Discussion: TotJO Culture Problems

Stephen wrote: If someone reacts that way to mediation, instead of trying to find a peaceful out come.
Personally, I think they need more help than the temple can give them.

A man who puts himself in the path of danger, deserves to face it alone.
- Qui-Gon Jinn

Some people enjoy the danger. Some people revel in the danger.
And danger is a matter of perception in which no help is required.

I encourage pushing beyond the "rules" mentality and developing an organizational culture based in the goals for the group, so that people understand how their individual behavior either works for or against those goals. It's really a matter of defining the core purpose for the organization's existence, and establishing the mission so that all the possible activities of the group can be measured against it to determine the priority. When new people come into a group, they need to know what the expected emphasis will be and how likely they are to find what they are looking for to determine whether the group is a good fit for them.

Naming something a “Temple” indicates that it is a space for the work of reverencing and preserving a spiritual energy or ideal, and everything that I’ve read in the introductions so far have stated that intent and purpose. That doesn’t mean that everything has to be serious or only involving the spiritual work (most churches have secondary outreach or social/fun opportunities) – but the priority has to be established to keep “mission drift” from happening. If the purpose is not for people to become more like that ideal through involvement, becoming more than they were when they came in, then it’s really just a club. I can go reinforce my basic personality and discuss things I’m interested in in any bar, if that’s all I’m after (yet when I’m among people who share the same spiritual goals, we can turn a table at local pub into a seminary.) [For the record, as it stands right now, I haven't had a problem finding the discussions that interest me and avoiding the ones that don't.]

No organization can be all things to all who find it in a web search, and to have an effective mission, both its leadership and members have to agree why they are here and what form that purpose is going to take. In my experience, when that is well-defined and based in the natural extension of the group’s goals, people tend to self-select whether or not it’s what they are looking for, making intervention from the moderators less necessary. Conflict is always going to be a part of group work - but when it happens within the frame work of a common goal, it's as productive and instructive as sparring within a martial arts school.

While no one may ever fully live up to their creed, the creed is the common statement of the ideal that defines a school or community, and a foundation for people to return to when their emotions run away from them. To put it bluntly, I don’t have to emotionally care about anyone in a group to abide by good standards of behavior – they are the time-tested methods of interaction that keep me on track for my own goals and to prevent me wasting time and energy on things that don’t support those goals. When I find a group that matches those standards, then I’m inclined to stay and form more personal relationships, knowing that they have a higher likelihood of being a positive influence on me. And I know that however emotionally rough the journey gets (and it will get rough, if real work is being attempted), I can always stop and review that creed and find my center again.

Arisaig wrote: Fun fact, it was never believed to be flat.

Never? by not even one person ever? I doubt that, also there's this guy:
http://www.newsweek.com/earth-flat-rocket-launch-mad-mike-hughes-719367

Tellahane wrote:

Arisaig wrote: Fun fact, it was never believed to be flat.

Never? by not even one person ever? I doubt that, also there's this guy:
http://www.newsweek.com/earth-flat-rocket-launch-mad-mike-hughes-719367

Human beings seem to have taken a step back of late intellectually. I did state that is was historically speaking. Today... well...

Quick question and to help summarize everything for future discussion, within this thread, what has been agreed upon and what is still in discussion?

Nakis wrote: Quick question and to help summarize everything for future discussion, within this thread, what has been agreed upon and what is still in discussion?

Lol we did diverge a bit.

Back on Track. TotJO culture and all that.

The idea was more to get a guideline on what has been agreed upon that can be worked on, and what further more we can discuss to come to a consensus so we can begin improving on that It also helps those new to the conversation catch up. :laugh:

Nakis wrote: Quick question and to help summarize everything for future discussion, within this thread, what has been agreed upon and what is still in discussion?

Here's what I know.

Our first goal is to identify the "culture problems" referred to in the title of this thread. It is still not entirely clear what that exactly means, and how bad those "problems" are. What we have seen a lot of in this thread is that people feel like there is a lack of compassion and common decency at times here, and it can be discouraging. We are certainly taking that seriously, and here is how we are addressing it.

We are working on a document in Council that will outline expected behavior of anyone entering and participating in this Temple. It will be basic guidelines for proper etiquette in the forums, chat, and the wall. It will also introduce the purposes of this Temple, those mainly being training, learning, self-improvement, communal support, and friendship. We already have rules for the website, but this document is meant more to be agreed upon standards for acceptable behavior beyond the hard and fast regulations. The goal of this document is to give us something to refer people to when the peaceful environment here is disrupted.

Included in this document will be more detailed descriptions of the duties of Moderators and Security Officers and how we will be enforcing the spirit and letter of this document. It will be available for all to see and offered as part of the introduction to the Initiate's Program.

There is also a survey being created that is meant to ask questions of the membership to help us discover specific areas where we can improve as departments, as a Council, and as a Temple. We want honest reaction from the membership as a whole so we can determine what the bigger issues truly are, and what may just be the gripes of a few individuals. That way we can focus our efforts on the issues that impact the greatest number of members first.

There will be more to come, but this is the start. I want to be clear that the Council is working, but we are moving slowly and deliberately in order to give the proper consideration to anything we decide on. We want to get this right, and we want it done with as much input from the membership as we can get. It will require patience, but know that we in "management" want to see positive action happen as much as everyone else.

Regardless, let's focus on building up those that would replace us and will do a better job than we have instead of worrying about who holds a title they aren't doing justice to.

- Senan

Because accountability isn't already a number one issue here, because sweeping the problem under the rug (which is exactly what your suggesting) has worked so well in the past?

Edit - How can WE place expectations on future members to do better than ourselves when WE don't expect those who are here now to do as well as they should?

I'm genuinely not trying to be abrasive Senan, I am, but that's hypocrisy straight out and has been a huge problem in this Temple for years...

Zenchi wrote:

Regardless, let's focus on building up those that would replace us and will do a better job than we have instead of worrying about who holds a title they aren't doing justice to.

- Senan

Because accountability isn't already a number one issue here, because sweeping the problem under the rug (which is exactly what your suggesting) has worked so well in the past?

How can you place expectations on future members to do better than ourselves when we don't expect those who are here now to do as well as they should?

That's hypocrisy straight out and has been a huge problem in this Temple for years...

I think its a quote straight from the Book of War. "If the officers are weak and the soldiers strong, there will be insubordination." (or something along those lines)