Why so many people become disappointed with this community

This post goes back to the original topic of this thread....

So at first I made it a point to stay out of this thread because I had allowed it to become a point of emotion for me.....dumb I know......

Anyway, I made it a point to read similar threads going back all the way to 2015 so far. I just want to list some similarities between them all that I have found and that deserve consideration.

1. All member of different ranks want to see leadership with "objectivity", this is a fallacy at best as true objectivity does not and can never exist. It doesn't happen everyone has an angle with which they see and many are searching for one to change too.
2. Every one wants more transparency, which in general is good, however, then we will see more conflict of sorts as Transparency can not be necessarily approached with objectivity.
3. A lot of people want a more defined definition of what they are looking for here, how it works and why it works that way.
4. People want to see more accountability, again though where will the line be drawn accountability towards one person will look like something to one person and something completely different to another.
5. Most people want everything NOW, that's not how anything with substance works.
6. Most people want some people to be more than people,or more than who they are.
7. The only one that could (I emphasize COULD) be possible is that a lot of people want to see discourse on a courteous level that does not get to the point of personal degradation.
This is all I have been able to pull so far and I give a lot of credit to Senan and Ren and other council members for being pretty forth coming in previous threads that extend back. Does that mean everything is answered or fine, no. However, it shows a willingness to continue moving towards some of these goals, which for the record will probably not have the outcomes people expect them too..........
Anyway, these are just my 2 cents on what I have been reading over the course of several days, if you can answer or find solutions to thee issues that would actually work then you my friends are a better PERSON than I.

Much Love, Respect, and Peace,
Kobos

Thanks again, Senan.

And hopefully the end result will be the same (ie, giving guests the ability to post there.)

Tellahane wrote:

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?

I just wanted to point out your memory might be playing tricks on you because I think we have been 14, but I don't know for how long... And You have at least been mistaken about one thing in this thread: You weren't the only councillor to oppose it, and you in fact miscounted it, back then. That's one thing our records certainly show.

ren wrote:

Tellahane wrote:

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?

I just wanted to point out your memory might be playing tricks on you because I think we have been 14, but I don't know for how long... And You have at least been mistaken about one thing in this thread: You weren't the only councillor to oppose it, and you in fact miscounted it, back then. That's one thing our records certainly show.

I know who else voted against and if you look at the time stamps from the announcement to when it happened that came in as a change from abstain to no after the announcement, which came out shortly after the majority vote at the time was in favor. I remember having that conversation vividly.

ren wrote:

Tellahane wrote:

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?

I just wanted to point out your memory might be playing tricks on you because I think we have been 14, but I don't know for how long... And You have at least been mistaken about one thing in this thread: You weren't the only councillor to oppose it, and you in fact miscounted it, back then. That's one thing our records certainly show.

Also as of this post:

https://www.templeofthejediorder.org/forum/offices/120309-kit-jl-spinner-senan-atticus-tellahane-councillor-granted-2017

It was 13, then I resigned, there has been no other announcements of anyone becoming a councilmember that I've seen unless I've missed it or its in a section of the forums not visible to guests...

The FAQ which is out-dated has the following list:
1 Adhara (Knight's Secretary)
2 Alexandre Orion (Education Administration)
3 Atticus (Council Secretary, Secretary for the Clergy)
4 Br. John (Founder, President, Patriarch)
5 Carlos (Associate Pastor)
6 JLSpinner (Security Officer)
7 Kit
8 MadHatter (Vice President Of Membership Affairs)
9 Neaj Pa Bol (Matriarch)
10 ren (Systems Administrator)
11 Rosalyn J (Pastor)
12 Senan (Security Officer)
13 Tellahane (Associate System Administrator)

So who is the two new people on the council?

The doctrine is there as a standard of what we all as a temple/church mutually agree upon. I encourage you to study for yourselves I reviewed our doctrine recently it was very enjoyable.

On the other hand we also, have in the option of your own personal beliefs and convictions your path is your own! So, to say that we need to get rid of the doctrine is a ridiculous statement and a incomplete thought.

Sven One wrote: The doctrine is there as a standard of what we all as a temple/church mutually agree upon. I encourage you to study for yourselves I reviewed our doctrine recently it was very enjoyable.

On the other hand we also, have in the option of your own personal beliefs and convictions your path is your own! So, to say that we need to get rid of the doctrine is a ridiculous statement and a incomplete thought.

Have you read people's IP several members disagree with parts of it, and so I don't think saying "we all" is appropriate.

And did you read the last of my comments that was in the vein of what you just said. Yes, I read people's IPs including your own if you recall. I am not being unfair with my statements Tellahane but, I stand for the doctrine but, I also have my own view points as well aside from the doctrine. Read my posts sometime.

So, earlier I made a post laying out some reoccurring themes that have been said out in repeated threads like this over time. As we know many have had consequences to individuals we know and setting those feelings aside, I admit to falling prey to hoping that just maybe, we as a group might look at those deeply and really consider what we could air here as plausible solutions to these issues we keep repeating. Maybe, break the cycle, it will always be a cycle but chipping away at one or more of these may help us alleviate some of the strife, struggle and suffering (if that's the word for it) these have cause over their repeated calls to action.

Tellahane has laid out a solution in a form to one about how we can define something better in the terms as those whom are new here so they may see things a little less blindly.

I hope this thread can be used for us to truly and deeply consider some of these and maybe have some solutions or at least working progress towards something that makes the community better. Continuously arguing details seems almost pointless and less and less discourse and more finger pointing. it's like watching the US congress on any issue (if there is someone to strive to be better than it should at least be them).

Much Love, Respect and Peace,
Kobos

Kobos wrote: So, earlier I made a post laying out some reoccurring themes that have been said out in repeated threads like this over time. As we know many have had consequences to individuals we know and setting those feelings aside, I admit to falling prey to hoping that just maybe, we as a group might look at those deeply and really consider what we could air here as plausible solutions to these issues we keep repeating. Maybe, break the cycle, it will always be a cycle but chipping away at one or more of these may help us alleviate some of the strife, struggle and suffering (if that's the word for it) these have cause over their repeated calls to action.

Tellahane has laid out a solution in a form to one about how we can define something better in the terms as those whom are new here so they may see things a little less blindly.

I hope this thread can be used for us to truly and deeply consider some of these and maybe have some solutions or at least working progress towards something that makes the community better. Continuously arguing details seems almost pointless and less and less discourse and more finger pointing. it's like watching the US congress on any issue (if there is someone to strive to be better than it should at least be them).

Much Love, Respect and Peace,
Kobos

This ^^^^ I'm gonna be done with this thread for awhile, can only beat your head against the wall for so long before needing to get a pack of ice or frozen pea's and spend some time in recovery