FAQ and Article Updates

There's something to be said for both versions.

Akkarin wrote: https://www.templeofthejediorder.org/faq#DonotAgree

New wrote: There are many Jedi communities across the internet with a great variety of beliefs, customs and policies. As a community we will do our best to address your concerns and take on board your views, but no one site may offer you exactly what you are looking for. If you'd feel more comfortable elsewhere maybe one of the other Jedi communities would correspond more to your needs.

Old wrote: In the immortal words of our founder “Membership is a privilege not a right” or in the not so immortal words of grump Kana Seiko Haruki: 'If you don't like the way we do things here - you don't have to stay'

I like the new version, though if it were me I would probubly change a few things.

It is not necessary to do so obviously...I am just musing out loud.

Can't find what you were searching for here? Or do not agree with some of the beliefs and systems we offer? As a community we want to ensure that you get a chance to examine your own unique Journey be it here or elsewhere. There are many Jedi communities across the internet with a great variety of beliefs, customs and policies. If you are unable to find what you were searching for here, we encourage you to journey to the other sites, groups, and chapters until you find a place that suites you most. Here is a list of approved communities that Temple of the Jedi Order is aware of as of [Update: March 10 2016] Community List <--Link

I like Triss' suggestion... the revision seems.. well.. a little bit mean...

Edan wrote: I like Triss' suggestion... the revision seems.. well.. a little bit mean...

it's a damn sight more cordial than the original, which was essentially "TOTJO or GTFO"

Is cordial the goal?

Connor L. wrote: Is cordial the goal?

Why wouldn't it be?

Edan wrote:

Connor L. wrote: Is cordial the goal?

Why wouldn't it be?

I suppose I see "Cordial" and "Polite" as seperate....but If it were me....I would much more prefer to appear Polite, respectful and helpful over Cordial or Dismissive....Just me though...

Trisskar wrote:

Edan wrote:

Connor L. wrote: Is cordial the goal?

Why wouldn't it be?

I suppose I see "Cordial" and "Polite" as seperate....but If it were me....I would much more prefer to appear Polite, respectful and helpful over Cordial or Dismissive....Just me though...

Well to me I usually think of cordial as courteous.. so I guess polite is what I meant.

Connor L. wrote: Is cordial the goal?

I would like to remind you that this is the same Temple that keeps routinely reminding me it's not what I say, but how I say it that makes them annoyed with me. We can have a moment of silent reflection on the irony there, if you wish. lol

My point was that the original "In or Out" clause was worded very aggressively. This new one doesn't seem so bad, and it has the added benefit (unlike Trisskar's otherwise lovely suggestion) of not having to break our own rules about external links to other communities that are mostly none of our business.

They found us with Google, they can find the rest of them the same way.

Trope FTW. I always thought it was meant a bit light hearted, as supported by calling one of the people quoted as 'grumpy'.

The problem with being so stiff is that many people are surrounded by it, and well we all know familiarity can breed contempt, and often people are drawn to 'different' or funny and ignore stuff they think is banal. It can go the other way too of course, with people sensitive for whatever reason having a fearful reaction sufficient to interfere with their confidence to opening up. Sometimes banal is safer.

My point was.. perhaps the Temple's view is a very "in and out" thing. And, we just didn't have a good representation of that.

If our goal is to get people away who don't want to be here in the first place (even if they don't know it yet), a strongly worded cautionary remark is better than a subtle one, right?

steamboat28 wrote: and it has the added benefit (unlike Trisskar's otherwise lovely suggestion) of not having to break our own rules about external links to other communities

TOTJO has an external Community Link Page .... Which was what I was referring to.

*Shrugs*

In any case It was just a suggestion. Either way, the new version isn't bad, it just felt a mite dissmissive to me is all. Not a bad thing...I just like to be more "Lovely" as you point out

There really isn't a way to say "If you don't like us, you don't have to be here" without sounding at least a little dismissive. That statement is rather literally dismissing people to leave should they choose.

The new version does it nicer than the old one but I didn't really have a problem with the old one.

The problem you run into with being bluntly dismissive is that it might drive away people who would've otherwise stayed. People come here seeking some measure of peace they think they'll find, and a harshly-worded "git gone'd" isn't necessarily conducive to the kind of environment we would otherwise attempt to uphold.

There's few nice ways of saying "then maybe this isn't for you"...

I don't think that its a bad point...

Simple Oath FAQ :

Old wrote: As of 1st January 2015 the Simple Oath is no longer a requirement for becoming a Jedi at the Temple of the Jedi Order. The Simple Oath can be taken by anyone at any time they please, but is now instead a requirement for reaching the rank of Initiate. Please see here for more details.

Please look here for the wording of the Simple Oath and the conditions under which it must be taken.

Members may wish to take a personal Jedi Oath (formulated in personal words), but a personal oath is not considered a valid and legal oath in the eyes of TotJO. Any pledge no matter in what form is a valid oath, no doubt, but it is not specific, in an official form, to the members who are Jedi here.

If your legal name should change for whatever reason then please inform an Intake Officer.

New wrote: The Simple Oath is a non-mandatory Oath of dedication to the Jedi Path. Any member may take it but they are neither required or obligated to. Taking it is not related to advancement of rank.

Please look here for the wording of the Simple Oath and the conditions under which it must be taken.

Oaths Article

There are two main Oaths within the Order: the Simple Oath and the Solemn Vow. There is also an Oath of Office and an Oath of Confidence.

The Simple Oath is a non-mandatory oath of dedication to the Jedi Path. It binds you to the Jedi Way until you are ready for Knighthood or until you decide to leave. The Simple Oath has previously been a requirement of rank advancement, but this is no longer the case.

The Solemn Vow is taken upon Knighthood and binds you to the Jedi Way for life.

If your legal name should change for whatever reason then please inform an Intake Officer.

Members may wish to take a personal Jedi Oath (formulated in personal words), but a personal oath is not considered a valid and legal oath in the eyes of TotJO. Any pledge no matter in what form is a valid oath, no doubt, but it is not specific, in an official form, to the members who are Jedi here.

Terms of Use and Rules article updated. Now includes Terms of Us e and Copyright notice which is linked to in Library and IP.

https://www.templeofthejediorder.org/faq#Rules

New wrote: 25. What Are The TotJO Website 'Rules'?

We prefer to think of them as guidelines or even just as good manners. These rules cover all Temple areas online.

For detailed explanations of our rules, information regarding terms of use at TotJO and for copyright procedure please see here.

Temple of the Jedi Order Merchandise article updated. Now includes a Shopping on Amazon section so if you want to shop online at Amazon in The US you can help fund the Temple by purchasing almost anything from Amazon, by going through a special link . Good for all those philosophical and spiritual readings, or anything else for that matter!!!

For those who don't have access to the article manager, there is an Article Index which, thanks to Darren, is now linked to in nearly all articles.

An updated version of the FAQ is being worked on and you can now click on the individual sections of the Doctrine as in: Code .