Why so many people become disappointed with this community

Thought it already was done... so found the thread confirming that...

Jediism Catagory Permission Change

When and why was it changed back?

I'm not sure. Even so, it is in discussion with Council

I know you believe that ren. You have been extremely close to it for probably many decades and that is why you have trouble seeing the reality for many that it is not that easy. Things you take for granted others have no comprehension of. Processes you view as naturally intuitive are not that way to those that did not write those procedures.

It's pretty much step by step, and literal meaning, no guess work required. We have also repeated/explained certain things many times over the years, but end up being ignored, sometimes on purpose.

I wonder to this day why apprentice journal forums are hidden?

They are not hidden. they are accessible to everyone who is an apprentice or more. They were created so that TMs could keep all (or most of) their apprentice's work in one place, on site. Apprentices can keep a public journal if they want to. Our general policy regarding posts is that not everything should be accessible to whomever passes by, from the average social engineer to the good ol' google spider. Not everyone does everything in public, and people who do (like celebrities) tend to suffer from severe mental health issues as a result of having no privacy.

Or the knights journals for that matter?

Knights, like apprentices, can keep a journal where they want. degree/studies journals are different from personal journals. If a knight wants to keep their personal journal in the knights' forum, it is presumably because they want to share their thoughts with knights only. It is their choice, not yours or mine or anyone else's. I don't question their preferences on this matter, and imo, neither should you.

Why the jediism board is read only for guests. There have been many threads here lately that guests cant post in even though they are long time contributors here. Does this place feel it is protecting people by doing these things? Are we not all adults here, capable of deciding for ourselves?

I'm not sure why that decision was made. I think it is because at the time, members found certain guests annoying, turning enjoyable conversations into flamewars.
Length of relationship has little to do with it. People who are only guests in my home do not get invited to my bedroom. I also like to do my number 2s in peace.
We are also not all adults here.
I guess overall it's about consent... And as you point out, people decide for themselves. Sometimes their decision is not the same as yours.


Regarding guests posting in jediism: There is no council record of a vote count, and we have no idea whether the change was made (or botched). Based on the current configuration (guests can post new topics but not reply to them), I would say 'botched'. Looking at the council records, i think it may very well have been the case that a majority was not actually reached. (although i think it was, with one late vote)(either way this issue is being discussed again, and some councillors in favour in the orignal thread had asked for the decision not to be implemented right away, and I guess it wasn't)

https://www.templeofthejediorder.org/forum/114-Announcements/120859-news-jediism-category-permission-change#315832

That was the announcement with the vote tally....

Rosalyn J wrote: I'm not sure. Even so, it is in discussion with Council

What exactly is being discussed? It's been posted twice now that there was a clear council vote in favor and madhatter posted an official announcement to that effect?

EDIT: Never mind, I misread. feel free to delete this here post, because I can't...

We have no means of knowing if a majority was reached, or if it was decided after a delay to not implement the decision, because as far as i know there is a record of neither in council chambers.

We could deduct from the announcement that it was a council of 13 or less, but i cannot confirm that, and some of the newer councillors misunderstood our voting procedures until recently, so i simply do not know.

Either way it had been requested ratification be delayed, and the council is currently considering whether it should be ratified or not.

ren wrote: We could deduct from the announcement that it was a council of 13 or less, but i cannot confirm that, and some of the newer councillors misunderstood our voting procedures until recently, so i simply do not know.

Just to state the obvious, the council in the entire time I've been registered on this website has NEVER been more then 13, the count in the announcement would easily match the replies in the council thread of that vote, it was a huge uproar that drew this vote out in the first place and everyone was so adamant that it needed to be in, council included, so why the sudden need for procedure review and a question of confirming how many people were in council at any given point in time....It just smells like there's something else going on not being said. I doubt that something this obvious would be so questionable?

Because "it was a huge uproar that drew this vote out in the first place". Decisions made in the heat of the moment deserve review later, by cooler heads.

That "uproar" was in fact a relatively short thread that occurred between a limited number of apprentices, knights, and councilors. Many of whom commented on the fact that they were, up until that point, unaware the Jediism board was viewable to guests, but that guests could not post in it. By comparison, there have been other threads I would call far more of an uproar than that one ever was. Nevermind the fact that there was nearly a two week period when it was discussed and voted on by the council only.

To quote: "Why the sudden need for procedure review and a question of confirming how many people were in council at any given point in time....It just smells like there's something else going on not being said. I doubt that something this obvious would be so questionable?"

We have a very clear tally, posted in a formal announcement by a then member of council and confirmed by a still member of council. Nine plus months down the road, we shouldn't really still be "discussing" this....

It's a shame that some votes are so quick to be acted upon and yet others have to apparently be discussed ad nauseum after the fact.