Home | Community | Message Board

Cannabis Seeds UK
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | Next >  [ show all ]
Offlinefireworks_godS
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Male


Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
Re: The Official Change P&S Thread/Poll [Re: deCypher]
    #10254263 - 04/29/09 06:04 AM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Yup, me too. :thumbup:

I think that, between what he just said on the matter, and what you've stated, regarding drawing the line between personalisms/flames that aren't in context of the discussion itself, is the middle ground that it seems the regular regulars that have voted thus far are probably looking for. I recognize that there's just a little too much steam that is building up underneath the rule as it stands. Most of us are mature individuals who can handle some personal criticism. I just wish more of the voters on the no personalisms rule would express where they see the line, since most went with the middle option.


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you

:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLakefingers
Registered: 08/26/05
Posts: 6,440
Re: The Official Change P&S Thread/Poll *DELETED* [Re: johnm214]
    #10254569 - 04/29/09 08:28 AM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Post deleted by Lakefingers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinefireworks_godS
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Male


Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
Re: The Official Change P&S Thread/Poll [Re: Lakefingers]
    #10254620 - 04/29/09 08:56 AM (14 years, 10 months ago)

I think that's the first time I've seen you post something in clear English. :grin:


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you

:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibledeCypher
 User Gallery


Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
Re: The Official Change P&S Thread/Poll [Re: Lakefingers]
    #10254705 - 04/29/09 09:29 AM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

Lakefingers said:
It's simply this: rules are always matters of
interpretation because they are written in an imprecise
medium.




I would say that it's not the fault of the medium but rather an imprecise notion of what exactly it is that we wish to arbitrate.  The solution is simple, IMO: less rules.

Also, how 'bout Ontology, Epistemology, and Ethics as an alternative forum title?  The way I see it discussion of religion, spirituality fits into the Ontology category while psychology and the philosophy of science are subsumed into Epistemology.


--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMiddlemanM

Registered: 07/11/99
Posts: 8,399
Re: The Official Change P&S Thread/Poll [Re: deCypher]
    #10255313 - 04/29/09 11:31 AM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Keep in mind guys that this is a private website and admin (not mods) can give preference to whomever they wish.

If admin told us to be nicer to supporters or old-timers that would be perfectly within their rights.

Life is not fair and neither is the internet.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineGrapefruit
Freak in the forest
 User Gallery


Registered: 05/09/08
Posts: 5,744
Last seen: 3 years, 3 months
Re: The Official Change P&S Thread/Poll [Re: Middleman]
    #10255947 - 04/29/09 01:28 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

I retract my vote for philosophy and psychology and enter a vote for "On-Topic Discussion."


--------------------
Little left in the way of energy; or the way of love, yet happy to entertain myself playing mental games with the rest of you freaks until the rivers run backwards. 

"Chat your fraff
Chat your fraff
Just chat your fraff
Chat your fraff"

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: The Official Change P&S Thread/Poll [Re: Lakefingers]
    #10258426 - 04/29/09 08:28 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Decypher and fireworks, thanks, thats nice of you guys to say.


Quote:

Lakefingers said:
Define "clearly understandable rule". You can't. In
fact, you change it to "fairly understood", but how is
that clearly defined for future forum rules?




I can.  A clearly understood rule is one that prohibits and allows particular things such that the normal forum member would know what class of discussion is prohibited and what is allowed.  This is in contrast to general "moderator discretion" rules where it does not prohibit and allow certain things. 

I've stated why i think the former, clear rule, is superior to the later in my other post.  Basically it is more fair, easier to follow, more consistant, and the moderators will have clear provisions to enforce which should cut down on misunderstanding or claims of bias.



Quote:

Then you
parry around to the point that it would be 'a rule that
is consistently enforced and easily understood'. With
the rest of the post it is not clear at all that what
you promote is any different than how things are now.
Instead you raise more questions by making a Wasabread
fragile argument for clarity of rules.

It's simply this: rules are always matters of
interpretation because they are written in an imprecise
medium.





I'm not saying the present rules are necessarily unclear if that's what you are suggesting, and if your wondering about substantive changes it would be that not all personal discussion is banned.  Read my suggestion: ribbing is allowed, things a poster bring into a thread may be discussed, personal discussion relevant to the topic or person's post is allowed.

Re: your other point:
I thought I clarified between the inherently subjective application of rules by mods and posters with the clarity of what the rule itself allows and prohibits- I'm trying to avoid needlessly unclear prohibitions rather than subjective interpretation of posts in application of those prohibitions.  The application will always be subjective as posts are subjectivly interpreted, the rule itself however can prohibit and allow particular things. That's what I meant by:

Quote:


That is a clear rule with definite meaning and definite prohibitions.  The application will always be subjective, but the rule's prohibitions need not be unclear as "some personal discussion at moderator discretion" would be. (I realize these weren't supposed to be final rules when put in the poll)





I have not attempted to suggest we need to avoid all ambiguity in the application- it will always be subjective.  What I have done, is clarified between the necessary ambiguity in the interpretation and the unnecessary ambiguity in the provisions.


Just cuz you can't be sure how a rule is applied to a complex situation doesn't mean it is unclear in its provisions, it just means the moderators have to judge the post just as the person making it does.  The difference is that I want that judging done by a clear metric.


Quote:


Saying "no personal attacks or malicious commentary"
begs the question being discussed in several threads:
What is a personal attack? As such, with your solution
the issue becomes no clearer than it already is, and
suggests we lead ourselves to the same interpretive and
ethical disputes we are now in.





I thought the rule now was no personalisms or personal commentary.  It would not be malicious commentary, one of the things banned by my rule if not directed at an idea,  to say something teasingly without intent to harm, but that would be banned under the present rules (not saying a mod would enforce it if no harm was done, but it is against the rules).  The malice part definitely means something, and  my suggested rule clarifies  that  malice should be evident from the post itself rather than some convoluted inference that someone doesn't like you.  This would ban "your a shithead" but would not ban "omg dude, that's hillarious, your such a shithead sometimes, lol :laugh:

The former is malicious the latter is not, and the former would be banned the later not.  I've also clarified what I see as the differences between my suggestion and the present rule in allowing personal commentary if the poster invites it by bringing it up in the post or it is relevant to the post or topic.  This is also different.





Basically I think you misunderstood what I said.  I'm saying we should have clear metrics and provisions and that its impossible and perhaps inadvisable to attempt to remove all subjectivity from the application.

I'm also saying that prohibiting all personalisms is needless, and have suggested a line that I think might work.  I think that line is very different from the present rule, and makes sense.

But my point was only to demonstrate what I am suggesting- a clear rule. If you don't like my actual provisions than offer what you'd like and why.  While I like the rule I suggested it was only to demonstrate a way in which I think a rule can be clear and still accomplish what I think is desired my many in changing the present rule.  There's no reason we need to adopt my suggested rule if people don't want it, however; I do think we should try to strive for as much clarity in the final rule's provisions as is possible.


Thanks for your comments

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibledaytripper23
?
Male

Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc: Flag
Re: The Official Change P&S Thread/Poll [Re: johnm214]
    #10261636 - 04/30/09 10:22 AM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

The malice part definitely means something, and  my suggested rule clarifies  that  malice should be evident from the post itself rather than some convoluted inference that someone doesn't like you.  This would ban "your a shithead" but would not ban "omg dude, that's hillarious, your such a shithead sometimes, lol :laugh:





OK, maybe this would be kind of improvement, but honestly, who really cares about that? Do you really think this is what we have been making such a hoopla about? Do you think anyone has ever really had a problem with this?

There is already plenty of good natured ball-busting already, so its not like this is actually a problem. If you can imagine this happening, then I think you can also imagine how easy it would be to be resolved:

If there had been such a silly indiscretion on the moderator's part, the two parties involved would simply point this out to him. This is not really an issue, because you can see that there is no real conflict to speak of. This is what the moderators have already been doing anyhow; I have seen Decypher let plenty of these "kind" personalisms fly.

Basically, I do not see this as a real problem or a solution, and as a substantial proposal, to me it seems almost entirely insignificant. What those of us who have raised the issue are concerned with, is the moderator's actual subjective consideration.

But to that, the idea you raise is important, because it outlines what this actually is. Your proposal, while insignificant to my concern, emphasizes and reveals the great pretense of the "no personalism" rule. Those of us who raised the issue are well aware of this, even if it has not been said in this thread in particular:


The personalism is not some secular mechanism, or a technical consideration, but a veiled moral control of "good and evil" intentions.


That; a morality, is as you put it, what the "no personalism" rule is in its most idealistic sense, no?

So again, I want to impress that this is not a compromise to the issue that most of us here are actually debating. If all of that falls through, then yes, simply raising this to a conscious level would be the first thing to do in my opinion. Even if we don't end up taking an approach of truly free speech, I would greatly appreciate a moderator having to at least take responsibility for his subjective considerations, as you have alluded to in your own proposal.

If moderators would acknowledge this, rather than as recently obviating their responsibility to some notion of an objective semantic mechanism (bullshit!), I would feel much better. That is in other words, acknowledging the moderator's role as censor, and arbitrator of morality. A censor is a censor.

But as the vote is tied up between "free speech" and "censorship" at the moment, I will again impress that while this issue you raise may be well noted, it is specific to one of these choices (one of the choices to keep personalisms).

It should not be confused with a more fundamental issue at hand, which is to possibly rid ourselves entirely of such subjective considerations. To that, it is not a compromise. Either we are beyond good and evil or we are not.

So I do not disagree John, (though I would vote the other way); I just believe that your proposal needs to be put into the context of the previous discussions. I hope you understand where I am coming from.


--------------------
Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
  The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
  The frumious Bandersnatch!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleIcelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Male


Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
Re: The Official Change P&S Thread/Poll [Re: daytripper23]
    #10261649 - 04/30/09 10:24 AM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Either we are beyond good and evil or we are not.

:satansmoking::hellfire::satansmoking::hellfire:


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: The Official Change P&S Thread/Poll [Re: daytripper23]
    #10262201 - 04/30/09 12:12 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

I realize my example was a bit obvious in wht should be done (rather than what the rules require absent moderator discretion) but my suggestion goes further than allowing the example given.



I'm not sure I understand what you want, exactly.  Maybe give an example of how you want the rules changed or what they should be?


Either way, I was just giving an example of what I'd like and saying we should err on the side of definite prohibitions in my opinion.  You guys have been hear longer than me so say what you'd think the rule to be- maybe there's some consensus on the issue that can be reached?


Would probably be easier to get a consensus for changing the rules if people have a defniite or provisional rule to consider.  I know that's somewhat why I refrained from voting- didn't want my vote misconstrued if the forum wanted something different than I was thinking of.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibledeCypher
 User Gallery


Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
Re: The Official Change P&S Thread/Poll [Re: johnm214]
    #10262214 - 04/30/09 12:15 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

johnm214 said:
Either way, I was just giving an example of what I'd like and saying we should err on the side of definite prohibitions in my opinion.  You guys have been hear longer than me so say what you'd think the rule to be- maybe there's some consensus on the issue that can be reached?




Yeah, I think I might be leaning towards this.  But what specific, definite prohibition should exist in your opinion?


--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibledeCypher
 User Gallery


Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
Re: The Official Change P&S Thread/Poll [Re: deCypher]
    #10262310 - 04/30/09 12:38 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

My tentative proposal at this time would be allow any posts that are on topic.  This would mean that any OP would have to propose an idea for discussion that pertains to philosophy or spirituality (psychology, science, and mysticism as lumped under these categories for purposes of current discussion as the name change of this forum is an entirely separate issue), and that any responder to the OP would have to post something relevant to discussion going on in that thread.

As it stands, the site-wide administrative guidelines say:

Quote:

On Harassment & Respect:

    Harassment of other members will not be tolerated at the Shroomery, and may result in an immediate ban depending on severity. If you have a problem with another member, please make your peace with them or simply keep your distance. If you cannot behave in a respectful manner, keep your words to yourself. Failure to comply will result in administrative action at the sole discretion of the staff. All members are encouraged to PM a moderator or administrator with relevant information if they cannot resolve their conflict privately.




Clearly we should try to prevent harassment when it pertains nothing to the discussion at hand.  But what about comments that are relevant to the posted topic and yet insinuate potentially negative comments about a particular poster?  This is too much of a grey area IMO; I'd be more inclined to permit any and all on-topic posting.  Potentially 'negative' comments remain only negative subjectively; what one person deems to be insulting another would not.  The crux of the matter is that posts in this forum ought to remain on topic and about philosophical and spiritual ideas; so long as this is maintained I see no problem with replacing the no-personalism rule with a no-offtopic rule.


--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAnonymousRabbit
Comrade
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/10/08
Posts: 8,993
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
Re: The (Un)Official Change P&S Thread/Poll *DELETED* [Re: fireworks_god]
    #10262324 - 04/30/09 12:40 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Post deleted by AnonymousRabbit


--------------------
.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineC.M. Mann
subconscious explorer
Male


Registered: 05/01/08
Posts: 899
Loc: Florida
Last seen: 12 years, 11 months
Re: The Official Change P&S Thread/Poll [Re: Middleman]
    #10262330 - 04/30/09 12:42 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

All of my life I have tailored any response to an appropriate level. It's called respect and manners!  When I go to a venue that is not mine, I treat them and their property with respect!  If some people want to be an idiot, let them support their own free speech.  Intelligent humans conversing about complex abstract thought relating to philosophy, should be educated enough to understand respect!  When you encounter people who refuse to maintain a proper level of respect, it creates a dysfunctional impediment for others to learn.  As long as we act like children, there needs to be a parent to smack our ass.  I think that many would come back, if the discourse was less acerbic.  I think that having moderators maintaining this balance, makes for a more open forum.  :bigblunt:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs
Female User Gallery


Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 3 years, 25 days
Re: The (Un)Official Change P&S Thread/Poll [Re: AnonymousRabbit]
    #10262506 - 04/30/09 01:08 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

supernovasky said:
Why Philosophy and Psychology? Why not Philosophy and Sociology?




Why do you think this would be better?


--------------------
:bunny::bunnyhug:
All this time I've loved you
And never known your face
All this time I've missed you
And searched this human race
Here is true peace
Here my heart knows calm
Safe in your soul
Bathed in your sighs

:bunnyhug: :yinyang2:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinefireworks_godS
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Male


Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
Re: The (Un)Official Change P&S Thread/Poll [Re: AnonymousRabbit]
    #10262595 - 04/30/09 01:25 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

supernovasky said:
Why Philosophy and Psychology? Why not Philosophy and Sociology?




I personally proposed Psychology because it represents a lot of the discussion in the forum. There's always an abundance of discussion pertaining to the mind and of behavior. Definitely much more than regarding matters of society, although there's certainly some of that here too. I find that Philosophy and Psychology are very complementary in a lot of ways and thought it would be interesting to see what people thought, and I included it in the poll because a few people said they dug it.
The poll consists of suggestions that had been put forth at the time, minus the suggestion of Philosophy and Science, which I had mistakenly forgot about (although I'm not sure how much of an option that would have been anyways due to it already belonging to another forum), as well as the option to write-in other suggestions.

Quote:


Anyway, it seems clear to me that while there is a vote that remains in the plurality, a large majority of people did NOT select that title.




This is true, and would remain true regarding any one of the choices. This is why the possibilities of either a run-off vote, eliminating all but say the top three choices, or a compromise name, are on the table. Say, for example, Philosophy, Logic, and Psychology. A run-off might be the best answer though, but its a matter that now waits for input from the administration. Its their turn to go further with this if they want to. :wink:


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you

:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAnonymousRabbit
Comrade
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/10/08
Posts: 8,993
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
Re: The (Un)Official Change P&S Thread/Poll *DELETED* [Re: fireworks_god]
    #10262705 - 04/30/09 01:47 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Post deleted by AnonymousRabbit


--------------------
.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleOrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,441
Loc: Under the C
Re: The (Un)Official Change P&S Thread/Poll [Re: fireworks_god]
    #10262759 - 04/30/09 01:55 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

I thought you wanted the forum to be called 'Pandamonium'... :crazy:


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinefireworks_godS
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Male


Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
Re: The (Un)Official Change P&S Thread/Poll [Re: AnonymousRabbit]
    #10263275 - 04/30/09 03:10 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Great points. Philosophy, Sociology, and Psychology would be a great title, IMO. I wouldn't say Philosophy and Sociology would be a better title than Philosophy and Psychology though, because I'm more interested in seeing Psychology represented. :razz: :grin: Also, sociology is simply the psychology of more people... :hehehe:

I personally don't like the idea of putting Logic in the title because its more of a function than a subject, but a lot of people are interested in seeing it in there. I'm starting to wonder if simply "Philosophy" should be settled for though....

Gotta tell you, though, I like how "Philosophy, Sociology, and Psychology" sounds. :yesnod:


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you

:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAnonymousRabbit
Comrade
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/10/08
Posts: 8,993
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
Re: The (Un)Official Change P&S Thread/Poll *DELETED* [Re: fireworks_god]
    #10263312 - 04/30/09 03:15 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Post deleted by AnonymousRabbit


--------------------
.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* The *Official* apocalypse discussion thread
( 1 2 all )
Dogomush 3,427 21 04/08/03 05:58 AM
by cleaner
* POLL: Do you believe in Aliens?
( 1 2 all )
Shroomalicious 2,623 28 07/15/02 05:40 PM
by mr crisper
* the new and improved S&P 3.0 with 84% less sticky threads ShroomismM 573 6 05/31/04 01:53 AM
by Swami
* The Official Truth Thread - No jokes please!
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 all )
World Spirit 18,789 178 10/31/02 12:23 AM
by Strumpling
* POLL: Is "something" happening?
( 1 2 3 all )
trendalM 4,396 51 12/07/03 09:27 AM
by Viaggio
* Shroomism poll skaMariaPastora 1,563 15 01/19/02 10:36 PM
by FatNug
* Are we bieng kept ignorant on purpose? Dreamer987 1,094 14 02/14/04 09:23 PM
by NiamhNyx
* Thread lock Nomad 905 7 12/02/02 04:30 AM
by Shroomism

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
11,128 topic views. 1 members, 11 guests and 41 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.025 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 15 queries.