So how much transformation is actually wanted, really?

[Dorjezigzag]

Hi Anotherbob,

As i told you I am not in a squable with you, my concern is with songs. I would rather have not presented you with that evidence but you asked me to and now you tell me that I should not do it any more and Pm you. Seems to me that you are a man that likes to be in control, what is that word again........hmmmmm heteronomy.

I think you know that I have had the utmost respect for your posts, but with songs in my opinion you have lacked respect and compassion.

Just so you know I actually debated songs on a seperate thread when she was writing about heteronomy, I asked her who exactly are the heteronomy so I can understand your prejudice?

With this thread I got where she was coming from and felt bad about my comment to her which as always she brushed it off and dealt with in a dignified manner.

Yes words are just symbols they are not the actual thing they represent, but thats all we have on this forum. I believe Songs is well aware of that, and she is just trying to give something of her self, her autonomy. She gave so much and I just feel she has been misunderstood as I origanally did

Compassion does not mean to stay silent when BS is being slung

Now you are actually saying that songs is slinging BS, that is your opinion, in my opinion her thread was one of the most beneficial posts that has ever been on Avalon.

[Delight]

Posted by another bob (here)

Posted by Dorjezigzag (here)
By the way I have no anger about this. I am purely concerned with intent.

Perhaps you could point out specifically where in this thread the alleged attack took place?

What continues to amaze me is how much (unnecessary) conflict is generated when concepts are mistaken for reality

My interpretation is that your intent is to say that songs mistakes concepts for realities, if you read her posts you will see that she is quite aware of the limits of language, that is why she writes so much.

Well, interpretations are interesting critters, eh. In fact, I was making a rhetorical comment, which was directed to all participants and readers.

He's the virus!"

No, she's the virus!"

"No, they're the virus!" ..[

To me this is an obvious attempt at riduculing songs means of expression, you are making fun of her.

Yes, I had forgotten that one. It was an attempt at pointing out the silliness of accusations of being virus-infected that Songs was leveling at any who disagreed with her pov.

On the other hand, the habitual narcissism of the self-enamored personality cannot bear the light of such scrutiny, and will resist any change, sensing that such a transformation would supplant it from its power position, and so in fearful reactivity typically retreats and clings to familiar conditioned strategies of contrived reality that inevitably trace back to a socio-pathological root.

Furthermore, it serves little purpose to point this out to such a personality, since they will only respond to messages which confirm their particular complex, defensively rejecting all others as threats and insults. The mind so afflicted in its own elevation and survival, by its very nature, precludes any empathetic impulse or compassionate response-ability.

This is the mad child who constitutes the vast majority of the population here in this realm, and so if we are truly keen on authentic human progress, we need to start with our own self-absorbed craziness, the knot at our own hearts, rather than speculating about global transformation and fabricating evolutionary fantasies predicated on names and notions spawned from the very mind for which true empathy and compassion is yet a distant stranger. Ultimately, it must be seen that effective transformation can only be built on a foundation of real compassion, which is what true love is all about

I don't see you have much compassion for songs!

Compassion does not mean to stay silent when BS is being slung. In my own path, the critiques that have hit home, even though they may have stung, were eventually seen as gifts.

Now, if you wish to pursue this further, we should take your complaint into private messages, imo, so as to give the forum a break from further distress.

I just want to go on record here that I am a reader of lots of the forum and I think there were personal issues at play. If one finger is pointing out, remember the cliche of the 4 fingers pointing somewhere else. I do not know why Paul agrees there is energy vampirism in the thread(s). But one thing I absolutely am positive in: energy vampirism is only possible in a relationship of agreement. I also think that garden variety "vampirism" is ego that has been injured and seeks to "win". It can get very demanding of attention. It can become very covert too and stir a pot till the pot boils. Sometimes an ego can use oh so reasonable sensibility and make it look like the other ego is the crazy one that must be "sanctioned". It is a shame that after several people said very mean spirited things in various places, Songs and Borden were sanctioned.

It looks to me as though the forum "lost" in this episode. I feel a loss of confidence that people with strong opinions are welcome to explore them in this venue. Others who may not actually post a response may feel a loss too. If there are any others who feel this was a mistake, I hope they speak out versus walk away.

I would like to see a public apology from Paul to Borden and Songs for being singled out as "problems". In my opinion the reaction to the public statements made are too much over too little because too many people here who are not on vacation are too ready to impose THEIR agendas.

I would have stopped reading this thread immediately if I had no interest. If there is the hint of a drain of energy....just say no thanks and vote with one's delete button. Maggie

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Anchor (here)
I think codifying energy vampirism into the forum guidelines may be quite tricky.

Yeah ... that would be tricky .

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Delight (here)
It looks to me as though the forum "lost" in this episode. I feel a loss of confidence that people with strong opinions are welcome to explore them in this venue.

It wasn't the strong opinions that concerned us (the moderation team.) If anything, I suspect that many of songsfortheotherkind's opinion's find considerable agreement with various moderator's, myself included. This forum is home to many strong, sometimes conflicting, opinions.

It's difficult (if not impossible) to explain to all, such that all will nod in agreement, the motives for such moderation action.

Most of us, myself no doubt included, can find it easy to overlook the energy draining, abusive rhetorical devices and undercurrents, of someone else's arguments, when that someone else is making a case with which we substantially agree.

[onawah]

It's difficult (if not impossible) to explain to all, such that all will nod in agreement, the motives for such moderation action.

I for one, would certainly appreciate it if you would at least take a stab at it.

[Anchor]

Posted by Paul (here)

Posted by Anchor (here)
I think codifying energy vampirism into the forum guidelines may be quite tricky.

Yeah ... that would be tricky .

Yes, well I was making a point.

I think the reason given for the holiday could do with being amended/elaborated.

As it stands it could be seen as farcical by some interpretations - especially from a PR point of view, viz a viz how others in the community would see these actions and the reasons for them.

I do actually care about these things you know!

[another bob]

Posted by Dorjezigzag (here)
Now you are actually saying that songs is slinging BS, that is your opinion, in my opinion her thread was one of the most beneficial posts that has ever been on Avalon.

Yes, we all have opinions.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Anchor (here)
Yes, well I was making a point.

I think the reason given for the holiday could do with being amended/elaborated.

As it stands it could be seen as farcical by some interpretations - especially from a PR point of view, viz a viz how others in the community would see these actions and the reasons for them.

I do actually care about these things you know!

Yes, I know you care about these things.

As I stated in another post just above:

It's difficult (if not impossible) to explain to all, such that all will nod in agreement, the motives for such moderation action.

So far as I can tell, those who see what the mods were seeing understand, and those who choose to protest the heteronomy will.

I could dissect in detail past posts, but I don't see the point in doing so. I've honestly stated, as best as I could, what motivated this action by the forum moderation team, and some other forum members have spelled out in more detail and more eloquently the concerns they observed.

The moderation team acted with the consent of all moderators present, and we stated what we did and why. Some members object. We (the mods) read the objections, doing our reasonable human best to remain open to insights and evidence that we missed. Such it is.

[another bob]

Posted by Delight (here)
I just want to go on record here that I am a reader of lots of the forum and I think there were personal issues at play.

It's all personal, until it isn't.

I have a longer history with Songs than either of you, and I comment with as much integrity as I am able in that regard, while also aware that I have work yet to do.

Thanks for your comments, though now I am withdrawing from this discussion.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by onawah (here)
I for one, would certainly appreciate it if you would at least take a stab at it.

I just did, in the post prior to yours, Post #204:

energy draining, abusive rhetorical devices and undercurrents

I will not go post by post, line by line, justifying this.

[Anchor]

Paul,

thanks. You know on some forums discussion on the moderators actions is actually a banning offense.

This place is special for a lot of reasons.

One of them is that you will step up to the plate and address concerns openly - and I can promise you it is very much appreciated.

John..

[jp11]

Posted by Paul (here)

Posted by onawah (here)
I for one, would certainly appreciate it if you would at least take a stab at it.

I just did, in the post prior to yours, Post #204:

energy draining, abusive rhetorical devices and undercurrents

I will not go post by post, line by line, justifying this.

It's been quite a while since I've posted...and I feel it's important for me to say something here.

Paul and all the mods, please know that I have deep respect for what you do, giving of your time and energy, and I know it is not something I would do. That said, what you have written Paul is so very subjective.

energy draining, abusive rhetorical devices and undercurrents

If one is so energy drained, then it is their choice to leave. To my way of thinking that is the sensible thing to do. Are we now responsible for another's lack of common sence to put their own well being first...rather that pretend to be protecting or speaking up for the others that can't or wont?

I can almost see why Borden was put on vacation, but good god! what the hell did songs say at that point...nothing...but she's gone too!

[ThePythonicCow]

Yes, jp11, it's subjective. It would be easier to moderate the forum on strictly objective criteria that would be evident to all and generally agreed to by most. But I am convinced that would end up allowing more harm to the forum.

Yes, members can choose to leave if they feel an unwelcome energy drain, or any other unwelcome affect from being here. But that observation really only justifies an absence of moderation ... "Why moderate ... members can choose for themselves?"

Forums are not just collections of individuals, making their own separate decisions. They also have structure and norms at the collective level.

[ljwheat]

In Veit Nahm 50 years ago I remember a group of guy’s that were like the Mod’s here at Avalon. There job was to see the unsuspecting trip wire, or land mine unseen by the unsuspecting GI that would set off or trip over while we stayed focused on the job at hand-- we felt much safer with these unsung hero’s around. And besides everything is recorded here and reviewing the trails and previous trip lines and land mines and how they went off and who set them up are all recorded. My entire spoken record is right under my name on my personal page find all threads started, plus this and every single post or thank you I typed on these keys.

All those running red lights, forgot all about the red light camera at each and every intersection. And I’m glad they are in place. I’m sure most of you wouldn’t have the time or fortitude to go back over a couple hundred hours of threads over one red light ticket. Frankly I would not want that job, and having to explain all this every time to everyone is mind numbing to me. IMO the mod’s are the unsung hero’s here.

John

[mountain_jim]

While I appreciate the reactor/control rod analogy, let me introduce another.

Basketball game, double-foul, referees are influenced by the yelling of the home (overall forum) crowd and only call (and punish) the foul on the team with less (or lesser?) partisans in the stands.

In spite of good arguments by the home team, it looked and felt like a (personal) foul to me during the 'game', as it occurred.

When I recently decided to dip my toe in the waters of the shared personal space community threads, I chose the one I did because it was much smaller to catch up with, thus seemed more easily entered, plus I liked tha virtual 'pub' allegory and the creative writing at the door.

I was unaware of any backstory or issues or even 'teams' really, until this thread's 'game'.

I hope to still be welcome in the 'home arenas' of all 'teams', and by all 'players' here, for I do find great value for my own walk on my spiritual path in the relayed experiences, understanding of Life, and points-of-view expressed by all here, and particularly so for the 'players' most involved in this particular 'game'.

This is my critique.

[spiritguide]

Communications............Do we love the respect, or do we respect the love? Is it dialog or diatribe? Quite clearly in any case when a bullet is shot at you in a time of conflict it is diatribe. IMHO

[Mad Hatter]

Mad Hatter dons his fascinated cap.

So it did come down to a fart in a spacesuit after all... but as I suspected might happen, the smell was not emanating from those genuinley participating in the conversation who had the intelllectual capacity to grasp the concepts being discussed and contribute accordingly but rather from those having their pet paradigm challenged and being unable to respond in the manner of a free thinking open minded adult, have resorted to the tactics born of being well and truly mired in Matrix type thinking.

Hey lets play shoot the messenger...truly original...NOT

*to all the coppertops involved and you know who you are, have another blue pill on me*

It does seem a shame when for those of us whom happen to delight in discussion that often times incurs more lengthy well thought out posts the opportunity is killed by a call for complying to the wishes of the lowest common denominator. In a shallow gene pool not such a wise idea but hey heteronomous demockery (mob rule by any other name) reigns supreme.

Well actually it's not killed it's just been Pauled for a bit...

Is it not curious that this forum seems to take a certain amount of pride in being one of the better alternative communities. What is that about? Alternative only so long as you don't go outside what has been pre-defined as safely alternative.

Hmm... perhaps the whole discussion of sui generis/sovereignty/self responibility is making TPTB uncomfortable and they have put their foot down. Think I'm joking? Just check out the contribution vs view ratio of the Pub thread...think about it...

Yes we all have opinions but why do some insist on ignoring the oft repeated good advice to leave what does not resonate with them alone. If you enter a thread like this, is it not acceptable for those participating to expect that you are actually up for some robust discussion of the idea(s) being proposed?

Is it acceptable for those regularly participating, to have to put up with interlopers who have not read the whole thread, thus having no grip on where the discussion is up to and why, go ahead and denigrate the participants with personal attacks?

"Oh, I think it's BS." M'kay. So to you it's BS to others it's mushroom food and when politely thanked for your input how about you just leave. Really laughable are those that say this is my final word on the subject and then come back with an oxymoron in the from of 'another' final word. Bingo heteronomy personified...talk about a power trip!!

Oh well, since I no longer have the oppotunity to enjoy my particular brand of interaction in this particular space with these particular people I'll maybe take the opportunity to investigate the musings of those who claim some knowledge of 'energy vampirism' and see if what they say has any basis in fact. Surely asking for proof of such matters won't cause any grief...surely they'll be up for robust discussion on the subject matter in which they claim some expertise.

As for 'energy vampirism' who thought that one up? Did it not occur to them that this entire forum could be considered an energy vampire. How many thousands of hours of have been input by all those keyboard warriors and to what effect? sheesh.

Cheers and in closing to quote another oft misunderstood and on occasion unfairly maligned past member of Avalon...

'I am responsible for wot I say not wot you understand' so there.

[christian]

Posted by songsfortheotherkind (here)

Posted by christian (here)
Without having read through all of this thread but just the OP and some more, I figure to solve the issue about whether one lives in an autonomous or heteronomous system, independently or dependently, is to consciously discover and express, that the 'other' and the 'self' are one. End of story.

"end of story" FOR YOU. Important distinction.

Does your message change if you switch to autonomous language that contains no suggestion whatsoever that any other individual needs or has to see things your way?

That was of course tongue-in-cheek. When is "end of story" ever a real definite end? On more subtle levels is always more going on, there are so many facets, in parallel universes, other timelines. The only real 'end' of anything, that I can somehow fathom, is this cosmos and all-that-is having fulfilled its purpose. Whatever that is and whatever comes 'after' that point.

I find your OP really interesting and inspiring by the way, it makes on reflect on an important issue.

Posted by Sebastion (here)
I was wondering Christian when it became okay for someone to waltz into the Avalon forum and use it as their own private "art" gallery? This particular form is problem-reaction-solution oriented and is as devisive to the forum as it gets. I agree 100% with Anotherbob's assessment.

Posted by christian (here)
Without having read through all of this thread but just the OP and some more, I figure to solve the issue about whether one lives in an autonomous or heteronomous system, independently or dependently, is to consciously discover and express, that the 'other' and the 'self' are one. End of story.

Hi Sebastian, I really don't know what you're referring to, but I'd like to. Please forgive me, that I don't just research it, but I'm very busy these days and am only on Avalon to write this reply.

[Antagenet]

Posted by Mad Hatter (here)
Mad Hatter dons his fascinated cap.

Yes we all have opinions but why do some insist on ignoring the oft repeated good advice to leave what does not resonate with them alone. If you enter a thread like this, is it not acceptable for those participating to expect that you are actually up for some robust discussion of the idea(s) being proposed?

Hello Mad Hatter and Forum Members,

I agree with you about sifting though ideas and resonate with some and leave others alone. I was in fact fascinated and very willing to discuss Autonomy/Heteronomy since I have been a visible rebel from most norms for my whole life. That is why I became involved in this thread.

What I object to is not Songs ideas, but the responses she gave to many of us as we began participating. She set herself up
as the expert questioner when what she was doing was appropriating our imput and judging us instead of asking IS THIS WHAT YOU MEAN?
She began to evaluate our experience and that is antithetical to autonomy.

So it was not that she had "threatening" ideas, on the contrary, they were good and worth pursuing.
It was her emotional tone of arrogance that made me shrink away from further intellectual engagement.
Take the time to read this whole thread, dear members, before you judge or name call the mods.

I applaud Paul and the moderators for having the insight to see through her clever words, to sense the lack
of compassion that she had for many of us, and to remove her. On other threads Song even admitted
that she "doesn't do love" and "doesnt understand compassion."

On other forums, people who insult others and start conflict are often named "Trolls" or "Goverment agitators"
They usually post often and wordy diatribes, I suppose because they are paid to do so.
Im not saying Song is, but she could be. Just my intuition. I don't really know.

I dont know enough about Borden to make a comment.

All is well, The mods here are brave folks.

[Delight]

How much transformation of the way we deal with the combustion inherent in ego butt heads?

Maybe there could be some icons posted to alert the forum and inflamed beings involved before the outbreak of war?

Maybe we can compile a large number just for variiety?