Thanks. I also like the picture of the naga a few posts later...
Hah! I think what does count for diversity, of the kind I care about it anyway, is the variety of perspectives that moderators on this site bring to the table. You all have different orientations and that is a really good thing IMO. And I find you all quite tolerant as well.
It's a worthwhile idea, though I'm not sure how practical it would be. I used to be involved in the Quakers, and in that organisation Elders would be appointed to a particular role for a 3-year period, on the understanding that somebody else would take over the role over after the 3-year tenure. The problem is that for some roles, nobody else was willing to take over after the 3 year period.
They do this at some other forums. AFAIK, the sister forum, DharmaWheel, has such a system (although since that forum has many more active members than this one, it's probably easier to have such a system in place).
What I would like to understand better is the role of a moderator in terms of the Dhamma. A moderator has administrative power; but is a moderator to be regarded as someone who also has superior Dhammic attainment (and can therefore adjudicate in matters of the Dhamma)?What would be useful is to recognise that moderation is a challenging role, and that people can get stale or jaded or tired over a period of time, perhaps needing a break.
No. I think you would be completely unjustified in regarding someone as having superior "Dhammic attainment" on the basis of their being a moderator. I am no more capable of "adjudicating in matters of the Dhamma" than anyone else on the forum, nor is that part of the moderator's role, nor (as far as I know) has it ever been claimed to be part of the moderator's role here on DW.binocular wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2018 12:02 pm
What I would like to understand better is the role of a moderator in terms of the Dhamma. A moderator has administrative power; but is a moderator to be regarded as someone who also has superior Dhammic attainment (and can therefore adjudicate in matters of the Dhamma)?
Because it seems to me that for all practical intents and purposes, this is what it comes down to.
Hi bodombodom wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2018 2:16 pmHere are my 2 cents.
A moderators role on any forum is to make sure the members are abiding by the terms of service. That's it. Done. End of story.
I do not have any superior Dhammic attainments or degrees from universities on the Buddhist Religon. I do not look at myself as if I am in some sort of powerful position. I am just another member like anyone else on here.
Off line I am a family man with a wife and kids, run a small landscaping business and try to practice the Buddhas teachings to the best of my abilities as a householder. I do not spend all day sitting in profound levels of concentration. My practice is the same as anyone else's on here. It is the basics: I try to keep the precepts, find time to meditate during the day and practice generosity and goodwill.
I think the whole suggestion of the mods here to use there real names and pictures is ridiculous. I am nobodies teacher. No one has to follow any advice I give. I simply try to share what I have learned in my own practice and through my studies of the suttas. People can take or leave what I have to say. I really don't understand any kind of fuss made over a moderator position.
Mahayana is a pretty guru-oriented religion. Idealizing religious figures is something that happens in all religions, but it's especially popular in mahayana. I've never seen on this forum things like creating a topic for a particular member where all others can post quotes from him and ego-tickle him for 5-10 pages. There isn't too much guru worshiping happening here.binocular wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2018 12:02 pmThey do this at some other forums. AFAIK, the sister forum, DharmaWheel, has such a system (although since that forum has many more active members than this one, it's probably easier to have such a system in place).
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests