked you for bringing it to the moderator’s attention. But before that point, during that point, and since that point, you have been vocally unhappy with the moderators, from the beginning it seems. Either too little moderation. Or too much.

Which has just baffled me and the rest of the team, and is part of what makes me want to retreat from the social discord. We stepped in on your behalf after you were upset by sexist remarks (a lower order of guideline violation), but when something of a much greater magnitude emerges, when an absolute litany of slander and abuse is posted, you do not object to it once, not once. Rather, you use it as fuel for your pre-existing beef with the moderators in general.

I don’t understand the source of your grievance. 99.9% of all transactions here are not moderated. How many of you, members, feel that moderation is heavy, oppressive, or restrictive? How many of you have been subject to moderator action? How do you feel that moderation here compares to your experience of other internet forums?

As we have said and demonstrated over the years, and has been expressed in this thread as a desirable situation by multiple members: we prefer to moderate as little as possible.

First and foremost because that’s our philosophy, that is what we feel helps create the best community experience from a positive polarity perspective – we’re lucky, actually, that the Law of One tends to attract people of high positive polarity and integrity, who are predisposed to interrelating harmoniously.

On a less important but very practical level, we prefer to moderate as little as possible because any time a medium to large-sized issue arises requiring moderator attention, it necessitates loads of email correspondence that often stretches over days. It is a lot of work in an already full workload. We want to make sure our response is appropriate, compassionate, fair, and balances the boundaries of this system against individual needs. We want to make sure that we contribute to the resplendent harmony of this system without interfering with the greatest free range of expression possible. The care that requires is massively time-and-energy consuming.

I don’t think we are going to be able to satisfy you short of turning over everything to your discretion and judgment. I could be mistaken, but I suspect that you may have harbored an acidic attitude towards authority figures for some time, and this is just the most recent life situation in which you are able to express it. Consequently, I’m not inclined to continue funneling energy into a non-productive whirlpool. I have a million places for my energy to go each day. My hands over the past couple years have developed a tremor because I’m running too many things through my mind each day, so in wisdom and in balance I am not going to continue attempting to move forward on a dead-end road, or encourage the other mods (though they are free to respond if they so desire) to attempt the same folly.

You’re unhappy. That has been registered. We seem unable to resolve your unhappiness to your satisfaction. I’m sorry. We are going to work to support the community - any time someone writes us with a request we work to fulfill that request if at all possible, but there are times when, enforcing the guidelines, we are going to have to make hard decisions, and they are not going to please everyone. I’m sorry that the moderators make you so unhappy. I hope you get nevertheless experience the joy of sharing energies with other like-hearted people that members, myself included, enjoy here.

With love and light,

RE: Suggestion - Melissa - 04-22-2014

You're clearly not a like-hearted or -minded member, GLB. Therefore I will cease all direct communication with you, otherwise I might actually become unhappy. Thanks for the clarification though.

RE: Suggestion - isis - 04-22-2014

please note: i was not blackmailed, tortured, & coerced into removing the original post that was here

i, alone, removed it...(if u can call this "removed")

Big Grin

[Image: 61417ebbb0b1bb2c123b800004a732b4819fe345...275bf6.jpg]

RE: Suggestion - Raz - 04-22-2014

"take humor seriously and seriousness humorously"

RE: Suggestion - Unbound - 04-22-2014

There is some serious butt-hurt goin' on in here. Don't even know what to do with all this butt-hurt. Maybe need some Preparation H up in here.

By that I mean HEART.

RE: Suggestion - Bring4th_Plenum - 04-23-2014

(04-22-2014, 10:37 AM)Bring4th_GLB Wrote:  Plenum, am I making this up?

nope, that was definitely my bad. Thanks for clarifying the situation Smile