On Member Poaching

Amyntas wrote:

Trisskar wrote: I never liked this member poaching fear and rule against sharing links.....but I've learned it's a fear this temple won't budge on. So I suggest not bothering. Feel free to share it at just Jedi though.

That is very kind thank you

As Luke Skywalker says "Jedi seek to improve themselves through knowledge and training" only way to find knowledge is through the sharing of materials with eachother. A practice JJ holds to dearly.

I'm sure intention is key and things are pretty clear sometimes with your - hints . I'm not sided or attached to any side as I am cautious about things I say in real life and here on the forum. You can not if I'm not mistaken and I've been wrong before: not link any one to "your" own web site. Good intentions or not . That's the rules. We all have to abide by the rules. There are a many new sites that have stemmed from here (totjo) and from other sites as well. happy seeking and happy trip on your new found journey. Seek out a master Wes if you feel you have need for some future help or guidance as I'm sure he would be happy to lend a ear and experience. As far as poaching goes ... you know your intent better than we . I am not gunna say anything on that because I don't quibble. So the intention was taken as that as well as the chats on and around . Keep your head up and good luck streen.

Things worth doing aren't ever easy but worth the effort. Keep up the seek and may the Force be with you as you continue to seek and serve it - the way you see you need to. In my life I've done the same - change of cast- often and though some times it hurts or is hard it was always worth the effort. This may be the change of character you need - or not . Happy seeking friend and we are always here - I am - if you ever need . My inbox is always open !

I disagree with post and thread deletion. It has been my understanding that Temple policy is archival--threads might get edited slightly or locked, but not deleted.

We really need to stick to that.

steamboat28 wrote: I disagree with post and thread deletion. It has been my understanding that Temple policy is archival--threads might get edited slightly or locked, but not deleted.

We really need to stick to that.

And in communication with the member that is being edited or who's post is soft deleted , its very enstranging to find ones post deleted if only a part of it is against policy , a bit of communication upfront cannot hurt surely?

Thank you, everyone, for your comments and/or support. I really do not mean to cause trouble. But I do not blindly follow rules. I question things. That's just who I am.

Streen wrote: Thank you, everyone, for your comments and/or support. I really do not mean to cause trouble. But I do not blindly follow rules. I question things. That's just who I am.

You and anyone can appeal a moderator action to The Council. If you believe the moderation was unwarranted or unfair you should appeal. If you put a link in your signature without making a big deal of it (speaking for myself) I'd not object. Generally a person is allowed one link in the signature. There's even a place for one in your profile.

I'm personally glad you brought it up, Streen. I had been working from my own "common sense" on links (which is basically: does the material linked to have something I'm finding useful to the study and practice of Jediism without infringing on any copyrights or advertising a competing group), and in re-reading the expanded policy in the FAQ section after the conversation here, it does sound like it's intended to be more prohibitive. And I'd rather know these things than continue posting links and run afoul of the policy.

Tellahane, I'm glad some clarification is being worked on. I do understand the problems that both spamming and predatory solicitation/member poaching cause for organizations (having been there on the admin end before in a viciously competitive scene), but with the tone and wording of the policy as it stands, it's hard to understand where the lines between members sharing their resources for study or own work and background knowledge vs "advertising" are being drawn.

I thought it was one of those "judgment call" rules that was most diligently applied to you Streen, because of the cyclic nature of your TOTJO presence.
Heres the cycle: Friendly Streen, who (sort of) participates in discussions, maybe shares his paintings, and drops little tid-bits of "wisdom" here and there around the Temple. Enough activity so that the people who dont know whats coming next will think "hey this guy is pretty ok"....But Friendly Streen eventually morphs into Volkum's Messenger Streen (or whatever) who insists we are a cult and a false religion "going the way of pedophilia" (lol, yall remember that?) and whatever else it is that you really think of TOTJO... someone who seeks to recruit and convert totjo members (such as silas mercury) and who targets respected leadership (Jestor)... Volkum's Messenger Streen eventually gets run off for a while, but for whatever reason, decides to return one day as Apologetic Streen...who asssures us that hes "really been thinking about things" and "learned a lot" and "came to understand something" blah blah blah and of course because people here are kind and forgiving and accepting, mostly you are allowed back in.... And then you play it cool for a while as Friendly Streen again but INEVITABLY the cycle of changing Streens will repeat itself and somewhere along the way you throw out the old "hey btw guys heres my new website why dont you come check it out"

At this point we have a problem, because youve repeatedly made it clear what your real feelings of this place are, so the "Powers that Be" delete your links based on the logical assumption that theyre links to a domain where you will continue your anti-totjo campaign unobserved and unchallenged.

Theres a lot of people who i have disagreed with since ive come here. But almost to a person, the membership here shows themselves over time to be sincere and to really value this space, even if that means something different to them than it does to me. Much as we disagree, we CARE about TOTJO. Much of a jerk as I am, I CARE bout TOTJO- this community.
Youre probably the only person who ive ever really thought we would be better off without, because, according to your own words and actions, you genuinely do not respect this community: Us. Youve shown that time and time again over the last few years with your repeated bullshit. So i agree with the seemingly unfair application of rules in your case. Based on what youve said and done consistently in the past since ive been here, the only conclusion i can draw is that we are (secondly) a potential membership resource for you to tap into, and (primarily) an unrespected rival with whom you compete.

Can you really tell me thats not true?
Can you assure us that the cycle i described (which we all recognize) wont continue? Isnt in fact, STILL continuing?
And to really be really real about the real deal, (why) should we take your word for it if you do? (Which is not to say that you shouldnt, if its possible to do honestly)

I wonder about how these rules are applied. I (and others here) post links to YouTube, resource websites, news sites, books hosted on other websites, and others. I even have a link to my SoundCloud address somewhere in the art section. And I've seen other Jedi websites linked in the forums before, but even without the links I've seen mentions of Force Academy, CoJ, Sith forums, Just Jedi, and many others throughout the forums. If the name is posted here, it's only a google search away -- so what is the functional difference between saying "I run (website without link)" and "I run (linked website)."?

I can understand why the rule is in place. We obviously don't want links to insecure websites, pornographic websites, or to share destructive ideologies like neo nazi websites. But in any given thread there are links to other websites on a pretty regular basis.

Maybe it's because it's a website you made personally, but then, don't personal YouTube channels, google docs, and SoundCloud pages count? I don't suspect that it was a personal matter or that you're being specifically targeted, but these rules for linking to other websites doesn't seem to be upheld in every instance and the specific rules regulating what websites can and can't be posted are not the most clear.

You can appeal to the council, and I see Br. John posted here, but I am also wondering about other cases where these links are not removed and how they differ from this one.

Something that we should better define and clear up in our current reexamining of policy.