Forum Access Changes

As one that voted against changing anything (yet understanding why it was under discussion in the first place), none of this would've happened had Temple members and above just ignored or not allowed themselves to get all riled up by trollers or unruly, disagreeable guests.

People offend everywhere: in churches, schools, families and life in general. They may offend because they tell you the truth you don't want to hear, or they offend you because they are belligerent and rude.

But you can choose not to be offended. Especially in an online setting.

Brenna wrote: Sorry Tzb, I dont really understand the question.

No worries. I was wondering if what you posted was about how up to now, people have only got Member status revoked after lots of second chances? If so, my response is... what was the point of stripping Member status before now? It didn't make any meaningful difference, whereas now it would restrict posting rights in certain high-volume forums, without kicking people totally off-forum.

Sometimes an outright ban would be more appropriate, yes... but not in every case.

tzb wrote: This is the Simple Oath:

I profess before all my fellow Jedi that I, XXXXXXXXXXX born on XXXXXXXXXXX, without reservation, choose the Jedi path, until I am ready for Jedi Knighthood or I otherwise decide, with all its duties and responsibilities. I shall do that which is right and profess my allegiance to the Force. During that time I promise to do my utmost to uphold the Jedi teachings, and to live a life as is worthy of a Jedi.

To which I state again, I am not a Jedi.

You see, I do not give my word lightly, even for a simple oath, which would in my case be completely dishonest.

Brenna wrote: We already have members only areas.

We do? We have Apprentice, Knight, Clergy and Council forums (to my knowledge)... but these are not open to Members, Novices and Initiates. What am I missing? :huh:

tzb wrote:

Brenna wrote: Sorry Tzb, I dont really understand the question.

No worries. I was wondering if what you posted was about how up to now, people have only got Member status revoked after lots of second chances? If so, my response is... what was the point of stripping Member status before now? It didn't make any meaningful difference, whereas now it would restrict posting rights in certain high-volume forums, without kicking people totally off-forum.

Sometimes an outright ban would be more appropriate, yes... but not in every case.

Ah. Thanks. Definitely dim.... more coffee perhaps.

In my previous post I said that membership is a privilege and we should treat it as such. Mine may not be a popular opinion, and it may be harsh, but if we don't demonstrate the value that we place on our own Temple and our oaths, then no one else will. As the expression says, what you allow will continue.

Revoking membership completely I think is something that should be reserved for extreme cases, but in instances where people repeatedly show that they are not here for constructive purposes, or a disregard for civility, then remove that privilege. If we want to put in place some kind of discussion with them after a period of time and are satisfied that they are willing to adhere to the basic expectations of membership, then sure. Bring them back. But until that point, sorry but right of admission reserved. And I think that we are at times too nervous of what others might think when we are considering bans, temporary or otherwise.

But we ALL earn our place here by our interactions and contribution. This is not just some playground. And we need to raise the bar on what we expect from people. All our people, not just the trouble makers.

tzb wrote:

Brenna wrote: We already have members only areas.

We do? We have Apprentice, Knight, Clergy and Council forums (to my knowledge)... but these are not open to Members, Novices and Initiates. What am I missing? :huh:

And the forum where the IP journals sit.

Nope, Guests can post there. But anyway that's not a discussion forum, so it's not as though we can use that as a members-only substitute for General Discussion, which seemed to be the suggestion.

tzb wrote: Nope, Guests can post there. But anyway that's not a discussion forum, so it's not as though we can use that as a members-only substitute for General Discussion, which seemed to be the suggestion.

:blink: seriously? I thought that was members only....

urg. too confusing

I think the idea is people don't have to become members to do the IP (or to begin it, if they're awaiting membership being approved)

In a couple of months we'll have been around (in one form or another) for nine years. That's not from being inflexible and un-evolving. I believe things are going to change, for the better, on the issue of membership soon. This is my personal opinion and an educated guess. The changes in the forum structure are with this in mind. If it works out like I foresee the forum restrictions will be a minimal issue if they're still an issue at all.

Ideas and comments are welcome.

I copied this from http://ello.co . How do you think it would work here? BTW, I have a few invites left if anyone wants one.

Ello has a zero-tolerance policy for abusive behavior.

This includes any form of hate, trolling, stalking, spamming, flaming, impersonating others, harming children, child pornography, or any other behavior designed to hurt another person physically or emotionally.