What would help the Temple Be A Better Place? Suggestions please...

Avalonslight wrote: Regarding IP Completion Before Membership:

I'll reiterate what I've said before. We've never required obtaining rank in order to be a member of the Temple and I don't think we should start doing so now. Like someone else said, the only thing that that stands to do is turn away legitimate potential members who just currently don't have the time to finish a rather extensive training program. And further, if this is decided upon, then there are boards which are currently restricted to members only that need to be reopened back up to guests, because that would take away a lot of conversations that generalized members take place in, and would no longer be able to. So no, I don't think this is the best course of action.

For the person joining, what meaning does it hold to become an official member if they have not done the IP, which helps understand the basics of what this site is? A flashy "Jedi" title?

For TOTJO as an organization, what meaning does it hold to have virtual strangers pledging to be a Jedi and a member, if the person joining has not gone through the basics to see if they are serious about it. Are we trying to artificially inflate our numbers for some reason?

I agree with opening up the forums to Guests. There is no reason to drive away input from newcomers. Just don't let then commit to membership until they prove they actually want it, and it means something to them.

By the way, I do not consider "Initiate" a rank. It simply states you know what Jediism is about.

A long time ago the Simple Vow was required for membership. I did it back then, but I found it odd that they would request my personal information so soon. In hindsight, it seems odd how overly eager I was to pledge to being a Jedi as well. I know the Simple Vow is gone now, but the principle remains: why pledge to being a member if you haven't done the prep work?

Manu wrote:

Avalonslight wrote: Regarding IP Completion Before Membership:

I'll reiterate what I've said before. We've never required obtaining rank in order to be a member of the Temple and I don't think we should start doing so now. Like someone else said, the only thing that that stands to do is turn away legitimate potential members who just currently don't have the time to finish a rather extensive training program. And further, if this is decided upon, then there are boards which are currently restricted to members only that need to be reopened back up to guests, because that would take away a lot of conversations that generalized members take place in, and would no longer be able to. So no, I don't think this is the best course of action.

For the person joining, what meaning does it hold to become an official member if they have not done the IP, which helps understand the basics of what this site is? A flashy "Jedi" title?

For TOTJO as an organization, what meaning does it hold to have virtual strangers pledging to be a Jedi and a member, if the person joining has not gone through the basics to see if they are serious about it. Are we trying to artificially inflate our numbers for some reason?

I agree with opening up the forums to Guests. There is no reason to drive away input from newcomers. Just don't let then commit to membership until they prove they actually want it, and it means something to them.

By the way, I do not consider "Initiate" a rank. It simply states you know what Jediism is about.

A long time ago the Simple Vow was required for membership. I did it back then, but I found it odd that they would request my personal information so soon. In hindsight, it seems odd how overly eager I was to pledge to being a Jedi as well. I know the Simple Vow is gone now, but the principle remains: why pledge to being a member if you haven't done the prep work?

I suppose that I could attest here that although having submitted my "application" for membership, and begun work on the IP (finishing up Lesson 1), the shift away from a mere "guest" tag to a "member" tag is nice...and shifting to "novice" would be nice...but in the end, I would continue forward with the rest of the IP anyway if full membership and such were not available until I completed that.

It may actually inspire me more to keep working through it if I simply remained a "guest" until I finished it...just me though!

Perhaps that helps separate the occasional account creation/curious type from those who actually get into the material, stick with it, and get through the IP all the way?

If keeping "guest" and "member" tags on the table for now...maybe a simple "OVERVIEW" brief or lesson on the Temple could be accomplished in a PowerPoint format or Video from a member of the Council...explaining and detailing some of the primary tenets and doctrine and what it means to them and what would be expected of a "member"....or at least an outline of what the path and experience here could be? Keep it relatively simple, and somewhat short (don't have to sell any secrets or tip any hands), but also have enough meat and potatoes that it could constitute an actual "lesson" while also giving people a concise upfront understanding of what the Temple is all about instead of just directing them to the FAQ and Doctrine, and saying, "Well, start the IP".

This way a "guest" who pokes around on the site enough, toys with the chats, and decides they are interested enough to keep going could get a clearer idea of what its all about before submitting their application to be a member and/or starting the IP? Make the presentation/video mandatory, and require a quick write-up/essay as part of the membership application to prove they watched/understood it, and get their basic attitude towards beginning the path on record so they can reflect on it later. Then unlock the IP when they have made that commitment?

Honestly, the IP so far, while extremely eye-opening, and interesting enough to keep me coming in...is not quite what I would have expected to see starting off, and almost kinda feels like you are just tossed right into stuff without a ton of "framing" or "context". Which I get could be the point, or intentional, or something...but a tad more front-end explanation or at the minimum a generalized version of what one's experience may start to look like could be extremely helpful in sifting out those interested in the Temple and those not, without just pointing people to the FAQ and IP and "PM me if you have any questions"...

Just some thoughts....hopefully coherent enough, and relevant...

Manu wrote:

Avalonslight wrote: Regarding IP Completion Before Membership:

I'll reiterate what I've said before. We've never required obtaining rank in order to be a member of the Temple and I don't think we should start doing so now. Like someone else said, the only thing that that stands to do is turn away legitimate potential members who just currently don't have the time to finish a rather extensive training program. And further, if this is decided upon, then there are boards which are currently restricted to members only that need to be reopened back up to guests, because that would take away a lot of conversations that generalized members take place in, and would no longer be able to. So no, I don't think this is the best course of action.

For the person joining, what meaning does it hold to become an official member if they have not done the IP, which helps understand the basics of what this site is? A flashy "Jedi" title?

For TOTJO as an organization, what meaning does it hold to have virtual strangers pledging to be a Jedi and a member, if the person joining has not gone through the basics to see if they are serious about it. Are we trying to artificially inflate our numbers for some reason?

I agree with opening up the forums to Guests. There is no reason to drive away input from newcomers. Just don't let then commit to membership until they prove they actually want it, and it means something to them.

By the way, I do not consider "Initiate" a rank. It simply states you know what Jediism is about.

A long time ago the Simple Vow was required for membership. I did it back then, but I found it odd that they would request my personal information so soon. In hindsight, it seems odd how overly eager I was to pledge to being a Jedi as well. I know the Simple Vow is gone now, but the principle remains: why pledge to being a member if you haven't done the prep work?

"Membership" means something different to everyone, but it's important to remember first and foremost that this is a "church" (for all we're also discussing if 'church' is in fact the right word or not in a different thread). If a person comes through, is serious about the beliefs (IE - homepage) and the Doctrine speaks to them, why should they not be allowed to join because they simply haven't got the time currently to engage in a training program (children, school, work, deployed, etc etc etc)? And again, the IP is an extensive program. Yes, some people are able to get through it in a few months, but others - myself included - take a year or two to get to that point, and some even longer still. The membership is a membership to the 'church' not to the ranks; the IP program is a step towards the ranks. We've never even required someone to obtain rank before. If someone comes along and says "look I believe in this and it speaks to me, but I don't want to be a knight or a senior member, so I'm just going to be a regular member" then they should be able to do that.

Remember, for some, 'membership' is simply about a sense of belonging where they feel a common connection. Start requiring a training program just to be a member, and you deprive some of that belonging. We've never taken a punitive or exclusionary stances towards those who cannot make the commitment to that training program, or simply would rather be participants within the 'church' rather than moving through the ranks of the 'church'. I honestly feel like doing so would be a step in the wrong direction. Doing so could also begin to appear like we're moving in a cult-like direction, at the risk of potentially soundly overly and unnecessarily alarmist. But of all of this is just my opinion. I simply don't want us to move towards a pattern of excluding people, and that's my bigger worry of them all when it comes to this suggestion.

[hr]

@Connor, I know I was just throwing out thoughts to keep in mind when considering such a program. Figured the random questions would get people thinking about how it might look, if we ever decided to include that.

As an addendum to what Avalon has said, the people that would be excluded from membership were the IP a requirement would include:

- Anyone who works long hours with no little time to study
- Anyone with learning difficulties who struggles with study
- The kids whose reading level is not advanced enough to do the IP (most kids do not do the IP)
- Anyone for whom English is not a first language and they are not proficient in English...

Etc. etc... these are only examples.

Many established members of this temple took a long time to do the IP, would anyone for whom it takes long keep going if they knew that they may never get there and that they will be penalised for it?

I am reading every one of the posts in this thread and will continue to do so. There are some ideas The Council will propose too.

Something that I don't think many know is that not everyone on The Council has a vote. They can participate in discussions and give advice. I'm asking that they put Council Emeritus in their signatures.

The original poster that started this thread is such an one.

Every idea proposed here will be listed and considered.

An idea I have is adding several Knights to The Council as Council Emeritus. I've even thought of having a well performing Apprentice to represent that group.

Every proposal will get it's day at least as being seriously considered. Where there are obstacles they will be explained as well as how they can be overcome.

Thank you for listening.

I think a church shouldn't force "bible study" on its members. But in totjo's case the IP isn't "doctrine study" (although maybe it ought to be), so I really do not see why members should have to go through it.

Edan wrote: As an addendum to what Avalon has said, the people that would be excluded from membership were the IP a requirement would include:

- Anyone who works long hours with no little time to study
- Anyone with learning difficulties who struggles with study
- The kids whose reading level is not advanced enough to do the IP (most kids do not do the IP)
- Anyone for whom English is not a first language and they are not proficient in English...

Etc. etc... these are only examples.

Many established members of this temple took a long time to do the IP, would anyone for whom it takes long keep going if they knew that they may never get there and that they will be penalised for it?

What is the penalization?

Handing out membership as participation trophies sets a bad example, but that is of course my opinion.

I took over 6 years to complete the IP. I started in 2010, left, then came back and finished it in 2016.

There is no time limit on the IP. There is no way to fail it. Why shouldn't it be basic reading before becoming an official member of an organization? Unless of course, membership is meaningless. Then you can hand it out to anyone who wants to be "part" of something they haven't even taken time to understand.

ren wrote: I think a church shouldn't force "bible study" on its members. But in totjo's case the IP isn't "doctrine study" (although maybe it ought to be), so I really do not see why members should have to go through it.

One could argue that the point of joining and becoming a member of the church is to study said "bible". In addition to being apart of its community of course.

Tellahane wrote:

ren wrote: I think a church shouldn't force "bible study" on its members. But in totjo's case the IP isn't "doctrine study" (although maybe it ought to be), so I really do not see why members should have to go through it.

One could argue that the point of joining and becoming a member of the church is to study said "bible". In addition to being apart of its community of course.

The foundation of jediism is not the doctrine, we don't have a 'bible equivalent'. I would argue that jediism is more about learning from others, which requires no IP.

Edan wrote:

Tellahane wrote:

ren wrote: I think a church shouldn't force "bible study" on its members. But in totjo's case the IP isn't "doctrine study" (although maybe it ought to be), so I really do not see why members should have to go through it.

One could argue that the point of joining and becoming a member of the church is to study said "bible". In addition to being apart of its community of course.

The foundation of jediism is not the doctrine, we don't have a 'bible equivalent'. I would argue that jediism is more about learning from others, which requires no IP.

mmm I could say there is some to learn from others, but also plenty to learn from study, and then the majority of it involves learning from yourself.

Whether it be others, doctrine, ip, apprenticeship or so on, they are all just different ways of guiding to the same end point or material in the end.

Tellahane wrote:

Edan wrote:

Tellahane wrote:

ren wrote: I think a church shouldn't force "bible study" on its members. But in totjo's case the IP isn't "doctrine study" (although maybe it ought to be), so I really do not see why members should have to go through it.

One could argue that the point of joining and becoming a member of the church is to study said "bible". In addition to being apart of its community of course.

The foundation of jediism is not the doctrine, we don't have a 'bible equivalent'. I would argue that jediism is more about learning from others, which requires no IP.

mmm I could say there is some to learn from others, but also plenty to learn from study, and then the majority of it involves learning from yourself.

Whether it be others, doctrine, ip, apprenticeship or so on, they are all just different ways of guiding to the same end point or material in the end.

That argument then doesn't support the requirement to have the IP, if everything leads to the same outcome.

Edan wrote:

Tellahane wrote:

Edan wrote:

Tellahane wrote:

ren wrote: I think a church shouldn't force "bible study" on its members. But in totjo's case the IP isn't "doctrine study" (although maybe it ought to be), so I really do not see why members should have to go through it.

One could argue that the point of joining and becoming a member of the church is to study said "bible". In addition to being apart of its community of course.

The foundation of jediism is not the doctrine, we don't have a 'bible equivalent'. I would argue that jediism is more about learning from others, which requires no IP.

mmm I could say there is some to learn from others, but also plenty to learn from study, and then the majority of it involves learning from yourself.

Whether it be others, doctrine, ip, apprenticeship or so on, they are all just different ways of guiding to the same end point or material in the end.

That argument then doesn't support the requirement to have the IP, if everything leads to the same outcome.

Let me rephrase, each "way" may lead to the same outcome, but not each way works for every person, having the options and availability best supports any given new member coming.

The doctrine is not the foundation of jediism, but most parts of the doctrine, specifically, the code, tenets, 21 maxims are the foundations of jediism. The teachings arrived a few years later in Jediism and have changed quite a lot since the originals. "Jedi believe" is totjo-only.

Tellahane wrote:

Edan wrote:

Tellahane wrote:

Edan wrote:

Tellahane wrote:

ren wrote: I think a church shouldn't force "bible study" on its members. But in totjo's case the IP isn't "doctrine study" (although maybe it ought to be), so I really do not see why members should have to go through it.

One could argue that the point of joining and becoming a member of the church is to study said "bible". In addition to being apart of its community of course.

The foundation of jediism is not the doctrine, we don't have a 'bible equivalent'. I would argue that jediism is more about learning from others, which requires no IP.

mmm I could say there is some to learn from others, but also plenty to learn from study, and then the majority of it involves learning from yourself.

Whether it be others, doctrine, ip, apprenticeship or so on, they are all just different ways of guiding to the same end point or material in the end.

That argument then doesn't support the requirement to have the IP, if everything leads to the same outcome.

Let me rephrase, each "way" may lead to the same outcome, but not each way works for every person, having the options and availability best supports any given new member coming.

Forgive me, but that still doesn't sound like an argument that supports the IP requirement. The IP material may work best for some, but not for others.

You make some good points Edan, which I hadn't considered.

I guess I do feel one would be a guest, of sorts, in a religious community, if they had not made the time to study their core beliefs. They may have very good reasons for that, like the ones you mention, but they wouldn't change the fact until you work at a thing, you don't really know it. For me, the reality is until someone really gets under the skin of something, they are a guest of sorts, and that's the status "Member" and to some extent "Novice" currently absorb - we just happen to have different names for them.

I wonder if we're only feeling "Guest" is a negative status of some kind because there are SO MANY ranks above it currently. Member, Novice, Initiate... all of these would be unnecessary is IP was required for being a full member.

Manu wrote:

Edan wrote: As an addendum to what Avalon has said, the people that would be excluded from membership were the IP a requirement would include:

- Anyone who works long hours with no little time to study
- Anyone with learning difficulties who struggles with study
- The kids whose reading level is not advanced enough to do the IP (most kids do not do the IP)
- Anyone for whom English is not a first language and they are not proficient in English...

Etc. etc... these are only examples.

Many established members of this temple took a long time to do the IP, would anyone for whom it takes long keep going if they knew that they may never get there and that they will be penalised for it?

What is the penalization?

Handing out membership as participation trophies sets a bad example, but that is of course my opinion.

I took over 6 years to complete the IP. I started in 2010, left, then came back and finished it in 2016.

There is no time limit on the IP. There is no way to fail it. Why shouldn't it be basic reading before becoming an official member of an organization? Unless of course, membership is meaningless. Then you can hand it out to anyone who wants to be "part" of something they haven't even taken time to understand.

The penalization is non-inclusion. When a person is seeking membership in order to be apart of, be included in, something, by saying "you can't be a member until you finish a long training program", we're telling them that we value an indoctrination procedure over them and their desire to find somewhere they feel they belong, with beliefs similar to their own. When that's all they want and not to obtain rank or advance, why would they want to do that training program that is designed explicitly towards advancement within the community?

There was a young, new member in chat today. Their application was finally accepted and status changed. They're actively engaged in the IP. And you know what they said: "I'm no longer on the outside." That speaks to something. There's an explicit sense of non-inclusion when one is told "you're just a guest"...

Further, what would you recommend we do about all the members who have not yet completed the IP, either because they haven't had the time or they're opting not to because they have no desire to obtain rank, and yet are all still very active, and contributing, members of the site?

I was a guest for almost two years on the site before I finally put in my membership application. I did so because, when I joined, the Simple Oath was still a membership requirement. We moved it back to post-IP because people were saying "why should I take an oath when I'm still learning." Because like you said, "pledging support of" something only makes sense after time and commitment have been made. But membership is not a "pledge of support". It's saying "I find something in this community which speaks to me and I'd like to be a part of it" and giving people the option to do so before any training program says "we value you as an individual and welcome you to our society so that you can grow within it as you choose." There's nothing meaningless in allowing people to do that.

(Addition)
Further, I know that if the application, oath, and IP had all been requirements for membership at the time of joining, I very likely never would have even began. Instead, the IP was an option I could engage in as a guest, but was not required to. In fact, one could take the opposite approach and say that membership is required in order to begin studying. To use an often drawn upon example, when you go looking for a dojo to study a new martial arts at, you may be allowed a few trial classes, but after a couple, you're very likely going to be you either need to join the dojo and enroll more formally, or that you need to find another dojo. A white belt is a member, and they have little to no prior teaching, training, or understanding before becoming a member. They're a novice, but they're still a member.

There is a Sufi center near me. I have considered looking into it because it seems somewhat interesting, or at least curious to me.

If I visit there a few times, talk with their imam, or a few general members, I'm likely to be considered a guest.

If I enjoy those conversations and decide to continue attending, they are rather likely to provide me some materials, instruct me in some basic practices, and such, before I would be considered a member.

The same applies for nearly every "religious" or "ideological" group throughout the history of man. I have attended Buddhist temples, Jewish synagogues, Baptist churches, Aikido dojos, Freemason lodges, a Kyudo school, and various other services or groups, sometimes on singular occasions, others on return visits here and there. Yet I would not consider myself to be a member of any of these groups, nor would I expect anyone (should the remember me) to consider me as such simply for having interacted with them several times, etc. I similarly would not feel comfortable donning the title of Buddhist, Baptist, Jew, Sufi, or otherwise, since I did not prescribe to them well enough to make that connection. Yet all their doors remain open to have me as a guest should I ever decide to go back and investigate what they have to offer further.

How/why would this Temple act differently?

SamThift wrote: How/why would this Temple act differently?

The argument could be made that we would act differently because we are different. We tout Jediism as a syncretic faith that is inclusive. We say all the time that anyone can be a "Jedi" regardless of rank or membership and we purposely do not standardize our training beyond the IP because everyone "walks their own path". If we truly believe these things we say, then forcing people down our IP path to be a member is saying you are a Jedi, just not enough to be TOTJO Jedi. I wonder what benefit that would have to us.

Making someone a "member" does not negatively impact anyone else here except for those responsible for processing the applications feeling that they are wasting time. I would ask yourself, if a member never come back ever again, does it affect me? If not, why exclude them from membership? People who are committed will show it. People who aren't will not. The labels we put on each other won't change that. What is at stake is access and the ability to participate in a Temple that should be more open, not less.

I'm suprised more members of the military community haven't spoken up about this.

When I signed up for the Forces, I was put on a waiting list (akin to our 7 day waiting period). When I was accepted in, I became a member. I was given a rank (akin to our "member" rank). After that you have to earn it. I was a private, and any rank I wanted after that I had to earn. That would involve training (again akin to our IP).

I find this very much like what we have here. Anyone can become a member, yes. But its that acceptance that helps people move forward. Other ranks (novice and above) are only attainable by putting forward a valid effort and applying yourself to training.

Now perhaps I could put forward an idea?

Perhaps make certain places blocked off for even members. As it is, you must become a member to discuss in the Jediism sub-forum... perhaps it is time for that to change. Perhaps Novice's and above should only be allowed to be in there. Yes, Novice is an easy rank to attain... but yet we have many that become a member and teeter off. But in the end it would add something to attain, making more people want to participate in the IP.

I'm pretty sure this was also brought up... but perhaps also make journals only visible to the person writing it and Initiates and above. This would not only prevent copywrite, but also add security, as only people that had put forward a full effort into becoming part of this commuity would be able to view it.

We have the rank of Initiate for those that have completed the IP. That's why it's there. Blocking membership for those that don't finish the IP would be, well, unfair. What of those that already have Novice rank? would they lose that title?

In the end, ranks is just that... a jpeg underneath your avatar that signifies what you've done while here. Having ranks such as novice and member differentiates those that have DONE something here. It shows which have logged on once and didn't come back, or those that are on the fence about joining. It shows those that made the consious decision to become a member. It shows those that decided to take the bold and brave step to undertake the training.

If you want to consider those that finish the IP as "Members", then look to the Initates. Thats what the rank is there for.