On Moderation

[Meno_]

Deeming someone not philosophical is on par with deeming someone a troll..

No

"Troll" could potentially imply competence, though overridden by ill will.
You come across as the opposite of this, though even when I try to honestly find something positive to say about you such as good will, it's marred by a sense of narcissistic pride that I seem to pick up from everything you say - which is why I expect you to be hurt by my opinion, but also why I expect you to deny and repress this, and likely to resist the idea with passive aggression. It's not in the nature of the weak to be honest with themselves, but as I'll repeat it's only the impression I get and I'm always open to evidence to the contrary. No hate whatsoever - I don't waste my time with such things, just a chronic sense of irritation that I'd prefer to be dispelled through the appropriate parties being honest with themselves even if it's hard, and learning and growing as a result - especially if it's me, but also if I can do the favour for others because I like to leave things in a better state than I found them.

said simply because they do not agree with you, or don’t share the same mindset as you. I deal in real results, not strangers’ words on a screen.. we are simply in and from different worlds and backgrounds, but the smart would factor this in and adjust accordingly, but most don’t, because most aren’t smart.

There are plenty of people who show philosophical competence who I don't agree with. The fact that I don't agree with you is not least because you don't show neither philosophical competence nor competence at moderation, the agreement bit is irrelevant to me for the most part - it's how you get there that counts. Philosophical argument isn't just opinion and asking questions if we're lucky, it's far greater than that. "Dealing in real results" has obvious value since the real is an ultimate test of whether something is viable, but dealing only with what's viable now doesn't show any wisdom concerning what could be. Most people simply accept how things are and struggle with their lot in the terms they've ended up with, and others might get lost in what could be through a refusal of how things currently are - one of them was instrumental in you being rightly demoted. I try to explore the possibility of bringing the real and the potential together through innovative avenues that are backed by sufficiently strong logic, which I enjoy discussing. Your sentiment that the smart adjust to different worlds and backgrounds is hardly wrong, it reminds me of iambiguous, but the smart also have the ability to explore the potential beyond merely accepting current realities. Funnily enough, this ability would help you at moderating because you'd be more familiar and capable dealing with those from a different world and background.
-------
"I doubt this advice will go anywhere, ego is a barrier for the unphilosophical." Sillhluette said,



The philosopher's concerns with ego are limited by differences which may not purport to distinguish effect.from intention. Or, such may be conflated and redirected elsewhere, not for the obvious reason of finding some more objective causal agency, but for finding a way out, of an existential contraption , too difficult to apprehend.

Such is sometimes the anomalie that political expediency has with basic defensive gestures.

Vanity, is a much less profound criticism of existence then pride or narcissism, the latter consisting of deceptions of mythically created reorganized fragments , most often resulting in a blow up of image.

Such blow up's as expressed in hyperbolae become characteristic of referential connections of prior manifested senses of connections of the self with such objects, regardless of the state of criteria which determine it's descriptive awareness and form.

Because it emerges from the higher and not the lower mediums of description, they appears as vague and unbalanced , but referentiality has partially descriptive functions: to reorganize it's self in terms of a continuum of progressed general to specific and more real attributes.

The motive behind it is shrouded in uncertainty, the ego may be caught up in it in an intentional need to fabriquate or caricature an image so as to fit all occasions.

The Joker becomes wild because the only form befitting it is one to please, to entertain the thought , that interactive guesses, provocative images depend on the intentional disunity, with life projects, ambitions , that are of mixed, creating a notion of displacement and bad faith.

I think Your analysis is apt, but misses it's mark by not signifying more aptly the two variants between the profound and the apprehensive.

Existential vanity, is not separate from mere ego ridden narcissism, and may not be derivable to the lower levels of unconscious motivation.Disagreement may not harbor any other motive then trying to find the way into, and not out of the enigma of existence.


After carefully looking for the difference, according to some sources , vanity consisted in a simple admonition of appearance, a surface preoccupation with appearances, with no other intention then gaining satisfaction in one's appearance, without intentions.

Narcissism harbors bad intent, such as harming of others at their expense, thereby gaining satisfaction and self worth. It is much more a deeply underlying functional malaise.

[Silhouette]

You don't have to be a great hockey player to be a good or great hockey referee.

Was she a good or bad moderator?

Sure, but some competence in hockey is necessary to be a hockey referee at all, or at least if a hockey referee plays on a hockey court themselves you might expect them to play hockey at all, or at least with enough competence to remove doubt in their calls when they are refereeing - especially if they claim to be competent at hockey when not demonstrating as much.

But the analogy of hockey isn't perfect, as forum moderation can be a separate skill completely to any main forum topic, whereas hockey referees need to know the rules of hockey as well as civility even if they can't play themselves. I'm not saying that you necessarily need to have both in the forum context. I'm saying that it can help, especially if you also engage in discussions that you're moderating rather than using the passive and detached approach that Carleas knows how to use (although he also actually has philosophical competence, which he occasionally treats us to) and especially especially when you claim competence in philosophy all the while.

But keeping to moderation alone, separate from philosophy altogether, you need a more objective approach that sticks minimalistically to indisputable facts, and when facts are disputable you need to show impartial discretion rather than to show personality weakness and resorting to mild name-calling.

And all this assumes moderation is necessary at all, which it is when forums are above a certain size, and/or if there are particularly malevolent posters at work, neither of which we have here anymore. Staying on well after the time has passed, continuing to impose in light of all the above is just bad taste.
This goes regardless of individual attitudes to authority.
I don't think Ecmandu likes authority other than what agrees with him, whereas I'm fine with appropriate and competent authority that neither claims to be more than it is, nor imposes when unnecessary - especially when imposition is personalised. MagsJ fails in every single account, where others here have succeeded, though I'm sure she's made the odd appropriate intervention as exceptions - such as communicated by Mowk. I don't intend to detract from that.

Whilst I'm being direct and not presenting positive opinions, and these are associated with hostility, I have positive intentions and don't speak out of aggression nor emotionality - I'm just honestly conveying the impression I've got over the years towards one individual in a way that could cause conflict, but not because I intend to cause conflict. Under the circumstances of a larger forum, with toxic individuals, where restrictions are impersonal and don't result in a net negative impact, I'm happy for this place to be moderated. Until recent actions were taken, none of these conditions were in play and hadn't been for a long time - which is why it's a good decision to remove a bad moderator when moderation was unnecessary in the first place.

[MagsJ]

You will have to accept that I will never agree with your analysis of me.. others’ here, yes.. your’s, no.. it seems to be steeped in a bias, but that is yours to have. I enjoyed reading Observs exchange with you on Entropy, but I don’t feel the need to share my thoughts in how I felt that went.

I felt my time here was up months ago.. I’ve said that here already.. pay attention and my exit being an organic one, the catalyst of which being.. how I felt. Never mind the mod-trolls and deliberate baiting over the years.. of which such analyses you do not seem to get or factor in. Odd.

[Arcturus Descending]

Hi MagsJ,

I don’t understand about having to stay out of my own way?

I thought that I would just send this hyperlink How to Get Out of Your Own Way and Let Your Life Shine to you. I think that it is both informative and full of pearls of wisdom. I myself am reading it. I need all of the help that I can get.

https://tinybuddha.com/blog/how-to-get- ... ife-shine/

....but I will not be interacting with the belligerents and short-sighted here.. both, harmful qualities to others’ being.

Yes, very toxic. I am still in the process of learning to be this way myself. Perhaps it comes down to how long a time we choose to engage these people ~ perhaps when we feel the toxicity beginning to stream through us ~ that is it.

A case of too much J and not enough P being exercised, I’d say.

At the risk of sounding imbecilic, what are P and J?

Again, enjoy your newly-found freedom to frolic.

[Arcturus Descending]

My feelings stay the same moderation or not, she is a gifted and capable thinker, in any case, moderator or ILP member. Her guidance can be relied upon in any capacity. I think You're guilt Ecmandu is not necessary, I don't think it is healthy for any frame of mind.

At the same time, Meno, I think that guilt can be kind of like a beacon, at least for those who are willing to see and to follow that beacon to where it leads and to learn from it.
Of course, in and of itself, without utilizing it, guilt is nothing more than wallowing in our own ego and an excuse to deny responsibility for something.

[Silhouette]

You will have to accept that I will never agree with your analysis of me.. others’ here, yes.. your’s, no.. it seems to be steeped in a bias, but that is yours to have.

I expected as much, but if I let futility get in the way of offering honest value to people, I wouldn't get to say much at all.

You jump straight from things like "I just don't like being disagreed with" to "I must be biased" - none of which is true - anything other than the faintest consideration that what I offered might have truth to it, and exactly as someone would who fit the criteria that I'm suggesting apply to you.
Every time you avoid my analysis of you, you prove its worth, so I'll let your actions admit the truth even if your words will not.

I enjoyed reading Observs exchange with you on Entropy, but I don’t feel the need to share my thoughts in how I felt that went.

I was surprised you were reading it, when so late in the day you finally jumped in at the first opportunity where obsrvr mistakenly thought he had some kind of upper hand, in spite of all the many times I pinned him down where you were silent - and you talk about "bias". Only prom seemed to understand the difficulty he was in - but for someone who was at base trying to suggest you can define the undefinable, he was never going to emerge better than bowing out and feigning some degree of dignity as he did.

I already know how it went without your input, and it amuses me that you lamely feigned disinterest in what I had to say here and yet now come out with the truth that you were enjoying a debate I was involved in that was going on at the same time. Obviously that same ego-protection-reflex in the post I linked, but at least you admitted the truth to yourself this much later on in time - perhaps there's hope for you yet. Now if you could only overcome that reflex and show at least minimal honest consideration of what I'm currently analysing of you, rather than waiting a month first. Immediate humility and a willingness to entertain criticism is an emotionally advanced skill that few possess - but it goes a long way to making you a good moderator if you can pull it off consistently. Take that or leave it, I have no expectations of you doing the wise thing but perhaps at least someone will pick up on it.

I felt my time here was up months ago.. I’ve said that here already.. pay attention and my exit being an organic one, the catalyst of which being.. how I felt. Never mind the mod-trolls and deliberate baiting over the years.. of which such analyses you do not seem to get or factor in. Odd.

It's odd that you think your time had only been up for a few months, and even more odd that you had to wait for the decision to be made for you, or "organically" as you put it. How many years has it been since we had those mod-trolls and deliberate baiting? I did factor this into my analysis when I said mods are needed when those people are still around and when forum sizes get beyond a certain size such as this place used to be. You accuse me of not paying attention - more psychological projection by your hands, playing even further to my analysis. Other mod presence faded away "organically" in line with the faded need for them, and yet you did not.

Like I said, I'll let your actions prove my point if your words cannot.

[Arcturus Descending]

Silhouette,

I am just wondering though ~ is it fair or just to analyze or critique someone who has not asked for that? Of course, if they have asked for that, if they are curious about what others think of them, that is different, right?

It is kind of like a deer being caught in one's headlights. I wonder what the deer feels about that.

[Silhouette]

is it fair or just to analyze or critique someone who has not asked for that? Of course, if they have asked for that, if they are curious about what others think of them, that is different, right?

It is kind of like a deer being caught in one's headlights. I wonder what the deer feels about that.

I think generally deers don't stand much chance of ending up in a better place than before they got caught in someone's headlights. That's not why I'm driving, and I'm hoping anyone I approach has more capacity for honest self-reflection and for demonstrated consideration than a deer. I'm just driving where I think it could be fairer to go, fair or not in my means, fairness is the intended end. If fate hasn't been fair enough to do it herself, I think it's fair to take the wheel for her. I think the logic and evidence I'm providing is fair enough, and I think if you disagreed you'd be doing so out of pathos rather than logos - and which is more appropriate for a philosophy forum would you say?

[MagsJ]

I thought that I would just send this hyperlink How to Get Out of Your Own Way and Let Your Life Shine to you. I think that it is both informative and full of pearls of wisdom. I myself am reading it. I need all of the help that I can get.

https://tinybuddha.com/blog/how-to-get- ... ife-shine/

Ahhh.. I’ve revisited Buddhism in recent months, so look forward to reading this later.. thanks for sharing.

At the risk of sounding imbecilic, what are P and J?

Again, enjoy your newly-found freedom to frolic.

Judging/Perceiving, in the personality Archetypes.. I’d say, that judging without insight (perception), is simply an opinion.

I shall frolic.. like a newborn lamb amongst Spring grass. lol

[MagsJ]

I expected as much..

Progress..

You jump straight from things like "I just don't like being disagreed with" to "I must be biased" - none of which is true - anything other than the faintest consideration that what I offered might have truth to it, and exactly as someone would who fit the criteria that I'm suggesting apply to you.
Every time you avoid my analysis of you, you prove its worth, so I'll let your actions admit the truth even if your words will not.

I am not avoiding your analysis, I am disagreeing with it.. it is simply not applicable to me.

I was surprised you were reading it, when so late in the day you finally jumped in at the first opportunity where obsrvr mistakenly thought he had some kind of upper hand, in spite of all the many times I pinned him down where you were silent - and you talk about "bias". Only prom seemed to understand the difficulty he was in - but for someone who was at base trying to suggest you can define the undefinable, he was never going to emerge better than bowing out and feigning some degree of dignity as he did.

..actually, I jumped in then because the discussion had gotten interesting (heatened up).. it became entertaining.. what more can I say.

I already know how it went without your input, and it amuses me that you lamely feigned disinterest in what I had to say here and yet now come out with the truth that you were enjoying a debate I was involved in that was going on at the same time.

I said how I felt it went, not how you think it went.. different.

So.. if I was enjoying the latter aforementioned thread.. perhaps I was not enjoying the former? for a reason that should be evident, and of which I won’t be discussing.

Obviously that same ego-protection-reflex in the post I linked, but at least you admitted the truth to yourself this much later on in time - perhaps there's hope for you yet. Now if you could only overcome that reflex and show at least minimal honest consideration of what I'm currently analysing of you, rather than waiting a month first. Immediate humility and a willingness to entertain criticism is an emotionally advanced skill that few possess - but it goes a long way to making you a good moderator if you can pull it off consistently. Take that or leave it, I have no expectations of you doing the wise thing but perhaps at least someone will pick up on it.

Wise for who? I did not want to do what you are suggesting I should have done, in that thread.

Immediate humility? What! I weren’t brought up or educated to be, but you can exercise it all you want.. all day long.

Entertain criticism? I prefer to be selective in that matter, but again, feel free to entertain every single criticism that comes your way. The education system I was in was one big critique-fest.. I’ve been critiqued the hell out of for decades.. it was a blast.

It's odd that you think your time had only been up for a few months, and even more odd that you had to wait for the decision to be made for you, or "organically" as you put it. How many years has it been since we had those mod-trolls and deliberate baiting? I did factor this into my analysis when I said mods are needed when those people are still around and when forum sizes get beyond a certain size such as this place used to be. You accuse me of not paying attention - more psychological projection by your hands, playing even further to my analysis. Other mod presence faded away "organically" in line with the faded need for them, and yet you did not.

Like I said, I'll let your actions prove my point if your words cannot.

This is of my concern alone.. I don’t want to share my personal concerns and decision-making, and your want to prove a point is not of my concern.

[Silhouette]

Immediate humility? What! I weren’t brought up or educated to be, but you can exercise it all you want.. all day long.

Huh. Interesting.

What value, if any, do you think humility might have?

Given your education or perhaps thinking past it, what is your evaluation of the "quality" of humility: in what circumstances, to whom, when and why?

How about in a moderator?

[Mowk]

Like I said, I'll let your actions prove my point if your words cannot.


This is of my concern alone..

Then get on with it already. None of us are fairly polished stones. Know thyself, without all the distortions. If you think you do, then you are still facing at least one grand distortion. It is after all an impossible task, always changing, ever the new part to get in touch with. Ever the new entanglement to distraction.

"I don't know myself well enough". Can any one repeat those words with me? Can we utter them with the most sincere conviction, such that we actually do something about it? My shit stinks so bad, I can hardly smell anything coming from anywhere else. Amen.

Thank you all for your distorted advice. We ain't going to see anyone else clearly until we polish our own lens and see ourselves more clearly.

I got go take a shower, who knows how long it will take to wash all my shit off my own face. And My house, it's a mess. And here I thought running the vacuum, and damp mopping once a day was enough.

[MagsJ]

Immediate humility? What! I weren’t brought up or educated to be, but you can exercise it all you want.. all day long.

Huh. Interesting.

What value, if any, do you think humility might have?

Given your education or perhaps thinking past it, what is your evaluation of the "quality" of humility: in what circumstances, to whom, when and why?

How about in a moderator?

I exercise patience a lot.. unlike some here, it seems.

A good question is, is some behaviour really necessary? now that’s a good one to ask. Agitation being a natural default setting for one or two, simply because they don’t like what they read.

[Silhouette]

I exercise patience a lot.. unlike some here, it seems.

A good question is, is some behaviour really necessary? now that’s a good one to ask. Agitation being a natural default setting for one or two, simply because they don’t like what they read.

Of course a lot here don't exercise patience.

No a lot of behaviours are not really "necessary".

Yes a lot of people get agitated because they don't like what they read.

Is this a new realisation for you or are you just making excuses?

So back to humility. You say you weren't educated to be humble. What is your evaluation of humility - in what circumstances, to whom, when and why?

[Mowk]

or don't. :shrug:

[phyllo]

Can we get moderator to move this nonsense into Rant?

TIA

[Silhouette]

Can we get moderator to move this nonsense into Rant?

TIA

Are you not gaining value, or seeing any potential for value to be gained from this debate on moderation?

What does humility mean to you, phyllo?

[MagsJ]

Of course a lot here don't exercise patience.

No a lot of behaviours are not really "necessary".

Yes a lot of people get agitated because they don't like what they read.

Is this a new realisation for you or are you just making excuses?

Making excuses for..?

So back to humility. You say you weren't educated to be humble. What is your evaluation of humility - in what circumstances, to whom, when and why?

Educated and raised, not just educated.. but we were part of a polite and well-mannered Community.

For me, there are more helpful traits to foster than humility.. I’d rather go out there and do good or be proactively helpful, so fostering a balanced character is more essential to my self than any one specific trait.. I cannot answer for others as to what is essential for them.

I appreciate others’ efforts and good gestures and express that, but is that humility or a combination of traits in play in expressing appreciation to others?

Humility is something that I don’t have to rely on or use.. there are other aspects that I do.

[MagsJ]

Can we get moderator to move this nonsense into Rant?

TIA

Did I miss something? in Mowk’s edit..

Perhaps it’s best I don’t know what was previously said.

[phyllo]

Can we get moderator to move this nonsense into Rant?

TIA

Are you not gaining value, or seeing any potential for value to be gained from this debate on moderation?

What does humility mean to you, phyllo?

It's a nasty attack. Nothing really about moderation.

[Mowk]

You're right mags there was more.

Oh, you say I missed a spot. Gee you're right, thanks.

Gets the bucket and scrub brush out again. Over here somewhere you say. I should clean the whole floor again just to be sure. Thanks.

Like picking weeds in my garden. Gives me some time to think. Man oh man they were thick this year.

And on another note, the wife (for my benefit, not yours) just got home from a business trip and I gave her the biggest hug, and whispered in her ear. I am sorry. She hugged me and whispered back, what's that for?

I didn't answer and hugged her again, but what crossed this mind, was some one who's respect for, I thought I had lost, suggested it in a rather unusual way.

It's odd what you can see in a mirror when you aren't confronting it square on.

You're going to have to squeeze me a lot harder then that, after the last time. Hugs are better.

This time I would hope to think I'm just feeding the fish, I've set the pole aside. Worms for all, no hooks attached.

That is... if you can dig the metaphors.

[MagsJ]

Can we get moderator to move this nonsense into Rant?

TIA

Are you not gaining value, or seeing any potential for value to be gained from this debate on moderation?

What does humility mean to you, phyllo?

It's a nasty attack. Nothing really about moderation.

Silhouette said: Like I said, I'll let your actions prove my point if your words cannot.

The only one’s actions and words proving their point, is his.

[Karpel Tunnel]

I open this thread for any thoughts on this decision, or on moderation generally.

As far as the bolded portion. The moderation seems pretty good. I don't see much and there don't seem to be too many problems. Laissez-faire, it seems, as a base, which, if it works, is a good base. It seems like there are even areas with no moderation, but maybe that's not true. I got a message once from a moderator, more or less, suggesting I tone down, seeing how I was doing. That seemed like a lovely approach. Not saying approaches have to be lovely, but it was, and I'd gotten out of hand.

[MagsJ]

That is not the case with everyone, KT.. it would be ideal if it was though.

Not everyone reacts favourably to even the most pleasant of DM requests to tone things down.. some replies can be so overly-aggressive and even abusive, as to make one think.. wtf, why? I can assure you that how you react to something politely requested, is not how all act to something politely requested.. why ever would you assume they do?

On that note, I depart this thread.. never to return.

[Karpel Tunnel]

That is not the case with everyone, KT.. it would be ideal if it was though.

Not everyone reacts favourably to even the most pleasant of DM requests to tone things down.. some replies can be so overly-aggressive and even abusive, as to make one think.. wtf, why? I can assure you that how you react to something politely requested, is not how all act to something politely requested.. why ever would you assume they do?

Um, I don't assume that. In fact I assume that moderators deal with abuse and rage.