I would suggest that members of the mod/admin team refrain from characterizing member posts as possibly just "jokes." From time to time, I have seen it happen that members who were trying to make a valid point from their perspective are told in-thread that it appeared they might just be joking. Here is one example.
I believe the mod/admin team sets the tone for the board. While it is generally positive, there are times when members of the mod/admin team appear to be needlessly dismissive of members. I believe the board would be better served if members of the mod/admin team would take better care not to use ridicule or dismissiveness in their posts.
Thank for listening.
Taking members seriously
Re: Taking members seriously
I've only been here a few weeks. I've had posts of mine moved several times. I didn't like that. I also contacted the moderators about it. I have not found the moderators to be disrespectful to the members and I felt that they have taken me seriously.
Last edited by Jhana4 on Thu Mar 03, 2011 7:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
In reading the scriptures, there are two kinds of mistakes:
One mistake is to cling to the literal text and miss the inner principles.
The second mistake is to recognize the principles but not apply them to your own mind, so that you waste time and just make them into causes of entanglement.
One mistake is to cling to the literal text and miss the inner principles.
The second mistake is to recognize the principles but not apply them to your own mind, so that you waste time and just make them into causes of entanglement.
Re: Taking members seriously
Just as we thought it safe to go back to the water the meta discussion sharks are circling again.
- Fede
- Posts: 1182
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:33 pm
- Location: The Heart of this "Green & Pleasant Land"...
- Contact:
Re: Taking members seriously
I take it that was a joke Peter.
Just to clarify, of course.....
I think sometimes people can take themselves too seriously, so that actually theuir utter seriousness is actually more laughable than a joke.
I am a Mod on three other forums.
it's a thankless task, and I'll tell you something else, jechbi:
Open criticism of Moderators is extremely bad form. Any critical comments should be confined to private messaging and relayed to the Moderators in question, away from forum discussion.
In my neck-of-the-woods, it's very bad etiquette to dis a mod in public.....
Just to clarify, of course.....
I think sometimes people can take themselves too seriously, so that actually theuir utter seriousness is actually more laughable than a joke.
I am a Mod on three other forums.
it's a thankless task, and I'll tell you something else, jechbi:
Open criticism of Moderators is extremely bad form. Any critical comments should be confined to private messaging and relayed to the Moderators in question, away from forum discussion.
In my neck-of-the-woods, it's very bad etiquette to dis a mod in public.....
"Samsara: The human condition's heartbreaking inability to sustain contentment." Elizabeth Gilbert, 'Eat, Pray, Love'.
Simplify: 17 into 1 WILL go: Mindfulness!
Quieta movere magna merces videbatur. (Sallust, c.86-c.35 BC)
Translation: Just to stir things up seemed a good reward in itself.
I am sooooo happy - How on earth could I be otherwise?!
http://www.armchairadvice.co.uk/relationships/forum/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Simplify: 17 into 1 WILL go: Mindfulness!
Quieta movere magna merces videbatur. (Sallust, c.86-c.35 BC)
Translation: Just to stir things up seemed a good reward in itself.
I am sooooo happy - How on earth could I be otherwise?!
http://www.armchairadvice.co.uk/relationships/forum/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27848
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Taking members seriously
Greetings,
Arguably your post is more a case of "meta-discussion" than this topic itself.
Metta,
Retro.
Just to clarify, it's fine for it to be done via the Suggestion Box... because having it done here means that the topic in question isn't being derailed in the process.PeterB wrote:Just as we thought it safe to go back to the water the meta discussion sharks are circling again.
Arguably your post is more a case of "meta-discussion" than this topic itself.
Metta,
Retro.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Re: Taking members seriously
Then please feel free to remove it Retro...
-
- Posts: 1285
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:46 am
- Location: Essex, UK
Re: Taking members seriously
If Alex (in your example) had/has a problem, it would be Alex's responsibility to raise that with the mods.
Not yours.
Not yours.
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: Taking members seriously
Who determines if it a valid point? But I engaged with Alex for pages, so I obviously did take what he said seriously, though significantly and seriously wrong. Also, quite seriously, at that time of the naughty post you linked, it was unclear if it was not an elaborate joke. It would not have been the first time being lead down a path by jokester like that..Jechbi wrote:I would suggest that members of the mod/admin team refrain from characterizing member posts as possibly just "jokes." From time to time, I have seen it happen that members who were trying to make a valid point from their perspective are told in-thread that it appeared they might just be joking. Here is one example.
The reality is that moderators are human beings; hardly perfect. Scour the forum for my bad doings.The above is, which I suspect, will be the first of many examples, but to what real end? I am afraid that you as a moral beacon have been seriously compromised by your negative blogging. But lay on, MacDuff.I believe the mod/admin team sets the tone for the board. While it is generally positive, there are times when members of the mod/admin team appear to be needlessly dismissive of members. I believe the board would be better served if members of the mod/admin team would take better care not to use ridicule or dismissiveness in their posts.
Thank for listening.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: Taking members seriously
He could have done that, or other forum members could have - had they found fault - used the "report" function or PMs, which is a perfectly reasonable thing to do.Mawkish1983 wrote:If Alex (in your example) had/has a problem, it would be Alex's responsibility to raise that with the mods.
Not yours.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
-
- Posts: 1285
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:46 am
- Location: Essex, UK
Re: Taking members seriously
Of coursetiltbillings wrote:...which is a perfectly reasonable thing to do.
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27848
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Taking members seriously
Greetings Jechbi,
Tilt's account is factually correct. Tilt consulted with DW staff at the time, as to whether we thought Alex was genuine in his argument, or stringing us along. We thought he was probably serious, but no one was totally certain.
Jechbi, I can't help feeling that you're grasping to find evidence to support your pre-determined conspiratorial conclusions, rather than looking at the evidence that actually exists and drawing a sensible and rational conclusion from that. You seem to approach these discussions from the POV of wanting to prove your pre-existing theory, and then desperately hunting around the Internet to find evidence to support them. Personally I don't think that's a sound way to facilitate healthy and collaborative Dhamma discussion, do you?
Metta,
Retro.
I don't find this example particularly convincing to be honest.Jechbi wrote:I would suggest that members of the mod/admin team refrain from characterizing member posts as possibly just "jokes." From time to time, I have seen it happen that members who were trying to make a valid point from their perspective are told in-thread that it appeared they might just be joking. Here is one example.
Tilt's account is factually correct. Tilt consulted with DW staff at the time, as to whether we thought Alex was genuine in his argument, or stringing us along. We thought he was probably serious, but no one was totally certain.
... and through proliferation, assumption, suspicion and distrust, you have made the massive leap from what is observed (and actually transpires) through to a trademark negative conclusion. Whilst your statement is true as far as it goes (yes, it's good to not ridicule or dismiss people, of course...), I believe the inference that the mod/admin group are prone to these behaviours is in error.Jechbi wrote:I believe the board would be better served if members of the mod/admin team would take better care not to use ridicule or dismissiveness in their posts.
Jechbi, I can't help feeling that you're grasping to find evidence to support your pre-determined conspiratorial conclusions, rather than looking at the evidence that actually exists and drawing a sensible and rational conclusion from that. You seem to approach these discussions from the POV of wanting to prove your pre-existing theory, and then desperately hunting around the Internet to find evidence to support them. Personally I don't think that's a sound way to facilitate healthy and collaborative Dhamma discussion, do you?
Metta,
Retro.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Re: Taking members seriously
I'm glad I'm not the only one. I wonder that when I end up in a discussion with Alex too (no offense Alex).retrofuturist wrote:Tilt consulted with DW staff at the time, as to whether we thought Alex was genuine in his argument, or stringing us along. We thought he was probably serious, but no one was totally certain.
Re: Taking members seriously
So Jechbi's *best* example of a mod making a "dismissive" comment to a member was a comment made (a) four months ago and (b) in genuine puzzlement?
I think that is more evidence, if any is needed, that the mods are generally fair and polite.
Kim
I think that is more evidence, if any is needed, that the mods are generally fair and polite.
Kim
Re: Taking members seriously
Well this hasn't worked out very well so far.
To those who have criticized me for creating this suggestion, please be aware that DW invited me to do so. To those who say it is bad form, I disagree. If a member has a legitimate concern, from their perspective, about something occuring that appears to be counterproductive to the goals of the board, I don't see why a member should not be able to discuss it openly and respectfully.
And no, Kim, this is not my "best" example, it is just one example. I also experienced this type of response personally, and I've seen this type of response in other mod/admin posts from time to time. But I haven't kept a catalogue. I don't think it would be correct to fill the suggestion box with numerous examples, because then, based on experience, I might be accused of being "obsessed."
One other thing to note: Having made this suggestion at DW's invitation, I now find that the tables are turned, and I am on the defensive, answering further criticism about myself. This, too, has been an ongoing pattern, and it is one of the things I have been concerned about.
I apologize to those who find this exchange offensive. I didn't think the discussion would go in this direction.
p.s., would someone please enable me to post my sig again? I still don't have access. Thank you.
To those who have criticized me for creating this suggestion, please be aware that DW invited me to do so. To those who say it is bad form, I disagree. If a member has a legitimate concern, from their perspective, about something occuring that appears to be counterproductive to the goals of the board, I don't see why a member should not be able to discuss it openly and respectfully.
And no, Kim, this is not my "best" example, it is just one example. I also experienced this type of response personally, and I've seen this type of response in other mod/admin posts from time to time. But I haven't kept a catalogue. I don't think it would be correct to fill the suggestion box with numerous examples, because then, based on experience, I might be accused of being "obsessed."
Retro, that's not what I did. I accepted your invitation to create a suggestion-box entry with what I view as a legitimate suggestion, based on things I have witnessed happening on this board, and based on my personal experience. I thought this would be an opportunity to start fresh and follow your advice for how to discuss these things. I didn't expect that you'd once again bring out your “consiracy theory” dismissal strategy.retrofuturist wrote:Jechbi, I can't help feeling that you're grasping to find evidence to support your pre-determined conspiratorial conclusions, rather than looking at the evidence that actually exists and drawing a sensible and rational conclusion from that. You seem to approach these discussions from the POV of wanting to prove your pre-existing theory, and then desperately hunting around the Internet to find evidence to support them. Personally I don't think that's a sound way to facilitate healthy and collaborative Dhamma discussion, do you?
Yes, Tilt, but the problem is that when I use the report function, I'm met with additional ridicule, criticism and dismissiveness. I'm not saying this to be negative. I'm saying it as a statement of what I have directly experienced.tiltbillings wrote:He could have done that, or other forum members could have - had they found fault - used the "report" function or PMs, which is a perfectly reasonable thing to do.
It doesn't matter if it's a valid point or not. As a member of the mod/admin team, I feel you would better serve the goals of the board by refraining from making in-thread, dismissive statements like that.tiltbillings wrote:Who determines if it a valid point? But I engaged with Alex for pages, so I obviously did take what he said seriously, though significantly and seriously wrong. Also, quite seriously, at that time of the naughty post you linked, it was unclear if it was not an elaborate joke. It would not have been the first time being lead down a path by jokester like that..
One other thing to note: Having made this suggestion at DW's invitation, I now find that the tables are turned, and I am on the defensive, answering further criticism about myself. This, too, has been an ongoing pattern, and it is one of the things I have been concerned about.
I apologize to those who find this exchange offensive. I didn't think the discussion would go in this direction.
p.s., would someone please enable me to post my sig again? I still don't have access. Thank you.
-
- Posts: 1285
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:46 am
- Location: Essex, UK