... and so, the witch hunt

I think the goings on of Jedi Council members on a witch hunt should be made available for all eyes to see. You know, "government transparency" and the like.

Wescli Wardest
Saturday, 08 February 2014 17:57
After reviewing the content of the topic
http://www.templeofthejediorder.org/forum/General-Discussions/105949-mortose-public-journal?limitstart=0&start=300#134430
It has become apparent that teaching by non-authorized person has occurred and is continuing to occur.

This is in direct violation of TotJO policy.

To maintain the continuity of TotJO policy I have locked this thread until further action is decided upon.

Security Officer Wescli Wardest
Alexandre Orion
Delete message Alexandre Orion
Saturday, 08 February 2014 18:00

I saw it, Clint ...

This is something we need to watch out for. Like I told you in chat when I agreed to your intended action, after looking it over -- it was teaching alright. Not even all that well 'disguised' ...

... in fact, it was pretty blatant.

Thank you.
Mortose
Delete message Mortose
Saturday, 08 February 2014 18:05
No such thing occurred any more than any other place with any other person. Everyone can learn from the writings of other persons, and what lykeios does here is his decision, as it is this decision of anyone else here who posts within the bindings of the rule structure.

In my journal I am writing for me but... I am also responding to comments. Is that teaching? In the mins of some any reply to any comment is a form of sharing information/teaching. Are you Jedi so paranoid you fear my information?

Wescli Wardest
Delete message Wescli Wardest
Saturday, 08 February 2014 18:09
I apologize if there was some confusion. This is a letter of notice and not subject for debate.

I will keep you informed of any future decisions.

Thank you.

What I see here is a witch hunt and though I really do not care if you ban me or otherwise, I think this deserves at least to be known. Do with it what you will.

As I told Lykeios...



I have no problem with my or our actions being public knowledge.

Well, it is quite possible that teaching did occur. But, I imagine it has happened more than once. And, maybe in less blatant circumstances overlooked.

For instance, we don't know what goes on in PMs, do we? (Maybe admin has PM access, I don't know).

As such, it is a rule (like all rules) that is enforced when the leadership of the site believes that somebody is in danger, or their reputation is weakened by a lack of solidarity amongst members. This happens when drama occurs. Certain aspects of your writings, Mortose specifically, have engendered reactions that cause the more primal centers of our beings to lift torches.

When people are inspired to observe their hatred, they tend to lose control of their head-knowledge. Instinct, then, takes over and pulls people to herd like sheep. It is the way Power works in situations like this.

TOTJO, I imagine, has no intention of allowing drama to destroy the network and community of the site. I realize you believe you're helping in lifting veils and all that (which I believe is a necessary step), but calling it a witch hunt is merely you naming yourself as an enemy to be stamped out. Is that how you think of yourself here? An antagonist?

If I were to weigh in on this matter, I would say:
1. Mortose, good work. You did exactly as I thought you would. And, that is post in such a manner as to provide new perspectives to the current members.
2. Clint, also good work. You have applied your instincts to your knowledge, and knew when "enough is enough".
3. Council, also good work. Rules are made to be enforced when needed. I pray you will stand by Wescli's decision, if he ends up being correct.
4. Back to Mortose... Don't play the victim card. Take the chance to be a protagonist.

There's also kind of no point in playing that card at totjo. People know it's difficult to get banned here even if wescli can be a bit cop-like.
So when someone plays victim, council reactions are in the "well if you don't like it here you can go" to "we can help you do that if you want" range.

Wescli Wardest wrote: I have no problem with my or our actions being public knowledge.

I just want to say... class act as always Wescli. There's nothing wrong with aiming to keep a private matter private.

I am certainly not playing the victim card here, merely bringing to attention what is transpiring. As for teaching, all formal versions of this on my part were conducted off site.

As for "authorized teaching", is there also "authorized learning" ? That is about how idiotic this motion against my journal was. Everyone can learn from anyone... ToTJO does not carry the copyright to learning. For that matter, it does not carry any copyright, Disney does.

I have never once claimed to be Jedi or hold any rank official to this institution. Yet, you still call my inquiries, statements and entries as "teaching"... "Unauthorized teaching" at that.

An open exchange of information is fine and encouraged.

Most that come here are of the intent to learn and are open to discussing other ideas. What I have discerned from reading the thread in question is that there are ideas being “taught” (whether they are believed to be in line with the TotJO doctrine is inconsequential at current); and, that the individual/s teaching their beliefs have no intention of expanding their own views, only spreading them.

My interpretation of the issue is just that.

My decision was not based on what people were/are learning or the views of any person.

My interpretation of before mentioned actions is that they are in violation of TotJO policy. The policy is in place for good reason and I do and will continue to support it. TotJO Policies are not currently up for revision or debate. People may be angry at my action and that’s okay, I realize that I will not make everyone happy all the time.

But unless a vehicle is offered that causes me to see the issue under a different interpretation, or the council votes to reverse my decision, it will stand.

Wescli Wardest wrote: An open exchange of information is fine and encouraged.

Most that come here are of the intent to learn and are open to discussing other ideas. What I have discerned from reading the thread in question is that there are ideas being “taught” (whether they are believed to be in line with the TotJO doctrine is inconsequential at current); and, that the individual/s teaching their beliefs have no intention of expanding their own views, only spreading them.

My interpretation of the issue is just that.

My decision was not based on what people were/are learning or the views of any person.

My interpretation of before mentioned actions is that they are in violation of TotJO policy. The policy is in place for good reason and I do and will continue to support it. TotJO Policies are not currently up for revision or debate. People may be angry at my action and that’s okay, I realize that I will not make everyone happy all the time.

But unless a vehicle is offered that causes me to see the issue under a different interpretation, or the council votes to reverse my decision, it will stand.

Ah! So because I am not an armchair philosopher and choose not to expand on every thing I bring forward, you consider that as "spreading" my ideology with the intention of gaining adherents? Do you know nothing of my path? Right! You have never bothered to find out! You did choose to assume I have an agenda beyond generating conflict so as to learn from, a fact I have made abundantly clear several times.

I have also made it clear I will not indulge anyone here in philosophical debate. Yet you went on to arrogantly assume your power base was under some type of threat. What threat is that? Information presented in a journal? Replies that are direct? Honest entries about my apprentices (now apprentice) ? I desired comments, criticism and even insults... and I received all of the above. No where did I state I would offer detailed replies to such input, yet still you assumed I have an agenda I do not.

Inform me again about this unauthorized teaching I engaged in...

You are welcome to try and alter my interpretation of whatever it is you claim but the actions (entries and replies) are in contradiction to your words from what I can see. And you have offered nothing to persuade me otherwise.

Wescli Wardest wrote: You are welcome to try and alter my interpretation of whatever it is you claim but the actions (entries and replies) are in contradiction to your words from what I can see. And you have offered nothing to persuade me otherwise.

My idea to use the journal as (and in addition to its main purpose)... a back and forth record with my apprentice was rejected, so I did not pursue it. Beyond that, I do not know what you are going on about.