How is rank about academics and not just a popularity contest?

Ideally, from my understanding, Rank is handled more as a combination of the two. Obviously, if the people in the positions to promote others find those people more favorable, it makes it easier to just do that, but that's more or less a part of why we have the "academics" in place, as a sort of check on that power. On the flip side, it's not enough to simply go through the academics, but to show that you have done so, AND displayed a genuine understanding of the material.

Growth is also a factor; this is not a conventional academic setting, but a place that promotes spiritual/philosophical development. If, when one is up for Knighthood, they are the same person as when they first came here, I would certainly hesitate to vote in favor, as such a person has somehow breezed through the process, falling into the same traps as conventional academia- rote memorization, learning what to say, and when, whether you believe it or not, whether you UNDERSTAND it or not. On the flip side, it also possible to change in a negative way, or even fail to truly address one's tendencies or behaviors honestly, even if at face value they are unbecoming of a Jedi Knight, or similarly considered positions. If it were purely based on how well the judging body viewed you, they wouldn't bother with the process in the first place, and there would be no academic process, for that matter.

Being Likable/liked helps, sure, but that's technically true of ANY process where a group attempts to reach a consensus- In this place, at least, an assessment of growth and genuine merit is the balancing act between the academic and the "popularity contest"/democratic process. It's also pretty easy to view a system as negative, if you already view it's representatives in a negative light; a state of mind that leaves one vulnerable to manipulation, but more importantly, shapes the light in which you view their actions and activities, whether it's true or not, or even if it's actually different than what's done by others who simply pass, ironically, for having your good opinion of them.

It's certainly not a perfect system, but, what system is? The potential flaws and failings in this system are no different than any alternative, and for the same reasons.

I AM curious, though, what some of your ideas are, in pursuing something akin to a "more perfect union"? You've stated what you don't like about it, but what would you do differently, how, and how/why would that actually be better?

Lumella wrote: Yeah its my first day here , is this representative of the level of discussion here ?

The thread was started by kyrin so someone was bound to troll...

Any way to get back to the topic?

To answer the original question, yes, rank IS a popularity contest. Worded like that it sounds like a bad thing, so the way I would rephrase it is:

Rank is a matter of TRUST. When you have gained the trust of leadership through consistent display of the qualities they deem as appropriate and representative of a Jedi Knight, THEN you are awarded the rank of Jedi Knight. The academics are a prerequisite, but rank is NOT about academic fulfillment, nor is it about a badge of being “more advanced” on the path.

Rank, as in most institutions (military or civilian) are awarded based on how a person displays both proficiency in execution of tasks and alignment to the values of an organization.

TL;DR: rank is awarded as a responsibility, and thus awarded not based on academic proficiency, but on alignment to institutional values.

Rank CAN be many things- including but never limited to - a popularity contest. Reminds me of the old saying - to a person with a hammer - everything looks like the head of a nail.
Flowers remind us often of our own hearts condition as do colors and songs and story’s and so on and so forth. Some would say like tea - it’s just a reflection of what we see and know.

When you have gained the trust of leadership through consistent display of the qualities they deem as appropriate and representative of a Jedi Knight, THEN you are awarded the rank of Jedi Knight.

Ideally, yes.

rank is NOT about academic fulfillment, nor is it about a badge of being “more advanced” on the path

However in reality things are preceived differently. A few senior members have now suggested we do away with rank is it appears to have a negative impact on the members. Years back i streamlined the rank progression system for lower ranks and it proved immensely popular... But it looks like it was for the wrong reasons. Shiny golden carrots, whether hanging off a stick or not, as it turns out, have zero nutritional value.

It took me a while to cycle through my thoughts on this matter. Rank does not necessarily indicate wisdom or indeed an understanding of Jediism
Fight me if you like, but from experience, this truth cannot be denied. As it were, people's expectation of Knight is what trips people up. I expect Knights to behave this way, or to understand this thing and when they don't, but the rank indicates they should, then I get mad and I quit because these people are not Jedi or Knights as I understand them. I work with my understanding of Jedi and Knight underpinning all my lessons, and if my teacher does not catch this, I can let this spill over into how I interact as a Knight. If I take on students, that tendency will be passed to them and so on and so forth.

Now, here is the thing. There are more than one way to be a Jedi and to be a Knight. The key to understanding that is putting your own view on the backburner and really trying to understand what the other view(s) are.

I'm reading a small book called The Apology by Plato which I think might be helpful here: http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/apology.html

ren wrote:

Lumella wrote: Yeah its my first day here , is this representative of the level of discussion here ?

The thread was started by kyrin so someone was bound to troll...

Could you eleborate on that?Iis she being trolled because she is "just" a guest or because she is Kyrin or both , and therefore making this discussion more than fitting? Meaning that this is the problem she is talking about?

Maybe it is. Kyrin is known for her abrasive/argumentative style. We have been discussing the nature and purpose of the "open discussions" section of totjo, whether an OP 'owns' a thread and can dictate what can or cannot be discussed. Maybe it's all just an ellaborate exercise whose purpose is to see how people react? Will people come to Kyrin's defense against the evil Jabba in a perfect display of wise and fair Jedi Justice? Stay tuned.

ren wrote: Maybe it is. Kyrin is known for her abrasive/argumentative style. We have been discussing the nature and purpose of the "open discussions" section of totjo, whether an OP 'owns' a thread and can dictate what can or cannot be discussed. Maybe it's all just an ellaborate exercise whose purpose is to see how people react? Will people come to Kyrin's defense against the evil Jabba in a perfect display of wise and fair Jedi Justice? Stay tuned.

Hmmm so its more of what an OP poster should expect when he posts something? The only thing that comes to mind quickly with me is this .. When i kick a football into the football field , i know that i no longer control the ball , if then someone picks it up with his hands and starts studying the colour and roundness or lack thereoff and my intention was to discuss the game ...that is annoying , but then again , why did i just kick the ball into the game , and should you explain all the rules etc ...? Intriguing indeed !