Taking members seriously

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

Regardless of how you and others perceive my actions, I have been trying to make a positive impact here for anybody who wants to hear the Dhamma.

"Insanity is repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results" (Narcotics Anonymous, 1983)

Probably the best thing for you, Jechbi, to do is to start your own forum and run it the way you see fit, setting the tone and all that goes with it. I'd highly recommend it.

This on the other hand, you have not yet tried - I too would highly recommend it.

When David, I and other Dhamma Wheel founding members didn't like how E-Sangha was being managed, we didn't hang about there whinging... we started our own alternative. If you think there's a market for a forum designed around your proclivities, I recommend you trial it.

Metta,
Retro.

[Jechbi]

Retro,

I recommend that you do some research into the phenomenon of scapegoating. The group dynamic at play here in this thread and elsewhere on this board is a good illustration of it.

If you look at the discussion referenced in the OP, you will see exactly that phenomenon at play. The tag-team responses from you and Tilt in that thread were more about isolating and estranging a person with whom you disagree rather than having a friendly, collaborative discussion. It was scapegoating.

You and Tilt set the tone for discussion on this board, and it's no surprise that this thread and discussion elsewhere on this board sometimes tends toward the negative. If you had wished to do so, you could have set a different tone in this thread and elsewhere on this board.

With regard to me personally, you went onto my blog and analyzed me according to Meyers-Briggs. You and others repeatedly have sought to portray me as mentally unbalanced, a tactic you continue to display here in this comment in referencing "insanity." It's demeaning, and it's also a very good example of scapegoating tactics.

My underlying message, first privately and publicly, is that this board would be better for Dhamma discussion if the mod/admin team treated people with more respect, if a friendlier approach were adopted, and if more open discussion were allowed. I also feel that people with viewpoints that differ from those of the mod/admin team are treated particularly harshly, which is counterproductive to Dhamma discussion. And I feel that legitimate points of view sometimes are villainized and marginalized. I have been astonished at the negative and highly personal reactions I have received, first privately and then publicly, from you personally and from others.

Privately, Retro, I have received messages from other Dhamma Wheel members who recognize what's happening here and who have told me they don't like what they see in your conduct.

The goal is to force me to "let go" and "move on" so that the board leadership problems I am discussing can continue to be denied, ignored, and not openly discussed. Then a certain self-selected group of members here (thankfully not including all members) can return to the fiction that the board is fine just the way it is. Some of us know better.

[Jhana4]

Jechbi;

I have no relationship with the mods and admins on DW of any kind.

I come to DW every day. Several times a week I read things from other posters that offend me. Frequently, posts of mine are moved or deleted. Threads I find interesting are shut down. I don't like it. While I like some of the admins, I find others to be arrogant and authoritarian.

Any of these offenses to my sense of the way things should be are in no way less than the things that fuel your frequent complaining.

I'm not putting up hate blogs and I'm not starting elephantine threads about any of these things.

You aren't Patrick Henry fighting for justice and freedom of speech. You are complaining with great attachment to something most people consider to be a triviality. Being offended by the way someone does something on the internet.

The mods are human beings just like you. They have their own views and they are going to run the board that way. It is their board. That is life.

[Ben]

Greetings J,

Privately, Retro, I have received messages from other Dhamma Wheel members who recognize what's happening here and who have told me they don't like what they see in your conduct.

The comment is not very meaningful. If some members don't like what is going on here they can either go through the complaints procedure if they wish their concerns dealt with privately or they can raise a thread in the suggestion box. And I encourage them to do so.

Greetings Jhana4

I come to DW every day. Several times a week I read things from other posters that offend me. Frequently, posts of mine are moved or deleted. Threads I find interesting are shut down. I don't like it. While I like some of the admins, I find others to be arrogant and authoritarian.

I don't think I've shut down any threads of late but I have removed from view a large number of posts. My attitude is that when a member signs up to Dhamma Wheel they have to check a box when asked whether they have read and understood the Terms of Service. Moderator action (including disciplinary action) is carried out with respect to breaches of the terms of service. That is the basis of my intervention as moderator as I know it is also the basis of my colleagues. If threads are shut down it is because discussion has either reached a natural conclusion or the thread has become a train wreck courtesy of the less-than-ideal behavior of some members.
In one instance in early March when we communicated regardng the move of your posts, I sent you the following message:

You started a discussion thread yesterday (my time) "Do you really find the Dhamma inspiring?" but continued the same discussion in "Letting go of longing for a relationship". I merely moved those posts which were a continuation of Do you really find the Dhamma inspiring? back to that thread, thereby maintaining the integrity of "Letting go of longing for a relationship".
The TOS are clear that off-topic posts are removed from view or moved routinely and without warning.

I'm sorry if you, or anyone else, finds the action of me or my colleagues authoritarian. Believe it or not, we (mods/admins) are here to help facilitate a supportive environment for Dhamma discussion for the benefit of all.
kind regards

Ben

[Jhana4]

Ben;

My comment was meant for Jechbi at face value and not as a thinly veiled put down. I take disagreements on web boards as part of life. Like being a guest in someone's home. I may not like the way they run things, but I accept that it is their shot to call without getting upset over it. I wrote that only in the hope that Jechbi would pick up on a perspective that would help to take the inevitable human differences on the internet far less seriously than he is now.

[Ben]

No worries Jhana4.
I hear what you are saying.
kind regards

Ben

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Jechbi,

Privately, Retro, I have received messages from other Dhamma Wheel members who recognize what's happening here and who have told me they don't like what they see in your conduct.

Given your history of shameful misrepresentations of what others have said and done (many deleted during your latest selective cull of blog comments that don't favour you) I'll wait until these members tell me directly about their concerns, rather than take your word for it. They are welcome to, and if they don't feel comfortable doing so publicly, or privately, they may do so via another member of staff. If I can improve as a person, moderator or administrator, then I am well and truly open to that.

The goal is to force me to "let go" and "move on" so that the board leadership problems I am discussing can continue to be denied, ignored, and not openly discussed. Then a certain self-selected group of members here (thankfully not including all members) can return to the fiction that the board is fine just the way it is. Some of us know better.

Yet of course you know better... so the crusade and search for fault lives on.

"'Searching is of two sorts, I tell you, deva-king: to be pursued & not to be pursued.' Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? When one knows of a search, 'As I pursue this search, unskillful mental qualities increase, and skillful mental qualities decline,' that sort of search is not to be pursued. When one knows of a search, 'As I pursue this search, unskillful mental qualities decline, and skillful mental qualities increase,' that sort of search is to be pursued. 'Searching is of two sorts, I tell you, deva-king: to be pursued & not to be pursued.' Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said.

For the record, I believe the functioning of Dhamma Wheel is very transparent. Many of our policies are a reaction to the closed-door policies of E-Sangha, hence the fact we're having this discussion here in the first place. We only ban/suspend members based on Terms Of Service violations rather than personal taste or laziness, hence the fact you're still here.

As I've said to you since the commencement of your crusade, if others raised the issues and concerns you had, then we would re-investigate them and give them further thought... but the thing is, and maybe now after seeing a couple of these recent Announcement / Suggestion Box topics in which you seem to be getting no traction whatsoever you might actually start to see this... when you speak, you speak only for yourself, not for the hypothetically repressed masses.

We've even set up topics specifically to say "tell us how the forum can be improved" and we've made fully clear people needn't fear this. I don't know how much of this openness, transparency and good will to those who wish to improve Dhamma Wheel you can simply ignore before your blinkers finally crack and you realise your conspiracy theories are just that.

If you don't want to be seen as a contrarian (and let's be honest, who does?), you might want to give some thought to the Buddha's counsel to a certain monk in SN 22.36...

"Whatever one stays obsessed with, that's what one is measured by. Whatever one is measured by, that's how one is classified. Whatever one doesn't stay obsessed with, that's not what one is measured by. Whatever one isn't measured by, that's not how one is classified."

The certain monk understood the detailed meaning of what the Buddha said in brief, and delighting in and approving of the Blessed One's words, got up from his seat and bowed down to the Blessed One, circled around him, keeping the Blessed One to his right, and departed. Then, dwelling alone, secluded, heedful, ardent, & resolute, he in no long time reached & remained in the supreme goal of the holy life for which clansmen rightly go forth from home into homelessness, knowing & realizing it for himself in the here & now. He knew: "Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for the sake of this world." And thus he became another one of the arahants.

However, for the one who obsesses, there remains birth and its concomitant suffering.

Staying at Savatthi... [the Blessed One said,] "What one intends, what one arranges, and what one obsesses about: This is a support for the stationing of consciousness. There being a support, there is a landing [or: an establishing] of consciousness. When that consciousness lands and grows, there is the production of renewed becoming in the future. When there is the production of renewed becoming in the future, there is future birth, aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. Such is the origination of this entire mass of suffering & stress.

"If one doesn't intend and doesn't arrange, but one still obsesses [about something], this is a support for the stationing of consciousness. There being a support, there is a landing of consciousness. When that consciousness lands and grows, there is the production of renewed becoming in the future. When there is the production of renewed becoming in the future, there is future birth, aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. Such [too] is the origination of this entire mass of suffering & stress.

"But when one doesn't intend, arrange, or obsess [about anything], there is no support for the stationing of consciousness. There being no support, there is no landing of consciousness. When that consciousness doesn't land & grow, there is no production of renewed becoming in the future. When there is no production of renewed becoming in the future, there is no future birth, aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of suffering & stress."

Moving to MN 18 we can see that the source of perceived conflict can arise from thoughts and conceptual proliferation...

When there is the intellect, when there are ideas, when there is intellect-consciousness, it is possible that one will delineate a delineation of contact. When there is a delineation of contact, it is possible that one will delineate a delineation of feeling. When there is a delineation of feeling, it is possible that one will delineate a delineation of perception. When there is a delineation of perception, it is possible that one will delineate a delineation of thinking. When there is a delineation of thinking, it is possible that one will delineate a delineation of being assailed by the perceptions & categories of objectification.

Delineations of contact are one's own doing, for the sutta makes clear one needn't necessarily do this.

'If, with regard to the cause whereby the perceptions & categories of objectification assail a person, there is nothing there to relish, welcome, or remain fastened to, then that is the end of the obsessions of passion, the obsessions of resistance, the obsessions of views, the obsessions of uncertainty, the obsessions of conceit, the obsessions of passion for becoming, & the obsessions of ignorance. That is the end of taking up rods & bladed weapons, of arguments, quarrels, disputes, accusations, divisive tale-bearing, & false speech. That is where these evil, unskillful things cease without remainder' — this is how I understand the detailed meaning."

Metta,
Retro.

[Fede]

The horse died long ago.
yet we still see it being flogged.....

In my opinion, this is sheer unadulterated foolishness.

And I'm not referring to any Moderator contribution here. I actually marvel at their patience and tenacity.

Count yourself as truly blessed, and fortunate, Jechbi; If this was anywhere else, you'd have been summarily dismissed as a troll.

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

It is time to draw a line under this and close the thread. Far too much energy is being wasted by all concerned when they could be learning and sharing their knowledge of Dhamma.

The best moderation policy is that moderation is not up for discussion, and definitely not in public. The moderators should decide among themselves on the policy, and review its implementation periodically in the light of user feedback.

If any members don't like the policy or its implementation, they should go elsewhere voluntarily, or be suspended, then banned if they don't agree to abide by the rules that they signed up for.

They are free to complain about moderation of the forum on their own blogs, as I did about E-Sangha, but it should not be allowed here.

On every forum I ever used, > 99% of disruption is caused by < 1% of users, and disruption equates to time and effort wasted by moderators.

[Ben]

With that excellent post from Bhante, I will now close this thread.
Before I do so, I would like to reiterate some advice to our members.

If you have a concern regarding the quality of moderation, seeking a review of a moderation decision or wish to complain about a moderator and/or administrator, I suggest that you raise it with the mod/admin in question. If you don't feel comfortable doing that, please use the complaints procedure pinned in the announcements forum.

As I mentioned earlier, my colleagues and I are motivated to facilitate an environment where Dhamma discussion can flourish. We are only human and sometimes mistakes are made. Any request for a review of a mod decision and complaint is taken seriously.
kind regards

Ben

[tiltbillings]

A couple of comments before this drifts downs to ocean bottom:

The idea that there is any "scapegoating" going on in this thread or on the forum in general really warrants no comment other than to say it really warrants no comment.

What does warrant a comment is Ven Peasala's to the point statement:

The best moderation policy is that moderation is not up for discussion, and definitely not in public. The moderators should decide among themselves on the policy, and review its implementation periodically in the light of user feedback.

It needs to be pointed out that behind the scenes the moderators here use the TOS as a basis for actions taken, that things are not done in an arbitrary manner, and this is due to Retro's insistence that we take seriously issues that arise and that we proceed in accordance to the TOS. Without that, it would be all too easy to slip into the chaos of arbitrary action. While not perfect the moderators here do try to make this a good place for Dhamma discussions.