Ramblings of a Security Officer

Senan wrote: I understand why his frustrations led him to make the choice he did, and I continue to see my friends on the Council struggle with similar frustrations. In particular, our Pastor Rosalyn, who I respect and admire very much, has been agonizing over the state of our Temple for a long time to the point of losing sleep over it. She and the clergy are here to be our spiritual support, and watching our home spiral into negativity causes a lot more pain for her than many of us realize. She's not only frustrated, but at times sad, angry, disappointed, even defeated. It isn't justified and it weighs heavily on me, but it has helped me understand that I am not only here to provide security for a forum and a Temple, but also do what I can to secure the health and well-being of those I care about.

I like and respect Rosalyn, and it is sad to me to think that she feels distressed at the state of things here. But ive gotten numerous PMs from her telling me to erase my posts, and its reached the point where im just tired of her telling me what i should be saying. Ive told her that i dont think its her place to decide what ideas i express and she keeps trying anyway. I will never respond differently to her than i have been responding. Not to her, nor you, nor to anyone else. Thats not an insult or attack or a challenge: I simply feel that every poerson should speak honeslty for his or her self, and accept the fact that other peole will speak differently. No one is choosing what i say except for me.

Mods have the power to change my posts after my editing window is over, and if it comes down to it, some have the power to ban me. I dont have the power to prevent those things, but i will speak my own ideas as i see fit. Ban me if you have to, very few people here will care. Edit my posts enough times and i will eventually stop posting altogether. Maybe this community doesnt want me around. Thats a sad thought to me after these years, but not a surprising one. If thats where it goes then thats where it goes, but as long as i am here, im going to be ME, and speak ME.

Excuse me, but to be frank, before the last time I spoke with you some time last week, we had not spoken in over one year. Where are these numerous messages? You think I am coming for you Ob1 and I am not. Yesterday's post was not directed at you, but the direction of the thread.

It might not always seem like it OB1, but I appreciate your honesty here. We can't have productive communication if we don't understand the unintentional barriers we are creating. Your response helps me to understand why you react to her the way you do.

Now, I hope you'll also appreciate my honest response. I firmly believe this Temple should be a place where people feel free to express their opinions, regardless of how unpopular they may be. I also respect people's right to ignore others or directly respond and engage others. Everyone here needs to decide what will benefit them most. Now that I've said that part, this is still a Temple and it does have rules and an administrative structure. We have to maintain some semblance of order and we have the right to demand a certain level of respect in order to do so. We, as a Temple, have not always been very good at figuring out how to make this happen without pissing each other off. You have obviously disagreed with Ros' actions in the past, but I would hope going forward that you could address those issues with me or JLSpinner and we could take the issue outside of the forum and into an environment where we could figure out the miscommunications and points of contention together. I am confident that we could clear up a lot of misunderstandings. Even if we all decide that we'll never agree, at least we will have a clearer path going forward when we interact with each other (or ignore each other ).

You may think this is just a bunch more big words from me, and I can see why you might see it that way, but I really hope I can change the path we're on here. I'd hate to see you leave and I enjoy a lot of your interaction here. I think we just need to clear up a few lingering issues and set some expectations. I want to help, but I'll also respect you if you tell me to "take a hike".

Rosalyn J wrote: Excuse me, but to be frank, before the last time I spoke with you some time last week, we had not spoken in over one year. Where are these numerous messages? You think I am coming for you Ob1 and I am not. Yesterday's post was not directed at you, but the direction of the thread.

Awesome. If its just my imagination then i can trust that it wont keep happening.

Senan wrote: It might not always seem like it OB1, but I appreciate your honesty here. We can't have productive communication if we don't understand the unintentional barriers we are creating. Your response helps me to understand why you react to her the way you do.

Now, I hope you'll also appreciate my honest response. I firmly believe this Temple should be a place where people feel free to express their opinions, regardless of how unpopular they may be. I also respect people's right to ignore others or directly respond and engage others. Everyone here needs to decide what will benefit them most. Now that I've said that part, this is still a Temple and it does have rules and an administrative structure. We have to maintain some semblance of order and we have the right to demand a certain level of respect in order to do so. We, as a Temple, have not always been very good at figuring out how to make this happen without pissing each other off. You have obviously disagreed with Ros' actions in the past, but I would hope going forward that you could address those issues with me or JLSpinner and we could take the issue outside of the forum and into an environment where we could figure out the miscommunications and points of contention together. I am confident that we could clear up a lot of misunderstandings. Even if we all decide that we'll never agree, at least we will have a clearer path going forward when we interact with each other (or ignore each other ).

You may think this is just a bunch more big words from me, and I can see why you might see it that way, but I really hope I can change the path we're on here. I'd hate to see you leave and I enjoy a lot of your interaction here. I think we just need to clear up a few lingering issues and set some expectations. I want to help, but I'll also respect you if you tell me to "take a hike".

Im not unwilling to compromise or apply some basic self moderation. But im not sure you can have both authenticity AND safety from offense. Not in a large community. I guess i will wait and see what the future brings.

OB1Shinobi wrote: Im not unwilling to compromise or apply some basic self moderation. But im not sure you can have both authenticity AND safety from offense. Not in a large community. I guess i will wait and see what the future brings.

Self moderation is kind of important to being a Jedi. I would go as far as saying it is required. That is how we can practice empathy and compassion and learn to communicate effectively. I know you are willing to make the effort so long as we do so from our end as well. It is actually possible to be authentic without offending people. It is a matter of choosing your language carefully and respecting others as equals despite a disagreement. That still doesn't guarantee that someone won't take offense anyway, but at that point it is on them. If someone is offended, we can at least ask why they feel offended and see if it was indeed the way we delivered the message or them just wanting to be pissed about something.

It is hard in a community this large and diverse to avoid ruffling some feathers. No matter what we say, someone is going to disagree or take offense. I just try to piss off as few people as I can at any one time.

TopHat wrote: I think you may have missed my point. I'll try to delve a little deeper. Depending on what you NEED is depending on what the situation and what is considered the most beneficial . If you NEED to lose the weight then yes you should do it as it is the right choice. We, as humans, do not make the right choice even if it ends up makes us happy.

Yes I understood your point. My point is who decides what the person needs? You seem to want to dictate to him that he needs to lose weight, but is that your right? What if he needs to be happy more than healthy? Is it your right, or even a doctor's right, to decide hes wrong?

The person themselves of course! Yes, yes, depending on what you need and the best way to get it is what is considered right. Not necessarily, I mean only to benefit the individual. After all being healthy has more benefits than not being healthy. If the person does want to remain unhealthy then they should continue being unhealthy if it makes them happy and that is want they want to do. Then they are right to do so. Not smart but right. It is not necessarily about a person's rights but about being correct in taking the proper action that will yield the desired result. A person's rights are different from being correct when making a choice. Maybe this help clarified it for you. Let me know if you still don't understand. Thanks!

TopHat wrote: After all being healthy has more benefits than not being healthy. If the person does want to remain unhealthy then they should continue being unhealthy if it makes them happy and that is want they want to do. Then they are right to do so. Not smart but right.

Shouldn't have had that donut. :side:

TopHat wrote: The person themselves of course! Yes, yes, depending on what you need and the best way to get it is what is considered right. Not necessarily, I mean only to benefit the individual. After all being healthy has more benefits than not being healthy. If the person does want to remain unhealthy then they should continue being unhealthy if it makes them happy and that is want they want to do. Then they are right to do so. Not smart but right. It is not necessarily about a person's rights but about being correct in taking the proper action that will yield the desired result. A person's rights are different from being correct when making a choice. Maybe this help clarified it for you. Let me know if you still don't understand. Thanks!

You are still looking at things from your subjective point of view. There is nothing that demands your view of healthy is the correct view other than your own. Remove yourself from your opinions and your beliefs and your thoughts and then evaluate this question again.

Manu, feel free to eat that donut.

Senan wrote: 1. These are our RULES . Please read them and know them. I will make every effort to enforce them fairly and evenly. These apply to EVERYONE.

A note perhaps outside of the immediate stream of conversation:

On Rule #1, "Please use respectful language, do not be abusive and swear only where appropriate". I totally agree that these rules should apply to everyone and be a condition of participation in the forum. However, many may not know that "respectful language" is a thing, a system of communication commonly taught in the workplace or in diverse professional environments through specific training. Here's a nice 40-page basic explanation of it, for example: https://www.centreforwelfarereform.org/uploads/attachment/470/respectful-language.pdf

The pdf is actually very good, and worth the read - though I'm stressing here that this isn't the thing one really learns overnight. It is, in itself, a hard thing to get across as a rationale of communication meant to keep people from making assumptions about each other (thus leading directly to conflict, as no one really like that being done to them) rather that a set of "words it's okay to use" (see page 18 on "Political Correctness".) Problems result when people are left to interpret this for themselves - especially when (as we've seen here) the meaning of the "word" respect is still being debated.

To be something uniformly enforceable, rules like these need to be broken down or explained as concrete actions. For instance, one of the central techniques is the use of "I statements" - remaining centered in one's own perceptions, reactions and responses - rather than statements that are "you-focused" - unfairly and inaccurately projecting motives, behaviors, or characteristics onto someone else (outside of being in a position directly responsible for their evaluation). Voluntarily avoiding the use of fallacies to manipulate people is another one - but again, people have to know what they are and be honest enough to spot their own first. But it is a skill that can be taught.

It can't be assumed that people will or can "feel" their way to understanding this just from the concept of respect that they may have. Given the general characteristics of the Star Wars fandom, it's likely that we have at least a few members with Asperger's, and I know (from both their disclosure and some of the recognizable characteristics of posts) there's been a couple people posting who deal with some level of schizophrenia. Online interaction can be a very positive source of strength, growth and connection for those who may find face to face interaction challenging due to such conditions, but it is also is very difficult and complicated when there are rules or conventions that are assumed to be ones people will "naturally" know.

In addition, we have different languages and cultures interacting here. This is exactly the kind of environment "respectful language" was designed for. Like any new form of language, it can feel awkward using it first, but eventually becomes second nature, as a real way of appreciating the uniqueness of others in an equitable manner, without putting all the burden of "not being offended" on the receiver while giving the sender (in communication terms) a pass to unload unconsciously on whomever they're speaking to. Communication is a two-way street - it's no different to ask people to "not feel" a certain thing in reaction to words than it is to ask people "not say" a certain thing in response to feelings. Except that the latter is far easier, and can be much more quickly achieved as a learned form of communication.