Why? are you kidding me? What's up with the rhetorical questions? Sorry, but the truly offensive post was deleted, because that was personal information of mine he didn't have permission to post. And he didn't just say it, casually or msitakenly, he used it to try and hurt me, and it worked. The sad thing was that it didn't really ring all that true, for me anyway. It was sad because Devin seems to have so much anger in his heart, and it is an uncontrolled fire, like cyclops without the glasses.

I was given moderation for a reason, and he's simply the first one to cause a need for it.

Who is an OG, ha! Indeed!

I wasn't going to tolerate having personal information being used against me or anyone else in such a nasty, inhuman way, so I deleted the offending post, and restricted access to the offender.

indeed

Forums and what we offerSubmitted by Devin on Sun, 2008-04-20 16:20.

With active moderation and the main users using tripcodes kusaba is ok. It'd need to be an image board though, not a text board. As far as user interface goes, it has

Strengths: easy linking to other posts, and all the posts on one page, great for high-traffic websites with impermanent and silly discussions like 4chan and 7chan

Weaknesses: as far as I can tell there's no support for quote and text formatting tags, one image per post, difficult to find and participate only in topics that interest the user, no search function, no way to search for your posts in particular, no private message system, and so on.

For me the weaknesses greatly outweigh the strengths unless it's a place like 4chan.

I actually liked phpbb a lot, and think it fits best for a small community. Drupal has "blog" options, and lots of other modules, but most of what it's used for here is far better served by phpbb.

As far as I can tell, there are two options for a php based forum:
Simple Machines Forum feature list
and phpbb:
Comparison of phpbb3 to its main competition, only SMF is free

SMF seems to have a few options phpbb3 doesn't, but in general phpbb3 has more features and a larger support community. It is the most popular forum style after all, and most of us are familiar with it from ishcon.

----

As far as what would be posted there, that'd have to be framed carefully. There are several aspects of a strong forum -- good moderation, intuitive layout, a conversational niche, a community feel, and if all of those are in place, active members.

For a couple examples of successful niche forums, see: http://www.backyardchickens.com/forum, http://forum.beemaster.com

Here's an example of a successful broad-topic forum:
http://www.homesteadingtoday.com

----

As I think about it more, all of the niches I'm interested in are filled already -- except for people who acknowledge the entire rhizome, who acknowledge the 10kWays. What we have to offer is not extensive knowledge or experience in practical matters like homesteading or permaculture, but an understanding of the development of this culture as a whole and an idea of the necessity to transition to a completely different culture. This is a hugely important niche, as I imagine the vast majority of those people on the homesteading forums are completely ignorant of the big picture. What we have here that is so valuable are systems thinkers on the scale of an entire culture.

We are the forefront of a completely new way of seeing and being in the world.

That's what I think we'd be talking about, that's what I think we have to offer, that's where I look to give support and get support.

»

I can't answer your question unless you can translate the above post into English. 

"Pray for the dead and fight like hell for the living." - Mary Harris "Mother" Jones

I should have quoted just this part, which seems pretty supportive of the Ish people and ideas, to me:

"As I think about it more, all of the niches I'm interested in are filled already -- except for people who acknowledge the entire rhizome, who acknowledge the 10kWays. What we have to offer is not extensive knowledge or experience in practical matters like homesteading or permaculture, but an understanding of the development of this culture as a whole and an idea of the necessity to transition to a completely different culture. This is a hugely important niche, as I imagine the vast majority of those people on the homesteading forums are completely ignorant of the big picture. What we have here that is so valuable are systems thinkers on the scale of an entire culture.

We are the forefront of a completely new way of seeing and being in the world.

That's what I think we'd be talking about, that's what I think we have to offer, that's where I look to give support and get support." 

Thank you for posting that. It's sad that he couldn't just post that way all the time and save the anger for his blog or his therapist or something.

"Pray for the dead and fight like hell for the living." - Mary Harris "Mother" Jones

being a technophobe, doesn't mean you can be ignorant, or not-have-to-read-mean-ole-devin's-words-cuz-omg-he-used-'phpbb-and-i-dunno-what-that-is!

so here, fair reader: english.
______
With active moderation and the main users using tripcodes kusaba is ok. It'd need to be an image board though, not a text board. As far as user interface goes, it has

Strengths: easy linking to other posts, and all the posts on one page, great for high-traffic websites with impermanent and silly discussions like 4chan and 7chan

Weaknesses: as far as I can tell there's no support for quote and text formatting tags, one image per post, difficult to find and participate only in topics that interest the user, no search function, no way to search for your posts in particular, no private message system, and so on.

For me the weaknesses greatly outweigh the strengths unless it's a place like 4chan.
I actually liked phpbb a lot, and think it fits best for a small community. Drupal has "blog" options, and lots of other modules, but most of what it's used for here is far better served by phpbb.
As far as I can tell, there are two options for a php based forum:
Simple Machines Forum feature list
and phpbb:
Comparison of phpbb3 to its main competition, only SMF is free

SMF seems to have a few options phpbb3 doesn't, but in general phpbb3 has more features and a larger support community. It is the most popular forum style after all, and most of us are familiar with it from ishcon.

kusaba would be ok, if we were 4chan.
phpbb (what most forums run on) works, in Devin's opinion, best for small communities as it has the most basic stuff to let people post easily and pretty safely.

Drupal (what you're using here NOW) has all sorts of bells and whistles that most folks either ignore, or use sparingly. while cool, it's so disorganized with all the cool crap that it doesn't really serve a tiny online community such as ours.

a list of phpbb options:
Simple Machines Forum
and
phpbb3

S.M.F. and phpbb are similar, but SMF has a few things phpbb doesn't. however, much like getting photoshop instead of an unknown photo editing program, there is more support/online FAQ for phpbb than there is the lesser known SMF.

---
As far as what would be posted there, that'd have to be framed carefully. There are several aspects of a strong forum -- good moderation, intuitive layout, a conversational niche, a community feel, and if all of those are in place, active members.

For a couple examples of successful niche forums, see: http://www.backyardchickens.com/forum, http://forum.beemaster.com

Here's an example of a successful broad-topic forum:
http://www.homesteadingtoday.com

but a forum isn't just software online for people to use through their browser. you need a layout everyone understands, good moderation (someone who can recognize spam, trolls, and help the newbish), something to talk about, and a friendly feel about the place (including an off topic area where people can whine about the dipshit who messed up their latte at starfucks)... THEN if you're lucky, you get active users.

here are a a couple examples: blah blah blah.

in other words Devin was saying more people aren't coming to ishthink because we write essays and gospel and wind up speaking some fucking moon language (including Devin). ((i mean, hell, i only come here once a week if i can help it to check my forum))
---
As I think about it more, all of the niches I'm interested in are filled already -- except for people who acknowledge the entire rhizome, who acknowledge the 10kWays. What we have to offer is not extensive knowledge or experience in practical matters like homesteading or permaculture, but an understanding of the development of this culture as a whole and an idea of the necessity to transition to a completely different culture. This is a hugely important niche, as I imagine the vast majority of those people on the homesteading forums are completely ignorant of the big picture. What we have here that is so valuable are systems thinkers on the scale of an entire culture.

We are the forefront of a completely new way of seeing and being in the world.

translation of fucking moon language (which is probably the only thing you understood from the whole copypasta):

all the subjects i'm interested in have forums already, and well networked people in them. however, even as i browse these places, i'm not finding anyone who has read ishmael/jenson/prechtel etc. and understands the whole 'we belong to the earth' thing. we're not experts in homesteading, or permaculture, or building chicken coops. what we are experts and thinkers on is the culture that all this stuff comes from. because, while homesteaders etc. may (or may not) be going in a great direction, they are not aware that they are still takers.

our value is our thoughts put into a keyboard and placed as pixels on the screens of the world.

"That's what I think we'd be talking about, that's what I think we have to offer, that's where I look to give support and get support."

TL;DR: Devin says we have no culture here on our forums. i'm tending to agree with him.

GF

--

Look, Ishmael... are you sore at me or something?

greenfeather, I am not ignorant. I just chose not to read a long rambling technical post by someone whom I don't particularly like. It was my choice.  Personally I don't like to be name-called and I respect myself enough not to tolerate it or put up with people who behave like that.  An intelligent person should be able to verbally skewer their opponent without resorting to that.

lulz

--

Look, Ishmael... are you sore at me or something?

I agree with what Devin wrote here: "I actually liked phpbb a lot, and think it fits best for a small community. Drupal has "blog" options, and lots of other modules, but most of what it's used for here is far better served by phpbb."

We should be using the Simple Machines Forum Feature List.  Navigating through IshThink is usually a nightmare for me.

take care,

Curt

Not tolerant; lazy and self-deprocating, also, afraid to make decisions.

Thank you for your support, Amanda. You make some good points above. 

 ...was publicly announcing that you banned Devin.  99% of boards would not do that. They would just ban the person without telling the other board members that someone was banned.

It's a shame that the other members here don't appreciate your honesty and your public accountability.

"Pray for the dead and fight like hell for the living." - Mary Harris "Mother" Jones

not sure Tony is "the board."

Not sure how to rephrase what I meant, but I think you know what I mean.

I have been banned from boards before and I know firsthand how it sucks, but them's the breaks. 

"Pray for the dead and fight like hell for the living." - Mary Harris "Mother" Jones

"I don't like his netiquette violations?  Adults don't call each other names?  I can't have an opinion because I didn't read/like the book?  I have nothing positive to say? I can't believe we tolerate such bad behavior?"

I can taste the puke welling in my throat... 

I'm banning my fucking self - again.

-Jim

That's too bad Jim. I know your personality sympathizes with the will of the Coyote, and look for gates to jump, but I hope you find my abstraction below helpful.

Maybe  that will help with the reflux.

Just curious, Jim.

What other message boards do you belong to that would tolerate the type of posts Devin delights in making? Would your Chicago Ish group tolerate it? Your hybrid car message board? (Sorry if I'm getting the names wrong, but I know you're active on other boards.)

"Pray for the dead and fight like hell for the living." - Mary Harris "Mother" Jones

And if Devon wants to curse at me in private, I am not too hard to track down. 

"Pray for the dead and fight like hell for the living." - Mary Harris "Mother" Jones

I'm open to having that conversation, about a possible cooling off period.

Unfortunately, all we have together here are words, so they take on the elevated meaning of representing who we are as individuals and should serve to reflect ourself, not serve to hurt others, or to attack.

I think what'll be harder to deal with is bringing people in who have been used to inaction and have been thinking it was anarchy, but it was a rule of silence, allowing people like Katie to be verbally abused.

With the recent realization that French Theory cannot be a philosophy, because it puts itself also in it's own crosshairs, I've learned there is not a 'no' philosophy.

So whatever we find here, I wouldn't want to build anything without laying the foundation that all people treat each other with respect, that is, to their person, and respect to their place in life, which from what I've seen, are the stickiest conversations to have, once the offense is made.

I hope the following abstraction makes sense: When building a house, and one comes upon a crooked stud, you don't try and make it fit, you don't try and cut it into a more straight path, you slice it up and use it as blocking. This doesn't dishonor the tree, but it does honor the house.

And that's the bigger point here: We have been disrespecting the house, in honor of a tree that has already been slain. It's time to choose, and the house is still left half-built.

OG refers to, what's obvious to me, now, outmoded jargon left over from Ishcon, referring to people who have attended conferences or otherwise been part of the conversation for a long time. Its not a rank, it's a place you've found yourself.

I think the three rules above are fairly explicit, could you ask specific questions on which you would like to have clarified?

Look, folks, this isn't about nettiquette, this is about people using abuse to abuse.

Nothing to contribute may have been a poor choice of words.

Most of my concern revolves around this concept of OG.  If i'm going to be subject to censure if I do not listen to them, than I want to know who they are or how to define them.  Am I an OG because I was on Ishcon or is it just Ghost, Nene, You, Jim, and Devin? 

Who decides what disrespect is?

Well, I am not sure who all has moderation power, but I'm sure it is comforatbly dispersed, and could be dispersed further if necessary. 

The person being disrespected decides they are being disrespected.

I feel very hurt that you used the word censure. Not sure what else to say about that.

Ya'll almost have me regretting deleting his offending post, I felt like it had been up for too long. I couldn't look at it anymore. It was beyond coaching, it was beyond working it out in a circle of people. It was the final straw in a long line of Devin using he and I's personal relationship and the knowledge thus obtained, against me.

I don't think anyone else is even coming close to needing coaching, let alone sent away to find another message board. 

I disagree it was beyond working out.

I appreciate that you are willing to share that.

I hope you'll consider working it out with Devin.

Possibly in the chatroom. 

I find that way of determining disrespect to be too open to abuse.  If I say to somebody that their information they are using to make a point is incorrect, can they than decide that I am not respecting their level of learning and being?  I think it is certainly possible.

The use of the word censure was meant to be "Censor", I was erroniously referencing the sociological use of the term.  Though, considering your response to Devin's actions, I would not say that the term 'censure' is inappropriate.

Devin was censored, his voice was removed from the community, by you, because you did not like what he had to say about you.

Understand that I, personally, disapprove of public attacks on forums, so I do not reproach you for deleting the post; but does that mean that Devon's voice should be excluded for all time?  I do not think so.

Good points, sorry, this seems too easy to fall out of a serious conversation. I think if it all works out and a majority wants it, Devin could come back if he wanted. For now, I feel we need to have a conversation without him.

First of all, that's a pretty good post, but it's also the best chance I have to refute concerns.

I think most importantly coaching means being free and strong to confront negativity. Secondly, it means listening. I'm surprised so many people have heard 'coach' and hear 'Bobby Knight'.

As Amanda and I agree, there are lines that can be crossed, and that Devin was a habitual offender, not under the influence of a one-time bender. At Ishcon, we were against moderation, and look what that did for all the people that were abused, Katie, Peter, Lynn, Kat. One checks in here from time to time, but they are all still kickin' and making cool things happen in their life. But that was the brutal, dog-eat-dog of it.I was smug enough back then to 'appreciate' our primordial state, and even join in on the abuse, but I'm putting that tolerance, as I was raised with a lot more respect than that, as far behind me as possible. If I've learned anything in New Orleans, the most important thing is how you treat the people you see everyday.

We never had that discussion here, and that bullshit Devin played with Adam, and me, coming out of nowhere is a great litmus test, and a great example of people who do get banned form online communities on a regular basis.

It's not an ideal way to start the conversation, but, there it is! 

funny how the tree always falls downhill.

thanks 

I wish I could use words as well as you!

Definitely a model to be use in life, both RL and intenet. 

sorry Adam, I can't seem to must up enough internet connection to view the video, I wish i knew what oyu had to say.

I'll send you a PM.

Other boards have a forum where all flaming posts are dumped, and if people want to keep fighting, they can do it there.  It could, I suppose, also be a place where fights are resolved, though I have never seen any attempt to resolve fights on other boards.  

"Perhaps, Tony, you should unilaterally allow him back or perhaps we should start a thread to discuss publically, how much longer he should be banned, or to frame it differently, how quickly he should be allowed to return. Either way, the matter is currently unresolved and I feel it needs to be resolved to restore harmony to our community."

I agree with the above. 

I maintain and am taking a stand for removing posters that offend the mission, which isn't let everybody be the way they wanna be, but for me, it's about building a better tomorrow and finding the people willing to do that. I don't know what to do with those who are sincere in the movement, contribute, and help those in need. I don't know what to do about the chronically pissed off, the sad, and the emotionally troubled.
I do know what to do about people who say our time has been wasted, the site is a joke, and that no one participating has a sincere, honest desire to 'save the world'.
Delete.

So I think from what I hear, a better way to go about that is to make sure the group recognizes the offense as well before action proceeds.

I think it would be a good idea, when the mission is threatened, to have a sidebar, open, discussion about the poster and their contributions.

I don't think online we can roll with the good or bad. I think online, you're in or your on another message board. If unity was the goal, then EVERYONE should jsut be on one big happy board, right?

Specialization matters.

This board is special to people looking to find another story to B in, after having their lives profoundly impacted by Ishmael and et. all.

Tolerance is great when you have to get along. But My point is here that we DON'T have to get along, per se, but we do have to treat each other with respect.

Regardless of the personal attacks, the following statements were serious breaches of community and organization:

Devin wrote:

"

You're about a year and 3 months too late.

I don't want to be like "I told you so", but I knew this website was going to fail. A website built to hold people's hands instead of push the envelope is destined for failure, and it didn't take long. This website adds nothing new, brings nothing to the table. It was supposed to serve as a way for people to acquaint themselves with Daniel Quinn's work, which is about 10 years outdated. I'd rather read the IshCon archives than this board, and have done so more frequently.

When you lack vision, all you can do is ask other people for suggestions. There was no better opportunity than the death of IshCon, but due to myopia and apathy this pathetic website was created instead of what could have been. I find it sad and am angry at what was lost in transition, but obviously it was not meant to be.

I doubt the sincerity of almost everyone here."

It's that last line that really got under my skin.

Then there was Adam, being dorky, trying to defelct this with lvoe, of all things

To which he was responded to with another Devin nugget of hope and saving the world-ness:

"Especially since the only truly constructive critique would be to trash this site completely."

Then, Devin goes on, talking about basing relationships based off experiences, re-ingratiates himself, and starts to spew moonlanguage about how technology would solve our communication problems.

Oh, adn there was he and I's litlte exchange.

But I when I think you look at the quoted 'nuclear' attacks above, it's cleear to see we are playtoys for the boundlessly abusive.

You are all welcome to let him come back in, I'm sure some of you have the power to do so right now. My vote is no.

All I ask is you to consider the two above posts, and to ask yourself, why would you want to have a conversation, at this point in your life, a life-long conversation, that doubts your sincerity? That considers your hundreds of posts over the last few years 'a failure'? Don't we already have enough guilt complexes, civilization consciousnesses, that we shouldn't need another voice, this time personified.

Are we really that addicted to abuse? No, I don't think so, I just think years of people getting along fairly well has made the bullshit alerts, a little rusty?

48 posts, and counting. Please tell me there is something more interesting on the internet that a starving troll. I know there is always a juicy center in the middle of a controversy. But I'm still waiting to hear how "Especially since the only truly constructive critique would be to trash this site completely." folds into our little existence here.

Stay The Course!

I still think Devin has some worthwhile things to say.  I already quoted some of them in this thread.

Yuck. What a powergrab - almost an exact model of our current goverment's penchant for disaster politics. After 50 posts it sure ain't about Devin's antics anymore - this is about Tony's big man moves...

Similiar to 9-11, sieze upon a convenient distraction, threat or scare - and use it lever asymeteric retaliation. Squlech rights, free speech and critical analysis. Change the rules, make up new rules on the fly. Unilaterally enforce them. Make up new "missions" to fit new priorities. Claim that after years of examples of online abuse, that NOW when Tony gets hurt (and NOW has power to do something about it) well, just look at the stand-up guy Tony's being for the community! (Moderator power, btw, was not given to Tony at IshCon).  Expolit moderator power against personal dislikes.  Repress and monopolize actual evidence; spin and release tidbits as it suits the stance of the day.. Buy time until it all seeps away...

Yeah, the only foolish move, as Amanda says, was telling anyone...

-Jim

Hey.

I gotta admit, while Jim's post is a little... shall we say, to be kind, emotional... he makes a good point.

Jim, you've managed to frame the argument in a way that I didn't see before. Once again, I am amazed by the power of framing.

Tony, I know for a fact that you mean well. I know that essentially, I agree with you about Devin, however reluctant I myself would be to ban a person. I think that given a public debate, people might just agree that banning Devin WILL BE the right thing to do.

But I feel that Jim is right. Banning him WASN'T the right thing to do. It was a unilateral move. The fact that there was no consultation is one thing, but the fact that you have a personal stake in it only adds to people's distaste.

I think you need to make a choice Tony. Really, we all need to discuss it as a community, but you have a personal choice to make.

Do you want this place, IshThink, to belong to you, ie, is it YOUR place, or do you want this place, IshThink, to belong to every member of the community, ie, is it EVERYONE'S place?

I hope you know that I'm not trying to dump on you in any way. You know how highly I regard you. But many people have reacted negatively to your decision and frankly, I think they have a point. I hope that you want to recognise that point.

Look, on the real, Devin needed to be dealt with. Banning him or not, he needed to be dealt with. When I say dealt with, I don't necessarily mean punished. He brought disharmony to the community and that needs to be addressed. Harmony needs to be restored and if that eventually means banning him, so be it. You recognised that he needed to be dealt with and so you dealt with him the best way you could think of. I know where you're coming from and I see your points and I know why you want to take a stand. But this is it. Do you want to be the Big Man that Godesky has always warned us about, or do you want to be a member of the whole. If it's the latter, this decision has to be everyone's.

I think that this is a serious crossroad.

I leave it to you.

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt

I can back Matt on the silverbacks. By and large we didn't have any special power. Our opinions were generally respected if we had also established a track record of being fairly even handed and clear headed. I think it was the reputation of being even handed and clear headed that really led people to call on some silverbacks to help resolve disputes, more so then the post count. We also had a tradition of "roasting" people when they reached the status of silverback. So our induction was to strip us down, not to build us up. That might have helped a bit on keeping us from getting too high and mighty. Towards the end a lot of this started to deteriorate. People got to 1000 posts by participating in flame wars. And roasting became mean spirited, and eventually disappeared. Maybe some lessons in that. In general I don't think post counts are a good way of determining status, but it worked for a while.

Matt broke 2000 as I recall. 

- Benjamin Shender 

I'm Laura, and I'm living my life fully and it's because of Daniel Quinn's books, plus a LOT of effort on my part. IshThink is extremely important in the world. Only if it stops performing its function of being a place where Ishmael readers can talk about real stuff and get real answers, will I allow it to fall apart.

Yes, that's authoritative. I have the authority. If you don't like it, go vote for someone in a nice democratic election. If you don't like the grandmothers in your tribe having authority about who you can pick on and how dirty you can fight, go wander alone in the forest.

A tribal community firstly has a LOT fewer people than IshThink does. But let's say, for the sake of argument, that this is the only tribe many if not most of us actually have. Let's take a seriuos look at reality here: some people have technical control, some people have authority because they're PAYING for the damn site, and some people have authority simply because they've earned the respect. The reality is that some people have more authority than others, and that is that. It's not a democracy, it's elders and chiefs and mothers and warriors and children and crazy old shaman

Now, if someone with a chip on his shoulder doesn't like this - and believe me, EVERY tribe has rabble-rousers, this is the fringe element that provides the operating edge for evolution to take place - if this loudmouth or sneak or whatever goes straight for the jugular of someone in authority (he's attacked more than just authoritative Tony, and it was totally unnecessary when he did it to me, but he didn't know who I was because I lurk for months at a time), then he's taking on the system. He's also taking a serious risk. 

There are great benefits to the tribe when stuff like this happens (except if the whole tribe is made of ass-kissers who can't stand any kind of confrontation, which was the case for my former Unitarian fellowship). It's actually a necessary function in a tribe or in a human social group. You need people pushing the limits and pissing everyone off, so that the system resiliency is tested, so that things get pruned and "productivity" stays up and so on. What I'm trying to say is that it all turns to deadwood and the lions get fat and useless if there is nothing in life to fight for or to use our skills on. In Taker society, mostly the ones doing the pushing are kids, shoving at parental and schoolteacher authority as hard as they can until, twitching in agony, they slowly are brought into dim-witted submission. Then they become adults trying to figure out how to save the world without changing a damn thing or taking any risks. Ass-kissers with special dietary needs and no real hope of changing anything.

I see a lot of good stuff coming out of Tony's move, which arose out of Devin's provocation. But I'd like to summarize the arguments against what Tony did:

Arguments against Tony’s decision to ban Devin include “You shackled him,” “weak,” “I don’t like authority,” “who put you in charge,” “you make me sick, Tony, as usual,” “I disagree with what you’ve done and you should try harder to make peace with Devin,” “here is a bunch of technical suggestions that Devin made about the site,” “Technophobe shouldn’t get translation she’s defending Tony but here it is anyway (with multiple insults to her intelligence),” “here’s some more specifically nice things that Devin said he might contribute to the community,” “Devin is right that we have no culture at our forums,” “Tony is not ‘the board’,” “we shouldn’t take the community apart over unkind words,” “Devin (and the rest of us) are subject to censorship,” “I disagree it was beyond working out,” “Devon’s offensive post should have been deleted, but he shouldn’t be banned,” “there should be a series of explicit rules for moderators (so Tony can’t do this),” “Tony’s actions are conflict of interest,”…

Go ahead and correct me, but I’m not interested in such posts as “I disagree” or “I don’t like that.” Being a community does NOT mean the crap that goes on on that dumb Survivor show, and I’m too busy living my life to suck up to anyone. For me, the main valid questions I've seen here are,

"what should we do about authority?"

"what should we do when we don't like what authority chooses?"

"should we decide what to do in this case, or should we decide FOREVER and make rules?"

I'm for tribal counsel and letting everyone have their say, on this one issue. We'll deal with the next one when it happens.

My opinion in cousel would be this: I'm really, really sick of little personal comments that escalate into insults and "I take offense to that" and so on. I think that there should be NO judgements - positive or negative - of other people - and certainly no psychological games like "you make me sick" - except in PERSONAL communication, which means NOT on discussion threads or front page topics.

My suggestion is that Devin should stay banned for a while until the IshThink community settles back and stops taking sides about who the good guys are and who the bad guys are and gets used to the idea that when you start getting nasty with someone stronger than you, you might have consequences to deal with. Everyone's opinions count, but personal references: positive or negative, should be kept out of the forums and kept in private messages, or in a special "let's tell each other off" forum, or in the humanure section or whatever. Once that's settled comfortably, welcome back Devin, we've got just the place for you.

So, discussion, but no personal comments of any kind. Not even "gosh, Laura, you're so smart" 

There is important stuff going on here, and these personal matters, though necessary for some people, don't always belong in important discussions about saving the world.

cheers

Laura

I approve of your suggestion. Personal comments in PMs and specially marked areas only. If we agree on this measure, I would also like to make sure that we keep in mind this difference between "Your idea is stupid" and "You are stupid".

Just asking for clarification; are you saying you think there should be no personal matters discussed at all, no relating to each other in a personal manner?  Nothing intimate?  Nothing about emotions relating to ourselves or other people here?

I'm saying that in discussion forums we should not make any references whatsoever to our feelings about one another, positive or negative, and should instead have our private, personal interactions about our intimate feelings about each other through private messages only or through a specially-created forum for the purpose of telling each other how we feel about each other. 

This takes a little getting used to, but it's actually very, very beneficial for people who are trying to get through difficult ideas and develop on them. When the conversation turns personal in any way, it becomes relationship-oriented and all our Taker conditioning comes into play. If we can refrain from any kind of personal comments (good or bad) then it allows the thinker or speaker to truly get into the particulars of what they are saying and possibly see their own flaws in logic and it also makes it much more likely that new things will be figured out.

Conversely, if someone's trying to discuss a strange new idea, especially anything controversial, and there is a personal comment (good or bad), the exploration of the idea gets instantly derailed because now there is a value judgement attached to it. This is the numero uno flaw in the Taker school system. Value judgements (good or bad) are put on absolutely everything, and within a short time every kid "knows" that there is right and wrong in this world and only certain people have ownership of that.  

If I am a newbie wanting to know ways to walk away, I don't want to read about what a dickhead someone thinks someone else is or about how someone doesn't like what so-and-so said years ago, or even whether two people here are in love with each other. I would much prefer to get my dramas from a drama thread if or when I'm in a drama mood. 

I personally believe that when we use a thread on a practical matter (which is the purpose of IshCon) to publicly declare our feelings for another person - positive or negative - we are putting that person on the spot and we are practically forcing them to defend themselves or otherwise demonstrate intimate things about themselves that they may not want to. For example, if I do a posting about New Medicine healing techniques and someone replies by saying they think I'm full of shit, or even that they think I'm the most brilliant person alive, that person is basically talking about ME instead of the New Medicine, and now the entire body of information that was meant for the community members to use and develop is called into question until it's determined by each person whether I'm full of shit or whether I'm a brilliant person.  I'm trying to make the point that getting personal when we're trying to do practical work ends up destroying the work itself.

If we all agree that Tony was in the wrong, does that mean everything he's ever had to say is garbage? To some people who don't know Tony, absolutely! If we all agree that Devin has had really productive things to say, does that mean that he's never a nasty jerk sometimes and is disruptive to the community? To people who haven't been attacked by Devin, it would be very hard to decide. 

It all adds up to distraction. 

I'd really like to see someplace at IshThink where we can express our feelings openly and honestly, but people who just want to gain knowledge about how to live their lives, or just want to express profound things that they have learned, really ought to be given a chance to avoid getting into the crossfire.

Laura 

Many people would not be able to distinguish between "your idea is stupid" and "you are stupid"

I think further discussion would be really helpful.

Hey, everyone.

 I agree with Laura when she says that IshThink is an important place. I have invested considerable time in this community (stretching back to the old days) and only because I see the same value that you do.

I do feel however that I must say that I have a problem with statements like 'if you don't like it, tough'. I'm my own man. I decide for myself what I like and dislike and what I will and wont tolerate. I don't need anyone to tell me (that's an expression of opinion. I'm not trying to be confrontational).

An important question for me is, what do we have here? What is IshThink? For me, it's not a tribe. The Quinnian definition of a tribe is a group of people making a living together. I'm not making my living with anyone on this board (except Janene. We've worked on editing some of my writing before). The Quinnian definition of a community is a group of like minded people. That, for me, is what we have. A group of like minded people. The question here, as I see it, is, what is it that we agree on?

For me, the obvious answer is, the principals laid out by Daniel Quinn in his Ishmael series.

There was a schism when IshCon came to a close. Those of us that agreed Quinn should remain central to the debate came here. Those that felt they had moved beyond Quinn went the 10k Ways route. Some did both I am sure.

One of the main principals of Quinn is that Taker civilisation will kill us all. I feel that what some people are perceiving is an infiltration of Taker culture into this community in the form of the possiblity of an office within this community (doesn't matter if Tony is in this office or someone else) with unquestionable authoritarian power.

This is not to attack Tony and say "he's a Taker, burn him". Nothing of the sort. I've listened to the man play piano. He's one of the best pianists I've ever heard. His compositions are spectacular. Tony is a friend. For me, this isn't about taking sides and saying is Devin right or is Tony right? For me, there are two things. Devin did something and we're dealing with the aftermath and Tony did something and we're dealing with the aftermath.

People can be jerks. It's nothing new and it pisses most people off and it gets tired quick. But anyone at any time can be a jerk and in any case, it's subjective. We've always dealt with it as a community. We've witch hunted, asked people politely to leave the community, but never outright banned someone.

 Was Devin a jerk? Can't say for certain but I wouldn't put it past him. The man, of his own addmission, believes in the unbridaled and uncensored sharing of all feelings. That's what he believes. It's pissed me off on more than one occasion, but hey, there is no one right way.

The consensus in this community, as I see it, has always been that Devin's way can provoke people, can be offensive and can be too much. So did he need to be dealt with, whatever that may mean? Probably. But that's one issue; the first issue. One I'm not going to address further in this post.

Tony decided to unilaterally ban him and delete one of his posts. He has the power to do that but it's not a power that has ever been used before. The second issue, it seems to me is, were his actions a legitimate exercising of his power?

This is not a question of, is Tony a good man or not. It's a question of, now that it's happened, what, as a community, do we want to see from this point forward? 

The rest of the issues, was it legitimate, was it illigitimate, should the ban stand, should it be recinded, should it stand until we figure something out, should it be banned so that Devin can be a part of the conversation, are our previous methods of dealing with personal attacks sufficient, should we ban more often, never again, should the moderators be able to use such powers, do members of the community have the right to question the use of such powers, can't be dealt with until we answer that question. 

Anyone at any time can do whatever they want. But people will always react to it.

This community wouldn't be possible without money. True. But that isn't and as far as I'm concerned, shouldn't be the only measure of people's contribution to this community.

There are people on this site, just like every other message board, that have administrative powers. That's how the message board program works. The question, for me, is, de we alow it to be used cause it's there or do we use the program the way we want to use it?

I feel that the unspoken assumption has always been that although the power to act unilaterally is there, there has always been the presumtion of limitation on that power. We, unlike MANY if not most other message boards, barely, if ever, rely on the moderators to solve problems, we solve them ourselves. We've had our fair share of arguments and witch hunts, but we've always done it together.

Now that power has been used very deliberately in a way that it never has been before. Now people are reacting to that use of power.

If some people are saying they feel it wasn't legitimate, they have the right to say it. Whether or not they'll be taken seriously is a matter for those who control those powers. But the simple fact is, if authority is wielded and people disagree, there will be resistance. That's just the way it works. Since most people don't control the site, I fear their only recourse will be to leave the community and I do not want to see that happen.

A community fails the moment it no longer offers its members the like-mindedness they sought it out for in the first place. If people came here seeking an egalitarian community free from the control of a few people with special powers, then I can only imagine that they'll leave if that is what they perceive here.

Most of us here want to be free from hierarchy and freedom from hierarchy means freedom from control. That, for me, is what this second issue is about. Will we as a community allow those who control the inherent technological control mechanisms of the message board that this community uses to use those powers with impunity or do we as a community want an egalitarian relationship between all members?

It's a serious question and I think this community will suffer if we don't seriously discuss it. I beg everyone to take this seriously and to talk about this. I don't want to see another schism in this community.

 Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt

If some people have stronger muscles and use that to thump out others that attack them, should we allow that kind of power structure?

If some people have better intelligence and use that to strategize ways to effectively deal with others that attack them, should we allow that kind of power structure?

If some people provide the food, clothing and shelter for the community and restrict that  from others that attack them, shoudl we allow that kind of power structure?

If some people truly offensive from time to time and really good at coming off as the underdog and they use that against others that attack them, should we allow that kind of power structure?

If we don't create a site that is absolutely perfect for every single user and some people leave because of it, should we stop being who we are?

First, I'm encouraged that this one post has wracked up such community interest in such a short time.  I don't recall anyone caring as much about anything (and willing to say so) as they just have here: its encouraging.  The fact that people care so much is an indication to me that there is something alive here - something that deeply matters to people.  WE might have got to it in the wrong manner, but at least we got to it?

The way that Tony proceeded is something I can understand.  In the past, I've been so hurt by the perrenial attacks of others that I've acted authoritarian; and if life were I board I'm quite sure there are some people in my life that would still be banned to this day.  But I agree with others that here, as elsewhere, if there is something that you are emotionally caught up in you need to recuse yourself and request that someone else handle it.  Also, if someone is banned, I also agree that we need let it be publicly known, that smacks of public embarrasment as a punishment, and I think for the most part the damage of being banned is enough without it.

I don't know devin, or his posts.  I know that Tony is a fair man.  Would the outcome have been any different if a different moderator had made the call: I don't think so, but maybe it would have meant more to Devin, then again maybe not.

I Don't have seniority here, Im not an important player or a big voice and what I think isn't something that many of you normally value.  Would all of you fight so hard if it were me that had been banned?  Do your real motivations lie with the person, or with the argument? 

I've got to go feed the chickens, if anyone wants me.

 Dominic

I agree that the group is already stronger for this (which is why I think Tony was "right" to do what he did, though it's