Split from "A Different Apology"...

From: http://www.templeofthejediorder.org/forum/open-discussions/108904-a-different-apology#172135

ren wrote: :sick:

So, since you posted this, I have wondered, "what is wrong with Connor's post that you make this face...

Then, this morning, it dawns on me...

Connor wrote: and I've come to the realization of how important it is to use "ranks" or "bars of progress" as a measure of character, regardless of any ideologies

So while rereading it, this line stood out, and I have to assume, since you didnt provide any info, and just felt the need to make a face, AND due to our many conversations on "rank meaning nothing", I would like to clarify my "Thanking" of Connor's post, and I think perhaps it was missed by others...

Nothing about rank defines a person character...

There are crappy Knights, as well as outstanding guests... And the variety in between...

But, one who aspires to a certain station, should hold themselves to that level of conduct...

An ongoing point of head butting between you and I... :lol:...

But, generaly speaking, one who holds themself to a higher caliber (rank? Moral code? Fortitude? Fiber?), or has been awarded such by their peers, should act as such...

I am not saying "toe the line", this would actually be going against the idea of what we (the majority of people I have been in discussions with) think a Jedi should be, as the policy makers could be corrupt, and only in it for the power, however much it may be...

Did I misinterpret?

Jestor looks to the left, and Jestor can only see left. Jestor looks to the right, and Jestor only can see right. Jestor looks to the front and Jestor cannot look back. Jestor looks to the back, and Jestor cannot see the front.

No, you didn't misinterpret, though I'd say the emoticon covered a bit more than that.

"not considering my duties as a Minister or a potential Knight. I have been undergoing supplementary training from the Council"

Tells me he did/said something someone didn't like (I'm not quite sure what), which lead to his suitability for knighthood (or continued clergy duties) being seriously questioned (First time I've witnessed this here), after which he got "whipped" (political meaning).

ren wrote: No, you didn't misinterpret, though I'd say the emoticon covered a bit more than that.

"not considering my duties as a Minister or a potential Knight. I have been undergoing supplementary training from the Council"

Tells me he did/said something someone didn't like (I'm not quite sure what), which lead to his suitability for knighthood (or continued clergy duties) being seriously questioned (First time I've witnessed this here), after which he got "whipped" (political meaning).

Connor L. wrote: Hello Temple!

A couple of weeks ago, we had a discussion on apologies and I made a little bit of a mess. At the time, it was what I intended to do. You should know that the conflict incited was for a purpose. The purpose was fulfilled, but it was due to my stubbornness.

I acted out of pure self-interest, not considering my duties as a Minister or a potential Knight. I have been undergoing supplementary training from the Council, and I've come to the realization of how important it is to use "ranks" or "bars of progress" as a measure of character, regardless of any ideologies. There are proper ways to challenge the system, and these are born out of awareness and curiosity, not condemnation and shaming.

With other words, He tells about the ranks as a way for the better understanding of the character behind the ranks. And how he thinks about the ranks, not about how the ranks are.

This was an explanation of behavior. Those were not the words someone did not like, those were words to say sorry. I do not say you did wrong by posting the emoticon, I do not say you did good with it either.

But I guess that many people in the temple can not fully understand your message with so little information. :blush: The temple would do fine to shape a forum rule: ,,Try to use more than four words, so other people cannot misunderstand you. Try to use less than four words, so that people can see everything, say everything, do everything without fully understanding as response and action started with your post.''



~Aqua

ren wrote: No, you didn't misinterpret, though I'd say the emoticon covered a bit more than that.

"not considering my duties as a Minister or a potential Knight. I have been undergoing supplementary training from the Council"

Tells me he did/said something someone didn't like (I'm not quite sure what), which lead to his suitability for knighthood (or continued clergy duties) being seriously questioned (First time I've witnessed this here), after which he got "whipped" (political meaning).

He is receiving supplementary training, and from the head of the clergy... I dont know that the office is doing it so much as the man behind the screen name is supplying it...

I believe this is why when a prospect has been presented as a candidate for Knighthood it is voted on by council (currently), in case there is an issue....

Or, if there is an issue with something someone has said, it gets brought to the attention of their training master, to avoid issues with the stepping on "toes/training" of the training master... However, I have yet to see someone complain...

When I see something in a journal, I PM or post on it, trying to help see other perspectives.... Whether in a journal, or in a post, or walking down the street, we are here to help one another, and in the long run, we will be helping all of us (in the human race sense of "us")...

If we really are putting our egos aside, when someone has a criticism of us, then we ought to at least listen to what they have to say, provided we have the time...... I dont say we have to agree, just ought to listen...

And since we all hang out here, we must have the time.... :lol:...

So.... Why did he apologize, and what for?

ren wrote: So.... Why did he apologize, and what for?

Well, for the best answer might come from the "the horse's mouth"...

Connor wrote: http://www.templeofthejediorder.org/forum/open-discussions/108904-a-different-apology#172135

So, for going about what I was trying to do in a not-so-fabulous way, I apologize.

It would appear he was apologizing for the way in which he went about his goal... Not for the goal itself...

And, this, by me anyway, was what I accepted the apology for...

I cant speak for everyone else...

I read the original apology thread when I first saw "a different apology". He had nothing to apologize for. After what he said there, how people reacted to him there, and what he said here, I don't need to be a neurosurgeon to figure this one out. The whole thing's a tragedy, one even he agreed to play a part in. I'm just going back to being pukerella.

Just another point in life, and conversation here, that you are a minority, lol....

I wonder what that might mean?

That, as I told you before, all politicians are the evil incarnate of populism? or
That, you once again use the good ole argumentum ad populum? or
That not many realize how ridiculous it is for an organization which promotes serenity and peace over emotion and passion to actually believe one-of-its-known-to-be-benevolent members requires training to feel emotion over indifference?

As if the mere idea something like this can be taught wasn't idiotic enough.