An inner sanctum subforum?

[sobriquet]

Well, we don't agree that some members are better than others in a way that warrants an 'inner sanctum', however I personally agree that yeah some members are worse enough that they warrant a sin bin.

Is that all?

If the whole exercise of this thread was simply an attempt to prove this 'point', then I thank you for wasting my time.

Au contraire, this was only an appendix, you seem to have missed the main exercise which you can do as homework

But I don't know who's more naive... those who think the forum doesn't warrant an 'inner sanctum', or those who can't see that one already exists.

[Torsten]

oh sob, the more you whine on about this the more I am inclined to just scrap the whole idea of giving second/third/fourth chances and just the delete the pains in the asses straight away. I thought I was doing you [incl you personally] a favour.

[sobriquet]

oh sob, the more you whine on about this the more I am inclined to just scrap the whole idea of giving second/third/fourth chances and just the delete the pains in the asses straight away. I thought I was doing you [incl you personally] a favour.

The Death of Socrates, by Jacques-Louis David 1787.

Despite claiming death-defying loyalty to his city, Socrates' pursuit of virtue and his strict adherence to truth clashed with the current course of Athenian politics and society.... But perhaps the most historically accurate of Socrates' offenses to the city was his position as a social and moral critic. Rather than upholding a status quo and accepting the development of immorality within his region, Socrates worked to undermine the collective notion of "might makes right" so common to Greece during this period. Plato refers to Socrates as the gadfly of the state, insofar as he aggravated the establishment with considerations of justice and the pursuit of goodness. His attempts to improve the Athenian's allegiance to justice may have been the source of his execution.

[AndyAmine.]

Yawn....

[Auntyjack]

sob you remind me of woody allen...

[Torsten]

clever distraction, but didn't answer the question [or maybe it did and we are just delaying the inevitable]. so what will it be? It is really quite simple. There are only two choices. Should we abandon the attempts to give trouble makers and rule breakers a second chance? You have so vehemently opposed these attempts to try and find a solution to the problem, but do you now have the resolve to actually accept the consequence?

[sobriquet]

clever distraction, but didn't answer the question [or maybe it did and we are just delaying the inevitable]. so what will it be? It is really quite simple. There are only two choices. Should we abandon the attempts to give trouble makers and rule breakers a second chance? You have so vehemently opposed these attempts to try and find a solution to the problem, but do you now have the resolve to actually accept the consequence?

Perhaps I don't have to answer this except to show the old timers examples of the old times. At least this old thread hasn't been sanitised (yet), allowing us to glimpse the rules in (in)action and the possibility of hypocrisy being considered by those who take offense at my non-offensive and polite replies to members. Let's get in the time machine together and look at:

http://www.shaman-australis.com/forum/inde...anica&st=25

Here are some quotes from Torsten from that thread...

"Oh dear. Fuck you're blind"

"none of you fuckwits give a shit about me"

"so maybe you should just trust me on that one and shut the fuck up."

"I am just wondering if you pricks"

"Kudos go to Earthalchemist, Dutchie and Daniel parents. and to you if you weren't such a stupid prick."

"Fuck!! you have to be kidding. you really aren't very bright right??"

"My recommendation to you shapeshifter: fuck off!"

"The last thing I need is fuckwits like you who don't have a clue about anything telling me that I didn't do enough"

"And then there were the really annoying fuckwits like Julian"

"Fuck you're dumb!"

Yes it was quite a while ago, but the forums had been up for at least two years when that ugly episode appears to have transpired. It was actually sad reading it and I understand the chaos and trauma it must have generated.

Surely people can see that all the hullaballoo about recent posts is minor compared to that stuff in 2002?

Surely there's room for differences of opinions and style?

Surely people aren't so narrow minded that they can support banning people unjustly?

[MORG]

Aren't the inner sanctums, ivory towers, inner circles, outsiders, popular people, the priveleged few, ostracised non-conformists just a normal part of human social-group interaction?

Even primary school kids recognise this. The only difference is that we're not supposed to cry about it.

This forum is just a projected version of human group-dynamics.

Edited February 10, 2007 by MORG

[Torsten]

Glad you brought up the whole mulga fuck around. It reminds me that I decided long time ago to never again waste so much time with people who primarily want to fuck this forum over. I think the responses you received from other members the last few days indicate that I am not the only one who is really really tired of you. So, life is too short to waste my time on people like you. I will accept the fact that you can not tolerate the new system of sin bin-ing trouble makers and would rather continue to post sexist jokes and to crap all over this forum. Bye bye.

Oh, and anyone have a problem with it, feel free to leave. EBA is back up so I have no obligation to put up with those who want to continually alter this forum for the worse.

btw sobriquet/username, the rules were made after the mulga discussion threads you just posted [in fact mulga was the reason for the creation of the rules], so your ignorance of this community once again leaves only your spite and your negativity behind, and I think most of us have had a gut full of it. Good riddance.

[Green Osiris]

In order for me to maintain the tentative grip on my membership, albeit as a ‘P-Zoner”, may I enquire as to what rules were just broken here, so I (and others) can avoid such outcomes ?

Moderation Credibility: 100%

Posts Pending/Queued: 3

[Torsten]

In order for me to maintain the tentative grip on my membership, albeit as a ‘P-Zoner”, may I enquire as to what rules were just broken here, so I (and others) can avoid such outcomes ?

A combination of things - and you will find at least one of these amusing.

1) As someone with plenty of warnings sob should have paid more attention to his selection of sexist jokes. For a normal member it was simply in bad taste, for someone who has been repeatedly asked to stop pushing boundaries it was simply another test how far he could go.

2) I've had a discussion with a couple of mods this afternoon about you and sob and it was pointed out to me that you were actually not a problem until sob arrived. I reviewed a lot of your post history as I could honestly not remember there being a connection, and was quite surprised to see this confirmed. Now, I am not saying that sob had anythign to do with that as it may have just been a change in forum tone at the time, but given the problems we are facing it was certainly something that had to be considered. The mods certainly seemd to think so.

3) sob's last few posts clearly indicate that he had no interest in being given a second or third chance to stay here, but that his interest clearly lay in causing more trouble and continually pushing to see how far he can annoy members, mods and myself. His choice of suppporting evidence was also not wise as it truely reminded me of just how much energy can be wasted on one individual and how they often thrive on it. ie, I came to the conclusion that providing sob with any more opportunities is simply a waste of everyone's time.

note: the events of the last few days would not have been enough to come to that conclusion for any other member except those in the 'warned 5'. The decision is rooted firmly in the ongoing problems emanating from sobriquet. And yes, I am fully aware that I can't please everyone and that some people will be pissed off with the decision. But I figured I'd rather make that decision myself than to lose good moderators or to see more and more threads poisoned by sobriquet. Remember, as an apparently upper class head honcho I also have the fattest asbestos undies here . I don't always select mods for their resilience, but rather for their diplomacy and fairness. So it is not fair to expose them to a problem that is really shared by the whole forum rather than just one subforum. if people want to flame me, that's fine. I don't get upset about that stuff anymore. i just get fed up with it and walk away - eventually

Posts Pending/Queued: 3

The main draw back of mod queueing is the delay when mods don't show up all the time. I can only do my part - you'll have to wait for apoth to do his when he gets back online.

[Green Osiris]

This ‘warned 5’ that is so often discussed of late becomes somewhat perplexing to my simple mind. Whilst there may have been elements to suggest such warnings in public posts, if this has been the only ‘heads-up’, then it might be perceived as redundant. How can you be assured that each of the ‘5’ understood the public message, or for that matter even read it ? On the other hand, a PM to each of the parties would have alleviated any doubt as to the ‘fair-warning’ being credible. I for one have received no such PM from the administrator either prior to being P-Zoned nor since.

I've had a discussion with a couple of mods this afternoon about you and sob and it was pointed out to me that you were actually not a problem until sob arrived. I reviewed a lot of your post history as I could honestly not remember there being a connection, and was quite surprised to see this confirmed.

Surprised to see it confirmed that there is no connection? As members, we are all connected to one another. Was he playing me for a patsy, if observations have been concluded that I was ‘not a problem’ until his arrival? If so, I am ashamed to have fallen into the deeply sinister interwoven trap. Yea, fuck it, ban the S.O.B. I don’t even want him sharing the P-Zone with me, as this is my exclusive domain at least for the time being.

My query above is specific to the last thread that resulted in your claims/statements of fact that Sob will be banned, for it is this action that becomes the impetus for such finality. In itself, it is not sexist, racist, derogatory, homophobic, abusive or insulting. It’s undeniable that the post aims to further stimulate discussion that may not be appreciated, but that’s hardly a crime. For all you know it might have been me who alerted him to that thread in the first place. And by extension I might have been pointed towards the old posts by another party entirely unrelated to the threads of late. All is never quite what it seems when contributing amongst internet ‘pals‘.

Despite your quoted comments & abusive insults of times passed being prior to the formation of ‘Da Rules’, if the ‘spirit’ of the forums is to be taken as an unspoken law, the aforementioned examples paint a thought-provoking picture that has nothing to do with the reasons behind such verbal assault at the time , but the undeniable fact that you allowed your emotions to dictate such abusive public behaviour in the first place. And this is only one historical thread being utilised for the purpose of self-reflection. The gods of the hard-drives might hold many more. Note, there is no need nor relevance in dragging up the unfortunate circumstances of times long passed that brought about such rudeness, interested parties can quickly visit the link if bothered, to see how fucked that seemed to be. Sob's point appears to be simply about the insulting, which is the only pertinant example to 'today's' censorship/banning discussions.

The main draw back of mod queueing is the delay when mods don't show up all the time. I can only do my part - you'll have to wait for apoth to do his when he gets back online.

Absolutely, I may be simple, but I can appreciate that mods aren’t walking around with wireless laptops just to ensure speedy processing. The pending count is simply an information stream for all to consider, one that adds weight to the presently outstanding percentile figure. Which to this point is faultless on the part of your team.

Moderator Credibility: 100%

Posts pending: 3 (inclusive of this one)

Makes ya fink, dunnit.

[Green Osiris]

I also have the fattest asbestos undies here

Are you suggesting you have a big, hot arse ?

[Thelema]

Torsten probably didn't count on ol' thelema bringing this up, but there actually was (and maybe still is as far as I know) once an elitist subforum on SAB called "the conservation committee." it was restricted to bumchums who could afford to chuck in a couple of $100 a year to belong to the ethnobotanica committee and had a penchant for conservation.

http://www.shaman-australis.com/forum/inde...94&hl=forum

Uh huh, so next time someone agrees that something is indulgent wank, doesn't necessarily mean that they're not an indulgent wanker.

Just joking, Torsten's great. But it doesn't change the fact that there was an elitist subforum.

That's one good and annoying thing about old members. They remember things - a touchstone in this historically-amnesic society.

[Torsten]

Ok, I will indulge you a little more cos it's nearly my bedtime and I couldn't be fucked doing any work. But I must say that this is pretty much exactly the kind of stuff that just keeps on annoying. You are probably happy to hear that though.

This ‘warned 5’ that is so often discussed of late becomes somewhat perplexing to my simple mind. etc etc

Really, it doesn't suit intelligent people to play dumb. You were warned in threads that you were active in and in posts that you replied to, so at the very least in your case there is no doubt as to the warning. Ditto for sob as he too engaged on that basis. The others were partly warned publically, as well as getting details in private discussions [via PM]. The extra detail was provided as they wanted to get a bit more guidance as to what is OK and what isn't. Kinda like you and sob have done, except for they meant it rather than testing boundaries.

Surprised to see it confirmed that there is no connection? As members, we are all connected to one another. Was he playing me for a patsy, if observations have been concluded that I was ‘not a problem’ until his arrival? If so, I am ashamed to have fallen into the deeply sinister interwoven trap. Yea, fuck it, ban the S.O.B. I don’t even want him sharing the P-Zone with me, as this is my exclusive domain at least for the time being.

LOL, I am happy to take you out of the pzone if you give me an undertaking to leave your profile alone. That's the only purpose of you being in the pzone and now that thing are going to be a lot quieter I can handle keeping an eye on things. As for the mod queue I think it is a little early to review that. I still feel that regardless of whatever else is going on, anyone who refuses to edit an insult should not have direct posting privis as that would simply encourage such behaviour.

My query above is specific to the last thread that resulted in your claims/statements of fact that Sob will be banned, for it is this action that becomes the impetus for such finality. In itself, it is not sexist, racist, derogatory, homophobic, abusive or insulting.

YOU might be conveniently only looking at only that post, but I am looking at all the posts in the last 24-48 hours. Each little bit just adds to the whole decision. And even if this thread itself does not break any rules at all, it shows that all the other rule breaches are of no consequence to sob.

It’s undeniable that the post aims to further stimulate discussion that may not be appreciated, but that’s hardly a crime.

Discussion between who? There is hardly a thread where sob's contribution is of a positive or supportive nature. if all he can do it drag everyone down, play games, and manipulate people, then he is simply not welcome here. I much prefer to maintain a space where people feel they are unlikely to be attacked, ridiculed, baited or undermined, than to provide a playground for people who's intelligence is of little help to the community.

yes, discussion is good, but no, it doesn't have to be negative in every thread. That is a lesson you might want to take to heart too.

For all you know it might have been me who alerted him to that thread in the first place. And by extension I might have been pointed towards the old posts by another party entirely unrelated to the threads of late.

Who cares who alerted him to the thread? Most of the old timers know about that thread [and many others]. They are an important milestone in the existence of this forum, this community as a whole, and EBA. In fact, these threads are still there mostly unedited because of their significance. As I said, I am glad he brought them up because they reminded me that time is too precious to keep arguing with such individuals.

Despite your quoted comments & abusive insults of times passed being prior to the formation of ‘Da Rules’, if the ‘spirit’ of the forums is to be taken as an unspoken law, the aforementioned examples paint a thought-provoking picture that has nothing to do with the reasons behind such verbal assault at the time , but the undeniable fact that you allowed your emotions to dictate such abusive public behaviour in the first place. And this is only one historical thread being utilised for the purpose of self-reflection. The gods of the hard-drives might hold many more. Note, there is no need nor relevance in dragging up the unfortunate circumstances of times long passed that brought about such rudeness, interested parties can quickly visit the link if bothered, to see how fucked that seemed to be. Sob's point appears to be simply about the insulting, which is the only pertinant example to 'today's' censorship/banning discussions.

and your point is? The thread from 2002 is there. It represents one of the hardest times in my life and they also represent what happens when you give a sociopath the same rights as everyone else. Mulga ended up getting himself banned from several [all?] other forums and mailing lists for the way he carried on, and given the events of the time I am surprised that this is actually the extent of my insults.

It was this era that set the scene for develping a set of rules that would not allow such destructive forces to poison this forum again. Rules that protect individuals from lies, slander, stalkers and trolls. See, that is why the prevention of slander you seem to view as so insignificant is in fact at the core of forum policy. Maybe educate yourself a little more about the history of that era and you will understand why this is so important to me personally and to the way I feel the forum members need to be protected.

Makes ya fink, dunnit.

makes ya fink what?

[Torsten]

Torsten probably didn't count on ol' thelema bringing this up, but there actually was (and maybe still is as far as I know) once an elitist subforum on SAB called "the conservation committee." it was restricted to bumchums who could afford to chuck in a couple of $100 a year to belong to the ethnobotanica committee and had a penchant for conservation.

LOL, not quite. You really know how to omit things to suit your purpose eh

The committee was elected by the members of the association. All members paid their fees, which were about $100 which was actually the conference entrance fee. As the committee had to deal with association business PRIVATELY I set up a forum and made it invisible. Only committee memebrs were allowed access. It had to be a forum as the committee was distributed all over oz and a forum was the only way we could hold out meetings [eg to organise conferences]. This was an emergency solution and was shortly after replaced by a dedicated forum on the ethnobotanica server. All that is defunct now.

I short, it was NEVER an exclusive club for 'some' forum members, as some of the committee members weren't actually forum members and only had special passes to get into the committee forum. We never discussed anything other than conference organisational matters on that forum. And the place existed for about 2 weeks before I moved it to the other server. I really doubt anyone actually *wanted* to be there....

Also, it was not an ivory tower as anyone could have been elected to be on the committee.

[Green Osiris]

Ok, I will indulge you a little more

The more articulate a person is in their writing, the more obvious it becomes to all that certain styles are recognizable in their statements. For example if Sob was banned, only to return with a different ‘username (not ~username LOL), before long it would become apparent that the ‘new member’ was actually him all along. I broach this theory not only because it’s an interesting thought process I was considering yesterday that I thought I’d share, but also pertinent to your statement above….. You often make comments like this as if you are providing favours for people by responding to them. I would hazard a guess that I’m the last one to be receiving favours from you right now, rather that these statements serve to gloss over the reality that you simply MUST respond in order to maintain a vision in the eyes of the reading members that you are the one ‘most right’ in these situations. I’m not going to drag out other examples now (lazy), but I trust you might appreciate these observations on recognisable written personalities.

Really, it doesn't suit intelligent people to play dumb

Um, thank you ? I do not for a moment consider myself intelligent, nor do I believe I have expressly suggested any such self-aggrandising of myself. I’m simply utilising the native language that I was born into.

LOL, I am happy to take you out of the pzone if you give me an undertaking to leave your profile alone. That's the only purpose of you being in the pzone

The only purpose ? A comment as such contradicts previously stated reasons for me being P-Zoned (by the way, that’s a snappy little description for my status that I’m glad you are utilising). If we’re now at the point that you’re ’happy’ to re-instate real-time posting privvies under the basic condition outlined, then here goes:

• • • I, Green Osiris, undertake to manage my personal settings in a manner that serves to ensure no misleading content, intentional or otherwise.
      

 

 

 

 

For the record, the Admin Assistant title was in no way intended to mislead, for I assume (perhaps wrongly) that members would never perceive the GO entity as a part of the management board. As it turns out, it was somewhat apt, considering it compelled the administrator to fast-track the ‘sin-bin’ project you had been working on, the outcomes being that your system was tested in real-world environment to great effect. There are holes in the system though, that might allow me to slip items through (directly under the GO moniker that is) without being queued. This has been formulated by me only in theory, not in practice - and perhaps I’ll have no reason to put it to use. Once re-instated, I might share this with you in private, unless this comment gets the ol’ grey matter working further and you can identify what I’m speaking of.

As for the mod queue I think it is a little early to review that

Oh, I just re-read this. So the P-Zone is not the mod-queue, rather an secondary restriction? I’ve been dealt TWO unrelated controlling mechanisms - I don’t think anyone here realised that ! I thought they were two of the same. My mistake.

yes, discussion is good, but no, it doesn't have to be negative in every thread

Negative to some, thought-provoking to others………….

Maybe educate yourself a little more about the history of that era…..

Been done. Long time ago. Sounds fucked, and undeserved.

…..and you will understand why this is so important to me personally and to the way I feel the forum members need to be protected.

The point here wasn’t about the circumstances, it was about the abusive tone. No one can doubt that this was a very stressful time in your life, but it hardly excuses such awful insults. With the exception of onemind, I haven’t noticed such condensed vitriol from active members since I’ve been registered - (note to others, my join date isn’t exactly representative of my time here, for I was in a ‘position’ for almost 12 months where there was no possible access to technology) Still, I’ve viewed many thousands of posts, and this one seems to stand out. There’s no need for us to focus on this any longer, for it’s not fair on you to be re-hashing these shitty circumstances all over again.

makes ya fink what?

Bad English really is contagious ! It’s a stand alone statement. All of what has been presented, it makes you think. And that’s not a bad thing, exercising a most valuable muscle serves to make it stronger.

I don’t need it pointed out that the brain, or rather the mind isn’t a muscle.

MODERATOR CREDIBILITY: 100%

POSTED PENDING/QUEUED: 3 (including this one)

[nil]

this is all surreal. i'd comment, but i understand that commentary has no place in this situation. my six months as a shrouded muslim woman is finally paying off.

[FungalFractoids]

it reminds me of murple's forum where all new members had to write in convincing him why he should let them join. pass me the kleenex please.

ROFL, that guy is a twit. I've seen similar things happen with other psychedelic forums, they always end up failing miserably.

Edited February 11, 2007 by Chronik Fatigue

[Torsten]

You often make comments like this as if you are providing favours for people by responding to them. I would hazard a guess that I’m the last one to be receiving favours from you right now

As admin I have a duty to explain certain things to a certain level. I think I have explained this situation and all related circumstances thouroughly enough even before this post, so I won't be buying into any more of these posts. Go back over previous postings if you want the answers.

If we’re now at the point that you’re ’happy’ to re-instate real-time posting privvies under the basic condition outlined, then here goes:

The condition was that you do not change your profile [which has not been fulfilled]. And the reward is that you are not in a special members group. This will not change you posting privis.

So the P-Zone is not the mod-queue, rather an secondary restriction? I’ve been dealt TWO unrelated controlling mechanisms - I don’t think anyone here realised that ! I thought they were two of the same. My mistake.

It's was stated clearly in the initial action and was detailed in at least one other public discussion.

[nil]

The condition was that you do not change your profile [which has not been fulfilled]. And the reward is that you are not in a special members group. This will not change you posting privis.

which, by way of administrative admission on an open forum, actually means that you are still in a special members group, albeit one that isn't searchable via the 'members' link.

the standover stuff is bizarre.

t, you do have a brusque manner about you that seems to come across online as condescending and as though you're casting your pearls to swine. not just in these recent weeks or threads. i guess that's part of your personality and it's fortunate that a lot of people understand that's just part of who you are and don't knock you for it. or maybe they don't knock you for it because they want something from you. or maybe they're afraid if you don't like them nobody else in the ethno community will accept them. people are weird but. (not excluding myself.)

[Torsten]

which, by way of administrative admission on an open forum, actually means that you are still in a special members group, albeit one that isn't searchable via the 'members' link.

the standover stuff is bizarre.

I find the fact that some poeple feel it neccessary to constantly create more work for the mods and admin, or to crap into every other thread even more bizarre. I also find it bizarre that some other folks would support that.

The irony of the situation hasn't passed me by and next time when we have a trouble maker I will give them a personal choce to be sin binned or deleted. That way onlookers with attitude can't jump on some sort of bizarre bandwagon. I realise that anarchists will always object to any sort of intervention, so I am not terribly troubled by that fact. This is not an anarchist forum, it is designed to be a safe space.

[ramon]

t, you do have a brusque manner about you that seems to come across online as condescending and as though you're casting your pearls to swine. not just in these recent weeks or threads. i guess that's part of your personality and it's fortunate that a lot of people understand that's just part of who you are and don't knock you for it. or maybe they don't knock you for it because they want something from you. or maybe they're afraid if you don't like them nobody else in the ethno community will accept them. people are weird but. (not excluding myself.)

seems to me as do t, is being very tolerant. If I had to deal with the problems of late I would have just chosen to ban troublemakers a long time ago. Problems is that does being given extra chances don't appreciate that fact.

[Thelema]

Too many words guys. Isn't there something better to do with thinking than this puerile posturing?

Giving atention to attention seekers acts as positive reinforcement, and not all words must be addressed lest one fall under the bewitchment of language.

[Green Osiris]

Too many words guys. Isn't there something better to do with thinking than this puerile posturing?

Giving atention to attention seekers acts as positive reinforcement, and not all words must be addressed lest one fall under the bewitchment of language.

It's akin to throwing a few breadcrums into a bucket of hungry carp.