Open invitation: Help us improve your DW experience!

[PeterB]

Sorry Anna...not buying it . If my French, German, Italian, was as poor as Hanzze's English I would not even attempt to communicate on a website in French, German or Italian...on at least 20 occasions he has had feedback from a number of different people saying that they have no idea what he is trying to communicating. Several people have made the point to him that if he spent just part of the time he spends posting in improving his English everyone including him, would benefit.

Then there is the other point, he has made no attempt to grasp even the basic points of Theravada Buddhism and instead refers to a weird hybrid of Mahayana and Animism of his own devising.


I simply read past his posts without stopping at them. I cant be arsed.

If at anytime he appears to be making an effort to understand the Theravada view instead of delivering lectures characterised by banality and gibberish in equal measure, I will start reading them.

PS YOUR English Fraulein Anna is better than many of the English speakers on the forum.

Thank you, Peter.

I'm aware your patience is at times challenged, as is mine, by many factors, but it also has a good side!

We can practice more patience, more compassion, and then we can reward ourselves--- with more chocolate!

I can resist anything but temptation Anna.....

[mikenz66]

I will join you raising a glass of non alcoholic beer to David and the Mods.....thats sounds like a 70's band.

Peter, surely you're not so old as to confuse the 70s with the 60s.

Ray Columbus and the Invaders' cover of She's a Mod. 1964 I believe. A good old Christchurch band...



Mike

[adosa]

Sorry Anna...not buying it . If my French, German, Italian, was as poor as Hanzze's English I would not even attempt to communicate on a website in French, German or Italian...on at least 20 occasions he has had feedback from a number of different people saying that they have no idea what he is trying to communicating. Several people have made the point to him that if he spent just part of the time he spends posting in improving his English everyone including him, would benefit.

Then there is the other point, he has made no attempt to grasp even the basic points of Theravada Buddhism and instead refers to a weird hybrid of Mahayana and Animism of his own devising.


I simply read past his posts without stopping at them. I cant be arsed.

If at anytime he appears to be making an effort to understand the Theravada view instead of delivering lectures characterised by banality and gibberish in equal measure, I will start reading them.

PS YOUR English Fraulein Anna is better than many of the English speakers on the forum.

Maybe I have this whole practice wrong but how is blasting another human being part of the path? I'm sorry, but I can only imagine how Hanzee would feel after reading this. Am I missing something? PM him if you feel correcting his mistakes would be in his benefit but this.....?

adosa

[Ben]

OK, I think its time we returned to topic.
Thanks for your cooperation.

Ben

[octathlon]

I will add my name to the list of those who are disturbed by posts belittling other human beings, in general, and also in particular the case mentioned of insulting people for having poor English skills. Anyone who thinks a person can so easily improve their English just like that or else should not participate here is ... entitled to that opinion, but refraining from snarky comments and personal insults in general would IMO improve the atmosphere of Dhamma Wheel and be greatly appreciated by me and at least a few others.

[christopher:::]

I also agree, and think adosa's point is very much related to the OP...

Maybe I have this whole practice wrong but how is blasting another human being part of the path? I'm sorry, but I can only imagine how [he] would feel after reading this. Am I missing something? PM him if you feel correcting his mistakes would be in his benefit but this.....?

adosa

From Jechbi's blog, again...

Aggression may have its appropriate and skillful application in certain situations, who knows? But I tend to believe that in general, aggression is incompatible with the goal of cultivating a healthy and helpful Dhamma discussion community on the Internet.

When is it okay to criticize another person publicly, and frequently, and when is it incompatible with the goal of cultivating a healthy and helpful Dhamma community on the Internet?

My own view is that lacking the assistance of voice tone, facial information and body language words printed here carry a bit more sting, may seem even more aggressive then they would on the outside. That's why being very mindful of applying the brahmaviharas when we are online can be so helpful.

But each of us has to take responsibility for that, and its sometimes very difficult, especially when someone else is pushing your buttons. We each have to disconnect our own buttons, no one else can do it for you, and blaming the other person can become a way of avoiding responsibility.

Isn't that a BIG part of what Dhamma practice is about?

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

There's been some good points raised and I'd like to pick them up in the established context of helping you improve your Dhamma Wheel experience.

From my point of view, the Terms Of Service represent the guidelines, or minimal standards for behaviour within the community. It's great if people want to go beyond those standards personally, but I don't think we can enforce our personal elevated standards upon others.

To that end...

1. If you think the Terms Of Service can be improved to better explain and make reference to the types of behaviour that you deem improper, please put forward your suggestions.

2. If you think that moderators need to enforce the Terms Of Service more rigorously with regards to a particular TOS component, again, please raise it. It will help draw our attention to it.

Perhaps someone, Christopher::: maybe, might like to start a new topic on this in the Suggestion Box? I'm just wary of this particular topic becoming a mish-mash of interconnected ideas that get lost along the way.

And again, if someone says something inappropriate in the forum itself, please try to avoid such discussion about standards within the actual topic, as that constitutes meta-discussion and is notorious for sending topics off-topic. There is the report button, there is the suggestion box... there is a proper channel for all these things.

Thanks.

Metta,
Retro.

[christopher:::]

Perhaps someone, Christopher::: maybe, might like to start a new topic on this in the Suggestion Box? I'm just wary of this particular topic becoming a mish-mash of interconnected ideas that get lost along the way.

And again, if someone says something inappropriate in the forum itself, please try to avoid such discussion about standards within the actual topic, as that constitutes meta-discussion and is notorious for sending topics off-topic. There is the report button, there is the suggestion box... there is a proper channel for all these things.

Hi Retro. I just bumped alive an older discussion on metta and meta-discussions. I also looked at the TOS and the situation looks complicated. The first and second TOS items seem to conflict at times, perhaps, in terms of prioritization for people. Some may view the first item (right speech) as a higher priority then the second, others view the second (disruption of the forum) as most important. People also seem to have very different ideas about what constitutes right speech and disruption. But maybe we should talk about this elsewhere, over there?

I'd want to get more people's views on this before starting a new topic in the Suggestion Box, though if this conflict seems clear to someone else and they would like to start a new topic, that would be great.

[Jhana4]

I never read TOS statements. I believe if people post politely, like adults and try to stay mostly on topic, they will never have any problems. I've been on many forums and ran a few. Forums can be choked to death by too much moderation. Forums can also be moderated too weakly and go to hell with bickering overrunning it. The mods need to already have good judgment in them. A TOS will not do that. People started TOS statements to safeguard against the day trolls with bruised egos get lawyers involved. Gladly, that hasn't happened yet.

[appicchato]

I think that the mods and members including alan, are EXTRAORDINARILY patient with ........, who despite a number of very reasonable requests has made no effort to either improve his English or to glean even a basic knowledge of the Theravada.

People's abilities, disposition, temperament, level of attainment (in any area)...etc., are what makes the world go 'round...singling out someone who 'grates' on you: where is that?...did you ever consider that you might grate on some here?...but don't feel the need to highlight it to everyone else?...

Evaluating someone's effort, while not having the least inkling of that person, is basically out there...in (most) anyone's book...

The solution is so simple: skip anyone's posts you find aversive...it's not rocket science...

Be well...

[pilgrim]

I just want to point out that despite all the jibes thrown at Hanzze, he has remained remarkably good-natured . Frankly I'd feel more comfortable with his company than with those who have all the Theravada-theory but cannot resist taking pot-shots at a guy with poor language skills and who is trying to join the party.

[Nibbida]

Most of the feedback that we receive from members is positive, but if you are experiencing any dissatisfaction with the way Dhamma Wheel is being managed, we would like to extend an open invitation to all members to raise discussion topics in the Suggestion Box and work with us collaboratively to improve this forum, for the betterment of all. We are volunteers with a genuine interest in making this a productive site for all members and for the online Buddhist community in general. Therefore, we would greatly appreciate any constructive feedback you could offer that may help improve people's experience with this forum.

Alternatively, you are welcome to post comments (either negative or positive) on the aforementioned blog about your Dhamma Wheel experiences without feeling as if you are jeopardizing your standing here at Dhamma Wheel by doing so. Dhamma Wheel staff decided that it would be inappropriate to ban or suspend the author of the blog simply for criticising Dhamma Wheel, so do feel free to speak your mind about your Dhamma Wheel experiences, whether you choose to do it via the Suggestion Box or at Lest It Be Soddened By The Rain. However, if you would like a guaranteed and prompt response from staff to your issue, we would recommend utilizing the Suggestion Box as we are here far more often than we are there.

The very fact that this is the response to a disgruntled member's blog speaks volumes to the strengths of Dhammawheel. I could not think of a more open-minded and productive response.

Whenever there is more than one person involved in a conversation (some people seem to only like to hear themselves), there are going to be differences in opinions and interpretations. Sometimes this pushes emotional buttons and things can get hairy. But if my practice means anything to me, then I try to apply it to what I do here. When I'm feeling the urge to debate beyond expressing a view, I examine whether there is clinging to views. When I feel annoyance, I watch that and see whether metta would be a more appropriate response. If I come on here, and spend a lot of time haggling and getting annoyed, it completely defeats the purpose. When I practice what I preach, it not only facilitates smoother discussions, it furthers my practice.

[Dan74]

Like many here, I feel that overall this forum is remarkably well run.

That said it may be that the blogger has legitimate grievances (I don't have the time to go through so many posts at the moment). We all have our pet peeves and weaknesses and sometimes mods may make a snarky comment or exercise poor judgment. This is to be expected and it's commendable if the mods here are serious about trying to improve their skills and make the forum even better.

Of course what makes a forum really work is the commitment of the members continually bringing substance, sincerity and good will to the exchanges here. The reason I keep coming is because there is a critical number of such members here and a real drive to explore the Dhamma.

As for Hanzze, I don't have a problem with his posts. Sometimes I don't understand him and sometimes what he says does make good sense. If people feel like taking nasty pot-shots at him or any other member, I hope the mods make it clear that such behaviour is not welcome. It makes for a much more wholesome atmosphere on the forum.

[alan]

If anyone can tell me how to respond to Hannze without mocking him, I'd like to hear it.
Once, twice, OK. Three times, 6 times? How about every time? Let's face it--if every post is laughably dumb then the only response is to treat it like comic relief. Sorry if this offends those with tender senses, but Hannze has made no effort to clarify his thoughts, good-natured though they may be. Why should I take them seriously?

[Dan74]

How about Ven Appicato's post above?

Just pass by, why comment if you don't have anything constructive to say?

[Ben]

I never read TOS statements.

I actually recommend it. The amount of times we, as mods, have had to pull up new members for inappropriate online behaviour only to discover they hadn't read the TOS. If I had a dollar for every time...

I believe if people post politely, like adults and try to stay mostly on topic, they will never have any problems.

That is the ideal. However, when people get involved so do their egos.

Forums can be choked to death by too much moderation. Forums can also be moderated too weakly and go to hell with bickering overrunning it. The mods need to already have good judgment in them.

Yes, we try and strike a balance here at DW.

A TOS will not do that. People started TOS statements to safeguard against the day trolls with bruised egos get lawyers involved. Gladly, that hasn't happened yet.

When we establishd DW, we were keen to encourage Dhamma discussion and that's what we had in mind with the framing of the TOS. A number of us have had experience moderating a number of different Buddhist discussion boards so there was some body of knowledge and experience with regards to what did and didn't work. The TOS has been edited and added to as time has gone on as different situations emergd. Its not framed to try and protect us against legal sanction but to communicate a statement of behavioural expectations and to encourage an environment where Dhamma discussion can occur.
kind regards

Ben

[Modus.Ponens]

If anyone can tell me how to respond to Hannze without mocking him, I'd like to hear it.
Once, twice, OK. Three times, 6 times? How about every time? Let's face it--if every post is laughably dumb then the only response is to treat it like comic relief. Sorry if this offends those with tender senses, but Hannze has made no effort to clarify his thoughts, good-natured though they may be. Why should I take them seriously?

What I would like to see explained is why you have to mock him instead of leting it be.

[Viscid]

You've got an incredible range of people here including religious screwballs, schizophrenic nutjobs, rich scumbags, proud monks, respectable monks, humble monks, fakers, feminists, flakes and a few who are truly honest and compassionate. It's a bit of a mess which is to be expected from an online Internet forum, and I think the mods have done pretty good job managing it all. I've tried pushing boundaries here and there, and have found the mods actions to be predictable and fair enough.

Tilt is cranky, old and stubborn though, and I think you should ban him forever.

[Viscid]

Also, Hanzze is the most lovable person on this forum and you Hanzze-bashers have got no heart.
Hanzze

[tiltbillings]

You've got an incredible range of people here including religious screwballs, schizophrenic nutjobs, rich scumbags, proud monks, respectable monks, humble monks, fakers, feminists, flakes and a few who are truly honest and compassionate. It's a bit of a mess which is to be expected from an online Internet forum, and I think the mods have done pretty good job managing it all. I've tried pushing boundaries here and there, and have found the mods actions to be predictable and fair enough.

Tilt is cranky, old and stubborn though, and I think you should ban him forever.

He certainly can be cranky and he does have a terse and sometimes pointy writing style, he is no longer a know-it-all twenty-something (thank the Goddess for that), though he is a know-a-few-things geezer, and he is certainly stubbron when debating a point; see these threads, which are objects of complaint by our blogger:


viewtopic.php?f=13&t=6847

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=6849&start=0

But he certainly will apologize when wrong and stupid, which does happen from time to time. As for banning forever, probably not a bad idea. He can then spend more time learning Irish verbs, which are only a bit less disconcerting at times than dealing with "religious screwballs, schizophrenic nutjobs, rich scumbags, proud monks, respectable monks, humble monks, fakers, feminists, flakes and a few who are truly honest and compassionate."