Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

MushroomMan Mycology
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

Feedback and Administration > Website Announcements and Feature Feedback
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

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: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore Bulk Substrate   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |  [ show all ]
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Swami]
    #4746049 -
Log in to view attachment

6. ride out your ban and put the cattle prod on the shelf.



--------------------
Anno cock? Is that some kind of Greek liquer? -Geo's all-knowing sex slave
Scat's way better than mud cause it's warm. -Ythan 4/23/07

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Swami]
    #4746086 -

You could also attempt to follow the rules. Now, isn't that a good idea?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Redstorm]
    #4746156 -

Not a single rule was broken for which my current 14 day ban was implemented. Nor was I skirting the issue with some 'technicality'. Go back and reread the thread. I was banned for my alleged mindstate.

The only one who broke a rule in my last S&P thread was a moderator. He failed to follow my disclaimer which is a bannable offense.


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Swami]
    #4746199 -

I thought this was about the Trendal thing. You've been banned again since then? Good god.....

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Swami]
    #4746201 -

You ignored specific direction from moderators and administrators alike,
indicating we would not take kindly to further sarcastic provocations of our
staff or policy. Yet you couldn't help yourself and apparently thought what you
did would be humurous. Unfortunately, we did not share your opinion of the matter.

The specific reasoning for the thread closure and associated ban was included
in the [locked thread] and subsequent private message.


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

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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Swami]
    #4746208 -

Quote:
The only one who broke a rule in my last S&P thread was a moderator. He failed to follow my disclaimer which is a bannable offense.


The tooth fairy thread was closed by the administration, in fact the moderation requested the administration to analyze that thread and reach its own conclusions, no pro or con argumentation was discussed by the S&P moderation.

You're just adding more drama to this situation with this kind of assumptions. Denoting bias against the administration and becoming a drama queen IS the bannable offense.

MAIA


--------------------
Spiritual being, living a human experience ... The Shroomery Mandala



Use, do not abuse; neither abstinence nor excess ever renders man happy.
Voltaire

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Swami]
    #4746293 -

Swami,

I will thoughtfully answer your question, only, my personal answer to it was not in your option list.

This is also something else I learned from my momma.

If x amount of all the mods and admins involved, have a personal bias against you, my mom would ask me, why do I think that is?

She would leave me to ponder it. She would suggest that maybe I ask them why they do? She would suggest, that, if I wanted such a group of people with a bias against me to not have one, to maybe work at listening to them, why they feel that way about me, work to understand it and IF I still cared to find peace and resolution, to make compromises to get along.

She would suggest that if I couldn't do that, then, I need to find a new group of people who accept me the way I am.

Thoughtfully, I might add this for you to think about. If you care about this family of 6 years as much as you say you do, then ask yourself why you push the limits so much to jeopardize that relationship?

When the new philosophy forum opens up, you can debate in it. IF something happens where a mod asks you to pull back and away, just don't challenge them or push them. Just respect their request and you will be welcome in this forum for as long as it survives.

You like challenges and you say you are great at exercising self discipline. Start fresh with a new challenge at exercising that discipline here. If you exercise it on yourself and pull back when asked too, they won;t have to exercise discipline on you, for you, instead.

Wouldn't you rather apply it to yourself then have them do it?

perhaps in your life off the forum, you are use to running the show, being the dominant figure and calling the shots. I am too. When, i come here, I know my place and that is, i am a guest and that someone else is running the show and in charge and that I am to show respect for that if or when asked to if I want to be welcomed here by the mods and admins.

make this a new challenge of self discipline here at the shroomery, if you truly care about your relationship with your family here.

Do it for that, not the mods or admins, but for the people you care about here who still care about you keeping a place for yourself here as well.

My personal advice. I would definitely scratch that public appeal option, but I think it has been made clear, that is one of the top things, that have you rubbing the mods and admins the wrong way. No one likes to have forces rallied against them on their own turf.

When it comes down to it, they have all of the power here and you have none. That may be hard for you to accept or deal with, but it is the bottom line fact.  You like getting real with the facts. For some reason, in this case, maybe you are in a "swami imagination zone" where you think you are in power here. They have the keys and rights of ownership to this place and we don't. That is the reality. 

swami, if you don;t start exercising self discipline to bite your tongue and back off when the mods ask you too, your comment about wanting to keep your family of 6 years that you care about will start to look like a smoke screen just to keep your foot in the door longer.

Show us how much you care and start disciplining yourself so they don't have too, so you can stay.

Thats just my thoughtful answer from the heart to your question.

My apologies to Cervantes as this post is not suppose to be about swami. he did reply to me asking how he can be a part of the swama solution, which is a part of the S&P solution.

I don't him all of the credit for S&P having a problem and needing a solution.  If swami left, others said they would take his place. if they left, others like them would come.

If a swami type was able to become a problem for S&P, that means, S&P has a weak walls and cracks to bust and slip through. I personally don't think it's the mods. I think it's what i have been talking about.

A forum that both supports and encourages cold aggressive logical reductionist philosophical debate and warm, mystical, expansive spiritual discussion, is BOUND and set up to be a stormy environment.

Cold fronts and warm fronts don't mix peacefully and without destruction.

Logical only types can not intuit, sense or feel it seems, when they are pushing people to far.

Like we have been saying in S&P. We have a full brain with two sides and if we only use one side of it, we will be half brained through life, like a boat with one ore and will row in circles and get no where.

FYI, the mocking posts, though funny sometimes, and most of us can laugh at ourselves you can save them. Many mystic type spiritualists already know, some people think we are crazy, flaky , fluffy, delusional, insane, out of touch with reality, too sensitive, etc.

little do they consider, we just use S&P to share a side where we allow ourselves to let go and explore and share with others. We are not always like that and if something was seriously wrong with us that needed to be corrected by people who want to save us, we would be in mental institutions. Most of us have good to great lives and function in this world quite well. Save the saving for the people who ASK for critical help.

The rest of us are doing just fine. If we want skeptical, rational, logical, critical help with something, we will ask for it. If you give it when it's not asked for, know now, that is one of those invisible lines many members in S&P cross that causes chaos. spiritual types do it to thinking they will save the cold hearted soulless people.

Members from both camps need to stop saving people who are not asking for help or assistance and a lot less on both sides would feel offended around there, which would mean less defensive people which would mean more peace.

Just a suggestion swami to help you understand what keeping a post on topic means, if you have future question about proposed suggestions for S&P, make your examples hypothetical with hypothetical future posters, to not make this thread about you. That would make for a good fresh start.;)

:peace: :heart:


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: MAIA]
    #4746306 -

I have direct quotes from staff saying that my punishment has nothing to do with rule violation. Are they lying?

I have direct quotes from other staff clearly stating personal bias and that it affects their every decision regarding me.

Saying that the thread in question would have been overlooked had ANYONE else have written it says what?

Where is the assumption?


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #4746362 -

She would suggest that if I couldn't do that, then, I need to find a new group of people who accept me the way I am.

If 29 of your group think you are pretty damn cool and 1 thinks you are a jerk, would you spend all your time analyzing yourself and trying to please the one?

The people that interact with me daily have given me uniformly high ratings. What does that say?

If a cop asked you out and you turned him down and his ego was hurt; later pulled you over and planted some pot in your glove box, would you quietly do the time without squawking?


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Swami]
    #4746448 -

Swami said:
Not a single rule was broken for which my current 14 day ban was implemented. Nor was I skirting the issue with some 'technicality'. Go back and reread the thread. I was banned for my alleged mind state.

The only one who broke a rule in my last S&P thread was a moderator. He failed to follow my disclaimer which is a bannable offense.


Perfect example of what not to do to stay welcomed here. Hmmm, question an admins judgment and publically defaming the character of a mod without getting the facts first?

It may make you popular with the chaos crowd that likes desent, but remember swami, they don't have the keys to this place nor their name on the title. It's not logical or rational to want to be popular with the people who also cause grief for the admins and mods.

That doesn't mean you have to kiss any ass. It just means, know your place here.

Swami, I will spell out for you what was wrong about that tooth fairy post. It had only one purpose and that was to mock people who believe in things they can not prove exist and to encourage others to mock them as well in that post.

You can try to convince people that you really believe in the tooth fairy and you will just insult them further.

Name one constructive purpose that post was meant to accomplish?

Solution for future reference. If you can't help yourself from mocking people, and feel the irresistible urge to do it, just post it in OTD. You'll feel better getting it off your chest and keep your ass saved in S&P, S&M P&R, whatever will be there when your ban is lifted.

Mocking people for their beliefs or making fun of them falls under the forum rule of showing respect for other peoples beliefs. That is the rule you broke in that forum.  :tongue: The shroomery has provided it's members a forum for those who have that need to express themselves and it's OTD.

After you were banned for it, one of your deputized followers, and an undeputized one put up mockery posts. People tend to follow your lead and bad examples , as funny as they are, they are inappropriate for S&P and break the respect for others beliefs rule.

They should be happy for the admins they have instead of complaining about them. I would've deleted those posts and warned both of them to take it to OTD and keep it out of S&P, funny as they are, they break the rules. They will be just as funny in OTD and not break the rules of that forum.

Then again, if people post them in OTD, they will not be able to offend those who believe in things they can't prove exist. I can't think of any other reason one would have for breaking the forum rules and risking a ban in the name of humor. Getting a laugh isn't worth it, or is it?


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #4746462 -

So, he's not allowed to question his ban?

Let's all lie down and let authority do whatever they like. That sounds like a good philosophy, huh?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Redstorm]
    #4746490 -

He can question them and he has been for the last week now and do you think its helping him?

Do you think it's helping him to question it this post of cervantes about S&P when the admins have asked him to PM them or use ticket support.

From what I can tell, because it has been brought out in public, the admins already gave him answers. They keep repeating the same answers. What is going to change if swami keeps questioning it and keeps getting the same answers?

He is going to wear the admins out and possible push them into perma banning him.

If anyone cares about keeping swami around, I wouldn't encourage him to push them any further. He has questioned it relentlessly already. He has been given answers reduntantly already.

Do you honestly feel he should keep going at this point Red?

Crazy ass experiment if he does. But hey, in the name of the scientific method and trial and error, maybe swami should take your advise and keep at it and see what the results are. Not my advice.

The answer to your question is, YES. No one forces us to be under anyones authority here. I thought it was something we agreed to when we registered.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #4746501 -

That "private website" argument is so shitty and played out. This forum would not exist without us (the members), so they have a vested interest in working to keep us happy. I think Swami's last thread he was banned for should have just been locked. He sure as hell did not deserve a ban for it.

I also think the ticket system is horse shit. When someone fucks up, it should be brought to the attention of the membership, as a deterrent to keep it from happening again. The process of banning and decision-making needs both tranparency and accountability, both of which are lacking severely.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Swami]
    #4746505 -

one of your deputized followers

???

Did they show you a badge?


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Swami]
    #4746539 -

Swami said:
She would suggest that if I couldn't do that, then, I need to find a new group of people who accept me the way I am.

If 29 of your group think you are pretty damn cool and 1 thinks you are a jerk, would you spend all your time analyzing yourself and trying to please the one?

The people that interact with me daily have given me uniformly high ratings. What does that say?

If a cop asked you out and you turned him down and his ego was hurt; later pulled you over and planted some pot in your glove box, would you quietly do the time without squawking?


I just caught this reply of yours.

swami, you do not have a bias issue that is causing you problems and threatening your relationship with your 6 year family with the members. They are not the group, you should be questioning why they have a problem with you. As you said, the majority don't. They arn't your problem either. maybe the minority members have been as the mods and admins say they get PM complaints about you. Start there if you think public support is so important. Why have people PM'd them about you? Listen, learn, understand, grow, move on a better person with that knowledge.

The group that does have a problem with you, that IS causing a problem for you, is the one, you need to be asking, why do they?

If a rock in my shoe is bothering me, I should take the rock out of that shoe. So what if my other shoe is rock free. It's the shoe with the rock that needs your attention. That rock will be a pain for you until you deal with it. The shoe not causing a problem for you doesn't make the shoe with the rock get any better does it? Switch focus.

You may not have tired them out, but you have tired me out.  :thumbup: :heart: :lol: Party on swami.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #4746580 -

White authority to MLK: Why rock the boat son? Just go along.


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #4746655 -

Why have people PM'd them about you?

As I have never seen a single one of these alleged complaints, I cannot be certain.

One thing I do know is that deconstructing erroneous beliefs will never win any friends no matter how sweetly it is done; yet examining these things in depth is the core of philosophy.


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Swami]
    #4746702 -

It may not win friends, but if it is done in the spirit of love and respect, it may, and it will rarely generate enemies.


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

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

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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Icelander]
    #4746740 -

Being loving is not a requirement for scrutinizing ideas.

More importantly, your statement simply isn't true. I have received insults after the gentlest of inquiry both here and in the real-world. Beliefs are held as sacred and people will defend them visciously especially after you reveal a fatal flaw in their thinking.


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Swami]
    #4746763 -

It's not true for you and it is for me. That's just the quirkiness of life and love.

By the way I believe love is an essential ingredient in all successful endeavors. That's why so many of mine fail. :wink:


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

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

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

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

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore Bulk Substrate   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds

Feedback and Administration > Website Announcements and Feature Feedback
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* YOu Mother F*#&$r's
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )		 KingOftheThing 17,229 115 11/19/03 04:04 AM
by PoetFirst
* &amp EffedS 1,133 3 09/08/03 07:26 AM
by Seuss
* Other Drugs Discussion: Temporarily Closed & Fully Moderated
( 1 2 all )		 geokillsA 5,316 27 03/17/03 06:36 PM
by geokills
* What discussion board software does The Shroomery run on? LucidDream 1,509 5 01/02/05 03:57 PM
by Jim
* FREE DOOBIE! Calbha 770 1 02/14/04 06:37 PM
by geokills
* This free IPODS spam shit.
( 1 2 all )		 Barbi 3,952 30 07/28/04 04:44 AM
by Shroomism
* Free stuff! Anonymous 547 2 09/05/02 02:59 PM
by Anonymous
* The Other Drugs Discussion problem resin 1,936 13 08/14/03 10:38 AM
by Thor

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Ythan, Thor, Seuss, geokills
13,691 topic views. 0 members, 29 guests and 1 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.03 seconds spending 0.006 seconds on 16 queries.