Voting to ban members

Leah Starspectre wrote: My idea:

I'd forgo a vote and instead, set up a system of publicly documented warnings, to be marshalled by the Security Officer, under the eye of the council.

Each warning post must include the rule that was broken, and how.

After a set number of warnings, temporary ban. Further warnings would be a permanent ban.

If the is uncertainty if a rule was broken, the knights/council can confer about it.

I think this would hopefully lower the chance of personal bias.

We have a system like that. One disadvantage of this is the reporting can vary. For example at one point one member was going absolutely insane yet no mods were reporting the personnal attacks, wild accusations, legal and other threats.... but would fill another member's record with far-fetched theories of what they might have meant and the obscure way in which it broke the rules.

The knights were asked to vote as there were numerous complaints and accusations about this guest, yet the council could not find sufficient evidence of rulebreaking or otherwise noxious activity to warrant a ban. The VP membership affairs and one of the two security officers had been opposed to banning this guest.

Not that I have either the time or energy to find it, but I recall there being at least one temple thread outlining the code of conduct that temple members are/were expected to adhere to.

It's the task of individual temple members to stay informed, updated on, and compliant with these standards.

If people forget that this is a church and a recognized place of worship on an occasional basis, that is one thing.

Choosing to willfully ignore established rules and standards; and then boasting about such decisions publicly is another matter entirely. In my time here I have seen far senior members, with much better standing in the community; banned or otherwise excommunicated for far inferior offenses.

Choosing to intentionally and willfully ignore multiple private and public warnings is also a glaring problem in and of itself, as it indicates a complete lack of interest in being a cohesive part of this community.

Although TOTJO offers itself to the public, it is not a public owned entity. It is a privately owned and operated church which (comparatively) asks very little from its membership.

I have this basic reminder in the footer of each post I make here, and it's unfortunate to see it's yet to catch on.

Choosing to willfully ignore established rules and standards; and then boasting about such decisions publicly is another matter entirely. In my time here I have seen far senior members, with much better standing in the community; banned or otherwise excommunicated for far inferior offenses.

Who was it and what were the offenses?

Who was it and what were the offenses?

If you would like an itemized list, I'd be happy to provide you a (detailed) history of all previously banned members ranking either Apprentice or above. That is, when I have the time and energy to do so.

Otherwise, being a council member; I'm sure you have access to member records. I'm also sure you know which particular member(s) I'm referencing having been a key player in their public trials & consequent banning/excommunication.

EDIT:

In lieu of a complete list, here is the initial event I am referencing in the post above.

How to get excommunicated - and not even know why.

I've been the busiest Mod for many years now, but I tried to let others pick it up when I became Council Secretary a few years ago. So despite rens bs here, its more a case of very sparse and sporadic moderators coupled with the disinterest of Councillors in moderating. Yet I still do it if I happen to be online and see it, but I left Council Secretary role because I'd have less time.... but in accepting the differet natured role of Security Officer recently, I reported on questionable conduct of someone Council was trying todeal with in the 'questionable member thread' to supprt their decision making - until ren decided to misrepresent all this repeatidly in public as me acting biased lol. So Council then decided it would let Knights decide by vote.

I abstained anyway, but rens spinning bs again. I had to type this with my tv remote on the screen keyboard so probably wont reply as it a hand numb'er!

Kohadre wrote: Choosing to willfully ignore established rules and standards; and then boasting about such decisions publicly is another matter entirely. In my time here I have seen far senior members, with much better standing in the community; banned or otherwise excommunicated for far inferior offenses.

Tu quoque fallacy. You are suggesting that because other members have been unfairly banned, Kyrin should be unfairly banned as well. Is consistency in bad policy more important than correcting it?

Manu wrote:

Kohadre wrote: Choosing to willfully ignore established rules and standards; and then boasting about such decisions publicly is another matter entirely. In my time here I have seen far senior members, with much better standing in the community; banned or otherwise excommunicated for far inferior offenses.

Tu quoque fallacy. You are suggesting that because other members have been unfairly banned, Kyrin should be unfairly banned as well. Is consistency in bad policy more important than correcting it?

No, that's not what I'm suggesting. However, interesting interpretation.

Kyrin has made her presence known on the forum. From what I've seen of it, it has only ever been antagonistic or otherwise hostile. What I am actually saying within the post you (incorrectly) attempted to quote, is that if anything Kyrin has had her behavior excused many times over or otherwise outright ignored.

This, in comparison to long standing members who either got on the wrong side of a thread/discussion, or bruised the emotions of particular staff/council members which consequently lead to public trial.

Kohadre wrote: Kyrin has made her presence known on the forum. From what I've seen of it, it has only ever been antagonistic or otherwise hostile. What I am actually saying within the post you (incorrectly) attempted to quote, is that if anything Kyrin has had her behavior excused many times over or otherwise outright ignored.

This, in comparison to long standing members who either got on the wrong side of a thread/discussion, or bruised the emotions of particular staff/council members which consequently lead to public trial.

From my point of view, this is an improvement. Long standing members getting banned in the past would be a bad thing, so Kyrin (who by the way, has not been a Knight here and thus should not be held up to as high a standard as Knights are) getting cut some slack seems like an improvement to me.

I will grant you that Kyrin has been at times explicitly hostile; she's not into the whole passive-aggressive stealth disrespect that other members are so fond of. Both styles can be disrespectful. Only one style gets frowned upon.

Manu wrote:

Warning: Spoiler!

Kohadre wrote: Kyrin has made her presence known on the forum. From what I've seen of it, it has only ever been antagonistic or otherwise hostile. What I am actually saying within the post you (incorrectly) attempted to quote, is that if anything Kyrin has had her behavior excused many times over or otherwise outright ignored.

This, in comparison to long standing members who either got on the wrong side of a thread/discussion, or bruised the emotions of particular staff/council members which consequently lead to public trial.

From my point of view, this is an improvement. Long standing members getting banned in the past would be a bad thing, so Kyrin (who by the way, has not been a Knight here and thus should not be held up to as high a standard as Knights are) getting cut some slack seems like an improvement to me.

I will grant you that Kyrin has been at times explicitly hostile; she's not into the whole passive-aggressive stealth disrespect that other members are so fond of. Both styles can be disrespectful. Only one style gets frowned upon.

There is a huge difference between using expletives within a post, and putting careful thought into an argument which differentiates from a conflicting viewpoint. There's an even greater difference from writing out a post to engage in debate, and writing out a post with the specific intention to emotionally charge specific member(s) with the end goal to incite a fight within the forums.

As far as "passive-aggressive stealth disrespect" is concerned, if any member on the forum has to put forth the effort to deconstruct an original post, and then look for specific things to become offended about, and then go further as to choose to become offended about them, I fail to see how that becomes the authors fault. Taking things out of context and then reinterpreting them in a response is a further attempt to incite arguments which otherwise wouldn't have, nor needed to exist.

As I interpret it, one of the key foundations of our doctrine is the ignorance or otherwise outright dismissal of emotion. As Jedi, we should seek to not feel, or at the very least not allow ourselves to be emotionally influenced by others.

To put forth an outright hostile presence within the community, and then seek to have that presence excused; accepted; and celebrated goes against my understanding of what this community was founded upon and what it seeks to accomplish.

Kohadre wrote:

Manu wrote:

Warning: Spoiler!

Kohadre wrote: Kyrin has made her presence known on the forum. From what I've seen of it, it has only ever been antagonistic or otherwise hostile. What I am actually saying within the post you (incorrectly) attempted to quote, is that if anything Kyrin has had her behavior excused many times over or otherwise outright ignored.

This, in comparison to long standing members who either got on the wrong side of a thread/discussion, or bruised the emotions of particular staff/council members which consequently lead to public trial.

From my point of view, this is an improvement. Long standing members getting banned in the past would be a bad thing, so Kyrin (who by the way, has not been a Knight here and thus should not be held up to as high a standard as Knights are) getting cut some slack seems like an improvement to me.

I will grant you that Kyrin has been at times explicitly hostile; she's not into the whole passive-aggressive stealth disrespect that other members are so fond of. Both styles can be disrespectful. Only one style gets frowned upon.

There is a huge difference between using expletives within a post, and putting careful thought into an argument which differentiates from a conflicting viewpoint. There's an even greater difference from writing out a post to engage in debate, and writing out a post with the specific intention to emotionally charge specific member(s) with the end goal to incite a fight within the forums.

As far as "passive-aggressive stealth disrespect" is concerned, if any member on the forum has to put forth the effort to deconstruct an original post, and then look for specific things to become offended about, and then go further as to choose to become offended about them, I fail to see how that becomes the authors fault. Taking things out of context and then reinterpreting them in a response is a further attempt to incite arguments which otherwise wouldn't have, nor needed to exist.

As I interpret it, one of the key foundations of our doctrine is the ignorance or otherwise outright dismissal of emotion. As Jedi, we should seek to not feel, or at the very least not allow ourselves to be emotionally influenced by others.

To put forth an outright hostile presence within the community, and then seek to have that presence excused; accepted; and celebrated goes against my understanding of what this community was founded upon and what it seeks to accomplish.

So, I will admit openly right now that I have broken every rule above while learning my path here. I will actually admit to engaging Kyrin in this style, because I was pissed. That lead me a bit to reading everything less emotionally, suddenly I didn't dislike a lot of people I did. Kyrin know I still don't approve of all the ways she handled/s conversations. Directly, during this time we conversed during active conversation and forums, I noticed some improvement in tone. Knights if you have already voted mentioning this with is a mute point. But, I know this was approached before with Senan (and was being done well and by a knight and someone much more versed in argument than myself but that pairing mentor situation is something to mention.

I have to become very staunchly against banning in all honesty, unless, there is no solution or it's one of the major breaking of TOS and well, certain sets of morality and actions.

I can;t believe I am defending Kyrin (believe me, wouldn't have seen it coming about 2 years ago ). But it's bigger than just this instance. So, I ask this to get my point and why I have second thoughts too my older reaction. Is this now the line? This is the you are banned for directed, indirect and sometimes straight Dickishness?

I guess I just need to know that, because I think, it is exactly where we place this line that decided whether we as Jedi are acting emotionally or not. Obviously, there is more to this discussion with in the knights and council I am not privy too so, there is a place of ignorance in this response. Whatever the decision is or was honestly there were some solid grounds to it and I won't argue with the outcome.

Just a question and my 2 cents wrapped up into one.

Much Love, Respect and Peace,
Kobos

Kohadre wrote:

Who was it and what were the offenses?

If you would like an itemized list, I'd be happy to provide you a (detailed) history of all previously banned members ranking either Apprentice or above. That is, when I have the time and energy to do so.

Otherwise, being a council member; I'm sure you have access to member records. I'm also sure you know which particular member(s) I'm referencing having been a key player in their public trials & consequent banning/excommunication.

EDIT:

In lieu of a complete list, here is the initial event I am referencing in the post above.

How to get excommunicated - and not even know why.

An explanation was provided. The offences are far more severe than kyrin's. As he says, it doesn't compare.

I've learned better than to argue with you, Ren.

I will make the point however, that Kyrin and her behavior on the site tie directly into the original accusations within that thread.

ren wrote:

Kohadre wrote:

Who was it and what were the offenses?

If you would like an itemized list, I'd be happy to provide you a (detailed) history of all previously banned members ranking either Apprentice or above. That is, when I have the time and energy to do so.

Otherwise, being a council member; I'm sure you have access to member records. I'm also sure you know which particular member(s) I'm referencing having been a key player in their public trials & consequent banning/excommunication.

EDIT:

In lieu of a complete list, here is the initial event I am referencing in the post above.

How to get excommunicated - and not even know why.

An explanation was provided. The offences are far more severe than kyrin's. As he says, it doesn't compare.

What, with that bs list you dug up?

Your pure comedic gold, you know that ren?

Must really get your goat having seen me return with a full pardon, and the TOTJO switch servers the same week...

I know your fond of "coincidences" so I'll let you figure that one out...

Zenchi wrote: What, with that bs list you dug up?

Your pure comedic gold, you know that ren?

Must really get your goat having seen me return with a full pardon, and the TOTJO switch servers the same week...

I know your fond of "coincidences" so I'll let you figure that one out...

And there you go. The wording seems quite tame, no words there need to be censored. But it would be dishonest to say there is no aggression in there.

What, with that bs list you dug up?

Your pure comedic gold, you know that ren?

Must really get your goat having seen me return with a full pardon, and the TOTJO switch servers the same week...

I know your fond of "coincidences" so I'll let you figure that one out...

I have no idea what you mean by fondness of coincidences.

The things you think I care about and what I actually care about are... different.

Your assumption that I want to be or enjoy being admin is laughable. I quit many years ago, and haven't asked for it back once.

The list is a small collection dug up from your q thread. The council never pardonned you. Not once.

I am surprised she was not banned indefinitely sooner. I mean I have mentioned this before in threads and she kept breaking rule after rule? I always wondered did she have some favor with someone? Because I have seen people get banned indefinitely for way less and she broke multiple rules. If I did any of that stuff, I'd probably be banned pretty quickly. So I don't know why she was an exception for a long time when she has demonstrated troll-like behavior multiple times for quite a while.

Being able to see another's point of view is always a challenge. From the side of the Temple, the general consensus is to promote a place of light and learning. Understanding that every path is different and acknowledging that some walk a more shaded path than otherss. However, in this environment there are still a set of guidelines and a level of character that should be displayed...after all we operate within the title of "Church". At the same, if we say that we recognize the inherent worth of all, and acknowledge that all paths are different then who are any of us to say that her path was wrong? Herein lies the issue that most people have. Kyrin was abrasive and condescending and blatantly insulting in most of her discussions, however, she also blatantly told everyone that was her path. Her path, by her definition, was to be the hard place, to be the mountain, the rock to stub your toe on as you walk your path. To me, I can see where that person can be valuable to encounter on your path...and perhaps that is indeed her role. The manner in which she conducted herself, and reveled in her own disregard for rules and guidelines of forum conduct, and her disregard for the general consensus of this place to be one of encouragement and learning is the problem.
I agree that she should have been removed permanently a long time ago, because (In My Opinion) the forum activity died down, there were fewer and fewer enlightening discussions happening on a daily basis.
Since the banning, I have already seen a return of long missed and absent faces. The return of those great minds and people who bring so much needed light and encouragement to this place is wonderful. It gives me the warm and fuzzies. I was sorry to see so many leave in frustration after not being able to get a word in edgewise with Kyrin present, and the fact that it was evident that was happening should have been, in my opinion, evidence enough to ban her.
Perhaps, if Kyrin had come in and presented her conflicting view of topics in a better, more constructive way...as opposed to a destructive way things would have been different. The fact of the matter is that there was no effort to change her approach, even when asked to stop bullying and insulting people. We challenge ideas here...in the effort and hope of growth. Not to insult and bully and break and kill ideas and spirits.
I am no one here, I barely have a Novice rank, but I am ever present and I know what happens, I know who most of you are (by name, if nothing else) I will continue to be here.
I think it is time to stop bickering about the banning of one member (who caused a lot more grief than positivity) and return to growth that needs to come back. Do you want this place to continue and grow? Do you want to see more open minded Jedi out in the streets? Bring it back...tell us about what you are reading and how its changing your thoughts, get back into your journals and reflect on yourself and your path...
There is a focus here Jedi...find it again...no more distractions...no one throwing rocks...learn, glow, interact, share, read, write, listen. Come back to the light, stop wallowing.

Kohadre wrote:

Manu wrote:

Warning: Spoiler!

Kohadre wrote: Kyrin has made her presence known on the forum. From what I've seen of it, it has only ever been antagonistic or otherwise hostile. What I am actually saying within the post you (incorrectly) attempted to quote, is that if anything Kyrin has had her behavior excused many times over or otherwise outright ignored.

This, in comparison to long standing members who either got on the wrong side of a thread/discussion, or bruised the emotions of particular staff/council members which consequently lead to public trial.

From my point of view, this is an improvement. Long standing members getting banned in the past would be a bad thing, so Kyrin (who by the way, has not been a Knight here and thus should not be held up to as high a standard as Knights are) getting cut some slack seems like an improvement to me.

I will grant you that Kyrin has been at times explicitly hostile; she's not into the whole passive-aggressive stealth disrespect that other members are so fond of. Both styles can be disrespectful. Only one style gets frowned upon.

There is a huge difference between using expletives within a post, and putting careful thought into an argument which differentiates from a conflicting viewpoint. There's an even greater difference from writing out a post to engage in debate, and writing out a post with the specific intention to emotionally charge specific member(s) with the end goal to incite a fight within the forums.

As far as "passive-aggressive stealth disrespect" is concerned, if any member on the forum has to put forth the effort to deconstruct an original post, and then look for specific things to become offended about, and then go further as to choose to become offended about them, I fail to see how that becomes the authors fault. Taking things out of context and then reinterpreting them in a response is a further attempt to incite arguments which otherwise wouldn't have, nor needed to exist.

As I interpret it, one of the key foundations of our doctrine is the ignorance or otherwise outright dismissal of emotion. As Jedi, we should seek to not feel, or at the very least not allow ourselves to be emotionally influenced by others.

To put forth an outright hostile presence within the community, and then seek to have that presence excused; accepted; and celebrated goes against my understanding of what this community was founded upon and what it seeks to accomplish.

With all due respect,

1. You said Kyrin's behavior has been excused. I'd like to see an example that I can judge myself. Because I think you can agree that whether or not behavior is excused assumes that such behavior was bad and violated the rules and the perception of behavior, unless actions explicitly stated in policy, is subjective. One person might be offended and someone else may not.

2. Most authors fail to see how offending others should be their responsibility. I feel like the responsibility is only to extent that it is "foreseeable" which is then relative to the ability of the author to foresee potential offenses. Many people read into things and take offense before even establishing that the person actually meant what they thought. I'd like to know that this isn't happening selectively and that we're simply not choosing who to call offensive based on a subjective standard, hurt feelings, or bruised egos.

3. You spoke of not being emotionally influenced by others. But then you assumed someone was putting forth a "hostile presence". Isn't this subjective? How do you determine such hostility when that is something that exists in the mind of the person you believe to be hostile? Could a person NOT be hostile and, because they like to debate, seem argumentative to the point where you might think they were hostile? And could that person, who enjoys debating, possibly ask questions to deconstruct an idea in a way that rubs the person holding the idea the wrong way without intentionally trying to attack the person?

4. What I'm most curious about, is your statement "and writing out a post with the specific intention to emotionally charge specific member(s) with the end goal to incite a fight within the forums." Are the people judging Kyrin psychic or people who hold masters degrees in psychology? What is the basis for saying Kyrin or anyone else acted with the INTENT to incite a fight? Because how could anyone know someone else's intent or their goals? This sounds very dangerous to me. I understand people make assumptions, but in what is essentially a "criminal" trial, this is basically defamation/libel. And I've seen people take those passive aggressive shots at Kyrin but they're not on trial. Seems unfair.

ZealotX wrote:

Warning: Spoiler!

Kohadre wrote:

Manu wrote:

Warning: Spoiler!

Kohadre wrote: Kyrin has made her presence known on the forum. From what I've seen of it, it has only ever been antagonistic or otherwise hostile. What I am actually saying within the post you (incorrectly) attempted to quote, is that if anything Kyrin has had her behavior excused many times over or otherwise outright ignored.

This, in comparison to long standing members who either got on the wrong side of a thread/discussion, or bruised the emotions of particular staff/council members which consequently lead to public trial.

From my point of view, this is an improvement. Long standing members getting banned in the past would be a bad thing, so Kyrin (who by the way, has not been a Knight here and thus should not be held up to as high a standard as Knights are) getting cut some slack seems like an improvement to me.

I will grant you that Kyrin has been at times explicitly hostile; she's not into the whole passive-aggressive stealth disrespect that other members are so fond of. Both styles can be disrespectful. Only one style gets frowned upon.

There is a huge difference between using expletives within a post, and putting careful thought into an argument which differentiates from a conflicting viewpoint. There's an even greater difference from writing out a post to engage in debate, and writing out a post with the specific intention to emotionally charge specific member(s) with the end goal to incite a fight within the forums.

As far as "passive-aggressive stealth disrespect" is concerned, if any member on the forum has to put forth the effort to deconstruct an original post, and then look for specific things to become offended about, and then go further as to choose to become offended about them, I fail to see how that becomes the authors fault. Taking things out of context and then reinterpreting them in a response is a further attempt to incite arguments which otherwise wouldn't have, nor needed to exist.

As I interpret it, one of the key foundations of our doctrine is the ignorance or otherwise outright dismissal of emotion. As Jedi, we should seek to not feel, or at the very least not allow ourselves to be emotionally influenced by others.

To put forth an outright hostile presence within the community, and then seek to have that presence excused; accepted; and celebrated goes against my understanding of what this community was founded upon and what it seeks to accomplish.

With all due respect,

1. You said Kyrin's behavior has been excused. I'd like to see an example that I can judge myself. Because I think you can agree that whether or not behavior is excused assumes that such behavior was bad and violated the rules and the perception of behavior, unless actions explicitly stated in policy, is subjective. One person might be offended and someone else may not.

2. Most authors fail to see how offending others should be their responsibility. I feel like the responsibility is only to extent that it is "foreseeable" which is then relative to the ability of the author to foresee potential offenses. Many people read into things and take offense before even establishing that the person actually meant what they thought. I'd like to know that this isn't happening selectively and that we're simply not choosing who to call offensive based on a subjective standard, hurt feelings, or bruised egos.

3. You spoke of not being emotionally influenced by others. But then you assumed someone was putting forth a "hostile presence". Isn't this subjective? How do you determine such hostility when that is something that exists in the mind of the person you believe to be hostile? Could a person NOT be hostile and, because they like to debate, seem argumentative to the point where you might think they were hostile? And could that person, who enjoys debating, possibly ask questions to deconstruct an idea in a way that rubs the person holding the idea the wrong way without intentionally trying to attack the person?

4. What I'm most curious about, is your statement "and writing out a post with the specific intention to emotionally charge specific member(s) with the end goal to incite a fight within the forums." Are the people judging Kyrin psychic or people who hold masters degrees in psychology? What is the basis for saying Kyrin or anyone else acted with the INTENT to incite a fight? Because how could anyone know someone else's intent or their goals? This sounds very dangerous to me. I understand people make assumptions, but in what is essentially a "criminal" trial, this is basically defamation/libel. And I've seen people take those passive aggressive shots at Kyrin but they're not on trial. Seems unfair.

I'll apologize in advance ZelotX, as I'm quickly running out of energy to do research for people who want to debate me on this and associated topics.

To begin, concern #1.



If you'll look at my prior posts within this thread, I've referenced a public trial of one of our temple Knights. This particular trial is one that Kyrin was instrumental in orchestrating, as one of the charges this particular knight faced was pushing for her (then) expulsion from the temple.

If you're really interested in seeing additional examples of Kyrin's (poor) behavior in the community, our temple search function can be located here . Have at it.

Concern #2.



I agree, authors do have a certain spectrum of responsibly concerning the content they choose to submit. Additionally, Kyrin has been well known in the temple to take things out of context, or otherwise re-interpreting posts and twisting the authors original message to suit her needs.

Again, if you really are interested in learning more about Kyrin and her presence within the temple. The SEARCH function can be located HERE .

Concern 3.

If you are attempting to insinuate that Kyrin's conduct within the forums can somehow be misinterpreted as something other than hostile, I'd argue you are unfamiliar with her and the events within the temple she has been involved in.

If you would like to learn more, you can search here .

Concern 4.

Our temple search function is located at this link .

It is not my function within the temple to provide members material for their own arguments.

If you want to do some research of your own and then debate me on your findings however, I'd be more than enthusiastic to entertain any arguments you might then make as to why Kyrin is a misunderstood and underappreciated (ex) member of this community,

Kohadre wrote: Kyrin has made her presence known on the forum. From what I've seen of it, it has only ever been antagonistic or otherwise hostile. What I am actually saying within the post you (incorrectly) attempted to quote, is that if anything Kyrin has had her behavior excused many times over or otherwise outright ignored.

I'm sorry you are tired but I find that condition less important than a friend and someone I like to debate with getting banned. Also, asking for evidence isn't the same thing as asking to debate you. It is only a debate if the evidence doesn't exist or isn't incriminating. You also very much remind me of Kyrin. How did I "incorrectly" "attempt" to quote the post in question? I understood EXACTLY what you just confirmed yourself as having said.

concern #1, I have already read the entire aforementioned thread. Where is the example in that thread of bad behavior on Kyrin's part? And the main complaint I saw there was Kyrin seeking justice over someone who, if the allegations were true, personally went after Kyrin over Kyrin's gender. That is extremely inappropriate. If someone assaults you, you get to tell the police that you were assaulted. If that person calls you a taddle tale for doing so then that speaks more to their character, not yours.

No matter how good you believe any forum's search function is, I can promise you it is not going to be useful in finding bad behavior. Moreover, you seem to be under the impression that I should be responsible for doing this when you are the one making defamatory accusations. If someone accused you of stealing a bike and I asked when so I could see if their story lined up with your alibi... if they said "sometime between 1995 and 2018" that would not fly. And then telling someone this person is guilty of stealing a bike and making them find the evidence from such a huge haystack is basically the same as saying "hi, I'll be railroading this person today." If you don't have proof why say things that are defamatory? Not only are you talking about someone's personal behavior but you can't be bothered to take the time to post 1 clear example? I don't typically say things I don't have the "energy" to back up.

Concern #2,

Additionally, Kyrin has been well known in the temple to take things out of context, or otherwise re-interpreting posts and twisting the authors original message to suit her needs.

Sure, that's called a strawman argument. People use different debate tactics all the time. Often, it's accidental because that's simply how they understood it. When Kyrin recently reacted as if I was calling her racist, I didn't get flustered or run to the mods, I simply corrected her. That's what you do in a debate. You can't simply take aspects of debating you don't like and put the person on trial for you not liking it. I've never seen a policy about these things either that Kyrin would be in violation of. Most people who debate can be accused, at some point, of the same things. You said the author has a certain spectrum of responsibility and that should also apply to being understood as well.

Again... the SEARCH feature is not going to be more assistance to me than my own personal experience with Kyrin. She had numerous opportunities to show me the kind of person you seem to be assuming she is. We're on opposite sides in nearly every debate. But I enjoy our debates and wouldn't change them. You're presenting a story as if everyone would have the same perception that you do and that it is evident in every post. The last time I got involved to defend another poster against my own perception of that person getting "bullied" Kyrin wasn't even the problem and had stopped asking the person questions about their belief, but defended herself because she was used to people blaming her.

Concern #3,

No, that's incorrect. I'm not insinuating Kyrin's conduct can be "somehow misinterpreted". Even saying that phrase is a judgement against other people's interpretation that is contrary to your own. You are assuming that your interpretation is correct and any difference of opinion is wrong. You go on to accuse me of being ignorant in relation to her when in reality her and I collide all the time. But instead of getting emotional and interpreting her as being "hostile" because she doesn't agree with you (which I get the feeling is a problem for anyone), using a clear mind, I am able to see her true motivations where as you see to be holding a grudge. I've even had multiple people PM and kind of warn me but ALSO say that Kyrin isn't bad, she's misunderstood, etc. I've had positive conversations about Kyrin. So when I compare Kyrin to Socrates I absolutely mean it and it's not just me speaking from my own experience. Kyrin confronts a lot of bad or questionable ideas that people bring to this site. Most people don't do that and therefore don't have a reputation for doing that and don't ruffle feathers as a result of not doing that. That doesn't mean those ideas shouldn't be challenged.

And if there are relevant events (and not ones in which Kyrin was the victim of someone else) then show me. You're saying there's evidence but you're not showing me the evidence. That's problematic.

It is not my function within the temple to provide members material for their own arguments.

I'm sorry but with all due respect you have it entirely backwards. If I was arguing that Kyrin showed bad/hostile behavior then I would need to produce evidence to support that claim. That's not my claim. That's your claim. Therefore I'm asking you for evidence. I cannot offer evidence of something NOT happening, nor can I offer what YOU think constitutes evidence because that's based on YOUR perception. I can't list all the posts in which Kyrin was a perfect angel as evidence that she never kicked a cat. Doesn't work like that which I'm sure you understand. I can therefore not do YOUR homework for you and if this is a prerequisite for you entertaining any counter argument then you are simply doing the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears while saying whatever defamatory things you have the energy to say but not prove. I was only asking for proof. If what you're claiming is true that should have been easy. If it's not then it makes me question if such clear evidence exists beyond the degree that Kyrin herself may have already apologized for in the past.