How to be the Greatest Forum on the Entire Internet

[Zebra]

Whiskey_Mystic,

You are doing a fine job of moderating and evaluating the sparkling points that are coming forward here.

Just appreciating the thread, and agree wholeheartedly with those points that you are acknowledging from others.

I would probably add, to check in with what baggage you are bringing to the forum each day. For example, you are still fuming over a personal incident at work, and this can - unconsciously - creep into how you participate in a thread. Advice would be, to just be honest with yourself about it as you launch into responding. And if you so wish, share with us too (I think if we know - in a general sense - what might be shaping the tone of a post (not only the content) there is greater understanding between all and acceptance.

Cheers, Zebra

[mgray]

Thanks for the thoughtful thread. My one suggestion would be:

Check your ego at the homepage. That should bring civility to the fore.

[Timreh]

What one person believes or what is true for them may not be so for another..

Debating points of view can be interesting but argueing and tit for tat attacks not only feel awful but on forums they are immature and selfish.
There are many Wonderful and Exciting threads that people (me included) just close the door and walk away from because of what they see going on.. negativity and wasted space.

Heres hoping this forum can be steered into one of tolerance and respect, one that is highly esteemed and a benchmark for others on the internet!

Ilie started a helpful thread for anyone that hasn't seen..

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...747#post480747

Posted by Ilie Pandia (here)
Hello,

The moderation team does its best to keep this a positive and respectful place, but we cannot read all the forum all the time, so if you notice a problematic post and you receive an inappropriate PM (private message) please report it so we can have a look.

To report a post or a PM you need to click on this "" button that you will find under each post or private message.

You will get to a new page where you will explain what the problem is and then click on "Send Report".

The moderation team will get a copy of the reported post or private message with your note attached and will take appropriate action. (We do not see private messages unless you report them. So if someone is causing your trouble via PM do not retaliate on the public forum, but rather report the PM).

(If you don't know what the posting guidelines are you can read them here: http://projectavalon.net/forum4/faq....shipguidelines)

PS: If you report a duplicate thread or request a thread merge, please include in your description the links to the relevant Avalon threads . It will make the task much faster for us.

PS2: Usually the moderators will respond pretty fast, but in some cases it may take 2 or 3 days before we have chance to check our notifications. (By "respond" I mean reading the report and taking appropriate action. We usually send a reply to a report only if more information is needed)

[ceetee9]

Posted by Ishtar (here)
What a great title for a thread, Whiskey!

I'm not sure if this is going off at a tangent, and whether you want to establish a more broader based discussion first, but, in the spirit of helping to get this thread going, I'd like to make just one suggestion upfront that I think would help enormously.

On my forum, we don't allow ad hominem attacks ... at all, not ever, not under any circumstances. People can attack the material or the content of the thread as much as they like. They can attack the argument. But they cannot make personal attacks on each other.

I find this makes a huge difference... not least, because, I have to say, most of us consenting adults know how to conduct ourselves without being given a load of rules. But I established that rule because it is, as I've learned to my cost, one of the favoured techniques of disinformation agents ~ they gang up on forums to bully their target into submission to support their own agenda. These sorts of people are known as 'bushwhackers' and they are very deliberate in how they attack. They circle like sharks and they go for the jugular.

A certain Harvard-based (yes, I kid you not) group of bushwhackers used to rule whole fiefdoms of Wikipedia in its early days, and so I first came up against them during the Aryan invasion of India debate which did actually in the end, rewrite the history books and those pages of Wikipedia, no matter how hard the bushwhackers defended them. But it was a bruising process for everyone concerned.

We are in an information war, and these kinds of operatives are on this forum and I even do have the odd one on mine, from time to time. I tend to let them stay on, because I'd rather have them where I can see them. If I chuck them off, they'll only send somebody else and then I'd have to get to know a new person all over again. But as soon as there's any hint of ad hominems, they're bounced off.

I believe that if ad hominems were a fireable offence on here, discussions would be much more pleasant and more productive and enlightening, because the other thing is, when people feel personally under attack, they dig in and get entrenched in their positions. So for people to be able to grow intellectually and in their understanding ~ to be able to change their mind, in essence, without feeling they're losing face ~ it's necessary to protect the members with that kind of a rule.

Anyway, just pitching in really, just to get this excellent thread started.... well done, Whiskey...!

Excellent comment Ishtar. This is an ancient, tried and true technique used not only by disinfo agents, agent provocateurs after they've gained your trust, and ordinary people after they realize they cannot attack the argument so they attack the messenger--either because they're not equipped to and/or because they are not ready to entertain ideas that may make sense but are just too upsetting to their cherished beliefs and/or world views. It is quite easy to get sucked into this type of tit for tat, as you pointed out, so I applaud you for taking the stance you have on your forum that enables people who are truly interested in exchanging ideas to share, learn and grow so they can stay focused on the argument(s) at hand. Bravo!

[Whiskey_Mystic]

I appreciate the support you have all shown for this dialog.

We have talked about the Four Agreements and shared some ideas. Let's also take a look at nonviolent communication. A lot of people have not heard this term and do not know that it is an established...."protocol"...we might say.

Have a look at this site- http://www.cnvc.org/

And here is a wonderful article by Katy Butler from Tricycle Magazine. Don't skip this. It is a good read. :-)

http://www.katybutler.com/publicatio...sayitright.htm

These communication concepts and practices are crucial to building a harmonious community out of diversity, which I believe we are trying to do at Avalon.

[Whiskey_Mystic]

Posted by mgray (here)
Thanks for the thoughtful thread. My one suggestion would be:

Check your ego at the homepage. That should bring civility to the fore.

Good advice, mgray.

I think many on Avalon could benefit from realizing that the first step to overcoming ego is to admit that we have one rather than try to pretend that we are too enlightened for that. If we have the humility to recognize how our ego needs are influencing us, we might be able to set it aside like laying down a burden. I have a big ego myself (I always want to be "right") so this is a good lesson to return to again and again. Great post. Thanks.

[Ishtar]

Posted by Whiskey_Mystic (here)

Posted by mgray (here)
Thanks for the thoughtful thread. My one suggestion would be:

Check your ego at the homepage. That should bring civility to the fore.

Good advice, mgray.

I think many on Avalon could benefit from realizing that the first step to overcoming ego is to admit that we have one rather than try to pretend that we are too enlightened for that. If we have the humility to recognize how our ego needs are influencing us, we might be able to set it aside like laying down a burden. I have a big ego myself (I always want to be "right") so this is a good lesson to return to again and again. Great post. Thanks.

This is not directed at your post specifically, mgray, but I think this word 'ego' gets bandied around a little too freely at times, along with the unspoken assumption that the Eastern philosophical way of transcending ego is a 'good thing'. However, in my experience in India and with various gurus and ashrams, some of those spiritual practises don't always lead to non-ego but to a damaged ego.

From that, I came to the view that we need our egos. In my opinion, they're an integral part of our design and as Nature never wastes a single cell, they must be no more superfluous to a happy and balanced human being than 'junk DNA' is 'junk DNA'.

I have noticed that many times when I have been accused of being in my ego, it is actually because I'm doing or saying something that someone is annoyed at me about because I'm not complying with doing it their way.

I don't want to play the 'woman card' ... well, alright, I'm going to then. But if you're a woman with firm opinions and not afraid to express them, you're much more likely to be accused of being 'in your ego' than a man behaving in the same way. </playing of woman card>

I think an ego is like a knife. You can either use it to peel the vegetables and make everyone a pot of delicious Scottish broth soup, or you can use it to injure said party.

In other words, I think that egos in the hands of responsible adults, who respect each others boundaries, are OK and help contribute to lively, entertaining and productive debate.

Anyway, that's just my twopenneth (before anyone accuses me of being in my ego! )

[<8>]

Hello and thanks for a great subject.

Trying to implement a higher awareness on a forum might do the trick, Perhaps by facing a few words of wisdom every time you are logging on?

For example, If you feel a thought with a strong emotion and the urge to tell how you feel, STOP, this is your thought and emotion, why do you blame others with your feelings?

Ask yourself instead, why am I feeling like this.

We all have our story with thoughts and emotions that we have accumulated throughout life, the wrong words, and it's easy to press any of our buttons.


..8..

[DeDukshyn]

Another thing that can potentially cause issues are threads that are started with very little intent or direction indicated from the thread starter. I think this could be alleviated if the thread starter states his or her clear intentions of why they started a thread and what type of discussions would be considered off topic -- if the thread starter wants to maintain a specific direction. Likewise - if the thread is intended to be a free-for-all open discussion on anything related - indicate that too. Better to do this up front then try to manage it after the fact (although that is sometimes un-avoidable).

Another issue I am consciously working to avoid is responding to threads without reading a single post - not even the first one. Don't do that! I've done it, and I've even seen people come on to a thread and start b@!tchin about something that they think the topic is on based on what they read in the "New Posts" thread list, without checking which sub forum it is in, and without reading even the initial post. This is just plain offensive and rude. At the very least - responders should read the initial post, determine the sub-forum the thread starter put the thread in, then respond - even if you are just responding to a single post in the thread - knowing the relationship to the larger picture will allow for a more productive comment.

Another tip I could give is if you've never started a thread - start one. It helps to have a view from both sides of the fence and allows the concept of "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" to be more front and center.

[Whiskey_Mystic]

Before I let this thread die, I want to go over the four stages of community development as described by M. Scott Peck

1. Pseudocommunity

When a group first comes together, they are generally polite and avoid conflict. They are not real. So they have a community, but they are faking it.

2. Chaos

Eventually, group members will begin to assert their individuals begin to assert their personal beliefs and values into the group. As these beliefs and values come into conflict with each other, the group has chaos

3. Emptiness

Many groups will not make it past chaos. In order for the group to move forward, each group member must let go of their own sacred cows. They must be willing to question what they believe. They must stop clinging to their version of reality and stop vehemently defending it. This will allow them to consider other points of view. If they do this, they might not choose new points of view, but they will be able to respect, empathize, and understand the other group members.

4. Community

Community is a state of being that is hard to describe. People feel peaceful, at ease with one another, accepting of differences, and perhaps celebrate with joy. It is a feeling of wholeness, of oneness, of knowing acceptance for just who you are, faults and all. Differences are appreciated, even honored. People seem to know it is just enough to be human and to experience a true feeling of what love may mean.

There are other processes that have four stages and there are similarities in meaning of the stages, but the processes are very different These are:

Tuckman

Forming
Storming
Norming
Performing

Blanchard

Directing
Coaching
Mentoring
Delegating

Peck

Pseudocommunity
Chaos
Emptying
Community

I think Bill Ryan talked about the Tuckman model back in early 2011, but I can't remember if that was in person or on the forum. Each model has merit and provides a different way of looking at group dynamics and some apply better than others in different situations.

Thank you for reading. I hope that this thread continues to provide ideas for us and the mods to have more harmony and be a model for other forums in how to conduct themselves. If the thread goes quiet now, then I hope it has served those who took the time to read it and participate.

May all beings be free from suffering.
May all beings be at peace.

[write4change]

Whiskey Mystic, you know I have great respect for you. I really do not want to distract from the positive note that you are sending as the conscious choice of letting this thread die. This is strictly for infromation puposes as it is one of my continual return to thinking points.

In the 80s, my husband and I were part of Scott Peck's 501c3 Foundation for Community. His book the Road Less Traveled has been on the NYT bestseller list from 1979 to 1989 which was something of a new phenomena. He gave a considerable amount of that money to this Foundation and he got several grants and big donations from Fortune 500. He really believed that some of the big coprs bought into his vision. I now understand that was just part of their distractions as they consolidated power. We went to many of his seminars and leadership trainings for community.

You may find this hard to believe but I was at that time so into doing something different that I made a committment never to open my mouth and just listen. I did learn a lot that way about myself by hearing what I would have said and did not and then deciding how glad I was that I kept my mouth shut. The people that went to these things were upper middle class and pretty highly educated because it cost quite a bit and it took a lot of time--three day weekends etc.

Never once did I experience real community. Some sessions the jocking for power was less bitter than others. Always, always, there were about five men who would jockey for power most of the entire session and only towards the end did the frustration become so intense people would just drop and pretend to come to community most of them never coming back. Each group had about 50 people as attending participants. It never was able to become a movement because it was never able to come to consensus about anything.

I have never regretted the experience, time or money but in all honesty I believe it to have been an abject failure or something before its time. I have come to feel that only bed rock conservatives can form a solid block of action because they always act from cohesive certainty which is not the basis of almost all seekers.

[Rantaak]

If we aren't allowed to be stupid, how can we learn?

[Whiskey_Mystic]

Write4Change,

I actually don't like Peck personally. I won't go into why. But I do think that some of the things he has taught in his books is practical and useful. Some of it also sucks. I am an expert in online community dynamics and community management, at least within my own field, and I have found Peck's model for community stages to bear out over time. It does not suprise me that he himself had trouble building community experiences. I appreciate your post.

[Anchor]

I cant read all the threads, I miss out quite a few and I just read this thread from a link in other thread.

What an great thread it is!

My summary of it: Be kind.

[<8>]

Hey I got an other...


"Do you believe OR do you know"

"Either way, present your thoughts in a respectful way"