Home | Community | Message Board


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: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   North Spore Bulk Substrate   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract   Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6  [ show all ]
InvisibleLunarEclipse
Enlil's Official Story
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 21,407
Loc: Building 7
Swama New Year = Resolution or Revolution?
    #3525585 - 12/20/04 08:49 PM (19 years, 3 months ago)

Let's hope the New Year brings more resolution than revolution as cooler heads prevail.




Edited by LunarEclipse (01/02/05 05:58 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: LunarEclipse]
    #3525651 - 12/20/04 09:16 PM (19 years, 3 months ago)

woohoo im shitting myself with excitement!

:smirk:


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


Everything I post is fiction.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSource
Remainder of anUnbalancedEquation
Male

Registered: 07/28/03
Posts: 667
Loc: Outer Darkness
Last seen: 10 years, 3 months
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: LunarEclipse]
    #3526060 - 12/20/04 10:58 PM (19 years, 3 months ago)

Since Swami has had more time on his hands for the last few days, I predict a 'Swami Manifesto'. It would be a gift for some and coal for others.


--------------------
What you're searching for is what's searching.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLunarEclipse
Enlil's Official Story
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 21,407
Loc: Building 7
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Source]
    #3526145 - 12/20/04 11:24 PM (19 years, 3 months ago)

"I predict a Swami Manifesto"

Didn't the Unabomber write a manifesto?  :shocked:


--------------------
Anxiety is what you make it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSclorch
Clyster

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: LunarEclipse]
    #3526238 - 12/20/04 11:47 PM (19 years, 3 months ago)

I predict he'll call the mods on their bs and get permabanned.

But then again... I'm probably just messing up with this crystal ball.


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinedeff
just love everyone
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/01/04
Posts: 9,421
Loc: clarity
Last seen: 3 hours, 39 minutes
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Sclorch]
    #3526988 - 12/21/04 08:27 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

I predict slight rain somewhere in the world tomorrow

followed by sunny periods somewhere else

:cool:


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


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblegettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: deff]
    #3527297 - 12/21/04 10:17 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

I predict a jester may or may not reappear.

I got a hardy ban once. I thought I didn't care because I was moving out of here anyway. Some people had touched me though and I came back to reconnect with them and have met new people too. I'm glad I did and I hope swami does too.

So many come here thinking we are on some obssesive mission to get to the truth, whose truth, what truth, that of modern science, modern goverment, modern religion, modern medicine? What about the truth of who we are, have been and can be? For me, it's about connecting and relating with other souls.

If we can't find a way to co-exist here in love, respect, good will and harmony, I can tell you, we arn't anywhere near finding or being in the truth, the one that really matters and never changes.


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 38,008
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #3527367 - 12/21/04 10:39 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

step by step
slowly he turned


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezahudulallah
Sexual Heretic

Registered: 10/20/04
Posts: 10,579
Loc: Tokyo, Japan
Last seen: 18 years, 9 months
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Sclorch]
    #3527722 - 12/21/04 12:39 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Sclorch said:
I predict he'll call the mods on their bs and get permabanned.

But then again... I'm probably just messing up with this crystal ball.




Yea. I don't think he's going to take it very well.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblegettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: zahudulallah]
    #3528019 - 12/21/04 01:51 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Swami knows how to find the humor in anything, including himself.

I doubt he'd come back here all heavy handed and hearted. That would make for a guaranteed perma Ban, he's smarter then that.


Zahud,

If he doesn't take it well and comes back with an emotional reaction, crying foul well then, maybe he will understand what others have felt like and maybe then he'll stop generating emotional reactions out of people.

Will he practice what he has been preaching? I doubt he'd come back if he can't.

How come so many support him in saying humans need to get control over their own emotions and then the same ones are all concerned about swami not being able to have a handle on his?

And they will say, "well how can he after being wrongly banned?" and I say, "well how can others when being wrongly portrayed by twisted words and interpretations of what someone really meant?"

If he does that to one of my posts again, I won't react to and from the illusion he created of me, I'll ask him to kindly go back to what I did in fact write and rethink how he came up with what he did and then maybe, he'll begin to understand how the mods came up with what they did.

If your going to dish it out, ya gotta be able to take it or stop dishing it out.

If everyone would kindly and peacefully call him on it, threads wouldn't blow up because the fabricated fuel would be diffused and the mods wouldn't have to get involved with school yard squabbles.

I've taken time to think about a lot too and I know he's reading this. He wanted to know what he did and here it is and he was doing it long before I came.

When he's looking to spar mental wits and can't find facts to challenge, which is fine to do if he has proof they are wrong or asks for proof of a claim to be fact, he makes up a reply to someone that reads as if the person he replied to said things they didn't and then a battle over an illusion made to look real ensues.

Like that time he did it with something I said about the Oregon anomaly. He's a tricky one cuz he got me and we started going back and forth as if I did say something I didn't. Thankfully, exclusive jumped in and said, "swami, I went back through the post and could not find where jiggy said that." I was like, if I didn't and I hadn't, then what the hell are we even dickering about. Arggggg he got me ha ha ha ha ha. I know to watch for it now so do all of you, including you swami because I know you are reading here.

If anyone reading this thinks that it was the persons fault for reacting to swami wrongly misportarying them, then you have to use the same measure of judgment if swami comes back with an emotional reaction for what you beleive was his being wrongly misportrayed.

Fair is fair and I think people get tired of a double standard that had been lurking underneath the surface here.

Maybe you sincerely never did it intentionally and its just a quirk of your mind looking for action. If you sincerely do not do it intentionally then let us help you see it in the future when you do and then you will know why you got called on stirring up so much chaos confusion and drama here.

Is spirituality and religion and philosophy more about getting to the truth of what we are and are not as spirit and consciousness inhabiting human form or about external material facts subject to change as science progresses?

This forum rocks more then any other and we all know it. We'll all get through this together as one big happy disfunctional mostly functional and thriving family full of so much love healing itself from the fray of existence.

We can do it! If swami doesn't come back at least I can say I learned more about myself while he was here and I am grateful for that. People come and go in out of our lives all of the time, some bearing goods and some bearing coal, and what we do with those gifts is what its all about.


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #3528291 - 12/21/04 03:21 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

i think if swami gets permabanned, we should all drink poison koolaid for swami solidarity.


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


Everything I post is fiction.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblegettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Moonshoe]
    #3528546 - 12/21/04 05:02 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

ha ha ha ha ha ha

That had to be a joke!

I'll kiss ya sweet dream if ya do. I won't drink poison for any cause, specially one as silly as this.

I don't go down with sinking ships either. There is always a life raft, grab who ya can, and get to shore. Only a captains pride and a fool would go down with the ship. Let the faulty ship sink, and keep your life because you can always build new ships to sail on with.

I think martyrdom for any cause is just like it says martyr-dumb.

Who started this scarifice to the gods nonsense anyway? Does anyone know the history of it?


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezahudulallah
Sexual Heretic

Registered: 10/20/04
Posts: 10,579
Loc: Tokyo, Japan
Last seen: 18 years, 9 months
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #3528602 - 12/21/04 05:18 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

On an off topic note, without martyrs there is no progress. History has proven someone has to take one for the team.

Entirely unrelated note though, I could care less about the Swami ban. He gave me a D- on Logic. :grin:


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLunarEclipse
Enlil's Official Story
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 21,407
Loc: Building 7
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #3528612 - 12/21/04 05:20 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

"Martyr-dumb"

Exactly. No Kool Aid for this boy....

Have you ever been around a panicked swimmer? I have, and thank God for Red Cross life guard training. Shot to the chest, grab them, spin them, pull under the chin or by the hair. Anything but the death hug that takes you both down to Davy Jones Locker.

Edited by LunarEclipse (12/21/04 06:09 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSclorch
Clyster

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Sclorch]
    #3557277 - 12/29/04 12:33 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Sclorch said:
I predict he'll call the mods on their bs and get permabanned.




It sucks being so right.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLunarEclipse
Enlil's Official Story
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 21,407
Loc: Building 7
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Sclorch]
    #3557338 - 12/29/04 12:47 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

"It sucks being so right."

Isn't the current ban for the puppet 10 days? Has he now been permabanned?


--------------------
Anxiety is what you make it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSclorch
Clyster

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: LunarEclipse]
    #3557370 - 12/29/04 12:54 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

LunarEclipse said:
"It sucks being so right."

Isn't the current ban for the puppet 10 days? Has he now been permabanned?



Like the mods aren't chomping at the bit waiting to make that call.
Reason has left the building... so far Fireworksgod is now gone from S&P... if others leave... there's really no point in me waiting around for my ban.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Sclorch]
    #3557607 - 12/29/04 02:22 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

fireworks said he was leaving for mainly non swami related reasons.

i dont think that things are so shitty that you need to worry about getting banned youself sclorch, just for being you.

lets hope not anyways

the first banning of swami was very iffy, the second was just terrible


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


Everything I post is fiction.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleJellric
altered statesman

Registered: 11/07/98
Posts: 2,261
Loc: non-local
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Sclorch]
    #3557800 - 12/29/04 03:12 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

I don't see myself being around much longer either if this continues.
I just don't feel a good vibe around here anymore.


--------------------
I AM what Willis was talkin' bout.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLunarEclipse
Enlil's Official Story
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 21,407
Loc: Building 7
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Jellric]
    #3558494 - 12/29/04 06:21 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

"I don't see myself being around much longer either if this continues."

In "real" life, when things aren't "fair", we have two basic choices:

1. Accept that life isn't always fair, and make the best of a bad situation.

2. Bitch and moan and cry woe is me, life isn't fair, and make a bad situation worse.

In sports, as in this forum, there are referrees (mods and admins) who interpret and enforce the rules.

Referees DO make bad calls. The KEY for the player or team that got a bad call is to tell the ref why they thought the call was bad in a diplomatic and unthreatening manner. Many refs will then proceed to make a bad call on the other team or a non-call to the team that got the first bad call. That's called making the best of a bad situation.

Now, if after the bad call, the player(s) and coach get in the ref's face, and keep bitching about how unfair the call was, the ref is likely to follow up that first bad call with a few more of the same. The ref might eject a player or two. The ref might remember next game how he was told he sucked, and the bad calls continue. That's called making a bad situation worse.

So, will Swami be able to accept his bad call and move on? Will his teammates pull him away from the refs for his protection and in the interest of the team?


--------------------
Anxiety is what you make it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSclorch
Clyster

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: LunarEclipse]
    #3558688 - 12/29/04 07:17 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

There's no teams in this... it just a series of bad calls... and it has all but destroyed the possibility of multidimensional, fruitful discussion.

Maybe S&P should just default to what the real whiners want: The Koombayah Forum.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLunarEclipse
Enlil's Official Story
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 21,407
Loc: Building 7
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Sclorch]
    #3559294 - 12/29/04 09:58 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

"There's no teams in this"

Perhaps not, but there are the players, and there are the referees. The referees have the whistle.

Maybe I am missing something, being one of the newbies here. Isn't this a private web site where it costs nothing to join? Isn't posting a priveledge and not a right?

If people are going to consider this their "home", perhaps they should consider who owns the house. If you don't pay rent, and you don't own the house, you aren't "home". You are JUST A GUEST. And we all know what happens to guests who wear out their welcome. SEE YA.


--------------------
Anxiety is what you make it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: LunarEclipse]
    #3559357 - 12/29/04 10:10 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Swami was starting to post more and more off topic crap! Something had to be done about it.

He had built up a huge ego and was using this to manipulate discusion in the forum. Like a child, any attention was good attention.

I always saw Swami as more of a joke than anybody worth engaging in philosophical/spiritual discusion with.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblewhiterasta
Day careobserver
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/09/02
Posts: 1,780
Loc: Oregon
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Sclorch]
    #3560910 - 12/30/04 10:31 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Maybe S&P should just default to what the real whiners want: The Koombayah Forum. 





Nah, someone is gonna get spanked. I can't read crap like "the tsunami and 2012" w/o saying something eventually.I took a ban(1fucking hr?)last night for posting this concern in the website feedback forum(where I thought FEEDBACK goes). The thread was locked saying it was just another "swami" thread and I was banned after a brief but telling interaction with a "mod?".Now I will just see how this all gets handled. I know S&P will be a Bullshit forum without the "skeptic" view.
I guess in situations such as this a Zen mode is key. It don't really matter and even if it did, it don't really matter.
WR :wexican:


--------------------
To old for this place

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblegettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: LunarEclipse]
    #3561082 - 12/30/04 11:27 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

LunarEclipse said:
  Isn't this a private web site where it costs nothing to join?  Isn't posting a priveledge and not a right? 

If people are going to consider this their "home", perhaps they should consider who owns the house.  If you don't pay rent, and you don't own the house, you aren't "home".  You are JUST A GUEST.  And we all know what happens to guests who wear out their welcome.




This is what it comes down too along with the forum rules for being a guest in someone elses home. Mods, I think this should head the forum rules post to serve as a reminder.

When I'm at my parents house, it feels like MY home, but I am just a guest there and they can pretty much tell me how I have to be when in their home or tell me to get the fuck out until I can respect their wishes and their other guests.

There are enough of you here complaining about how the owners of this home like to keep house. Why not get together and create your own Web-site? If you did, maybe you would appreciate the time and money that goes into as well as the effort to keep it an enjoyable place to be for the welcomed guests.

I would gather that the original vision was to create a community for people who shared a common interest-shroomin. I'm sure the original vision and intention included a harmonious and co-operative atmosphere, not oppositions and power plays.

I'm not on a high horse. I've been mega banned and have had threads locked. I didn't complain about it but rather took the opportunity to realize where and how I became an obnoxious house guest regardless of the provocation and appreciated the reminder of what a privilege it is to be allowed to post here.

On a final note, I fucken hate rules. Catch this, my first message board was at the crystal children web-site, you can imagine how airy fairy it was. Some of the old timers didn't like the way I played and complained to the site owner acclaimed book author Doreen Virtue herself about me.

Moderators were put in place for the first time to appease the gooey sappy oldies who felt I was to abrasive. I never got in trouble there but was like oh fuck that whiney crap, and I started my own message boards and invited everyone over who was diggen a different vibe.

Only then when all hell would break loose did I actually find myself starting to ban people and delete threads. I couldn't believe I was doing that when I valued freedom and free will as I did. I had no rules and no intention of moderating, rather participating as an equal.

I thought I was acting in the best interest of the majority who found certain people upsetting to the flow or highly negative as they did complain to me off the board and then when I would ban the offensive ones and delete the negative stuff, the others turned on me for doing it. I was like wtf?

I can really appreciate first hand what these mods are dealing with. After a while, I got tired of the time and money upkeep and trying to please everyone and bailed on it.

The moral of the story is, if you don't like how this home is wished to be kept by the owner keepers of it then maybe it's time you buy your own house, invite some guests and then maybe you will appreciate and understand this whole situation much better.

I feel bad for anytime I stepped out of line here and you won't find me complaining about my rights to be an ass in someone elses home flaming the home owners, staff in service to the festivities or the guests.

A lot of people have backed off from posting for now simply because they are waiting for the opposition against the admins and mods to settle down. Some people read like people who crashed a mellow chill civilized party, trashed the place, then had the nerve to complain about how lame the party was while making fun of the dorky guests. Its not cool, its just not cool.

Buy your own house, let everyone trash it, fight, shred and tear on your guests and YOU, then maybe the light bulb of understanding and appreciation will go off in your head. :wink:


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblewandrnshaman
old hand
Registered: 09/21/03
Posts: 1,196
Loc: Pinellas Co, FL
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #3561102 - 12/30/04 11:34 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

well said! :grin:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSclorch
Clyster

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #3561161 - 12/30/04 11:45 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

It's easy to say when you've only been a part of this community since July.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblewhiterasta
Day careobserver
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/09/02
Posts: 1,780
Loc: Oregon
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Sclorch]
    #3561355 - 12/30/04 12:42 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Well said! when one has operated with a set of "rules" for a number of years and then is subjected to "new" and unanounced "rules" a reaction will ensue.
Perhaps this is a rather unpopular and unflattering view of human behavior. but that IS what we all are here,human?
OR... How would you like to get a ticket for driving one handed without knowlege one handed driving was an offence?Driving is also a privelige,neh?
But you would still react to the injustice,right?Well this is the reaction from some long time one handed drivers.
WR :wexican:


--------------------
To old for this place

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleJellric
altered statesman

Registered: 11/07/98
Posts: 2,261
Loc: non-local
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Sclorch]
    #3561371 - 12/30/04 12:46 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Sclorch, I've just bought the marshmellows to roast for the fire. All we need now is a :jamming:.

Seriously, the world right now is in desperate need of a trait known as tolerance. We are NEVER all going to think alike, and we are NEVER going to convert those dirty heathens either. So where does that leave us? We can try to wipe out the heathens (genocide), or segregate. Both have been tried many times throught history without success. Isn't there a third option?

Even in the U.S. people are lining up into opposing camps, red states vs. blue states. Center-to-left leaning citizens have their CNN, center-to-right has FOX news. Now you don't even have to encounter opposing points of view, you can isolate yourself and only hear from those who agree with your point of view. I think that's unhealthy, both here and the world at large. People need to hear and respect ALL sides of the story. The alternative is a closed-loop feedback system which successfully repels external contamination. Ah.. but what about internal contamination? Heh. People always forget about internal contamination! We like to think of ourselves as pure. And therein lies the fatal flaw of that type of thinking.

I have considered this place a home since the inception of the forum. So this has been a little hard for me to watch. Old school S&P such as me and Sclorch have been around here long enough to see the big picture, and the undercurrents at play. This goes deeper than just the Swamster.

Personally, I have elements of both believer and skeptic in me. To some extent I feel like I'm being forced to choose between two halves of my nature. And that is a false choice. I will step away until this blows over. Long time regulars here probably know I periodically take breaks regardless. This seems like a good time for one.

I'll leave you with a little science fact:

When a cold/dry front meets warm/moist air there is always a terrible storm. When the two opposing elements absorb and combine each others energy, the storm has passed and peace returns.

Peace to you!  :sun:

-Jell


--------------------
I AM what Willis was talkin' bout.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblegettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Sclorch]
    #3561557 - 12/30/04 01:32 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Sclorch said:
It's easy to say when you've only been a part of this community since July.




It's been interesting watching some use the same reasons to support their beliefs and feelings that they call others "nuts" for.

Say I am talking about some cosmic trippy shit and someone tells me I am nuts and I say back that they don't understand because they are just waking up and I've been involved with it for a decade. I suppose I would be called arrogant, think I am better then the newly awakened or some like cacophony, yet you sit here and say, "i have been here longer so I matter more. Same shit different face.

It's also interesting to see the double standard that has lied beneath the surface coming out here.

For those of you who have been deeply caught up in the swama, let me share an outside view with you.

Some are beefing that this forum is NOT about feelings , people overact based on emotions and that they shouldn't and how no one can make you feel anything and that the emotional wusses here should take a hike.

Well well, aren't those same people coming froward within the swama from a place of strong emotions, reacting from them as if they were made to feel hurt and upset by his unjust ban?

Maybe some people should take an "aha" moment and realize, that's how some others here have felt when they come from emotion, feel that they have been treated unfairly and say things like "this made me feel this or that way".

The same people who argue against that are the same ones acting in the same manor regarding the swama.

We are no different in the end it appears.

For example, what if Markos told you that your feelings about the shroomery being like your home that has been a part of you for so many years do not matter and that you should refrain from bringing that sentiment and part of yourself into this forum like you told him he should do with the esoterism that has become a part of him?

Like jell pointed about what happens to calm a storm, the energies merge into one.

We are more the same then we are not after all I hope some are realizing. We all have things we feel strongly about that have become a part of who we are and even those who have pooh poohed emotions and emotional reactions and taking offense to unfair attacks on what you feel strongly about are now doing the same exact thing.

Maybe now, some of you may understand how others have felt over the years here when they come from feeling strongly about something that has become a part of them and maybe, some more consideration and respect will be shown for that across the board. Maybe no one will have grown from this.

regardless, what pulled me in is what Lunar said and that is no matter how long or short you have been a guest in anothers home, and no matter how much it feels like home or how many liberties the home owner gave you in the past, they are free to reset the boundaries for their open house whenever they wish how they wish. Like a private home with owners and hired staff, this is the same thing.

They had intentions and visions for this community, it is theirs to run, theirs to make the choice of staff to hire that they believe will maintain the original integrity to the best of human ability as they see fit. To insult the mods is to insult the homeowners intelligence. That's a very disrespectful thing for a house guest to do. This is an open community. No one is held captive here. People are free to come and go.

This is a growing community, you have to expect change and growing pains and adjustments to occur from time to time to keep the vision alive and thriving in new directions. That's evolution. Funny how the hard core evolutionists seem to be having the most difficult time adapting to change.

Remember who survives, those that can adapt to change and those who thought they were strong calling the others weak can't seem to adapt to a changing environment very well.

Go ahead everyone in the swama, keep talking because all you are doing is showing yourselves to be and do what you have been accusing others of. It's sort of funny and something one can laugh at themselves over. Maybe soon we will all be laughing over this up the road TOGETHER. :heart:

This is a great opportunity to take a pause for some self reflection. I know I have.


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Edited by gettinjiggywithit (12/30/04 01:46 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLunarEclipse
Enlil's Official Story
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 21,407
Loc: Building 7
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #3562273 - 12/30/04 05:08 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

"Funny how the hard core evolutionists seem to be having the most difficult time adapting to change."

Good point. Some of the evolutionists and logical members have handled the changes so poorly they have said their teary eyed goodbyes. I didn't understand it either. But, I respect the belief of members who feel wronged, whether rational and fact based, or whether irrational and based on personalities and emotions.

I do disagree with the notion that the house owners owe their guests room, board, and putting up with endless griping to boot.

Management reserves the right to refuse service to any patron.
House Rules are subject to change without prior notice.
Piss off the bartender and you may not be coming back to the bar.

While I would like to believe that upon the third return of the banished one, cooler heads will prevail, it seems doubtful. Neither side seems willing to budge, so git ready for the final showdown at the OK Corral.

How's that for some SwamaTM?

Still, coming to a gun fight armed with knives and verbal ones at that seems like bad odds. Maybe a good way to end up six feet under in Shroomery Boot Hill...

Let's hope not for the sake of community. I kinda miss the old gang...


--------------------
Anxiety is what you make it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #3562303 - 12/30/04 05:17 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

"When I'm at my parents house, it feels like MY home, but I am just a guest there and they can pretty much tell me how I have to be when in their home or tell me to get the fuck out until I can respect their wishes and their other guests. "

well yeah but if your parents throw you out of your house for being who you are then refuse to clearly state why they did it and then 2 weeks later they let you back, and you ask about what happend with the last time, and then they just throw you out again, your parents are assholes.

swami bugged the HELL out of me often but i never complained about it to mods or anything because i figured he bugs me, maybe i bug him, but we both have the right to be who we are regardless.

he made things a bit more fun although i agree he was an attention fiend.


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


Everything I post is fiction.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblegettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Moonshoe]
    #3562594 - 12/30/04 06:54 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Dude, I never would of banned him. In my ideal world, I would love to be here with swami and NO RULES.

But this isn't my world to idealize. It is the admins and I and he and everyone have to respect that or not post here.

he took the time to clever craft psycho analysis and ad homonyms into words that fit within the rules. I don't care to take that time and I crossed the line a lot with him and I admit that, it was obvious.

Don't tell me you think he doesn't know how crafty he is with words and that he was banned for that initially. There is no technical rule he broke in that sense, but it was stirring up shit anyway as it was meant to and he could say, "what did I do?" Please!

I think swami and I have had more 'sweet gooey" public moments then him within anyone else here and he's made me laugh so hard I could pee my pants so no one think he and I didn't have our own mutual understanding that required NO mod interference on my behalf. Swam entertainment was often better then TV and I use to tell him he should be a sit com writer. He was wasting his talent here. He belongs in Hollywood. I had a lot of fun with him and hes gone. I have no one to play smokey and the bandit with now cuz the bandit's been smoked out.

So, I will readjust, re-conform to the new rules best I can when I post here and life goes on anew falalalala :tongue:


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLunarEclipse
Enlil's Official Story
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 21,407
Loc: Building 7
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Moonshoe]
    #3562682 - 12/30/04 07:17 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Santa and Swami came and went all too quickly.

I hope Swami comes back along with others who have left and all can just drop this banning thing. This place is worth it.

Thank you mods for letting this thread ride after this most recent ban, as I feel some good ideas were expressed. Should you wish to lock it now, you have my blessing.

Happy New Year all and thanks for the learning and the laughs.

Edited by LunarEclipse (12/30/04 09:22 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineincubaby_421
half naked andfull witted
 User Gallery

Registered: 08/14/04
Posts: 2,629
Loc: the center of the univers...
Last seen: 5 years, 8 months
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: LunarEclipse]
    #3563512 - 12/30/04 10:54 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

yes...
ive found the hippie convention to re-enstate swami
HCRS
thats sounds like a good name for it.
FREE SWAMI!...FREE SWAMI!...FREE SWAMI!!!


--------------------
"yet the more i dig, the more i consume, the more i unfold... the less protected i feel.
i am the spit on the hair of the son of an electron, swimming around the nucleus of a cell inside the sperm of a killer bee, and my purpose is as nebulous as why weve been bestowed with the capacity to give a shit" Brandon Boyd


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineincubaby_421
half naked andfull witted
 User Gallery

Registered: 08/14/04
Posts: 2,629
Loc: the center of the univers...
Last seen: 5 years, 8 months
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: incubaby_421]
    #3563551 - 12/30/04 10:59 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

i know that was ignorant. i know it was annoying. and i know it was degrading to the human race.
but forgive me i just couldnt help myself that time.


--------------------
"yet the more i dig, the more i consume, the more i unfold... the less protected i feel.
i am the spit on the hair of the son of an electron, swimming around the nucleus of a cell inside the sperm of a killer bee, and my purpose is as nebulous as why weve been bestowed with the capacity to give a shit" Brandon Boyd


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblewandrnshaman
old hand
Registered: 09/21/03
Posts: 1,196
Loc: Pinellas Co, FL
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: LunarEclipse]
    #3563571 - 12/30/04 11:03 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

I know skepticism is an important part of any open minded community but you'd think the level of acceptance that should be kept here would allow the young shroomers the chance to step out in their shaky new belief system without being browbeat back into submission by critical comments and goading by the critical masses who've owned this forum for so long.

Some of us may have forgotten how scary it was to see errors in a fundamental belief system and know that it isn't the correct path for ourself. Then again, maybe some here still believe their way is the only way. Hopefully, open discussion will begin to take place in this forum soon instead of just debate.

I'm sure I'll regret this post in the morning but right now I'm just tired of seeing what you'd think would be one of the most advanced, free willed, spiritual forums on the internet being over run by the some of the most vocal cynics online. I think many would like to express new ideas and theories here but are afraid of the backlash. I know the few posts I've made here have consumed too much of my free time just trying to defend myself when all I wanted to do was discuss.

It would be very nice if someone made a messageboard just for the ones who aren't happy with the way things are going here. I'm not wanting to debate this post with any fundamentals either. What's good for you is good for you. Just my thoughts.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 2 months, 14 days
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: LunarEclipse]
    #3564244 - 12/31/04 03:15 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

You have alot of opinions on the subject of S&P and you have been here 3 months?? The vibe has changed in this forum without a doubt.


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblewandrnshaman
old hand
Registered: 09/21/03
Posts: 1,196
Loc: Pinellas Co, FL
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: GazzBut]
    #3564611 - 12/31/04 08:56 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

whiterasta said:Well said! when one has operated with a set of "rules" for a number of years and then is subjected to "new" and unanounced "rules" a reaction will ensue.
Perhaps this is a rather unpopular and unflattering view of human behavior. but that IS what we all are here,human?
OR... How would you like to get a ticket for driving one handed without knowlege one handed driving was an offence?Driving is also a privelige,neh?
But you would still react to the injustice,right?Well this is the reaction from some long time one handed drivers.
WR :wexican:


Could acceptance be a reaction, too? In this country we are being imposed with more laws as we speak. If someone will react to an injustice, how about reacting to this instead of a friend getting banned at your favorite message board.
I was pulled over on an interstate highway in south Georgia for 'getting a little too close to the white line' a little over a year ago. My car alledgedly smelled 'like burning marijuana' (not) and the subsequent search revealed a few ounces of dried mushrooms. Laws are being enforced thru lies regularly in my country and my reaction is to share my experience with others, not expressions of outrage.

Injustice...I'm used to that since I am a United States citizen. I can't leave the country legally because I'm a convicted felon stemming from a simple retaliatory assault in '90 which the victim later lied to cops and said I took money from him during the attack to make it a felony violation. I'm sure there are others who believe that this is an acceptable way to enforce the law but to me, personally it's an injustice and I just deal with it.

I share my experience with others when it comes up to warn them...but as you mature, you learn that life isn't fair and if you keep stirring up shit when you come around, people soon begin to turn their head when they see you coming.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblewhiterasta
Day careobserver
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/09/02
Posts: 1,780
Loc: Oregon
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: wandrnshaman]
    #3564722 - 12/31/04 09:42 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

belly up! Just accept it. Now that is what makes america great! :rolleyes:
WR :wexican:


--------------------
To old for this place

Edited by whiterasta (12/31/04 09:43 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblewandrnshaman
old hand
Registered: 09/21/03
Posts: 1,196
Loc: Pinellas Co, FL
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: whiterasta]
    #3564758 - 12/31/04 09:55 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

No, I mean there are more important things to lose sleep over. Sorry if I was a little unclear.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAsante
Omnicyclion prophet
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 87,230
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: whiterasta]
    #3565238 - 12/31/04 12:09 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Ok.. I'm going to state a personal opinion here regarding Swami's first ban which was so disputed. I will absolutely not be representing the Administry in this. I will absolutely not engage in discussion because this has gotten nobody nowhere except a bunch of grief and closed threads, not to speak of alienation between some members and the management.

I'm going to state my case just one more time and this time I will go all-out. Please do not expect a discussion because if one member says one thing that looks like the mudslinging and drama we had before I will not even reply yo any responses, no matter how benign, at all.

I have gravely misbehaved but I, being only human, was provoked by several members who in my view gravely misbehaved too.
This is Spir & Phil. If I cannot state my personal opinion about the Swami banning here because i happen to be a moderator then nobody will get any answers from me.

I post my personal opinion here. Not website policy, but because I crossed the line in being rude and now am pleasantly surpriesed by the friendly atmosphere in this thread here I will post my personal viewpoint for those who sincerely are confused about the matter, and not those who are rallying for a cause.

Please, let us be civil about this.
I will state my view on things such that it is self-explanatory for those who want to understand my viewpoint, and this time I will play all the cards as I percieve them.

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

The "guests in somebody's house" analogy is correct. The Administrators physically *own* the Server (the House) and that means we are *not* in a place of democracy but rather in somebody's home, or, as I put it before, in a Kingdom. And Kings/Admins are never chosen by the people. Kings Rule.

Look at it like this: The Admins are throwing a psychedelic party in their own home. Everybody is invited. Some people whom they trust are called upon to serve the drinks and snacks. These are the Moderators.
Moderators are hand-picked by the Admins. The Admins throw the party, and it is after all their house. This never was a democracy.

Don't get upset. Hear me out, and then decide if you will get upset.
Remember it is my personal opinion, as a moderator, member and human being and I will lay all the cards on the table as I see them.
That ought to deserve your respect even if you disagree.

There has been much uproar over Swami's banning. Many explanations were given, or rather they were many sides of the same thing. Let me clarify things for once and for all.

Swami was justly banned. Great was the outcry that he didn't break any rules, that he was banned for completely random reasons. Now here me out: we're getting there.

If the Administrators had banned Swami for completely random reasons, then that in itself would be justified. It's their party, it's their house, and they can point anyone to the door with zero justification needed, just because they want them out the door. Kings Rule.

But this is not what has happened.
Swami was banned by Moderators. Moderators cannot ban without due reason or they will be strongly reprimanded or lose their Modship.

And now here's the card you all have been waiting for. Will I have a good hand or has this been a game of bluff-poker like was alledged?

Swami was, in my personal view, justly banned using rules that exist on this website since before time was. Please look up the "Administrative Rules and Guidelines".

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. 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.




People (not just one or two) have complained to the Administry about how insistently Swami baited, badgered and harassed them and these complaints by different people have been flying in for many many months. As you see in the Rules: people are encouraged to do this and they did.

What constitutes harassment, and the degree of it, is to the sole discretion of the management. Kings Rule. The Moderators work for them.

In my view Swami was not banned earlier because until then it never became a "red alert". But it has often, way too often, been "yellow alert" just shy of banning. And then comes the next PM, and the next, and finally the Moderators decided there has been ample harassment and issued the first ban. There hasn't been a sudden thunderstorm, but rather an insistant rain, and though less spectacular then a thunderstorm a light rain for months and months still is no sunshine.

There have been communications with Swami which, as I see it, have been quite unsatisfactory as they did not stop the rain from falling.
Quote:

Failure to comply will result in administrative action at the sole discretion of the staff.



And so it was: Swami was banned, because of insistant harassment of members, by Moderators who acted to the letter of the rules.
And the Administrators did not reverse this ban.
And Kings Rule: It's their party in their house.

So as you can see Swami was banned according to the rules and the Administrators did not reverse his ban.

During this ban Swami posted a list of demands against the management. Imagine: a violation of ban to state a list of demands against the owners of the house and the ones who cater the party.
If this had been your website, would you *really* have so much respect for a member who obviously held so little respect for you, and even tries to gang up the guests against the owners of the house?
Or would you on your website do the same thing as on any other website, namely shove this individual out the door?
The Administry have been Boddhisatva's of Patience and Lenience in this matter.

What happens now?
A brisk discussion ensues between the Management and the more vocal guests of this party. A few of these guests become very hostile and emotional in their debating. The Moderators stand between the guests and the owners of the house and they toughen up.
"Go hence: we owe you nothing, you are but guests"

The Moderators bent over backwards to explain how it was against some very hostile house-guests, discussion which you likely would not engage in at all. The Shroomery is a very tolerant place. And we have the Admins to thank for that. And Kings Rule. A mighty fine Kingdom, I may add.

You come at this party as a guest. Look at it from this side:
-Server maintenence.
-Software updates.
-Software, hardware & bandwidth issues.
-Financing and advertisements.
-Public relations with befriended websites.
-Dealing with guests to your party who gang up and become highly annoying.
-Stopping people from accidentally killing themselves with insane drug combinations.
-Justifying yourself to the world's news media when a poor, poor kid does die.
-Managing, locking and transporting threads that are out of place.
-Answering questions newbies and regulars send you by PM.
-Being present in the community to socialize and moderate.
-Intervene between bickering parties, getting blamed and dealing with an audience of spectators.
-Coping with direct hack attacks on the server by members that should be cut off.
-Swallowing a ton of emotions because you represent the website.
-Being blamed and poked with a stick because people feel you slipped up.
-Striving to catch every letter from every post in every forum to see nobody comes to harm.
-Removing photos of poorly toilet-trained ladies and have those pictures pop up again a hundred times.
-Monitoring suspected puppets and making sure they do no harm.
-Nuking illegal activities planned by members in the chatrooms or on the boards.
-Try to effect harmony in the forums.
-Put initiatives like Shroomery Radio on wheels.
-Being expected to tell it again, and again, and again, and then at length or U SUK.
The list goes on and on.

Nobody gets paid. The Administrators and their Moderators are a pro deo organisation of gung-ho volunteers who pour massive amounts of time and effort into this website, to throw this free party where all are invited and some of them act like the guests from Hell.
Look for once at the massive effort which is put into the Shroomery Community. Ir seems to run itself, but it doesn't! It is a whole lot of work for a whole lot of people and some of the guests of the party really take a lot of motivation to deal with. But we do.

Where were we?
Oh right: Swami was banned in accordance with the rules, a mob of hostile members merged with some disgruntled and puzzled ones and completely chewed out the management as if, on top of all things, we owe them money too. Oh yeah, and Swami breaks his ban while stating a list of demands. We were to choose one representative of the Administry, in a public thread made specially for him, and then he would ask the questions and the Adminstry representative would supply the answers until Swami was satisfied he was not unjustly treated.
Well.. no Swami. That's not how it works.

Then Swami returned and poked up the fire again to prove he was mistreated. Which he wasn't, the ban was justified. But instead of laying low and engaging in Spir & Phil discussion Swami had to prove how he was wronged.
Fed up with all this drama he was banned again. The Moderator felt harassed and was quite emotional. Several of us were feeling very harassed and very emotional.

And the pounding went on.

"Swami Solidarity". And make no mistake: for some of you that meant going to war against the Kings, who rule, and the ones appointed by the Kings to Moderate these forums. For some of you this meant sending PM's to other members to try persuade them to fight the moderators. For some of you this meant that Moderators were free game to flame the liquid shit out of, to pester and harass and deliberately twist their words to make them say it all again.

And we took it. We took it all. We took a bullet or two for the Shroomery, for organized warfare against mods to free a member who was banned by the book, and we went and explained till we were blue in the face and very much disliked by some and behind our backs the Shroomery's own PM system was used against us to call in reinforcements.

Needless to say we got a bit upset with all of this and said things which on hindsight were not the best words to say.
And we apologized. You would likely mace such guests, pull a pillowcase over their heads and boot them out of your house but we apologized and explained again.
Would you do all this on your website?
Some say "The Shroomery isnt what it once was".

Please remember Adam and Eve were expelled from Paradise by the Lord God Almighty for the crime of biting on an apple.

The Shroomery is a wonderful place. It's just that some people do not see that and choose to focus on the freedoms they do not have. And try as they might they never had those freedoms nor will they ever have them because they're guests of the party in the house of the Admins, and the admins are King. And Kings rule.

No Democracy. A benignly, *very* benignly governed Kingdom that is highly underappreciated by some. And Swami, topic of this thread, was justly banned from the party, according to the Rules of the House, and several guests assembled a protesting platoon and raised Hell because they felt as wronged as the Swami.
There are over three billion webpages on the Internet.


This, like I said before, is entirely my own personal opinion. It is not policy, it is not a conbspiracy, it is strictly member-to-member discussion where I speak on my own account.
If you have questions I might be inclined to answer but if anybody as much as hints at the total mess of Drama we've seen lately there likely won't be a reply on the boards, in PM or in any way.

The last 5 days I have spent 60 hours rallying all over the Internet for the Tsunami victims. When I came to the Shroomery I got attacked by wave after wave of pointless Drama over a just ban.
In some hours it'll be 2005.

Happy New Year to all Shroomerites of good will.

Wiccan_Seeker signing off.


--------------------
Omnicyclion.org
higher knowledge starts here

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSclorch
Clyster

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Asante]
    #3565385 - 12/31/04 12:42 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

I appreciate the tone of your post. IMHO, this was the first bullshit-free post by a mod on this subject. Finally.

There is still one crucial flaw in your personal opinion. I'd like to address that if you don't mind. If you don't think you can take my criticism of your opinion (not your person), then read no further.





I'd say that over 90% of the people in S&P don't understand Swami's post style (I didn't at first either, but I caught on after awhile). There is NEVER any ill intent behind anything he says in here. He's all about getting to the fundamentals... the bare bones... the primary motivations. He does this by finding weaknesses in people's BELIEFS, THOUGHT PROCESSES, and/or IDEAS and then he explores these. He's explained himself every so often, but the audience changes and it sometimes that's hard to keep track of.

Problems arise only when people misinterpret or misunderstand Swami's post style. People often take everything Swami says personally and get all bent out of shape even though his words clearly do not attack the poster (except in rare instances when he's been ad hominem attacked incessantly - like when Alex123, Enter, and Mr_Mushrooms used to cross that line so often... though the first two eventually figured out Swami).

Furthermore, a double standard has most definitely been applied in this case.
If you can't admit that there is a mod bias towards the esoteric crowd, then you've got some work to do in the realization department.

Thanks for listening.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblewhiterasta
Day careobserver
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/09/02
Posts: 1,780
Loc: Oregon
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Asante]
    #3565450 - 12/31/04 12:57 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

W.S. for my part I have NOT involved myself in the swami issue until I posted my opinion in the feedback forum lamenting the loss of several long time posters and internet buddies in S&P and cervantes ASSUMED it to be another Swami thread and had it locked.
Swami's ban Just or unjust has NOT been my concern.
Having a innocent thread which was inviting feedback on how to upgrade the conversation in S&P locked and then being baited by cervantes when I wanted an explanation why the thread was locked. A simple search will show when I became involved in all this bullshit and as a former moderator here i feel qualified to call it that.I agree about being in someone elses domain. but I also know when the "powers"(:lol:) are being abused.You seem to assume that a moderator cannot be out of line and if so guests are to accept it.
Well try this scenario: the hired help is insulting the guests. Do they have a right to speak out to the "host" and voice their displeasure?
Is the host interested in meeting the needs of the guests or is this just an ego party where body count is more important than the quality of the guests?
Perhaps the analogy is flawed but you are intellgent enough to see the point.
There has been another instance of a moderator stepping out of line which resulted in a permaban and account deletion.This mod was a friend of mine but he severely crossed the line of proper conduct(possbly while intoxicated). The offended "guest" spoke up,rightfuly, and the situation was looked at and dealt with.
Now when the party is getting wierd and the help is offending the guests, what does the host do?
WR :wexican:


--------------------
To old for this place

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinegeokillsA
∙∙∙∙☼ º¿° ☼∙∙∙∙
Male User Gallery

Registered: 05/08/01
Posts: 23,544
Loc: city of angels Flag
Last seen: 9 hours, 24 minutes
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: whiterasta]
    #3565510 - 12/31/04 01:12 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

> Do [the disgruntled guests] have a right to speak out
> to the "host" and voice their displeasure?


Always, but if in so doing, the guest is adversely affecting the environment for the remaining guests who are still enjoying the party, the host will be inclined to take the complaining guest outside and settle it face to face without the curious eyes of the bystandars. It would then be advised that the concerned guest present their opinion to the hosts in private, and said hosts will do their best to explain their stance.

> Now when the party is getting wierd and the help is
> offending the guests, what does the host do?

For my part, the host will work to ensure that communication between the host's wishes and the ushers who tend to enforce such wishes will be clearer in the future in efforts to prevent such displeasure. All guests must however remember that respect is a two-way street and if they fail to offer it, it is less likely that they will receive it, regardless of how tactful the hosts and ushers may be.


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

--------------------
┼ ··∙   long live the shroomery  ∙·· ┼
...╬π╥ ╥π╬...

Edited by geokills (12/31/04 01:16 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: geokills]
    #3565597 - 12/31/04 01:46 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

thank you wiccan seeker. i can definetly understand about the second banning for his list of 'demands' . that was absolutely ridiculous. what kind of logic dictates that when you get banned you are entiteld to make demands of the moderators? DEMANDS. what a piece of work. and he violated the ban to do that i guess to. didnt think of that.

but yeah its good to have some clear explanation. seemed to me like the mods were so silent about this it was hard to see it as anything but a personal thing but i tthink wiccan seeker cleared it up at least for me.

thanks for all your hard work and keeping this place alive


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


Everything I post is fiction.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineincubaby_421
half naked andfull witted
 User Gallery

Registered: 08/14/04
Posts: 2,629
Loc: the center of the univers...
Last seen: 5 years, 8 months
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Moonshoe]
    #3566222 - 12/31/04 05:52 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

"psychopsilocybin runnin, horny motherfucker, trippin on his shoelace, searchin for the hairy sucka, he dont need n funny money, his love is all his power, half naked, and full witted, and two weeks less a shower"-incubus.

sorry, wanted to lighten the mood a bit.
maybe somebody shared a laugh with me.


--------------------
"yet the more i dig, the more i consume, the more i unfold... the less protected i feel.
i am the spit on the hair of the son of an electron, swimming around the nucleus of a cell inside the sperm of a killer bee, and my purpose is as nebulous as why weve been bestowed with the capacity to give a shit" Brandon Boyd


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAsante
Omnicyclion prophet
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 87,230
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: whiterasta]
    #3566364 - 12/31/04 06:32 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

SCLORCH said:
I'd say that over 90% of the people in S&P don't understand Swami's post style (I didn't at first either, but I caught on after awhile). There is NEVER any ill intent behind anything he says in here. He's all about getting to the fundamentals... the bare bones... the primary motivations. He does this by finding weaknesses in people's BELIEFS, THOUGHT PROCESSES, and/or IDEAS and then he explores these. He's explained himself every so often, but the audience changes and it sometimes that's hard to keep track of.

Problems arise only when people misinterpret or misunderstand Swami's post style. People often take everything Swami says personally and get all bent out of shape even though his words clearly do not attack the poster (except in rare instances when he's been ad hominem attacked incessantly - like when Alex123, Enter, and Mr_Mushrooms used to cross that line so often... though the first two eventually figured out Swami).

Furthermore, a double standard has most definitely been applied in this case.
If you can't admit that there is a mod bias towards the esoteric crowd, then you've got some work to do in the realization department.





Ah, I'm sorry but that's an opinion. If ninety percent of S&P posters don't get it and many feel bad about it a change of strategy might be in order, especially after several rounds of email exchange with the Admins. But instead of quitting the unacceptable behavior Swami seems to only up it, which is the wrong strategy to take if you are dealing with the owners of the website who already warned you before.
So there is a difference of opinion regarding the benign-ness of Swami's style between us.

I don't know if the moderators kean more towards the Spiritual side then to the Rational side as you suggest. But fact is that this has nothing to do with Swami's bannings. He was, in my personal view, justly banned in accordance with the rules for persistantly baiting, unpleasantly playing on the emotions and harassing other members a vision that seems to stand as Swami was not unbanned prematurely by the Administrators which they would do in case of a truely unjust ban.
Read it in my mail. It is not about personal bias against his person or his stance: he was banned because of violation of rules of conduct.


Whiterasta: I know when you got into the matter, and you indeed kept well out of the whole issue which dragged on from Swami's first ban onward. I had to respond to someone, I meant no personal offense.

Quote:

WHITERASTA said:
Well try this scenario: the hired help is insulting the guests. Do they have a right to speak out to the "host" and voice their displeasure?



If the member feels unjustly treated by a moderator and has substantial grounds for that stance he can easily go over the head of the Moderator and address another Moderator or the Administrators directly.
But: PM would be the acceptable way to do this as it then is a personal matter which does not require disrespecting said Moderator in public. I believe this is evident from the Administrative Rules and Guidelines.

Quote:

You seem to assume that a moderator cannot be out of line and if so guests are to accept it.



But no, then you misread my post. In the beginning of it I started off with very clear and sincere apologies for what I consider slipups on my part and other moderators have done the same.
Administrators however throw the party and invite you into their house, and their will is the final word in all matters. Kings Rule.

Quote:

Now when the party is getting wierd and the help is offending the guests, what does the host do?



All I do is offer my view in things, but I am convinced that the Administrators always have the community's best interest at heart and since they are the only ones who hold unrevokable power and usually stand distant from the drama (the Moderators are the enforcers) I have no doubt they will do what they consider to be just.
In the course of these Swami-ban days several Moderators, including myself, have been reprimanded and clearly instructed.
As a former moderator you can understand I can not go into detail but I assure you very clear Administrator action was taken towards the Moderators who, like I, got caught up in the Drama.
We're only human..

My loyalty lies with the Community but I answer to the Kings, and I yet have to see a sinle instance of them acting unjustly.
Rest assured. The Shroomery is in capable hands.

Quote:

Is the host interested in meeting the needs of the guests or is this just an ego party where body count is more important than the quality of the guests?




I don't understand what you mean by bodycount. Please remember that, as I see it, Swami was banned for bannable offences and re-banned because he insisted on upping the ante and take it all one step further. There is no bodycount, because as far as I know Swami will return and be welcome unless he persists in the behavior he was banned for in accordance with the rules.

If a moderator is out of line this is firstly a private PM matter. If people choose to publicly flog a Moderator this is street justice and that forces the hand of the Administry.
Politics are inevitable and a necessity when Moderating or Operating a web-community as large and diverse as the Shroomery.


--------------------
Omnicyclion.org
higher knowledge starts here

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,689
Loc: On the Border
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Asante]
    #3566738 - 12/31/04 09:17 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

This is true...but if your guests decide to leave due to ungracious treatment on behalf of the "king's men" you have no party. WIthout a truly free exchange of ideas you have no party worth attending.


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAsante
Omnicyclion prophet
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 87,230
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #3567807 - 01/01/05 08:26 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Huehuecoyotl, please reread my two posts.

In my view, Swami was not banned for his ideas but for violation of rules that are written down for all to read and are old as the Shroomery itself.

As far as I know, the people who left did so without seriously PM-ing with more neutral Moderators or Administrators to see if they could effect a resolution to the conflict that made them feel that bad.

If you leave the party "because of the behavior of some helpers" but did not personally, in private, tried to settle it with other helpers or the owners of the house, then they left the party in anger and people are as free to leave as they are to come.

Sad as it may be, they decided to leave. Sad as it may be, I know of not a single PM discussion they had with neutral Moderators or Administrators to resolve the matter.
If you choose to turn inward in anger, and leave in anger, nobody will stop you.

And not even one-tenth of a single percent left the party. If the Shroomery itself was that important to them they would've stayed on board and try to calmly and civilly help to untangle the mess, and what a big mess it was from both the Members side and the Management's side. Many Moderators involved in the drama have clearly and publicly apologized for their own part in the mess. I did too, several times in this thread alone, but the ones who left deprived themself of these apologies and of the resolution of the conflict.

And, as I feel I must stress yet again: In my view, Swami was not banned for his ideas but for violation of rules that are written down for all to read and are old as the Shroomery itself.

A truely free exchange of ideas does not include the freedom to bait, badger and harass members what the Administry, in my view, has banned Swami for. You are free to treat your fellow members with respect and if you violate that for either too long or too severely, as decided by the Administrators, then you will be forced to leave.

As I see it, according to the several events I was informed of, Swami was treated with a lenience that goes beyond the fixed rules. His longterm membership and involvement with this community earned him a preferential treatment of lenience, and he promptly used this lenience to violate his ban by posting/having posted a list of utterly preposterous demands and to create puppets which in itself can be a perfectly by-the-book bannable offence.
Still, as far as I know, Swami is free to return when his ban is over.

The "Swami Solidarity" movement has got no case.
Swami has repeatedly broken rules, has been treated very leniently which includes elaborate PM communications with the Management, he has abused this leniency, the Moderators and Admins have taken some tremendous growls and snarling from quite some members because of it and still Swami is given a new chance to prove his good will.

I wonder when we, the Adminstry, will hear elaborate personal yet public apologies like we have given? But instead people dramatically "leave forever" in anger. I wonder when those IP's will turn up again.
Idealism is great, especially on a Spirituality/Philosophy forum, but at some point one has to show loyalty and respect to the ones that *give* you freedom to speak at all, because servers do not appear out of thin air and the Administry consists of a group of dedicated unpayed volunteers who work very hard 24/7 to be able to throw this party in the first place.

I can't help but stress that I here speak my own mind and do not voice website policy. If you are a volunteer representative of a community there absolutely is not a shred of freedom of speech at all, and that is precisely how it should be.

We are here for YOU. We voluntarily slip into a straightjacket of restrictions and open wide for the ball-gag of self-censorship for the good of the community. Sometimes we are under attack and have got the winning argument that'll end the drama and assaults, but if it would be in the best interest of the Community not to speak out we grit our teeth and take a bullet for the Shroomery. That can be frustrating and few user-members would want to be on a website that gags you like that. \

If you are a Community Volunteer however you have increased capabilities but agree to some pretty dire restrictions in the best interest for the Community at large.
Please all of you appreciate this effort and respect us for it, even if we slip up entangled by community drama.

There is a lot of love in this thread, and a genuine desire to come to understanding on all sides with no drama yet, and this is why I choose to answer your questions, but can only do so on personal title.
Remember that it's not "Us vs Them" but rather "We, The Shroomery" which includes every member, whether he uses the boards, performs volunteer work to manage and moderate the boards, or owns the website entirely.

It is time to become a whole again, and this thread shows how both sides find their peace again.

Remember: because I'm a Moderator I can answer a lot of questions some of you may have, but I speak on my own account, how *I* see this and do not represent website policy. Still I'm one of the guys in green so my freedom-of-speech days are over. If my words are used as ammo (as happened before) or tension rises again I have to call it a day for the greater good. But if you got questions I can answer: let's have it. Let's think solutions and insight.


.


--------------------
Omnicyclion.org
higher knowledge starts here

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMushmonkey
shiftlesslayabout
 User Gallery

Registered: 09/25/03
Posts: 10,867
Last seen: 5 months, 6 hours
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Asante]
    #3567963 - 01/01/05 10:33 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Ah, I'm sorry but that's an opinion. If ninety percent of S&P posters don't get it and many feel bad about it a change of strategy might be in order, especially after several rounds of email exchange with the Admins. But instead of quitting the unacceptable behavior Swami seems to only up it, which is the wrong strategy to take if you are dealing with the owners of the website who already warned you before.
So there is a difference of opinion regarding the benign-ness of Swami's style between us.





Yet if 90% are complaining about childish things, the rational and mature thing to do would be to tell them all to grow up, suck it up, and not ban someone for being right. It's not his fault that others are unable to cope with it being pointed out that what they have posted does not make sense.

As I've said before..
if you wish your beliefs to be rationally consistant, you should gladly accept posts that would point out inconsistancies and irrationality.
if you do not require that of your beliefs, you shouldn't give a flying fuck about posts that point out inconsistancies and irrationality.

You can't have it both ways. if you believe in invisible gnomes, and it is pointed out that there is absolutely no proof that invisible gnomes exist.. I cannot express how childish it would be to PM a mod and cry about being harrassed. If you constantly are posted about those gnomes and it's constantly pointed out that there's no proof to support invisible gnomes, there IS NO HARRASSMENT. The poster pointing out the lack of proof is doing as much harrassment as the poster who is posting about the gnomes.

That is really what the whole thing seems to boil down to for me. The mods and admins conceded to pressure from immature reactions. That is why I took such great offense, and why I've chosen to hardly post in this forum anymore. I've no time to worry about getting banned over someone else being a big baby and crying if I point out they are wrong or inconsistant or lack proof.

Fact of the matter is, while I do feel Swami contributed a great deal to this site and forum.. that's not what got me posting those diatribes.
The idea that childish reactions were being catered to is what upset me.. and still upsets me.

disclaimer: i think i may have wandered around in this post, and i cant' go read over it. im friggin hung over :| have fun.


--------------------
i finally got around to making a sig
revel in its glory and quake in fear at its might
grar.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinedeff
just love everyone
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/01/04
Posts: 9,421
Loc: clarity Flag
Last seen: 3 hours, 39 minutes
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Mushmonkey]
    #3567978 - 01/01/05 10:45 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

umm

who cares? :laugh:


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


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblegettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: deff]
    #3568029 - 01/01/05 11:34 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Mush cares as he says he is still upset, emotionally reacting to people who react from their upset emotions. Gotta laugh at the irony as it comes up again and again and again.

Boy the tables really got turned on those who didn't seem to be able to understand how some can react from upset emotions when they are told they are wrong.

Tell them they are wrong about why swami was banned and look how upset they get and react? Hmmmmmmmm I think it clicked "understanding" of how it happens with the majority but their are still a few stragglers who can't see in themselves what they are criticizing others for and blaming the swami ban for.

Non of them consider how others have left in the past for being told they are wrong or feeling like foul play invaded their sense of feeling comfortable participating here. They say, "who cares if they couldn't hack it, let them leave.

Well mush, deff and many others are feeling the same way with the tables turned, who cares if some can't hack being told they are wrong and their delusions of foul play, let em leave.

Maybe this outside perspective will help you understand something bigger then yourself here Mush,

So, your at the best party in the city, every ones hanging chill enjoying themselves in their own way and its all cool. Then, you got some guys who start walking around "trolling" saying things like this to the other party guests and hired staff

Dude, that chick your with is so ugly.

You're belt doesn't match your shoes. You're a mess, read a fashion magazine.

I ordered a gin and tonic and you gave me a gin and soda moron.

DJ you suck, why are you playing all of this techno crap, (while the dance floor is bumping) some of us here want to hear Alice and chains or Beethoven. You're just being biased because YOU like that music.

So new party guest, what are your thoughts on this subject? You're an idiot.

You dance like one of Jerry's kids.

You guys are talking nonsense, you must be fucked up, get off the drugs so I can understand you or shut up.

Why are you sitting on the coffee table like it's a chair?

That new guy doesn't belong at this party, he's different from us.

Your hair looks like you stuck your finger in a light socket.

You're drinking juice? What a wuss, can't handle Jack straight, be a man like me.

So, picture that you have about 10 of these guys trolling the party, walking around looking for something to criticize to get "I am important look at me attention" and putting others down for the way they party , in an attempt to make them look lame, foolish or stupid, so they can look cool.

People are slowly here and there leaving because of these guys not saying anything on the way out. Some are just playing back with them and not letting them interfere with the good party vibe and some, are just getting tired of it and they tell the host about them and to keep an eye on them.

That's the big picture here. When the hosts decide to watch, they naturally will make their own determinations for how they see these guys effecting the over all tone of the party they wish to create and hold. They will handle it as they see fit and it's their house.

What is this all really? Are some of you panicking because you saw King troller get a time out and now you are afraid, you're own little trolling parties within the big party are coming to an end?

That's what it looks like from my seat up on the chandelier. All of this is just a perspective of many to view the big party from and it may be worth considering how some others are seeing as well.



:heart:


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMushmonkey
shiftlesslayabout
 User Gallery

Registered: 09/25/03
Posts: 10,867
Last seen: 5 months, 6 hours
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #3568166 - 01/01/05 12:42 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Mush cares as he says he is still upset, emotionally reacting to people who react from their upset emotions. Gotta laugh at the irony as it comes up again and again and again.




The difference is I'm not crying about somebody disagreeing with my ideas and beliefs. Actually I'm not crying, foaming would be closer but that's not quite it either.

It's the situation itself that's upsetting.

Let's take Alex123 and me talking about gun control. Has happened several times since I've been here. We're on opposite sides of the issue.

I don't get upset and complain to moderators because he disagrees with me. I don't get upset and complain to moderators because when I post something opposed to gun control, he would reply with a contrary opinion.

That is simply how things work. Rather than get upset, what I would do is come back with another point, or clarify a previous point, or debunk a point he made.

Am I going to change my viewpoint? Nah. Is he? Nah. So what. We'll argue the point for a while till it gets stale. No reason to cry about somebody disagreeing with you, ever.

Jiggy, your party analogy's just a bit off. In your scenerio, the troller is walking around making personal attacks and insults, and not responding to anything.
A closer analogy would be..

"Let's get a keg!"
-"We have nowhere to put a keg and no way to keep it cold. Besides, no one has a tap. To get a keg would be a pointless waste."

"I think we should get tiki torches."
-"The party is indoors, and a tiki torch is an open flame. That may not be a good idea with many drunken revelers."

"We're going to invite 2,000 people."
-"There is only room for 100, tops."


Basically the message being conveyed is: Don't point out errors and problems when the esoterics post about their invisible gnomes.
or:
Go away, no skeptics allowed. Your rational/scientific viewpoint is not welcomed here, the invisible gnomes take great umbrage when you point out there is no evidence to support their existence.

Or, as.. I think it was Schlorch? put it:

The Kumbayah forum. No disagreeing allowed.


--------------------
i finally got around to making a sig
revel in its glory and quake in fear at its might
grar.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAsante
Omnicyclion prophet
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 87,230
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Mushmonkey]
    #3568179 - 01/01/05 12:50 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Mushmonkey: Relax. Now read on and please assume benevolent tranquility on my part.

You have hardly taken the effort to really read my posts in this thread. Much you say has been dealt with but you react as if nothing was said about it at all.

Quote:

You can't have it both ways. if you believe in invisible gnomes, and it is pointed out that there is absolutely no proof that invisible gnomes exist.. I cannot express how childish it would be to PM a mod and cry about being harrassed.




Do you really believe that the Administry deals so lightly with the topic of harassment? Do you really believe the Administry would be "so childish" as to ban for such an occurrance?
Wouldn't the management be able to discern true baiting, badgering and harassment from people angry their ideas are rejected?

Quote:

Yet if 90% are complaining about childish things, the rational and mature thing to do would be to tell them all to grow up, suck it up, and not ban someone for being right.




So the Administry wasn't rational and mature in their decision?
Oh and 90% aren't complaining at all.

Quote:

The mods and admins conceded to pressure from immature reactions.




You bring on the invisible gnomes. Now it is my time to get rational:

1...you seem to know this is about invisible gnomes (=irrational beliefs, I get your metaphor) while to my knowledge it isn't about that at all. Please read my posts here and don't carry on being angry.

2...you cannot reasonably be expected to have access to the Adminstrative and Moderator forums and all our PM emailboxes for the last months, yet you base your whole stance:
Quote:

That is why I took such great offense, and why I've chosen to hardly post in this forum anymore.



on the assumption that you know exactly why Swami was banned and that all factors boil down to your example of "somebody who's beliefs were shown to be irrational".

Who is being irrational here?
How can you possibly defend your fierce flaming of the Administry on the basis of the assumption that you know all about what was discussed in meetings you didn't attend, in votes you never knew existed and discussions you weren't present in for months on end?

You talk about rationality but in fact it is YOU who believes in the invisible gnome of knowing what drives the Administry. And that is hardly rational, because your version completely deviates from what is actually going on.

Quote:

The idea that childish reactions were being catered to is what upset me.. and still upsets me.




Well you can let go of all that anger then.
That is not the reason why Swami was banned in my view. If you want to hear my view on why Swami was banned read my earlier posts in this thread.

So you can rest assured and relax: Swami, in my view, was banned for valid reasons that I described are written in the rules everyone can access.


------------------------------------------------------------
and now a seperate matter that has nothing to do with Swami:
------------------------------------------------------------


Quote:


if you wish your beliefs to be rationally consistant, you should gladly accept posts that would point out inconsistancies and irrationality.
if you do not require that of your beliefs, you shouldn't give a flying fuck about posts that point out inconsistancies and irrationality.
(...)
If you constantly are posted about those gnomes and it's constantly pointed out that there's no proof to support invisible gnomes,
(...)
I've no time to worry about getting banned over someone else being a big baby and crying if I point out they are wrong or inconsistant or lack proof.





Chill out, sip a decaf and ponder your own words.

you do not own the Spirituality & Philosophy forum

You have to come to terms with the fact that some people believe in invisible gnomes. You display an incredible aggression towards people who believe in invisible gnomes. You cannot *stand* irrationality.

Then you suddenly snap into the irrational belief that you know everything that is discussed and debated among the Administry.
Then you jump to the irrational conclusion that the Administry is wrong while you know precicely what's right while you weren't even IN the meetings, polls, PM's, debates etc.
Then you get highly emotional based on unfounded beliefs and conclusions.
Then you start flaming the Administry. BADLY.
You attack Moderators, me among them, fiercely like the deluded fundamentalists you so oppose.

Relax.

Some people believe in invisible gnomes. They have every right to post about that, because this is a *Spirituality* forum as well as a Philosophy forum.

If Swami had rallied against a MEMBER in the same aggressive way you have rallied against MODERATORS over some invisible gnomes it would be quite likely he might have been banned forever immediately.

People usually do not get banned for their ideas but for the way they treat other members. Please tone down your anger. Write your post and reread it to see if it's an appropriate response. Like the rules say: try to go out of your way to be civil.

Being a Shroomerite is about being accepting and forgiving. While you (and others) were throwing rocks at specific Moderators one of them and I decided via PM to not request a longterm ban for you and in fact oppose that decision if other Moderators had called it despite the fact you were flaming the shit out of us and really pissed us off *badly*. So gritting our teeth we on our own call decided that you (and others) were venting steam unreasonably but understandably and that it was best to let you get it off your chests for the good of the Community.
THAT is Moderating.

Mushmonkey: you let yourself get caught up in the drama and became part of that drama because you got angry on an assumption instead of rationally getting the facts.

Likewise I hope you won't fly off the handle like that when somebody talks about invisible gnomes: On the Spirituality forum you sometimes have to get in touch with your Inner Gnome :wink: or at least step out of the threads, because things people really believe in are important to them. It is not the Rationality forum but rather the Gnomes & Skeptics forum and for the sake of community spirit (and the Administrative Rules & Guidelines) try to either get along, civilly disagree or politely ignore eachother.

Please read my earlier poswts in this thread and take your time for it. I surely did!


--------------------
Omnicyclion.org
higher knowledge starts here

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinedeff
just love everyone
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/01/04
Posts: 9,421
Loc: clarity Flag
Last seen: 3 hours, 39 minutes
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Asante]
    #3568314 - 01/01/05 02:28 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

nice wiccan :smile:

my sentiments exactly :cool:


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


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSclorch
Clyster

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: deff]
    #3568389 - 01/01/05 03:33 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Filibusters are incredibly sophistic.
Is Protagoras still teaching?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMushmonkey
shiftlesslayabout
 User Gallery

Registered: 09/25/03
Posts: 10,867
Last seen: 5 months, 6 hours
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Asante]
    #3568411 - 01/01/05 03:43 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

I had based my assumption that one of the main reasons for the ban was due to pressure on the fact that it was stated, I think in the WAF thread, that that ban was based on many complaints being recieved and all the work he's caused the mods of this forum over the years.

The way it was worded lead me to believe that the work he caused the mods was directly a result of the complaints being recieved.  Perhaps I misunderstood that point.

(and an aside, today it's not anger in my posts.. it's just a hangover)

Now, I have read these forums for a while, and as I never percieved any sort of baiting, personal attacks or harrassment, they had to be counted out as being a possible reason for a ban.
That leaves, basically, just one thing.. that being people who felt as if they were being harrassed, attacked, or baited because their ideas or beliefs were continually being nitpicked.

Quote:

You have to come to terms with the fact that some people believe in invisible gnomes. You display an incredible aggression towards people who believe in invisible gnomes. You cannot *stand* irrationality.





It's not aggression towards those who believe in invisible gnomes.
They can go ahead and believe in invisible gnomes if they want to.  I'll go ahead and point out there never once has been any proof offered as to the existence of invisible gnomes.
They can either decide their belief does not require proof, and heck, I'll admit that's a bit frustrating for me, but you just have to shrug it off.  I'm not about to try and FORCE anyone to believe anything. 
Or, they can decide their belief DOES require proof.  And, from there either offer up proof that invisible gnomes are real, or abandon their invisible gnome theory.
If they choose to offer proof the gnomes are real, that's also fine.
If that proof is solid, hey, maybe I'd review the situation and change MY point.
If the proof is not, I'll probably point out the problems I notice with it and why I can't accept it as proof.

And then we go around again.  No anger or hatred, just discussion.. though I'll admit I can come across pretty damned abrasive at times, I hope yall realize I'm not actually an angry, bitchy person nor do I intend my posts to be angry and bitchy.  Just imagine a wry smile behind my posts, that might help :wink:

It's not about FORCING someone to abandon their beliefs.  I may try to persuade or reason with them..  just as they would try to persuade or reason with me to accept those same beliefs.

Back and forth.. it's a level playing field and the rules are fair.

Quote:

Mushmonkey: you let yourself get caught up in the drama and became part of that drama because you got angry on an assumption instead of rationally getting the facts.




:shrug:  The facts offered fit the assumptions made.  As I said, I never noticed anything in Swami's conduct that would single him out from any other user on this forum, excepting his longevity and prolific posting.

So far as everything arising around this after that first ban.. I've tried to make it clear that I'm not talking about that.  I've no wish to contend a list of demands or a puppet account..  I didn't even see the list of demands, and though personally I could care less about the puppet (not just swam's, but most of them) it is pretty open-and-shut.  (though I did make one comment about the puppet I believe, that being other known puppets have been allowed to continue with no ban for the primary or puppet account for quite some time.. not to argue against that ban, merely to point out that although it is clearly against the rules, the actions taken from that point on aren't as clear as they would at first seem to be).

As I said in the WAF thread..  I don't hold any animosity or hatred towards any of the mods or admins.  I took issue with a decision, not the people that made it.  Sometimes when you're after a squirrel, it'll run up a tree and lay flat against it in a nook..  well, one way to try and get them to show themselves again is to bang on the trunk of the tree.  The tree's not hurt, but that squirrel just may pop his head out.
I have no friggin clue what kind of analogy I'm trying to make there..  but I'll leave it hoping that it makes sense and my head just hurts too much for me to understand myself right now :p

All I was tryin to do was call it as I saw it.  I can't remember who, but I think it was a greenie, said that questioning of authority and the official line given is to be expected considering the types of people that would be drawn to this site..  and while obviously the owners can do whatever they want, that does not mean that if they were to do something unfair that it should not be mentioned.  I'm not saying that what was done IS unfair, but I'm not calling it fair, either.

At this point (well, actually at -that- point, I think we passed it a while back) it's pretty clear that neither side's going to change their mind about anything, so I've pretty much resigned to agree to disagree.  I still don't see the things that were given as reasons, but the boards I cut my teeth on were just a few shades away from completely unmoderated..  flames, bait, and harrassment hardly register anymore, and the idea of sending a PM to a moderator about someone else's behaviour is totally alien to me (if anything I would respond to flames, bait and harrassment in kind..  though I've tried to smooth a few edges since I did get a warning for that about a year back now.  Boy howdy do I wish I'd saved THAT post.. whew. (and no one get upset about that, either -- I believe the guy I was blasting got banned, i think before I even was told to calm it down)). 
It's fortunate for others, since I'm not about to start complaining about them, but unfortunate for me -- since I tend to assume others would act similarly, though I guess many don't, and do take issues to moderators.

Oh.. and I have to fess up.  I didn't make up the invisible gnomes!  A friend of mine did several years ago -- his assertion was that we lose the ability to recognize them due to cultural biases, or something along those lines.  We had a lengthy discussion about how it could or could not work..  and he's only the SECOND most..  I'm at a loss for the correct word here, so I'll just call them crazy.. person I know (though he and #1 are both quite crazy I assure you, I'm obviously not insinuating that all crazy beliefs are crazy.. and even a crazy and misguided belief may have value (though I do think the better course would be to take that value alone and remove the extranious, but i'm going off-topic yet again)).
Several years after that I did co-opt the invisible gnomes -- I argued instead for invisible dwarves as the building blocks of all matter, and since dwarves like alcohol, ".. Give me my damned whiskey back right now so I can satiate them or they'll get pissed off, start a fight, and then I'll blow up".  yay and it worked :wink:

Oh.. this is actually off-topic as well but wtf.

Quote:

if you wish your beliefs to be rationally consistant, you should gladly accept posts that would point out inconsistancies and irrationality.
if you do not require that of your beliefs, you shouldn't give a flying fuck about posts that point out inconsistancies and irrationality.




I'm not entirely clear on your response to this..  in my mind it's a perfectly reasonable stance.  If someone has a belief, and they feel that their beliefs must be rationally consistant..  would it not be doing them a disservice to NOT point out where that belief is inconsistant?
If they require no such thing of themselves, it would not matter if you point out an inconsistancy or not.
I've had people point out inconsistancies in MY beliefs..  and yes, it does suck.  Long and hard.  I didn't take offense, because.. well, they were right.  Sometimes I knew beforehand that I can't explain holding position A while also holding position B, sometimes I didn't and needed to take a bit of time to try and resolve the two into a consistant, single position.. because I do personally disdain being inconsistant.  Now, you can choose to continue to have inconsistant beliefs..  however, if you'd choose consistancy instead, how could you be upset if errors are pointed out?  And if it doesn't bother you, why would you be upset?  If I'm wearing a red shirt, I don't get pissed if someone tells me I'm wearing a red shirt -- and if I told someone I'm wearing a blue shirt, but it's actually red, how could I get pissed at them for telling me so? 

So..  just as people are free to believe in and post about invisible gnomes, I too am free to believe and post that they do not exist.  And no one should get offended at any of it.
And the reason I used 'childish' so often is that that's simply the label I use when someone gets upset about something they have no reason to get upset over.
No one is being harmed by anything said here... rational OR irrational.  In the end either nothing will change -- and you can't really complain about that -- or beliefs will be gained and lost, and no matter what direction you're moving it can only be, for you, a positive change.  If you find that after some discussion, you cannot help but abandon, or acquire, a belief.. that can only be a positive change, as that old belief must not have fit correctly, or that new belief must fit correctly.  Change isn't as comfortable as not changing, but if there is a change it's not likely that you've been tricked into it -- it's probably because you recognize that it would be good to either abandon or adopt that belief. 

It's not about owning the forum and forcing things on others, it's simply that I find taking offense and getting upset about things that there is no reason to be offended and upset about to be immature and a detriment primarily to yourself, but also to those who would be forced to change themselves because you are easily offended and upset.  There is such a thing as sensitivity, but to expect others to handle you with kid gloves because you're easily upset is selfish.
If you're easily offended and upset, what you SHOULD do is try to discover what the problem is and why you are like that -- solve a problem -- rather than force others to accomodate you -- creating a problem.

No, I'm not pointing fingers at anyone here..  if you think it applies to you, point your own finger at yourself, I'm not going to.  I can't make a fair estimation of any individual person, this is merely just generalities I'm speaking of..  and the original statement was made under the assumption that the banning dealt with people complaining because their beliefs didn't hold up to rational scrutiny, which may or may not be the case.  However, if you find yourself pointing into the mirror, I'd say go ahead and take my advice and try to figure out the how's and why's of the matter..  you'll wind up better for it in the end.


--------------------
i finally got around to making a sig
revel in its glory and quake in fear at its might
grar.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLunarEclipse
Enlil's Official Story
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 21,407
Loc: Building 7
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Mushmonkey]
    #3568436 - 01/01/05 03:55 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

"The Kumbayah forum. No disagreeing allowed."

While I respect your right to believe that, I disagree with you on this matter most emphatically!

I do wish to commend you for explaining the reasons for your anger in a calm and rational manner. However, you are not being rational in your overall position as Wiccan, Jiggy and others have pointed out.

To wit: you are holding unproveable and therefore questionable beliefs regarding the Swami ban and the circumstances behind it. As Wiccan has pointed out, how could you MM know the five year history of PMs to various mods and admins precipitated by Swami? How can you know their leniency (or in fairness to you lack thereof) regarding this situation based on your ignorance of the content of the various PMs from members to mods to Swami over five years? Face it, your position is irrational and untenable in this area.

Worse, your reaction has been the same anger and not posting that you seem to think is the problem with all of the weak emotional people who can't handle having their irrational beliefs challenged.

That's not only ironic, that's hypocritical.

Having said that, I still respect your right to hold irrational beliefs. Please stay and don't get mad as I would like to discuss it further with you.


--------------------
Anxiety is what you make it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAsante
Omnicyclion prophet
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 87,230
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: LunarEclipse]
    #3568572 - 01/01/05 04:45 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

That's not only ironic, that's hypocritical.







.


--------------------
Omnicyclion.org
higher knowledge starts here

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSclorch
Clyster

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: LunarEclipse]
    #3568808 - 01/01/05 06:56 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

LunarEclipse said:
To wit: you are holding unproveable and therefore questionable beliefs regarding the Swami ban and the circumstances behind it. As Wiccan has pointed out, how could you MM know the five year history of PMs to various mods and admins precipitated by Swami? How can you know their leniency (or in fairness to you lack thereof) regarding this situation based on your ignorance of the content of the various PMs from members to mods to Swami over five years? Face it, your position is irrational and untenable in this area.




How can YOU know of any of this?
How many mods have been here as long as Swami? How many of the remaining few mods posted in S&P enough to understand Swami's intentions?

If a position is asserted based on evidence not made public... is it so wrong to question said position? In light of the evidence presented thus far, is it so wrong to not march in lockstep to the jumbled tune sung by the staff?

They're just questions... I mean no harm.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLunarEclipse
Enlil's Official Story
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 21,407
Loc: Building 7
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Sclorch]
    #3569173 - 01/01/05 09:31 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

"How can YOU know any of this?"

I don't profess to. That is exactly the point I made to MM, that it is impossible for anyone outside of the Swami/mod/admin realm to know the internal communications. As such, it is irrational for MM you and others to formulate a belief in the "injustice" of the ban based on lack of proof. Even assuming it was somehow "not fair", the reality is that any action whether "wrong or right" is the call of the admins. It is THEIR CALL. To believe otherwise is irrational, and those beliefs deserve to be challenged.

For the record, I did not ask for a ban of Swami or complain to mods in PM about Swami or any other member for that matter.

My initial post questioned whether Swami would return with gifts or lumps of coal. Instead, he returned a victim of a brutal authoritarian regime in the persona of a lobotomized Randall P. McMurphy. Just as in the movie One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, there was outrage over the horrible treatment of their hero.

What's next, A Few Good Men?

Cruise: "I WANT THE TRUTH!!"

Nicholson: "The Truth? YOU Can't Handle The TRUTH...OK I ordered the First Swami Banning"

Swami will have to play Tom Cruise this time, seeker of the TRUTH...who will play Jack Nicholson?


--------------------
Anxiety is what you make it.

Edited by LunarEclipse (01/01/05 09:46 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSclorch
Clyster

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: LunarEclipse]
    #3569185 - 01/01/05 09:36 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Okay... how about you address the rest of my post now?
Quote:

Sclorch said:
If a position is asserted based on evidence not made public... is it so wrong to question said position? In light of the evidence presented thus far, is it so wrong to not march in lockstep to the jumbled tune sung by the staff?




--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLunarEclipse
Enlil's Official Story
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 21,407
Loc: Building 7
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Sclorch]
    #3569309 - 01/01/05 10:21 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

"Is it so wrong not to march in lockstep to the jumbled tune sung by the staff". 

Not so wrong to question authority.  I just don't view this situation as anything other than a privelege to be here.  The authority here need not be explained or justified, yet the admins have been for the most part patient and thorough in their explanation as to their reasons.  They didn't have to be, they wanted to be and they seem to care.  Perhaps you question their motives?  Perhaps you question their ownership?  Perhaps you question their right to refuse service to anyone? 

I don't "march in lockstep" with the mods, for I am just a newbie member.  However, I do support peoples rights and one of those rights is property ownership and the resulting right of owner's to evict unruly guests. 

"Jumbled tune sung by the staff"
In addition to your getting a free seat to a concert by a group of dedicated musicians, you demand that they sing in perfect harmony as well?  :rolleyes:


--------------------
Anxiety is what you make it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSclorch
Clyster

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: LunarEclipse]
    #3569480 - 01/01/05 11:01 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

LunarEclipse said:
"Jumbled tune sung by the staff"
In addition to your getting a free seat to a concert by a group of dedicated musicians, you demand that they sing in perfect harmony as well?  :rolleyes:



I demand nothing.
I'd like to have an official consensus on behalf of the administration.
The "jumbled tune" is the mish mash of half-answers and emotional tirades from a handful of mods/admins.

If I really felt like leveraging anyone, I'd make an offer to buy the servers and the rights to The Shroomery.  But I'm not going to be a dick like that even though I could afford to be.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLunarEclipse
Enlil's Official Story
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 21,407
Loc: Building 7
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Sclorch]
    #3569513 - 01/01/05 11:12 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

"If I really felt like leveraging anyone, I'd make an offer to buy the servers and the rights to the Shroomery.  But I'm not going to be a dick like that even though I can afford to be." 

You can bet the S&P owners are thankful you didn't "make them an offer they couldn't refuse", Sclorch I mean Godfather  :smirk:


--------------------
Anxiety is what you make it.

Edited by LunarEclipse (01/01/05 11:50 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,689
Loc: On the Border
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Asante]
    #3569543 - 01/01/05 11:30 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

"In my view, Swami was not banned for his ideas"

I've read most of Swami's posts over the last few months, and I have seen people get upset because he questioned their beliefs. He generally kept a good sense of humor and would make sarcastic comments occasionally to point out fallacious logic. If you consider this to be "harrasment" you are really thin skinned. Refusing to agree with another's view is only harrassment when the person on the recieving end of the disagreement can not tolerate the ideas of others. I understand you are expressing your "view", but your "view" is difficult for many others to see as having any objectivity whatsoever. By this logic I accuse you of harrassing me. Your statement:
"Huehuecoyotl, please reread my two posts" (as if I did not????!!!)
drips with sarcasm and belies a clear sense of superiority....so are YOU harrasing me? This is exactly what you accused Swami of. I understand that the forum is privately owned and I have NO rights here, but without users exchanging and discussing meaningful ideas the forum loses it's worth to the owners. Heavy handed, rude treatment to the users does not further the interests of the owners.


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblewhiterasta
Day careobserver
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/09/02
Posts: 1,780
Loc: Oregon
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Asante]
    #3570323 - 01/02/05 07:27 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

My sole complaint is having an innocent thread locked,followed by a series of baiting posts by "A Mod" which led to my losing temper and flinging a bit of merde`.Followed by a "symbolic?" ban of one hr.
the larger issue is ,How much like Mycotopia is the shroomery going to become? I would like to know now rather than post another innocently"offensive" post.
Could I have handled it differently,of course.I could have whined to some vacationing admin or worse a mod,asked wha,wha,why. But instead I chose to call out a bad mod and give him a shot of lip. Now tell me I was not being baited to elicit just what he got?
As for Geo I agree PM's would have been a less public way of perhaps handling my own thing,but then perhaps I wished to draw out the poor handling of a minor issue? Perhaps it is an indication of larger problems
.
On Swami he HAS NEVER BEEN ANYTHING BUT HIMSELF,If that now is "not approved" what next? Now after years of contribution to the S&P he is pariah.I understand his indignance,though not the sock puppet. I really held no thought other than I would flick him a bit of B.S. when he returned and WAS NOT INVOLVED, until now since I have been spanked for it.
On the "privelidge" of posting...FEH. you did not know what I meant by "body count" It means # of regged members and it carries weight in advertizing.Each poster here adds to the "value" of the Shroomery as a commodity.Is this quantity over quality?
While we are guests of the shroomery the shroomery w/o guests is Mycotopia.
Now please Wiccan can you tell me why and who locked my thread in feed back? since I never recieved the PM we gave when I moderated in ODD explaining the lock?
Handling via PM's is great but needs start with YOU guys when you lock or delete posts,this helps calm anger and educate the poster on where they stepped out of line.It was suggested in my situation I should have PMed someone before "going off" on Cervantes, I sugest if I were PMed with a reason for locking my thread,instead of being told it is"just another Swami thread and will be closed" A wholly different exchange would have occured.
That is all I wish to convey

WR :wexican:


--------------------
To old for this place

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleuriahchase
Skinny White Boy
Male User Gallery

Registered: 09/25/04
Posts: 675
Loc: SoCal
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: whiterasta]
    #3570362 - 01/02/05 07:51 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Question: can't any of us ignore another user? even if not by free will (mentally) can't you choose the option on your My Home page to ignore a user???? if so, which you can, what's the purpose of banning someone? With the exeption of being banned for giving false and/or dangerous info. to another user about drug consumption, which shouldn't be an issue in the spirituality and philosophy forum, because those post which ask dosage, ID, etc. don't belong here....right? everyones point of veiw and opinion should be posted here PERIOD. ~make sense~?


--------------------
Wanting to be someone else is a waste of the person you are -Kurt Cobain
       



     
Hotter than the left sink handle.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAsante
Omnicyclion prophet
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 87,230
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: whiterasta]
    #3570629 - 01/02/05 10:15 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

SCLORCH said:
If I really felt like leveraging anyone, I'd make an offer to buy the servers and the rights to The Shroomery. But I'm not going to be a dick like that even though I could afford to be.




Sclorch.. You were reged '99, that makes you a senior member.
Whuat you are saying here sounds a lot like:

If I wanted to leverage people I'd simply buy the Shroomery, because I can afford it.

How shall I address this. Ummmm.. 
The Shroomery is not for sale! It is a pro deo organisation of volunteers! We are NOT sell-outs to the highest bidder!
This is pretty damn insulting to the Administry.
Would the City Council sell the town?
THE SHROOMERY IS NOT FOR SALE !!


Quote:

HUEHUECOYOTL said:

I've read most of Swami's posts over the last few months, and I have seen people get upset because he questioned their beliefs. He generally kept a good sense of humor and would make sarcastic comments occasionally to point out fallacious logic. If you consider this to be "harrasment" you are really thin skinned.




I really MUST ask you to reread my posts in these threads because several times I stated plain and simple that that, in my view, is *absolutely not the case*
It's not sarcasm nor false superiority, but you are not reading what I am writing and I'm very specific in my wordings. I do not hold the notion that I'm better then you nor was I trying to be sarcastic.
If I went sarcastic I would get flamed, because this is a tense topic, and I'm here to give my view so people come together again.

Quote:

your "view" is difficult for many others to see as having any objectivity whatsoever.




Are views ever objective? :wink: In this thread I can not give anything else but my personal view as a member who happens to be a moderator.
If I didn't give my view, you wouldn't even have my view  :smile:


Since I'm going on & on about my view now for something personal:

I do not want Swami to be permanently banned. I can see he is liked by many here. There however seems to be a range of tricks Swami uses to bait, annoy and harass many members, which has nothing to do with logic or points of view but can rather be described as subtle psychologic warfare for pesonal gain. Many in the Administry see this and some see it for a long time. Administry people who strongly disagreed with the charges against Swami have seen proof in his latest postings that it is all true, that they were taken in by his charm. I do not want to see Swami banned if he stops his private psychologic guerilla war that he has been made aware of. If he however continues to use his intellect for the purpose of insidiously making people feel very bad I feel he should be banned forever.


WhiteRasta:

"FEH!", does that mean spitting in disapproval? Is it an abbreviation? You use that alot when you disagree.
Quote:

Each poster here adds to the "value" of the Shroomery as a commodity.



The Shroomery is not a commodity. It will not be sold and nobody recieves any money. Instead advertising money goes into server updates, software updates, connectivity and little projects like Shroomery Radio (I keep missing the broadcasts, darn!)

Quote:

On Swami he HAS NEVER BEEN ANYTHING BUT HIMSELF,If that now is "not approved" what next?




If Swami cannot separate his psychological warfare effort from his postings of logic and debating then a permanent banning is next.
It's great you have such faith in Swami that you say he never was anything but himself. Try this one:

Suppose someone hacks into the server. All the time, dozens of times?
Well, in my opinion it is very widely agreed upon based on Administry evidence that Swami hacks into people. All the time, hundreds of times. And with hacking I mean hax0ring with the intent to screw up the member. Not logic, not debating: insidious, intentional psychological abuse with the purpose of making people feel bad without letting them know what hit them. Clever.
If you led or modded a website, would you let that slip by?
I for one wouldn't. As far as I'm concerned he can either clean up his act and be very welcome or leave and not come back.
Question is whether he likes the Shroomery enough to stop his insidious emotion play.

Quote:

Now please Wiccan can you tell me why and who locked my thread in feed back?




Sorry, I can't. What I can and will do is ask the person involved to write you a PM but as you understand this is politics.
Picture me as having voluntarily chosen to have no freedom of speech at all in the best interest of the community.
We are passing a joint sitting on a mound of gunpowder here. There has been too much community drama already.

Quote:

Now tell me I was not being baited to elicit just what he got?




Trust me: you were not being baited. I can tell you with 99% certainty. I have PM-ed around on said 1 hour ban when it happened with questions of my own.

Quote:

I never recieved the PM we gave when I moderated in ODD explaining the lock?




I agree that was and is against standard policy and if you indeed did not get a PM for that I personally can't justify it to myself.
I will contact the one who made the call to ban and ask that person to PM you. Given the circumstances I know of I don't think it was a bad call but then we're getting into politics again. I will contact said person but don't scream bloody murder once you got a name, ok? :wink:

Quote:

Handling via PM's is great but needs start with YOU guys when you lock or delete posts,this helps calm anger and educate the poster on where they stepped out of line.




In the vast majority of cases, I fully agree.
You were a quite a bit pissed off that night tho (here it was night) so I dunno if that would've helped.

Please, if you want to get personal stuff off your chest in times of high drama do so by PM instead of in public. You've been a mod yourself, you know the workings.

Personally I don't believe in really short bans. If I ban someone (only did that once) it'll be nothing less then the full 24 hours, and that means a situation where i see no option but to deal the full blow, after I have exhausted all viable options.
Knowing what I do now I would not have banned in that instance but written a warning PM that would've scared the egg out of a chicken. :wink:
No moderator takes banning lightly and bad calls are dealt with sternly like it should be.
 
If you have seen that puppet show called "Dinosaurs" daddy dinosaur worked for a company called WESAYSO. There are times I wish the Shroomery Administry was being so dysfunctionally bossy and offer some members a nice warm cup of STFU but the Shroomery Administry is nothing like that. There's a very strong need for internal justification.

If I were in a funny mood and pressed BAN on you then I can look forward to between 5-10 mods and admins chewing me out and perhaps get an official warning by the latter.
People seem to think anything goes "once you got power" but I for one got 10x more responsibilities then Shroomery Siddhi's. There's a substantial degree of politics involved with being a moderator.

If you (anyone) give poor heroin advice on ODD and a kid dies, you're a fuckoff. If a moderator slips up like that the man might bring the Shroomery down and confiscate the server because "the Shroomery killed this kid". There's a ton of politics involved with being a mod people just don't realize. You're literally taking on a volunteer's JOB with a ton of responsibilities.


Have faith in the Administry. The Shroomery is not for sale, we're not a powerhungry bunch and we are in fact all very gung ho to create to throw the finest psychedelic party in town.


--------------------
Omnicyclion.org
higher knowledge starts here

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblewhiterasta
Day careobserver
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/09/02
Posts: 1,780
Loc: Oregon
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Asante]
    #3570672 - 01/02/05 10:39 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Wiccan I defer to your patience and commitment to the board.You are an EXCELLENT moderator and a fine person.I will not pursue this any futher in public, however I would like to talk with whoever chose to misinterpret the jist of my post and lock it w/o a PM, if only to reiterate my reasons for the post
Thank you for your patient handling of this situation,As a former mod of ODD I fully understand the repercussions of errroneous info and your point made by the reference.
WR :wexican:


--------------------
To old for this place

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleuriahchase
Skinny White Boy
Male User Gallery

Registered: 09/25/04
Posts: 675
Loc: SoCal
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: whiterasta]
    #3570889 - 01/02/05 12:19 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

"they say Swami causes extensive psychological nerve dammage to the brain, when he goes to lengths this far at other peoples' expenses" well i say "you're all just too god damn sensitive. its censorship and its down right blasphemous." let's end this shit now cause i wont stand for this and christopher reeves wont sit for this neither!!!
  yup...so you're sayin' that since swami was starting to get into one of your heads (your=mods,admistry, you know who you are) and was making you question your beliefs he is using "subtle psychologic warfare for personal gain" ? that's BS! maybe he's just weeding out people who can take a stand on a topic and back thier point up. or maybe by saying the things he says (which aren't of any relevanceon the surface) he helps people re-think some things and grow further...
Swami was just being himself as was said before...which is okay IF "if he stops his private psychologic guerilla war that he has been made aware of."

    im glad you know better than he does what his or anyone else's logic or reason for saying what he says!!  because if he wasn't aware of what he means.....NOW HE IS!!! because you guys told him..(and he'll like it whether or not he likes it...cuz you said right?)    i also beleive that no one can make you do anything... and only you are responsible for your actions. including the way you re-act to what people say..only you can make you mad. and only you can make yourself annoyed or "feel very bad"

    it's like school! swami called jill a doo-doo head, so jill cried. and what's said is "Swami made Jill cry!!" NO he just said something and she chose how to react to it. just like all of us have the chose to react to what others say. I think the shroomery should vote... the members too whether or not to ban him.  ~or has he got us all brain-washed into thinking he's worth keeping around?~  Im new here and Swami is one of the few people who've caught my attention...everyone says the same shit..over and over...he's one of the only people here who think outside the shroomery/box...

      im dissapointed with the shroomery....probably all the mods would chose if they could to make weed legal, and shrooms legal, etc. but don't care enough about freedom of speech. it's not like he was personally attacking anyone by being racist or too vulgar...he used his vocabulary very intelligently...and if it made anyone feel very bad about themselves then maybe they should get some proffessional help...or take a look at yourself...and see what it is about yourself that you feel very bad about. im sorry but no one...,swami included is capable of the "subtle psychologic warfare" he is accused of.      but hey if he didn't have anything nice to say he shouldn't have said anything at all.:whatever:


--------------------
Wanting to be someone else is a waste of the person you are -Kurt Cobain
       



     
Hotter than the left sink handle.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblewandrnshaman
old hand
Registered: 09/21/03
Posts: 1,196
Loc: Pinellas Co, FL
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: uriahchase]
    #3570907 - 01/02/05 12:25 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Wow...and I thought there was more censorship due to Swami and his buds attacking the open minded posts!
I musta been looking at it all wrong. Hell, he's coming back, isn't he? I'm sure you guys will have this forum back soon.

Wiccan, you are a real asset to the Shroomery. You've gotta know this by now but you've expressed alot of patience and energy into this place.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAsante
Omnicyclion prophet
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 87,230
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: uriahchase]
    #3571251 - 01/02/05 02:13 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

i'm new here



Oook.. September 25, 2004 and 104 posts. I agree, quite new here.


Quote:

you're sayin' that since swami was starting to get into one of your heads (your=mods,admistry, you know who you are) and was making you question your beliefs he is using "subtle psychologic warfare for personal gain" ?
that's BS!




Indeed. that statement you just made is BS.
You haven't been reading have you? What a lot of anger, all this whipped-up and emotion stoning people for your self-invented sense of Justice will make the Master of Intellectual Debate very proud.
Wipe the foam from your mouth and read.
This is not at all about one Mod who's beliefs were challenged, it was stated over and over again and again and again I repeat my words against the same BS.
Read.

And while you are reading, read the Administrative Rules and Guidelines. This community, and the people who really make it happen, are all about respect.

You are, in your own words, an active participant in this community for a pretty short time. Argue about lurking till you are blue in the face: that is not participating. And not even 200 posts to your name.

And here I see a post full of aggression, foaming at the mouth with anger against the volunteers who run and OWN this place rambling about things that were done away with ten times over in this thread alone.
Is this the quality of your contribution to this site?
Where is the respect when you come barging in and while your coat's still cold accuse the Administry of BS?

Quote:

im glad you know better than he does what his or anyone else's logic or reason for saying what he says!! because if he wasn't aware of what he means.....




Perhaps he wasn't aware that people were on to him?

Quote:

i also beleive that no one can make you do anything... and only you are responsible for your actions. including the way you re-act to what people say..only you can make you mad. and only you can make yourself annoyed or "feel very bad"




If I punch you in the nose, did you punch yourself in the nose? Would you want someone on your website who punches people in the nose inbetween his logic? You're entitled to believe everything you want, but logic it is not. Logic dictates people CAN set out to hurt people and create a situation where that person is hurt. If you want to bring people into logic, that's fine. If you want to EMOTIONALLY HURT people and keep at it despite warnings you wear out your welcome.

Quote:

Swami was just being himself as was said before.



Fine. If being himself is setting out to hurt people he doesn't like then he will indeed be banned for being himself.
No community in the world allows someone to consistently harm others.
If he drops the hurting he is welcome to stay despite his previous actions, and because he has earned respect over the years the rules were bent towards lenience.

Quote:

Im new here and Swami is one of the few people who've caught my attention...



Well you caught my attention but not in a good way. What do you like, his logic? You present little logic yourself in this post.

Quote:

but don't care enough about freedom of speech.




You didn't actually read to get freed of your anger did you? Only to look for ammo and fuel it. Freedom of speech and freedom to break rules and setting out to hurt people emotionally are two completely different things. Freedom of Speech is noble and highly esteemed at the Administry. Freedom to Hurt is doodoocaca that won't fly here nor anywhere.

Quote:

he used his vocabulary very intelligently



More intelligently then you realize, obviously.

Quote:

maybe they should get some proffessional help...or take a look at yourself...and see what it is about yourself that you feel very bad about.



Perhaps they feel bad about their noses Swami busted in while they were under the impression a debate was going on?

Quote:

maybe he's just weeding out people



Yeah, maybe he was. Maybe he was systematically working people out of these forums, who is to say?

Quote:

im dissapointed with the shroomery....



3 billion sites on the web last time i checked. How many would tolerate:

Quote:


Im new here
(...)
well i say "you're all just too god damn sensitive. its censorship and its down right blasphemous."
(...)
yup...so you're sayin' that since swami was starting to get into one of your heads (your=mods,admistry, you know who you are and was making you question your beliefs he is using "subtle psychologic warfare for personal gain" ? that's BS!
(...)
~or has he got us all brain-washed into thinking he's worth keeping around?~
(...)
im dissapointed with the shroomery....probably all the mods would chose if they could to make weed legal, and shrooms legal, etc. but don't care enough about freedom of speech.
(...)
but hey if he didn't have anything nice to say he shouldn't have said anything at all. :whatever:





You kick off with "I'm new here". How about reading the webside rules and aquire a respectful attitude?
In case you didn't quite catch it in polite terms, so more directly:
You're entitled to jack shit. You have the privilege to post on a privately owned website of unpaid volunteers with the added luxury of a Just management who both feels the need for self-justification as well as feeling the urge to communicate these justifications to their members.

.


--------------------
Omnicyclion.org
higher knowledge starts here

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibledeep_umbra
Stranger
Registered: 05/12/02
Posts: 109
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Asante]
    #3572835 - 01/02/05 07:50 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

swami is just here to make your minds stronger

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,689
Loc: On the Border
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Asante]
    #3573027 - 01/02/05 08:28 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

"There however seems to be a range of tricks Swami uses to bait, annoy and harass many members, which has nothing to do with logic or points of view but can rather be described as subtle psychologic warfare for pesonal gain."

I must be either naive or stupid as I have had Swami go full bore on me a time or two, but I have seen no malicious intent in Swami's postings and I have read hundreds of them. I spent several years in the military as a combat soldier, and I have been very well educated in the subject of propoganda and psychological warfare. I have had college level classes in logic and ethics to boot. Most of my adult life has been spent in public safety and information technology, so I consider myself, if not an expert, well informed in matters involving communications. I know for a fact that the best propoganda is truth. Spreading the truth to the uninformed is THE most powerful form of psychological warfare known. Basing psychological warfare on lies and untruths is very bad form due to the shallow nature that it assumes.(using misinformation for a short term gain wears itself out quickly) If you are implying that Swami is spreading truth (at least by his definition) then you are correct, but if you believe he is using some top secret (or occult) means to force us to see his view against our will then you are very paranoid. Swami's only psychological techniques are using logic, humor, and sarcasm to argue a (usually) defensible point. Even implying this psychological warfare B.S. is an insult to our (the shroomery users) intelligence. If one cannot ignore viewpoints with which they disagree then they are a very weak person indeed.

Edited by Huehuecoyotl (01/02/05 10:21 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblewhiterasta
Day careobserver
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/09/02
Posts: 1,780
Loc: Oregon
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #3573197 - 01/02/05 09:25 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Trained by alien reptiles to destroy the minds of the chronicaly illogical with occult methods of logic and reason.His sole mission, destroy an internet forum frequented by susceptable people using mind altering drugs.Purpose,to cast the unsuspecting into a sea of self doubt and delusion.
To all interested in learning these techniques of mental mastery send 575,000$US to me via pay pal and I shall submit your request to the overlords(alien reptiles I believe) which created Swami. Be warned no refunds are given and failure means DEATH!
I now recuse myself to commune with the Mantids on matters concerning 2012 and the involvement of elemental beings in the destruction of civilization as we know it using the rouge planet Neribu.
WR :wexican:


--------------------
To old for this place

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,689
Loc: On the Border
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: whiterasta]
    #3573229 - 01/02/05 09:34 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

So, thats it, eh? So, how can I contact our overlords...I have an interesting proposition to make.


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSclorch
Clyster

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: whiterasta]
    #3573250 - 01/02/05 09:41 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

whiterasta said:
Trained by alien reptiles to destroy the minds of the chronicaly illogical with occult methods of logic and reason.His sole mission, destroy an internet forum frequented by susceptable people using mind altering drugs.Purpose,to cast the unsuspecting into a sea of self doubt and delusion.
To all interested in learning these techniques of mental mastery send 575,000$US to me via pay pal and I shall submit your request to the overlords(alien reptiles I believe) which created Swami. Be warned no refunds are given and failure means DEATH!
I now recuse myself to commune with the Mantids on matters concerning 2012 and the involvement of elemental beings in the destruction of civilization as we know it using the rouge planet Neribu.
WR :wexican:




:lol: :lol: :lol:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblewhiterasta
Day careobserver
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/09/02
Posts: 1,780
Loc: Oregon
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: whiterasta]
    #3573274 - 01/02/05 09:49 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

To all interested in learning these techniques of mental mastery send 575,000$US to me via pay pal and I shall submit your request to the overlords(alien reptiles I believe) which created Swami. Be warned no refunds are given and failure means DEATH!




this is the sole means of contact. I also accept cashiers check or bank draft.
WR :wink:


--------------------
To old for this place

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAsante
Omnicyclion prophet
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 87,230
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #3574441 - 01/03/05 07:19 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

HUEHUECOYOTL said:
If you are implying that Swami is spreading truth (at least by his definition) then you are correct, but if you believe he is using some top secret (or occult) means to force us to see his view against our will then you are very paranoid.





Oook, then let's do a little experiment in Psychological Warfare, and please take NO offence as it is all an experiment, NOT my opinion:
---------------------------------------------------------

Huehuecoyotl..
I am not belittling or denying your extensive experience with propaganda in the US Army nor the fact that you extensively studied logic and ethics in college but I agree when you say you are not exactly an expert in communications.

Seriously now, and i'll take you serious on this matter as it is after all one that transcends the usual level of debating we see here on the boards. There is a vast difference between the propaganda and psychowarfare you got to know as a grunt in the US Army and what goes on in the real world. In the real world, huehue, people tend to stray from the path of righteousness and justness as you obviously are very aware of.

You see, sometimes ordinary people just like you are rationally explaining something, as I hope you understand while they beside the logic are deliberately stabbing directly at the man behind the conversation. Surely you must see this, we're all rational people here after all.Some people put words between the words independent of their rational message, I can't understand why you won't come to terms with the reality of that.
We're only human, aren't we?



good, this was an oddly worded but perfectly rational post, wasn't it? After all I gave you a rational explanation of why I believe you are wrong. But there were curiously odd un-Wiccanstyle phrasings.. let me now mark some odd passages with smileys before I come to business

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

Huehuecoyotl..
I am not belittling or denying your extensive experience with propaganda in the US Army (caught that one? :wink:) nor the fact that you  extensively studied logic and ethics in college (equally subtle :wink:)
but I agree when you say you are not exactly an expert in communications (huh? :wink:)

Seriously now, and i'll take you serious on this matter as it is after all one that transcends the usual level of debating we see here on the boards(:shocked:). There is a vast difference between the propaganda and psychowarfare you got to know as a grunt in the US Army (:smirk:) and what goes on in the real world. (:tongue2:) In the real world, huehue( :wink:) people tend to stray from the path of righteousness and justness as you obviously are very aware of. (:evil:)

You see, sometimes ordinary people just like you (:grin:) are rationally explaining something, as I hope you understand (:shocked:) while they beside the logic are deliberately stabbing directly at the man behind the conversation. Surely you must see this, we're all rational people here after all.(:grin:) Some people put words between the words independent of their rational message, I can't understand why you won't come to terms with the reality(:rotfl:) of that.
We're only human, aren't we? (:evil:)

I just have argued that some people say more then they imply to say, didn't I?
Now let me translate the lines I specifically marked with those smileys for their emotional, not rational, message, and please don't take this personal as that text is only a blatant example and most certainly not my opinion of you. Let's read between the rational words from an emotional point of view:

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

-you have been brainwashed by the military
-you had to go to college to learn about logic & ethics
-I agree you got no idea what you are talking about (selective quoting wins people over and have a laugh at your expense)
-We only take you seriously because you for once have a point worthy of consideration, we all see you as someone who lowers the standard of discussion on this board.
-You were subjected to propaganda and psychowarfare experiments when you were a mere rankless serviceman in the military
-because of this you are out of touch with the real world
-let me bring you in tune with reality
-you got a piece of iron a bit too close to your moral compass and you know it
-you aren't so irrational that you can't see this?
-you are impossible to reason with, don't you like reason?
-do you think you are better then us?


HUH?! An entire line of consistent unreasonable emotional ranting, which was NOT written but fully included in the true meaning of the rational post :eek:

And wouldn't you be banned for vicious flaming if you wrote this message in WORDS rather then innuendo?
----------------------------------------------------

This, Huehuecoyotl, is psychological warfare, hacking into people's heads, that is part of the array of tricks Swami was banned for.
It is most certainly NOT my message or opinion of you but a blunt, inpersonal example of said psychowarfare
The rational post I made emotionally put a shotgun to your head and pulled the trigger. This was in no way subtle, I'm new to doing this but i damn well catch it if it is being used on people.

In my view Swami systematically selected people he disliked, homed in on their emotional weakspots and then began a systematic approach of perfectly benign rational posts loaded with this psychowarfare aimed at driving them off of Spir&Phil so it can become the SKEPTICS DEBUNKERS FORUM where people making the mistake of posting the beliefs they hold so precious and dear are ruthlessly assassinated by a mob of debunkers.

If the Administry had given some examples they would've been laughed at and called pussies. There is a lot of stuff we cannot show you because it falls under the privacy of duped members.

Suppose you are all discussing round the table and some newbie starts whining unfounded BS and leaves. Can happen, can't it?

But what if the Management has looked under the table and saw that during the rational conversation the most popular guy was constantly kicking the newbie's shinbone to shite?

And that the majority above the tabletop were not aware and sided with the popular guy, so the newbie in his view got confronted with an opposing and emotionally hostile mob. Because several people were pounding away rationally (which can be defendable) but at least one other dealt low blows and makes sure the emotional wound rots while the pounding goes on.

What if the management sees this going on time and time again? Warns but then it just happens again? Bans, and sees the ban violated by a list of completely unreasonable demands? Have this guy return bearing the title LOBOTOMIZED :drama: and use an illegal puppet to stir up the unrest?

If you wonder why on earth Swami would violate his ban AND use an illegal puppet instead of using his ban to think up a rational strategy and working it out with the Administry in PM as to ease the tension in the community...
Perhaps you got an incorrect image of Swami. Perhaps he isn't ALL about rationality.. Perhaps there *was* something to this banning after all, if he violates it several times and returns to fuel the riot.

All this is my personal opinion. In my view, if you were to read many of my and other Mods posts about the SWAMA, then you might see all sorts of variations on the theme i'm laying down in this thread.

This is all my personal take on things. I will not represent the Shroomery Administry on this topic which has sparked too much unrest already.

If anyone wants to ask me stuff as a member then please read my posts and react appropriately to statements I made or questions I not yet gave my opinion on.

I'm here as a MEMBER who happens to be part of the Administry. Even as a member I have voluntarily waived freedom of speech in the best interest of the community and I'm bound further by the politics that inevitably come with responsibility over a community.

Please be respectful.


.


--------------------
Omnicyclion.org
higher knowledge starts here

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleuriahchase
Skinny White Boy
Male User Gallery

Registered: 09/25/04
Posts: 675
Loc: SoCal
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Asante]
    #3574468 - 01/03/05 07:56 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

you got it. i understand that that in now way can you say anything "the administry" wouldn't want to be said as a representative of the shroomery, and that only tid-bits of the situation which are selectively chosen are you at liberty to discuss on your own accord. i hold nothing against you...i know that if you just like soo many others would, undisclose the un-edited version of the story. but theres absolutely nothing you can do.... you as a MEMBER who's coat is hung nicely on the peg couldn't for Swamis sake waiv your waiver of freedom of thought/speech. who would? why dip into it? you are a respected shroomery member who must go along with what the administry sees just or unjust....  almost 3 years and 2100 posts later?! not after working soo hard to belong!! i respect one who can go with the flow like that!                :poke:and :jester: too much and.. :jesus:
            I'm done.


--------------------
Wanting to be someone else is a waste of the person you are -Kurt Cobain
       



     
Hotter than the left sink handle.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAsante
Omnicyclion prophet
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 87,230
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: uriahchase]
    #3574485 - 01/03/05 08:18 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

I'm not even trying to look for hidden meaning in that :wink:

All I want to say is that I speak here as a member among members and that all censorship in my words is entirely self-inflicted.

I did not get any PMs by other members of the Administry to stifle me, there is no list of Do's and Don'ts taped to the side of my computer and no admin is using me as a puppet here.

I am here to speak my mind and I use the restraints that I myself believe I should adhere to. My loyalty lies to the COMMUNITY above the Management.

If there was a deep-dark secret that the Administry was keeping that was detrimental to the well-being of the community, you would see me posting it everywhere and eventually getting perma-banned for it if they were unjust.
I've got an injustice complex just like me most quarrelsome members, but I happen to be in the know and can tell you there is no injustice here. I in fact keep telling it to all very plainly.
If there was injustice here I'd raise some serious hell if it were for the good of the Community.

But I specifically tell you that is NOT the case. As far as I have seen, without restraint of expression here, the Administry is acting entirely in the best interest of the Community.

In my view it would've been better if we put op a sticky right in the beginning that clarified it all, but if you have been reading in my posts it is a complicated matter and it in my view not lack of evidence, but rather the complexity and privacy issues of the matter are so out of hand that this was infeasible.

Remember that the Administrators have the Right to settle any dispute with the big rubber stamp of WESAYSO, but that they never even hinted at stamping it for a cover-up.

There is no conspiracy, Swami does not sit on the Shroomery server with a belt of explosives screaming The Truth Is Out There, there is no coverup or injustice even if the Administrators were our equals, it is an unfortunate matter. I believe that if Swami is banned forever for a public matter in the future, that you can actually see him bring it onto himself with covert use of the techniques i outlined in these posts.

If Swami behaves like the thousands that do not get warned and banned all the damn time then he'll be on these boards for as long and often as he himself wants to be.

TRUST WE ARE JUST.


--------------------
Omnicyclion.org
higher knowledge starts here

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleuriahchase
Skinny White Boy
Male User Gallery

Registered: 09/25/04
Posts: 675
Loc: SoCal
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Asante]
    #3574490 - 01/03/05 08:22 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

"I am here to speak my mind and I use the restraints that I myself believe I should adhere to. My loyalty lies to the COMMUNITY above the Management.

If there was a deep-dark secret that the Administry was keeping that was detrimental to the well-being of the community, you would see me posting it everywhere and eventually getting perma-banned for"

fair enough.


--------------------
Wanting to be someone else is a waste of the person you are -Kurt Cobain
       



     
Hotter than the left sink handle.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAmber_Glow
Sat Chit Anand

Registered: 09/02/02
Posts: 1,543
Last seen: 11 years, 20 days
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Asante]
    #3574866 - 01/03/05 11:50 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Thank you for your replies here Wiccan. I think this is the first post I have read from the Mods that has really honestly explored and explained the whole of the issue.

I think the biggest problem in all of this is that people are worried that it's Swami's posts for challenging other's whacky beliefs that he has gotten in trouble for. I think it is most likely a good thing that those who come to this board with a head full of fantasy should get a good dose of reality, even if that can be hard on them. Those who support Swami see these posts from him, and not posts that harass.

The core issue here is that people are worried about the Mod's judgement of the fine line between opposition and harassment. I think what some people would like to see would be specific examples selected by the Mods of Swami's posts that show he is harassing someone. People want to see evidence, they want to see the case that was made against Swami, but it is all kept behind closed doors.

But I believe Wiccan that there probably was some crossing of the line by Swami, and in any case he will be back soon so we don't really need to worry too too much. We should have some faith in the mods, there is no reason to assume that each one of them handling this case is incompetent.

*Previews my post and realizes:* The mods are telling a bunch of Swami supporters (SKEPTICS) that they should have FAITH in their decisions, without showing evidence. By definition of who they are, those who support Swami will likely try to fight the mods until their skeptic minds have been satiated by evidence.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSclorch
Clyster

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Amber_Glow]
    #3575214 - 01/03/05 02:13 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Amber_Glow said:The mods are telling a bunch of Swami supporters (SKEPTICS) that they should have FAITH in their decisions, without showing evidence. By definition of who they are, those who support Swami will likely try to fight the mods until their skeptic minds have been satiated by evidence.



The only evidence...
Quote:

Wiccan_Seeker said:
In my view Swami systematically selected people he disliked, homed in on their emotional weakspots and then began a systematic approach of perfectly benign rational posts loaded with this psychowarfare aimed at driving them off of Spir&Phil so it can become the SKEPTICS DEBUNKERS FORUM where people making the mistake of posting the beliefs they hold so precious and dear are ruthlessly assassinated by a mob of debunkers.



...is paranoia.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblegettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
Re: Swama New Year = Resolution or Revolution? [Re: LunarEclipse]
    #3575288 - 01/03/05 02:48 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Maybe some of you can understand this. Swami had put up a post when he hit 10,000 asking what he wins. I decided to honor his 10,000 posts with a ROAST. Maybe the humor in it can lighten all of this up.

He had mentioned that he may be spending to much time here and considered getting a job at Burger King and he was joking.

Here was my reply and BTW he responded with a laugh and said "good one".


How bout a Roast to celebrate the occasion?

Swami working at Burger King, can you picture it?

swami: Good evening sir, welcome to Burger King. May I take your
order?

customer: Yes please, I'll have a whopper with no onions and
a coke for here.

swami: An all beef grilled patti eaten without onions is illogical
and makes no sense.

customer: But onions give me gas sir.

swami: Proove it!

customer: Look, just give me a whaler fish sandwhch instead, hold the
mayo.

swami: So, you are admitting that onions do not give you gas and that
you are wrong.

customer: Can I just have the whaler with no mayo please?

swami: A whaler is a fish sandwich made with mayo. You are talking
about something that does not exist except for in your
imagination. Please do not confuse your fantasies with the
actual BK menu.

customer: Sir, that sign over their says that I can have it my way.

swami: That sign was written by Burger King and he has been
proven to be a fraud. He is a fictional character and there
for his words have no validity, use or credibility.

customer: Fine, you have it your way. Just give me a large fry to go.

swami: We have strawberry, vanilla and chocolate

customer: Just cancel my order. I'm going to McDonalds.

swami: Oh sure. Now you are renigging on the order because you don't
know how to order whats on the menu and insist on ordering
up fantasy sandwiches that do not exist with excuses that
you can't back up.

customer: Looks around for the hidden candid camera video because
he's thinking , this has to be a joke. Then he heads for
the door.

swami yells out: Their chicken McNuggets are fake. Ronald McDonald is
a fraud after your money.

End of the shift swami tells his boss he quits. He thinks to himself "if all of my customers are this delusioned I might as well go back to spending my days at the shroomery."

Happy 10,000 posts!


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAsante
Omnicyclion prophet
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 87,230
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Sclorch]
    #3575390 - 01/03/05 03:27 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:


The only evidence...
...is paranoia.





The only thing Sclorch sees...
...is what he wants to see


--------------------
Omnicyclion.org
higher knowledge starts here

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAsante
Omnicyclion prophet
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 87,230
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Amber_Glow]
    #3575569 - 01/03/05 04:14 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

We should have some faith in the mods, there is no reason to assume that each one of them handling this case is incompetent.




I can top that, it's irrational, verging on the arrogant.
"Everybody in the Management is wrong and I am right and I have the right to pressure the Management into providing me what i want."

It is interesting that in all matters relating to banning things barely cause a ripple, but that the banning of somebody for his badgering is associated by an uproar of people who start badgering the management.

We have seen that somebody was PM-ed to join the fight against the Moderators, we see overt aggression and hostility to the management, we see statements that the moderators should be flushed, the management is accused of BS, of paranoia, of irrational and childlike behaviors, hostile threads are being started for the sole purpose of viciousness, attacks are played directly on the person...

But, ofcourse, Swami has nothing to do with any disturbance of the peace. This is only natural and happens with any banning, right?

It is only normal that members act like a pack of vicious snarling wolves against the unpaid volunteers who operate and own this private site, isn't it?

Swami has broken his first ban by making an absolutely ridiculous list of demands and having someone post it illegaly for him knowing full well this person could be banned for doing his dirtywork. Then he comes back in outrage and gets banned again. Then he uses the puppet Gustavius.

Gustavious questioned Swami's ban with a naivite that is totally unlike Swami. In the Spirituality forum he posted how he loved things that Swami would utterly reject and he even makes lots of spelling errors and naive wordings, a bambi-eyed newbie..

But it was all Swami. Swami faked Gustavius and we caught him with his IP hanging out of his pants. A completely fabricated personality of naiveness and innocense and spelling errors and fake spirituality for the purpose of misleading people and used to violate his second ban too and fuel the fire in that very thread.

Isn't that enough?

No! we want evidence!!
You have been given evidence.
No we want OTHER evidence. There is no evidence.
...and a flame war ensues of hostility against the management.

Oh sure.
This is going to convince the Administry that Swami is innocent.
This is going to prove that the Swami Solidarity Movement is not about terrorizing the boards to get their demands answered through aggression.
This is going to promote the Administry giving out a public statement to give in to terrorism.
This is going to help Swami not get banned for good if he breaks the rules again.
If you really believe this please visit www.lalaland.com because in the real world this blatant aggression campaign won't fly.

When Gandhi was imprisoned his followers engaged into nonviolent protesting which freed him.

...so if you really think that Swami is angelic but oppressed by a demon management you all have chosen the right path to ensure him being freed prematurely and get the accusations reviewed.
Several of you have been behaving like a pack of vicious snarling wolves out for moderator blood and in my view the matter is such that if there will be no public Administry statement on the Swama affair, a significant part of it will be the "zero tolerance on terrorism" stance that most communities have in place.

How about blotting out the words Swami Solidarity and writing FIGHT CLUB? because the behavior looks a lot like a bunch of anarchists with the delusions that anything goes and a great thought-up leader.

In my view if Swami had gracefully taken his ban, and people hadn't been acting like a pack of vicious snarling wolves Swami would be back for days & days posting in merryness.
Too bad "rational philosophy people" can't swallow their aggression.
In OTD people know OTD matters should be settled in OTD.
The S&P people get righteous and holier-than-thou (thou = the entire management) and post their indignation across the forums.
Classy.


.


.


--------------------
Omnicyclion.org
higher knowledge starts here

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleuriahchase
Skinny White Boy
Male User Gallery

Registered: 09/25/04
Posts: 675
Loc: SoCal
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Asante]
    #3576338 - 01/03/05 07:15 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

oh shit! one more little thing then im done bitchin' bout it......the post about "how not to talk" posted by a mod for the communities use....is it not a Swami debate handbook? the tactics that are listed and given for all to use in their daily debatings are exactly the tactics swami uses... sorry to keep this thread going..im sure you're exhausted with it all.


--------------------
Wanting to be someone else is a waste of the person you are -Kurt Cobain
       



     
Hotter than the left sink handle.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,689
Loc: On the Border
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Asante]
    #3576550 - 01/03/05 08:09 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

We all use hidden meanings and inuendo in our communications. It is an unconcious act in many cases. Of course I will call a person's credibility into question often using sarcasm and veiled references in a disagreement. It is called being subtle. As I pointed out to you in a previous post you do this as well. By asking me to reread your posting (when you know damn well I did read it) is implying that I have a deficiency in comprehension and intelligence. You didn't need any smileys to do it either. Your posts are filled with inuendo and sarcasm,(much as Swami's were) but I do not see it as warfare...merely debate. You would probably disagree and say that you express no hidden meaning to attack others...so would Swami. To others it is clear. With or without the smiley's, by the way, I see the same message. You are projecting on to another what you do as well...Swami was just good at it. Warfare...no, just pointed conversation and a little paranoia on your part. Trying to demonstrate your expertise in psychwar (see a little sarcasm and inuendo there?) is futile to me as you have demonstated none. I see only someone reading what they want into the words of another. By the way "you have been brainwashed by the military" was put on me by the true believers (not Swami) my first month on this forum, I took no offense as I just considered the source. One more thing...skeptics have just as much relevance on this forum as anyone else. I am beginning to see much hypocrisy in this whole affair. A man on another thread preaches hate againt Jews, but his thread is not locked and he is not banned. To question young believers in the occult is not allowed, but the expression of racial hatreds is? I have seen Catholics and Mormons attacked on a similar basis and no moderation was applied, but scare a few of the "groovy" people and you are gone.


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFrog
Warrior
Female User Gallery

Registered: 10/22/03
Posts: 4,284
Loc: The Zero Point Field
Last seen: 11 years, 2 months
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #3576645 - 01/03/05 08:36 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Huehuecoyotl said:
We all use hidden meanings and inuendo in our communications.




I beg to differ.  :grin:


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,689
Loc: On the Border
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Frog]
    #3576657 - 01/03/05 08:39 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

You just did it yourself. I restate "We all use hidden meanings and inuendo in our communications". Thank you for making my point.


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,689
Loc: On the Border
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #3576662 - 01/03/05 08:40 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Then again maybe you meant to...I am dense at times.


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFrog
Warrior
Female User Gallery

Registered: 10/22/03
Posts: 4,284
Loc: The Zero Point Field
Last seen: 11 years, 2 months
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #3576668 - 01/03/05 08:40 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

That was not hidden at all!  I said I beg to differ!  I DO differ!  How is the meaning hidden in that statement???

I AGAIN beg to differ!!!!

:grin:


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,689
Loc: On the Border
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Frog]
    #3576685 - 01/03/05 08:43 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

You do not see it...but the smiley tells the tale. My point was that this was an unconcious process. Some do it more than others...but we all use hidden meaning and inuendo.


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,689
Loc: On the Border
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #3576696 - 01/03/05 08:44 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Or maybe...like many moderators here, I read in what I wanted to see...


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFrog
Warrior
Female User Gallery

Registered: 10/22/03
Posts: 4,284
Loc: The Zero Point Field
Last seen: 11 years, 2 months
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #3576711 - 01/03/05 08:47 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Huehuecoyotl said:
You do not see it...but the smiley tells the tale. My point was that this was an unconcious process. Some do it more than others...but we all use hidden meaning and inuendo.




Nope.  I (almost) always use a smiley, because if I don't, people think I'm being a sarcastic asshole.  So, I use smiley's a lot, to show that I'm unarmed.  :grin:

It's like a handshake, ya know???


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinedeff
just love everyone
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/01/04
Posts: 9,421
Loc: clarity Flag
Last seen: 3 hours, 39 minutes
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Frog]
    #3576724 - 01/03/05 08:49 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

I agree :cool:

Changes the tone entirely :laugh:


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


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,689
Loc: On the Border
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Frog]
    #3576763 - 01/03/05 08:55 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

That particular smiley is a smug, a-hole lookin smiley though. When Swami used them they were "psycholocical warfare" (note the sarcasm)...so are we at war?


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFrog
Warrior
Female User Gallery

Registered: 10/22/03
Posts: 4,284
Loc: The Zero Point Field
Last seen: 11 years, 2 months
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #3576793 - 01/03/05 09:01 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

It is a grin, not a "smug, a-hole lookin" smiley.  At least, not imo.  :grin:

See?  When I said "not imo", that could be taken wrong, as if I think my opinion is the only opinion that matters.  It could be taken as harsh. 

By putting a :grin: , I show that I'm just being light-hearted.  No seriousness intended, although it's still my opinion.  I'm not saying that you have to have my opinion, as well. 

And see?  You asked, "So, are we at war?"  You didn't put a smiley at the end of that sentence!!! 

So now I have to ask myself...."ARE we at war?"  "Is Hue being serious?"  "Does Hue think I'm really being serious and just putting a smiley there to piss him off?"  "Is Hue mad at me?" 

Hue, you really need to learn the art of the :grin:


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,689
Loc: On the Border
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Frog]
    #3576826 - 01/03/05 09:09 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

I never use smileys as they obscure the actual meaning. I like to be as direct as possible as well, but I often come off as sarcastic and superior...and sometimes, to my discredit, I am. Calling words on a web page warfare is a bit silly. I prefer calling it conversation. I will never be one who walks on eggshells. (I stomp them)


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFrog
Warrior
Female User Gallery

Registered: 10/22/03
Posts: 4,284
Loc: The Zero Point Field
Last seen: 11 years, 2 months
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #3576840 - 01/03/05 09:11 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Huehuecoyotl said:
I never use smileys as they obscure the actual meaning. I like to be as direct as possible as well, but I often come off as sarcastic and superior...and sometimes, to my discredit, I am. Calling words on a web page warfare is a bit silly. I prefer calling it conversation. I will never be one who walks on eggshells. (I stomp them)




Well said, Hue, and I tip my hat.  Except I don't wear a hat.  Tried to, this past week while in Houston.  Damned store only had sizes for bigger heads than mine.  :grin:


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLunarEclipse
Enlil's Official Story
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 21,407
Loc: Building 7
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Frog]
    #3577175 - 01/03/05 10:24 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

"smug, a-hole looking smiley"  :grin:

For some reason, that caused me to laugh hysterically.  I guess it was Hue reading into the intent of the Smiley.  According to the word that comes up before you post, it is "supposed" to be a grin.  Still, Hue may have a point, that Smiley may be laughing at us and not with us. 

Damn Smileys.  I used to have a 1975 Smiley, and that thing was always in the shop.  :wink:


--------------------
Anxiety is what you make it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleuriahchase
Skinny White Boy
Male User Gallery

Registered: 09/25/04
Posts: 675
Loc: SoCal
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Frog]
    #3577207 - 01/03/05 10:28 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

hmm.i totally think that this is finally comming to an end  :whatever: and am satisfied :sick: with how the swami situation was dealt with. :jesus: the actions taken in the matter were fair and reasonable.  :doggystyle: and swami should take it like a man and apologize to the mods over a cup of tea as his treat:stfu:  and hopefully he can come back and behave and no ones feelings will be hurt :crymeariver: in the future.


--------------------
Wanting to be someone else is a waste of the person you are -Kurt Cobain
       



     
Hotter than the left sink handle.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,689
Loc: On the Border
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: uriahchase]
    #3577259 - 01/03/05 10:38 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

You don't get it then. This ain't about Swami...it is about having the freedom to speak your mind and argue a point fairly without fear of being banned. Swani got banned for being a hard corps skeptic. I do not think "it's" coming to an end.


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLunarEclipse
Enlil's Official Story
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 21,407
Loc: Building 7
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: uriahchase]
    #3577457 - 01/03/05 11:19 PM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Who's pulling your strings, Uriah?  :smirk:


--------------------
Anxiety is what you make it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSclorch
Clyster

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Asante]
    #3577647 - 01/04/05 12:03 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Wiccan_Seeker said:
Quote:


The only evidence...
...is paranoia.




The only thing Sclorch sees...
...is what he wants to see



*closes eyes*

I want to see some justice.
I want to see some honesty.
I want to see some humility.

*opens eyes and looks around*

Damn... I was actually counting on that to work.


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinedaimyo
Monticello

Registered: 05/13/04
Posts: 7,751
Last seen: 12 years, 1 month
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Asante]
    #3577711 - 01/04/05 12:18 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

OK. After reading these hidden meaning posts, I decided to give it a go myself.
I picked you out Wiccan Seeker since you seem to be proficient at identifying and distributing hidden messages.

Quote:

Wiccan_Seeker said:
In my view



I am a pompous ass, so listen up.
Quote:

if Swami had gracefully taken his ban,



bent over and succumb to the Moderators of Doom
Quote:

and people hadn't been acting like a pack of vicious snarling wolves



calling out what was seen as an injustice and, in the heat of some arguments, made personal attacks
Quote:

Swami would be back for days & days posting in merryness.



Some people may have been brought joy through a perceived abuse of power.
Quote:

Too bad



Why can't I have things my way?!
Quote:

"rational philosophy people"



Those inferior folks that disagree
Quote:

can't swallow their aggression.



sit back and watch someone, who's posts they enjoy, get ass-fucked. Damn, I'm so good at swallowing.
Quote:

In OTD people know OTD matters should be settled in OTD


It is my opinion that OTD matters should be settled in OTD. If you do not feel this way, too bad you jackass
Quote:

The S&P people get righteous and holier-than-thou (thou = the entire management) and post their indignation across the forums.



The S&P people do what they feel they should, and I don't like the fact I can't control them. Their methodology is admirable.
Quote:

Classy.



I'm still better than you.


This was intended as a joke. I hope you didn't take it personal, but I know you're above that.

If a person uses hidden meaning, then they are a weirdo in my book. Why can't they say what they mean? Does it make them feel good when they THINK they are controlling a "drone"?
If you see hidden meaning in posts, then you may be suffering from paranoia, or you may be reading a weirdos(in my view) post.
Either way, a person should not be banned for what can, at best, be attributed to an interpretation of written word.


--------------------
"I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSclorch
Clyster

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Sclorch]
    #3577905 - 01/04/05 01:12 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

Note: I?m doing this for all the rest of the Al-Swami ?terrorist? cells in the Shroomery.
:rolleyes:

Quote:

Wiccan_Seeker said:
It is interesting that in all matters relating to banning things barely cause a ripple, but that the banning of somebody for his badgering is associated by an uproar of people who start badgering the management.



How so?

Quote:

We have seen that somebody was PM-ed to join the fight against the Moderators,



Again? no one is attacking the moderators PERSONALLY.  This is about the ACTIONS of the Staff here.

And it?s good to hear you finally admit that you?re reading PMs.  Well, not really.

Quote:

we see overt aggression and hostility to the management, we see statements that the moderators should be flushed, the management is accused of BS, of paranoia, of irrational and childlike behaviors,



Some members of the management ARE dishing out BS, ARE paranoid, ARE irrational, and exhibit childlike behavior.  And you expect no reaction?

Quote:

hostile threads are being started for the sole purpose of viciousness, attacks are played directly on the person...



All the articulate threads tend to be ignored by the staff.  Don?t focus on the extreme examples just to prove your point.  I haven?t been vicious.

Quote:

But, of course, Swami has nothing to do with any disturbance of the peace. This is only natural and happens with any banning, right?



What?
Yeah? I?m only upset because Swami is paying me to be upset. :rolleyes:

Quote:

It is only normal that members act like a pack of vicious snarling wolves against the unpaid volunteers who operate and own this private site, isn't it?



Pity poor you.  You LOVE operating this site.

Quote:

Swami has broken his first ban by making an absolutely ridiculous list of demands and having someone post it illegally for him knowing full well this person could be banned for doing his dirty work. Then he comes back in outrage and gets banned again. Then he uses the puppet Gustavius.



A. The first ban is what everyone is pissed about.
B. No one was fooled by his puppet.
C. ?Outrage??  He posted his issues in the Feedback Forum, what?s so wrong about that?
D. Banned for a puppet?  Fine? see A.

Quote:

Isn't that enough?
No! we want evidence!!
You have been given evidence.



Not for the first ban.
Quote:

No we want OTHER evidence. There is no evidence.



No? we want evidence for the FIRST BAN.
Please, I?m tired of sounding like a broken record.
Quote:

...and a flame war ensues of hostility against the management.



Flame war?  Hardly.
More like a continual reminder.
(Again, ignore the extremists)

Quote:

Oh sure.
This is going to convince the Administry that Swami is innocent.



What is this word you keep using?  Administry?

Quote:

This is going to prove that the Swami Solidarity Movement is not about



Movement?  hahahahahaha
Ravus and I have sig banners.  TWO people with sarcastic sig banners!

Quote:

terrorizing the boards to get their demands answered through aggression.
This is going to promote the Administry giving out a public statement to give in to terrorism.



terrorizing? aggression? terrorism?
Jesus? you?re as bad as our president.
?Bad rhetoric, bad!  Now sit.  Sit.  Good boy.?

Quote:

This is going to help Swami not get banned for good if he breaks the rules again.
If you really believe this please visit www.lalaland.com because in the real world this blatant aggression campaign won't fly.



What rule was broken in the first place?!!
Are you talking about the ex post facto ?Swamitrolling? rule?

Quote:

When Gandhi was imprisoned his followers engaged into nonviolent protesting which freed him.



This IS nonviolent!
THESE ARE ALL JUST WORDS.
How much more NONVIOLENT can you get?

Quote:

If you really think that Swami is angelic but oppressed by a demon management you all have chosen the right path to ensure him being freed prematurely and get the accusations reviewed.
Several of you have been behaving like a pack of vicious snarling wolves out for moderator blood and in my view the matter is such that if there will be no public Administry statement on the Swama affair, a significant part of it will be the "zero tolerance on terrorism" stance that most communities have in place.



What?s with all the hyperbolic symbology?

Quote:

How about blotting out the words Swami Solidarity and writing FIGHT CLUB? because the behavior looks a lot like a bunch of anarchists with the delusions that anything goes and a great thought-up leader.



Fight Club wasn?t about anarchy.
I?d debate you on this, but I don?t want to get banned.
Not such a great design idea, though?


Quote:

In my view if Swami had gracefully taken his ban, and people hadn't been acting like a pack of vicious snarling wolves Swami would be back for days & days posting in merryness.



I suppose you?re entitled to have this view no matter how inaccurate it is.

Quote:

Too bad "rational philosophy people" can't swallow their aggression.



What aggression?
Are we stockpiling Tomahawk cruise missiles and setting our sights on Santa Cruz, CA?
?Must stop the server? must permaban the whole damn site??
Hardly.
This is TALK.  It?s what we?re doing.  We?re taaallllkkkking.

Quote:

In OTD people know OTD matters should be settled in OTD.
The S&P people get righteous and holier-than-thou (thou = the entire management) and post their indignation across the forums.



The initial FEEDBACK was posted in the proper forum.
And no one is upset with ?the entire management??  just the ones responsible for enacting their personal agenda with Swami?s first ban.

Overall, I think the admins are doing a superb job? and I thank Ythan for founding this place.


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAsante
Omnicyclion prophet
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 87,230
Re: Santa aka Swami [Re: Asante]
    #3578278 - 01/04/05 04:24 AM (19 years, 2 months ago)

I have written over and over that I'm only stating my own opinion and am not representing the management.

This thread was so peaceful and respectful, now look what it has become. The entire thread? No, not the entire thread.

Huehuecoyotl and Sclorch consistantly,

keep demanding answers for things I already answered,
keep explaining my words in ways the logic in my wordings rules specifically out
Do not react to things I an writing and
react to things I did not write
and to call it a day
They fail to see the difference between a friendly discussion and the taking of hostile stances and show little empathy.

And this whole thread suffers because of it.

It has no point for me to answer your questions because you did not listen to my answers before and there is no indication that you will if i regurgitate and add to my stance once more.
If somebody drops by and empathically and in a friendly and reasonable tone asks the very same questions they will get their answers.

In contrast to any others in this whole thread, and many had strong disagreements, the two of you display a rather aggressive way of discussing that includes consistently missing or misinterpreting the point, posting questions to me that I have answered ten times before, and a complete unwillingness or incapability to maintain a respectful attitude and empathize with another's point of view.

If I were to continue with the two of you this thread effectively goes to shite. I specifically said many times earlier on in this thread that I will only discuss with people who maintain a respectful attitude, which in this long thread was anyone but Sclorch and Huehuecoyotl.

If somebody in a friendly fasion asks the same questions they get an elaborate answer but I draw the line at what I consider foam-at-the-mouth snarling.
If you call this debating then try doing so in the same fashion as a member of a city council or a bridge-club.
I like to think that in person you debate in a far more agreeable way, but then again you may not.

I am posting here as a member, and in this thread, on this topic, I have had enough of this style of disagreeing.


.


--------------------
Omnicyclion.org
higher knowledge starts here

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6  [ show all ]

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   North Spore Bulk Substrate   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract   Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* swami would love this
( 1 2 all )
Moonshoe 1,461 20 10/23/04 12:04 PM
by fireworks_god
* Santa, Christ, and the holidays CherryBomM 757 16 12/08/04 08:02 PM
by CherryBom
* Is there really a Santa Claus? Swami 793 14 11/25/03 02:24 PM
by Scarfmeister
* Is Santa Claus a stalker / peeper? Swami 581 7 12/24/03 10:31 PM
by micro
* Swami/Shroomism relations
( 1 2 3 4 all )
LearyfanS 6,173 68 03/20/02 07:32 PM
by Swami
* Swami doesn't exist
( 1 2 all )
Swami 1,293 24 05/30/05 05:32 PM
by Huehuecoyotl
* Swami Reiki Challenge
( 1 2 3 all )
Swami 4,284 42 03/06/03 02:55 AM
by Sclorch
* Swami visited by the Spiritual Police
( 1 2 all )
Swami 3,650 32 08/03/06 07:19 PM
by PhanTomCat

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
5,676 topic views. 1 members, 10 guests and 22 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 0.068 seconds spending 0.01 seconds on 12 queries.