Is there a need for a new sub-forum?

[Jud]

Jud, this is great! I've not seen this technique used anywhere. Seems it would be reasonable and quite effective.

 

I can tell you that at the blog where I saw it used - Pharyngula - Just another site - it was *very* effective. Who wants their comments reduced to risible semi-unintelligibility?

[christopher3393]

Precisely!

 

I am posting again about these matters because it has reached a critical mass, in my view, for all the reasons that Jsmith and others have expressed. Different models of the World contributes to diversity and lively discussions and no one I am aware of objects to those activities at CA if that is one's choice. But it is divisive to justify what is clearly perceived by many members as antagonistic and derisive as dismissive of their point of view. If it is a matter of sensibility, or personalty traits, and a member does not perceive what is appropriate, then someone needs to help that member. Ironically, some members are comfortable with communicating in a critical manner and become defensive. If we support each other in maintaining a reasonable standard for exchanges at CA, lively exchanges can still exist. Laissez-faire, turning a deaf ear to expressions which alienate set a climate of discomfort and threatens the integrity of free exchanges.

 

In the midst of this fallout, one member who apologized for past behaviors to make amends asks disingenuously if another member first language is English. Another member expresses a preference for carnage vs deepening the connection, whether the response was artificial or not. Both members have a history of insensitivity to others. And look to the other person as deserving of ridicule.

 

I support making a commitment to the CA community to take a stand against the complex of behaviors that finally resulted in a ban, which occurs infrequently, but is rampant at CA. I believe there is a consensus amongst those of us who enjoy this hobby that incidents of unacceptable behavior from certain members needs curing. Threads are consistently hijacked with OT posts. Members take pot shots at others to express their POV in the guise of humor or to save the rest of us from being hoodwinked, misled as if they are the Enlightened and the Entitled. Too often any attempt to reason with them is met with further disdain if not contempt, criticism, stonewalling or sarcasm. As those behaviors are fatal to couples in relationship leading too often in divorce, here at CA members leave, take sides into factions and pervade the threads with impunity because it has been decided their behavior, repugnant to others, are in the bounds of what is tolerated at CA until something so repugnant attracts Chris Connacker's attention who dispenses an intervention.

 

Given there is room for humor, edgy exchanges, disagreement, and a variety of other dynamics, that should not give license to take those behaviors into the realms of excessive, repetitive undesirable attitudes. You know it when you hear it. Except those who seem to delight in those dynamics and gravitate to conflict for their amusement or because they lack character. Trying to be careful with my remarks. Forums are open and democratic and composed of diverse personalities such that it can easily become difficult to agree on what is what.

 

I prefer to express my concern openly. I prefer the membership create the most welcoming and free climate for the exchange of information, love of music and camaraderie at CA for this hobby that we visit with considerable attention. This represents my commitment to the community in the best interests. I join all those who want more desirable experiences and less undesirable experiences. I believe it is more about taking personal responsibility than having a moderator decide what is. Banning is unfortunate unless a member dismisses feedback and persists.

 

CA is what we members for our part make it. Chris Connacker does his part. I have been a student of Huna for over thirty years. They believe it is a sin to hurt oneself, or another or the space you are in. When I enter CA, I regard my time here as if I have invited others to my home, welcome them, treat them accordingly as my guest.

 

In support of the best interests of CA.

 

Richard

 

Hats off, Richard! The commitments and practices you've engaged in for decades have served you well. I don't understand the particularities of the perspective and practice you have trained in, and I would have a number of questions to be able to discern how much I'm in sync with you, but regardless, what you wrote rings true.

 

I have to confess that I don't have a problem with philosophical arguments if they are genuine. I believe that everyone has a philosophy, but often this is tacit. I also would tend to favor the position that exploring presuppositions may be essential to achieving any genuine harmony, and that it is harder work than most would want to do on a site that identifies itself as recreational for a particular hobby, with the goal of enjoyment. For me, and I'm sure for others, there is at least on occasion, more at stake. At its best, the pursuit of music is a pursuit of direct experience of beauty, truth, and wisdom in music. I personally believe that there can be a profound ecstatic quality to listener's experience, and that this can be elusive as well. And I continually wonder about the role of sound quality in making that experience accessible. I do wonder to what extent this can become a Faustian bargain, but still continue to explore.