What would help the Temple Be A Better Place? Suggestions please...

Manu wrote: I still insist the IP should be compulsory for membership. Even if one does not wish to pursue Ordination nor Knighthood, it's a good introduction to Jediism.

I could get behind that, definitely.

Wescli Wardest wrote: " Right now the only mechanism for replacing them with effective people is waiting for them to decide to step down."

There is another mechanism, it takes a magority vote in Council.

You're telling me the only way to get rid of officers (including council members) is by a council vote? That system seems...sketchy.

[hr]

Another thing I think would help the Temple are basic grasps of logic and long-term planning. Right now, for example, IIT are people saying that IP journals should be private (which reduces the capacity for us to learn from others, which is a vital aspect of teaching this kind of material), and there are people trying to start a clergy-renaming petition while the clergy has many, many other things they've tasked themselves with doing that should be requiring our full attention.

This place is the god-emperor of putting the cart before the colt, and it's really running me ragged, personally, trying to keep up as the whole set rolls downhill.

To The Dude,
I don't have a problem with information sharing. I have a problem with digital file sharing. Every time you share a digital file, it makes a copy of the material. But, if a member were to mail a copy of their book to a new member, then that would be completely different to me. No copy would be made, and there would be no violation of the First Sale law.

How do you expect writers to make a living if everything they create is given away for free?

Sure, if we lived in a socialist society, that would work. And, I'd be happy, in that scenario, to provide as much free information as warranted. Hell, if I were given a basic income, I'd throw all my music out there for free all the time too.

But, we live in a capitalist world, still. And, content creators deserve attribution and money for their intellectual content... so they can afford to stay in this business.

I don't understand why people don't think that is true. And, it's very disheartening to me that people feel entitled to such intellectual property.

To Manu, I kind of love the idea of having to complete the IP before gaining membership. AND, I also like the idea of doing the IP off-site and manually. I believe that it would cut down on people who are not serious while still allowing people to participate on the forums. That would greatly increase what it means to be a Jedi at this site. We'd need to flesh it out more... of course.

Steam, that also kind of scares me... perhaps we could introduce a referendum clause to help usher people out of office? Or, at least a referendum of Knights?

There are broken links. A lot of them. Please, do something with them -- anything. At least change the broken links in DQS lessons and the FAQ.

I've posted about this in the librarians log, you know of a broken link, make it public there or post to me in a pm, I'll add it to the "to do" list...

TheDude wrote: And they're not all available in the library all of the time.

I would extend that suggestion to all esoteric practice. Other Jedi communities have clear sections for discussing esotericism, and those kinds of teachings are readily available in the temple library. The fact that there isn't any such section on TOTJO makes me feel as if discussing esoterics, meditation, or generally the more "mystical" stuff is frowned on in some way. Perhaps that is just my own feeling and not the intent, but I don't see very many of those conversations happening very often and I assume that others have the same feeling...


There are broken links. A lot of them. Please, do something with them -- anything. At least change the broken links in DQS lessons and the FAQ.

The assistant Librarian was looking into adding more original content to the library.

And we are talking about making a mediation sub-forum. Of course adding it as a section of the library is not out of the question.

I gave our assistant librarian the ability to fix the broken links. And he was doing an excellent job. But someone decided that they needed to take that away from him. So we’ll have to wait till the links get fixed by some other means I guess.

I was doing it for a while. But there is just so much to do to keep everything running that I just can’t do it all by myself. Hence why I gave our assistant librarian the ability to fix them.

I'm a simple man. I like pretty dark haired women and breakfast food.

Sorry, couldn't resist the Ron Swanson quote.

Honestly there are only two things I would really like to see here: more visible involvement from Knights and specifically Councilors, and more discussion around the Doctrine in the forum. Even if it's just mentioning which part of the Doctrine you think applies most to the discussion at hand.

I also wanted to bring up Nakis' post from a page back that I really liked.

Nakis wrote: I'm mildly curious as to how the council and others who are working in the administration feel about this and what more can be done on our (non-council/administration personnel) end as well. Perhaps there are things that can be done to help out or process things faster.

I've always been more of an ask not what your country/temple can do for you kind of guy. It might need a split off but I think we should focus on what everyone at any level can do, not just those "above."

Wescli Wardest wrote: there is just so much to do to keep everything running that I just can’t do it all by myself

This is precisely the problem those who want term limits/other mechanisms for removing ineffective Councillors are seeking to address... you shouldn't have to do it all by yourself.

There's supposed to be a whole Council of people there to do it with you, and a whole community of potential Officers to support the work.

Believe it or not Goken, when I have used our doctrine to illustrated a point of view I have been accused of just reciting doctrine at people.

I would love to discuss more about how current events and issues interact with or how our doctrine might reflect on these topics but it seems many would prefer to just give their opinions. Which is a valid discussion but often times doesn’t have much to do with Jediism.

tzb wrote:

Wescli Wardest wrote: there is just so much to do to keep everything running that I just can’t do it all by myself

This is precisely the problem those who want term limits/other mechanisms for removing ineffective Councillors are seeking to address... you shouldn't have to do it all by yourself.

There's supposed to be a whole Council of people there to do it with you, and a whole community of potential Officers to support the work.

I would agree. But that is not how everyone seems to see it or where there focus is or tends to be.

What can we do to get the focus there? Whose backsides do we need to light fires under?

With love... of course... but, fire, yes... light it, we must.

Connor,

You'll find no bigger supporter of capitalism than me. But I think there comes a point when it goes beyond capitalism. To me, fair capitalism happens when I have produced something (or have paid others to produce it) and engage in a fair exchange with those who want what I've produced. So for Joseph Campbell to say, "Here is my book, I wrote it and I'll sell it to you for $20 so that I can buy dinner and some coffee" is fine. But Joseph Campbell is dead. Krishnamurti is dead. Lao Tzu might not have ever existed. The various philosophers, poets, mystics, &c. in the library and IP are more often than not dead. My money won't help them. It may help a certain publication, but that publication didn't produce the work -- they only take advantage of the fact that someone else produced the work and needed a way to get it to other people. Now the means of making your work available to others is much simpler. Anyone can find pretty much anything on the internet. Those publications are no longer required for you or me to access the work of long-dead people, and it's no longer a service that I personally feel has value within this market.

Suppose someone figured out physics and wrote a new Principia which perfectly explains how our universe works on a physical and mathematical level. I'd say that none of the information they've presented is actually their own creation. If they're presenting the truth, then it's the truth regardless of whether or not they write it down. With works of fiction it makes sense to charge for such a thing, because it is an original creation which can only be presented by the person imagining it. When it comes to the truth,however, a $250 price tag on a book (have you seen textbook prices lately?) can only serve one purpose: standing in the way of progress. And more often than not it isn't even the author who sees the payoff, it's the publication company. How someone can print a book for less than $5 using words somebody else has written and sell it for $200+ is beyond me. I'd have too much trouble sleeping at night to do that.

This is an issue especially true in the sciences. Scientific advancement nowadays takes place within government funded academic buildings, or is otherwise funded by taxpayer money. There are private scientific labs, but the publicly funded ones are far more common. There people use tools that you and I have funded, and it only makes sense to me that you and I should be able to access the information that has been gathered using those tools. Yet professors will use those tools which we pay for, on salaries that we pay for, in order to produce scientific studies which will be published in journals that cost $400+ for a subscription to and which you and I can't access without paying for. If you want to see what ALL of your money is going towards in the sciences, be prepared to drop tens of thousands of dollars on journal subscriptions. The same can be said of philosophy, theology, and almost all academic areas of study. We fund them and we can't even see the benefit from it without paying more and more fees.

So while I understand your point of view, I think that the truth is something that we should all have access to regardless of whether or not we have the means to pay for it. In many cases we already have.


Wescli,

Maybe a temporary recovery officer(s) could be appointed in order to deal with situations like the crash? As TOTJO grows, that kind of thing may happen more often.

steamboat28 wrote: What can we do to get the focus there? Whose backsides do we need to light fires under?

See, that puts me under a particular microscope. I commented on what I saw as an issue. But if I go around naming people then it will quickly get turned around as I am the one causing trouble. Which will hinder my ability to do my job.

What I will tell you is do exactly what you are doing. Stand up for yourself. Make your voices heard. Pay attention to what’s going on and then talk about the issues you see.

It may take time, but I believe everything will turn out for the best in the end. If I didn’t believe that, I wouldn’t still be here working for it! LOL :laugh:

And there will be someone that says, then why did you say anything!?!?

Because we all know that there are issues. We’re talking about them now. And if there is an issue that I see that isn’t enough of an issue for others to see, then maybe it just isn’t really an issue.

Wescli Wardest wrote:

TheDude wrote:
There are broken links. A lot of them. Please, do something with them -- anything. At least change the broken links in DQS lessons and the FAQ.

The assistant Librarian was looking into adding more original content to the library.

And we are talking about making a mediation sub-forum. Of course adding it as a section of the library is not out of the question.

I gave our assistant librarian the ability to fix the broken links. And he was doing an excellent job. But someone decided that they needed to take that away from him. So we’ll have to wait till the links get fixed by some other means I guess.

I was doing it for a while. But there is just so much to do to keep everything running that I just can’t do it all by myself. Hence why I gave our assistant librarian the ability to fix them.

Sounds like a major decision in removing editing abilities connected to my doing MY JOB was made without consent of the council, why is this permissible?


Don't all Council members answer all at once now... :whistle:

Is anybody keeping track of all of these suggestions? It sounds to me like this is a time for Knights (myself included) to prioritize these and provide some specific and actionable items to Council. I'll start making a list...

I regard this thread rather with incomprehension. There are multiple topics in this thread that I tried to highlight as a knight and either got rebuffed by Council or eventually ignored. Once I got the knights to have a vote, only to have a Council member (my own training master) question me on whether I was going to 'do it again'.

There is a great irony in the member of the Council who opens this thread being the one who barely posts.

I would like to hope that this time around the Council actually listens to what is being said, rather than brushing things off.

It is one thing to open a thread about it, it is another thing entirely to actually enact change.

I've got pretty limited experience here, but for what it's worth, here's what might improve my experience

I enjoy having the journals be open, and having folk in positions to respond do so, and getting the "thank yous" that let me know I'm being heard. And I think I might feel even less alone in my process if there were one or two or even three people who I knew were specifically and officially there for me to ask questions of and to let me know how I'm doing.
I've been contacted by loads of people who are great friends and unofficial mentors, but I'd be more comfortable bringing some things to more official mentor types, and knowing that for sure someone is relatively up to date on my process and would let me know if I need to make changes.

tzb wrote:

Avalonslight wrote: Wes mets his term end, steps down, one day later steps back up because... Who else is suitable to take on his role?

So long as that's the case, there's not a problem with Wes staying in the role. This is more about post holders who aren't showing up anymore, or aren't obviously effective in their roles. Right now the only mechanism for replacing them with effective people is waiting for them to decide to step down. That seems... silly. And even then, they have been replaced by similarly inactive members... so the problem is compounded.

The other thing is we can only guess who they are, because we don't have any visibility on what individual Councillors do (or don't do). Or even what they're supposed to be doing. People most of us don't know get to decide how this place works, if they show up, because once upon a time it was decided they should. That seems really crap to a lot of us... this place is a big part of our beliefs, it matters to us, we show up. And then a stranger declares themselves in charge and starts throwing their weight around... that's an unpleasant experience.

I have no doubt some councillors do a lot of work. I also know for a fact several don't. How about sharing that work between multiple active councillors? How about delegating some of that work to non-Council members so that Councillors remain part of the community? How is it people can claim to represent the best interests of this community when they're not engaged in it?

Like I said... you can't be a leader if you're a stranger.

Ah, tzb sort of beat me to my own counterpoint before I could get to it. Yes, this is exactly where I was about to go with my follow up. Obviously, in the situation of 'term limits' if someone's term were to be up, but no suitable replacement was available, then that person would remain in office. I have no doubt that this collective Temple is more than capable of exercising that level of common sense. I was merely pointing out the trouble with hard term limits.

That said, the other problem is also there too, that a person can obtain an office and indefinitely remain there. In some cases this is fine; we don't really need to change the way that applications are processed, for example, unless a better way comes along that makes it easier for the person processing said applications. There is little need to change the people in charge of this unless, as I believe someone mentioned somewhere, it becomes obvious that the person in such a position is abusing their power in some other fashion (and no, I'm not saying you do Wes!!)

Other positions, however, do benefit from change. Be it the Pastor or the Degree Scheme administrator, getting a new pair of eyes in there allows for fresh ideas. Fresh ideas are what keep the entire process from stagnating. Such change tends to only benefit those around it, so long as it doesn't occur to frequently.

Either way, what might possibly be a good idea to consider is the general activity of those involved in some sort of office position. And I don't necessarily mean posting on the forum. Y'all are busy. I get that. I've never (well almost never) been one to advocate for the idea that once you obtain a certain rank, you ought to be required to post a specific number of times every so often. What I do feel, though, is that if you explicitly hold an office (especially the councilors themselves) that some consistent level of presence making ought to be done. Whether it's to sit in chat for a while every now and then, or post where you can. Really, sitting in chat... Because then you're known to be online, and we know we can reach you easily. And no, *not* all the time. Just often enough that we don't have someone who joined 6 months ago going "wtf is this person?!" to an individual holding an office who's literally not been seen by anyone (outside of highly restricted forums) for any length of time. And if you cannot, or are not willing to, do at least that, then the position needs to be removed and passed on to another individual.

I won't carry on because I think all my other points have been made by others at this point, considering it's taken me a few hours to get this typed out.

Another quick thought, and feel free to tell me to sit down and shut up.if this is already being done, but I feel like I've heard somewhere that part of the reason it takes so long to get any sort of changes or decisions implemented is because of the time in between council members responding and so on or so forth.

As such, would it even be plausible for the council to have mutually agreed upon meeting times in Skype or Google Hangouts? Say once or twice a month, all of you log in and do an active chat session so that things aren't restricted purely to forum posts? Just a thought I randomly had...

(Holy crap, sorry! Fixed the blaring typo there!!)

"Protocol for removal of Officers other than by Council vote"

Has been mentioned. And removing an Officer is one thing; but, it leaves a void that will have to be filled until a replacement can be selected. Has anyone given thought to how we might do that?

In Council, we have been looking at the use of applications and a selection process. Normally we reserve Officer Position for those that have achieved the rank of Knight or higher. Is a process like that something that would be wanted by the membership?