Discussion: TotJO Culture Problems

I've found a lot of folks on here really helpful and or point me in the right direction of the help I needed.

We must allow open discussion no matter how painful it can be thats how people grow and learn

There's my two cents from a youngin'

I'm a rather new member. Still working through my IP, still have a long way to go, and overall I have basically not been present enough in this community yet to really comment on any aspect of its culture or what people are going through.

I would like to say, however, that at least for me, I am grateful for the grace and kindness that was shown to me so far, and I have felt very welcomed. Thank you for your hard work!

One issue with the nature of the work that we intend to do (at least, how I have come to understand it so far) is that we are challenging deeply-rooted assumptions and perceptions about the way we interact with and view the world. This is not easy work... confronting our biases, assumptions, and core values for what they are can easily be described as painful even. Through the work I've done so far in my own life, I have experienced a lot of this kind of conflict, and I still do. Harder still is accepting that some parts of our perception will always be so, and that it's okay, but we still need to work hard to continue doing the best for others.
Because of this, struggling with mental health issues only makes the work of examining the deepest and darkest parts of ourselves that we care not to admit that much harder. I am still struggling with this in my life, and I can attest to this. Still, I can also see that navigating how a community approaches people in this position can be difficult, as I see it as a rather grey area. That is, a religious community should both be a place of support, love, and encouragement, but also one that emphasizes the importance of obtaining more specialized help when needed that could not be provided here. There is no single solution that would fix it, and it takes the work of talented and introspective people to handle each person with care so as to apply what works for them. I am someone who regularly sees a therapist and is working actively through a lot of trauma in my life, and also I am someone who surrounds myself with caring people both off and online.

In short, if it seems really daunting and challenging to address this issue, then I think that means we're doing it right, essentially.

OB1Shinobi wrote: As long as Ive been here, there have always been those seeking a to make totjo into a "safe space" where the rules create a culture that prioritizes safety from offense as the highest social value.... which i believe to be ultimately debilitating ESPECIALLY TO THE SENSITIVE PEOPLE ITS MEANT TO PROTECT.

We agree.

I personally do not think we need more rules, simply a higher bar for people who represent the Order, and could thus be perceived as holding an unfair leverage over newer members.

It is a complicated issue because TOTJO is so many things for different people.

And despite advocating for more kindness displayed by Initiates and above, kindness cannot be enforced.

Manu wrote:

OB1Shinobi wrote: As long as Ive been here, there have always been those seeking a to make totjo into a "safe space" where the rules create a culture that prioritizes safety from offense as the highest social value.... which i believe to be ultimately debilitating ESPECIALLY TO THE SENSITIVE PEOPLE ITS MEANT TO PROTECT.

We agree.

I personally do not think we need more rules, simply a higher bar for people who represent the Order, and could thus be perceived as holding an unfair leverage over newer members.

It is a complicated issue because TOTJO is so many things for different people.

And despite advocating for more kindness displayed by Initiates and above, kindness cannot be enforced.

This was really the point of my post on page one as well. This place will never be able to regulate kindness. Instead kindness needs to be felt. It can be felt best through personal interaction. Personal interaction does not typically happen on a two dimensional post board. Open the rules on the board but then practice personal interaction through real life.

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote:

Manu wrote:

OB1Shinobi wrote: As long as Ive been here, there have always been those seeking a to make totjo into a "safe space" where the rules create a culture that prioritizes safety from offense as the highest social value.... which i believe to be ultimately debilitating ESPECIALLY TO THE SENSITIVE PEOPLE ITS MEANT TO PROTECT.

We agree.

I personally do not think we need more rules, simply a higher bar for people who represent the Order, and could thus be perceived as holding an unfair leverage over newer members.

It is a complicated issue because TOTJO is so many things for different people.

And despite advocating for more kindness displayed by Initiates and above, kindness cannot be enforced.

This was really the point of my post on page one as well. This place will never be able to regulate kindness. Instead kindness needs to be felt. It can be felt best through personal interaction. Personal interaction does not typically happen on a two dimensional post board. Open the rules on the board but then practice personal interaction through real life.

This is why I felt it was a cultural issue here, rather than a rule one. Perhaps instead of 'rules', they could be guidelines? Something we could look at and go "Hey, this is what's expected of a [rank], do you feel you're upholding these values in this instance?"

This really is a tough subject because I do feel that there needs to be a change, but I don't want to stiffle it or sterilize the environment either.

Kit wrote: This is why I felt it was a cultural issue here, rather than a rule one. Perhaps instead of 'rules', they could be guidelines? Something we could look at and go "Hey, this is what's expected of a [rank], do you feel you're upholding these values in this instance?"

This really is a tough subject because I do feel that there needs to be a change, but I don't want to stiffle it or sterilize the environment either.

I was under the assumption that the doctrine was pretty much guidelines on how one should conduct themselves here.

What about an optional pledge? Like a voluntary statement of intent by individuals to hold themselves accountable to certain standards?

"I ob1shinobi will make a formal commitment to..... blah blah blah" lol
Whatever the specific points might be. This would not be the sort of thing anyone could enforce or punish anyone over, but something we could all look at and see for ourselves whether we are living up to our own standards?

Is that stupid, lol ? Would it be enough? Do you think it would still make a difference six months down the road?

Arisaig wrote:

Kit wrote: This is why I felt it was a cultural issue here, rather than a rule one. Perhaps instead of 'rules', they could be guidelines? Something we could look at and go "Hey, this is what's expected of a [rank], do you feel you're upholding these values in this instance?"

This really is a tough subject because I do feel that there needs to be a change, but I don't want to stiffle it or sterilize the environment either.

I was under the assumption that the doctrine was pretty much guidelines on how one should conduct themselves here.

It's a bit vague I think for that. I can give someone an uncalled for ass chewing and still believe in their sanctity as a human person

Like Ros, I too have been following this thread closely and I am happy to see a constructive and open dialogue happening here. I hope you all can trust me when I say that I am taking all of the responses here into account and making sure they are considered as we work toward establishing some new procedures and trying out some new things.

Specifically, I want to address the concern about being overly sensitive or being too quick to swing the ban hammer on people who are simply attempting to be honest and transparent. This is a difficult judgment call to make, and I have made mistakes enforcing rules here in the past. What I have learned up to this point is that different personalities need to be handled differently, and it takes some practice to understand how to handle certain conversations. For example, I know that I can be blunt, direct, sarcastic, and even downright condescending while debating something with Zenchi, OB1, or MadHatter and they will not only hold their own, but throw it right back. In the end, we all typically walk away feeling just fine about it and hopefully we've all learned a few things along the way. This may not always be appropriate or ideal, but that is the relationship we have established. We just have to be very careful when others get involved in the conversations because they may not understand these informal rules we have established among ourselves.

On the flip side of this, it is always possible to be honest and transparent without being sarcastic, condescending, or mean. We can be direct and compassionate at the same time. It could be as simple as saying "I think you are mistaken" instead of saying "that is stupid." Sometimes we need to acknowledge the value of another's opinion even when we disagree. Instead of saying "you're wrong," I can try saying "I hear you, but this is why I disagree." It isn't always easy to do this when we are passionate about a topic or feel defensive, but it is something we have to work on as individuals and as a community.

When it comes to punishing those who are unwilling to remain polite or at least civil, I agree that simply banning people or deleting posts is not a productive or helpful way to proceed. While it has been effective in the past, it does little to change the behavior or foster any growth. What I am proposing instead is that we establish lessons for both sides of the conflict. We can ask everyone to take a step away from the conversation and look at their own behavior. We may have to lock a thread for a period of time, but that is better than punishing people. When we recognize someone acting in a way that is detrimental or harmful to others, instead of banning them, I would rather direct them toward a lesson in respectful debate that focuses on issues, not people. The person taking offense at the behavior may also benefit from a lesson in how to separate emotion from the logical argument or how to recognize various tactics used in argument that are meant to inflame emotions. It shouldn't be seen as a punishment, but rather a real world opportunity to learn.

As I've said, this will take some practice and time to iron out the wrinkles, but I believe we are all capable of finding the balance between supportive compassion and lively debate.

Kit wrote:

Arisaig wrote:

Kit wrote: This is why I felt it was a cultural issue here, rather than a rule one. Perhaps instead of 'rules', they could be guidelines? Something we could look at and go "Hey, this is what's expected of a [rank], do you feel you're upholding these values in this instance?"

This really is a tough subject because I do feel that there needs to be a change, but I don't want to stiffle it or sterilize the environment either.

I was under the assumption that the doctrine was pretty much guidelines on how one should conduct themselves here.

It's a bit vague I think for that. I can give someone an uncalled for ass chewing and still believe in their sanctity as a human person

I was thinking along the lines of these two teachings:


2. Jedi maintain a clear mind; which can be achieved through meditation and contemplation. Our minds can become unduly troubled and concerned with the happenings of the world. We must work on overcoming our individual issues through training and diligence.

We tend to talk without thinking. Meditation and contemplation. We allow ourselves to get caught up in the problems rather than focusing.

3. Jedi are aware of the future impacts of action and inaction and of the influence of the past, but live in and focus on the Now. We let ourselves flow like water through the events around us. We embrace the ever changing and fluid world, adapting and changing as it does.

And as a result of not thinking, we tend to lose sight of the future and how our actions can affect it. I've seen this time and time again, people making a decision that seems inconsequential in the moment, but ends up really messing things up down the line.

But also the entirety of the Creed.

EDIT: And that's just me skimming over the doctrine. I'm sure I could make entire posts on each part,
but for the sake of brevity, I'll leave it at that.