Poll

Do you approve of this alternate proposed rule change?

I approve
15 (68.2%)
I do not approve
7 (31.8%)

Total Members Voted: 22

Voting closed: July 22, 2013, 08:20:30 PM

Author Topic: Vote: ALTERNATE Rule change to handle disruption  (Read 10793 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

July 20, 2013, 05:01:45 AM
Reply #45

Enchia

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 1018
  • Karma:
    28
    • View Profile
Quote
From now on I shall know Enchia as the leaker of truths

Normally I would say Yeeej, but coming from you I'm not sure how I feel about that comment. Just saying.

July 20, 2013, 05:16:31 AM
Reply #46

Searcher

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 1017
  • Karma:
    -66
  • Personal Text
    Yes they bite😈
    • View Profile
They say that the weak shall inherit the earth, from your efforts enchia you are in the lead pack, may I suggest knitting as apposed to metaphysics as it is acceptable if you drop one!

Searcher
Always with love and peace - never anything else
We can look but do we see and we can listen but do we hear? So what gets in the way?
👂u have to say because I don't do hints👂

July 20, 2013, 06:10:55 AM
Reply #47

Silver_Archer

  • Veritas Moderator
  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****
  • Prophet of Doom

  • 1380
  • Karma:
    42
    • View Profile
And I am not interested in any individuals sexual orientation so that comment is lost on me or are you trying to tell us something and I've missed it, sorry if I have.

You brought up sexual orientation in the first place. The only reason anyone is talking about it is because of you.

...Or did you already forget?
<Forg> Everything is adjustable when you have a saw.

July 20, 2013, 06:21:43 AM
Reply #48

Searcher

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 1017
  • Karma:
    -66
  • Personal Text
    Yes they bite😈
    • View Profile
No body as forgotten anything SA, but I will repeat if you misread:

Many times in metaphysics we discuss concepts via detail so concentrating on the detail and not the concept leave one short of understanding. This omission of looking at the concept however can by missed by not reading properly or not reading properly because of bias or by fear of treading that route.

But back to the original post and rule

If the rule is against the American constitution (which in it's current form it is) as a proud American which way have you voted SA?

Searcher
Love and peace
We can look but do we see and we can listen but do we hear? So what gets in the way?
👂u have to say because I don't do hints👂

July 20, 2013, 08:26:46 AM
Reply #49

Silver_Archer

  • Veritas Moderator
  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****
  • Prophet of Doom

  • 1380
  • Karma:
    42
    • View Profile
If the rule is against the American constitution (which in it's current form it is) as a proud American which way have you voted SA?

...I'm not American.
« Last Edit: July 20, 2013, 08:32:06 AM by Silver_Archer »
<Forg> Everything is adjustable when you have a saw.

July 20, 2013, 01:54:53 PM
Reply #50

Vecna

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****
  • Heartless Admin

  • 985
  • Karma:
    11
  • Personal Text
    The Silence Between the Void
    • View Profile
Please kindly cease with the personal attacks, and return to discussing the subject of the vote.

~Vecna


July 20, 2013, 03:38:02 PM
Reply #51

Mind_Bender

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 1135
  • Karma:
    89
  • Personal Text
    Deus ex Machina
    • View Profile
I would even go as far as stating that it is very undesirable no just impractical. Even though rules might be based on democratic principles the implementation of it should never be a direct democratic construct. First of all if would be very impractical if not impossible to maintain such a structure. Second of all it would be very undemocratic if the majority decides over the faith of a single person because it does not lead to justice, it is often inconsequential (if someone is liked or not might influence the voting), it might cause tension within the community between those who support and those who oppose etc. Third of all it raises the question of who is responsible for what. What is the role of the members and what is the role of the staff in following and maintaining the rules and do you want your members to have those responsibilities and in turn do they want to have those responsibilities? And last of all what justifies making this rule democratic while the other rules are not?

I think with the few of us that are more outspoken then others it wouldn't be so hard to up keep a democratic ideal  with this rule (Veritas is already very democratic as it is), but I understand where you're coming from.

 With almost 20,000 members and less (far less) then 100 members that show they actually care what happens to this forum and says something about it, referendum can work. Of course, I admit I am very new to this forum business, but I also think that what some staff members might call delusional can really help others understand these obscure practices in a unique light.

I am really not too attached to the referendum ideal... as long as the wording is different, because like you said, other rules that are not democratic here help keep this forum running smoothly. I like the rule, agree, but not with the wording.
"Spirit is in a state of grace forever.
Your reality is only spirit.
Therefore you are in a state of grace forever."

"As relfections of the Source, we are little gods."

"...part of me doesn't want to believe that auto-eroticism while crushing on a doodle (sigil) could manifest a check in the mail box, but hey, it did."

"Everybody laughs the same language."

July 20, 2013, 09:09:35 PM
Reply #52

Steve

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 3685
  • Karma:
    139
    • View Profile
Regarding the referendum thing, and the comment that someone made about using referendums for everything, that would be insane. No democracy holds referendums for every little thing that happens. That's why we have rules instead, so that those who are voted into positions of leadership don't have to continually bug their "constituents" on every little topic. The fact that we, in this forum, actually have a say on every single rule is a huge step in a positive direction, compared to any country's democracy you'll find on the face of this planet.


Back to the topic of the word delusional, perhaps a different, more precise, term should be used, such as "incoherent". For instance, "People may not engage in behaviors that are both persistently disruptive and blatantly incoherent." As we're not putting people's personal views and beliefs on trial, but the rule is trying their ability to present themselves in a social setting, I think a word that applies to the aspect of communication between people is more proper than a word that relates to a person's internal struggle at relating to the external world.

This change would NOT cause problems with people who merely don't speak/write English very well, as the criteria for communications being disruptive would still need to apply but they wouldn't apply if the only "problem" is in the poster's ability to string together sentences according to formal English rules.

This vote is only two days away from ending, and if it gets passed as is but still people dislike the term "delusional", then we could start an "official" discussion thread on the matter. Then if we come to some sort of consensus through discussion about a better wording for the rule, then we can always start up a new vote as a request to change the one word of the rule that seems to be drawing all of the contention.

~Steve
Mastery does not occur when you've performed a feat once or twice. Instead, it comes after years of training, when you realize that you no longer notice when you're performing a feat which used to require so much effort. Even walking takes years of training for a human: why not everything else?

July 22, 2013, 06:16:43 PM
Reply #53

kobok

  • Tech Team
  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****
  • Veritas Council

  • 4985
  • Karma:
    171
  • Personal Text
    Veritas Council
    • View Profile
Approved with 100% of the staff vote and 68.2% of the member vote.

(EDIT:  I inadvertently posted this 2 hours before closing, but the vote at closing remains unchanged from what I posted.)
« Last Edit: July 22, 2013, 08:50:27 PM by kobok »
Latest article:  Construct Dynamics

Want to learn psi?  Check out our collection of psi articles.

September 19, 2013, 04:27:35 AM
Reply #54

Mars

  • A Familiar Feature

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 229
  • Karma:
    7
  • Personal Text
    Radonis
    • View Profile
There has been a lot of discussion, and there have been ideas put forward on this topic.  So this is an alternate to the other proposal.  If both were to pass, we will only put into effect the one with the highest approval (you may support both, or only one, as you choose).  The proposed rule:

"People may not engage in behaviors that are both persistently disruptive and blatantly delusional."


I'd agree with the rule, but don't you think its difficult to define delusional ? To any psychaitrist we all likely would be delusional for what we believe in and are practicing ?
Experience: that most brutal of teachers. But you learn, my God do you learn. -CS Lewis
Cultivation to the mind is as necessary as food to the body. - Marcus T Cicero