User Tag List

First 1234513 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 213

  1. #21
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    175

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wind Up Rex View Post
    If the forum is supposed to be dedicated first and foremost to its members' ability to explore what they feel and why they feel this way, then their belief that their sense of psychological security and well-being will be respected is a pretty necessary feature of the whole experience.

    Therefore, the biggest issue that you're running into is that the whole forum was setup to be a safe space by definition. As long as Highlander remains committed to the idea that this is a forum for self-exploration, then it's in his interest as the owner to maintain that.
    Aye, but there is one big flaw in your logic regarding this. You see, this is a typology forum. However, the thread about "dear men" which brought up so much attention, wasn't in an area connected to actual types. It is located under -> Psychology -> Relationships. See for yourself.

    So, if this is a forum that ONLY wants to deal with personality types, then it should restrict itself to that alone and be done with it. However, if you actually want to deal with general issues, that are happening elsewhere without the need of "safe spaces", then the rules of engagement change. Typology topics aren't restricted just to people interested in typology just as general topics aren't restricted to general users. To me, this speaks again, of doublethink. You are either tackling generic issues and act accordingly, or you don't, you don't get to eat your cake and still have it.

    There is a saying" People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. I think you should remember that. As far as I am concerned, that thread was in a generic section, outside the typology subforums, so I find your explanation to be weak.

    Why am I on this forum? Because a friend recommended it as being more relaxed and more open to free speech than the Politically Correct Cafe. And I did it because that friend spent more time here and I wanted to be around to chat every now and then.

    Quote Originally Posted by Anaximander View Post
    @Wind Up Rex @highlander @mystik_INFJ

    That's my point. It's a niche forum. Eliminate superfluous politics, entertainment, et al subforums and associated discussion unless any discussion of those topics ties to typology in some form--what is Trump's/Clinton's type? Perfectly fine. Why is Clinton lying about emails/why is Trump orange and bloated? Not acceptable. Feminism rocks/sucks? Not acceptable. What is Gloria Steinem's type? Acceptable.

    I've no problem with it being a safe space for type discussions, but the problem is the mods seem to want the best of both worlds and straddle the fence between safe niche forum and anything goes, all topics are allowed, feelings may be potentially bruised smorgasbord. Still allowing discussions on non-type, potentially controversial topics while enforcing a safe policy that might be difficult to objectively enforce could be problematic.

    My solution will also make the mods' jobs much easier.
    Well said indeed. I don't think limiting the topics is the way. Just clearing out some of the subjective and irrelevant rules that are there to protect the feelings of a irrelevant minority that can't stand having their opinions challenged, even if done so harshly.

  2. #22
    Sweet Summer Dik Dik yama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Posts
    7,732

    Default

    I don't understand the controversy. This is only a problem for people who don't have common sense or decency. People who don't act like assholes don't get banned. It really is not hard. The people who get banned aren't being banned for disagreeing with an idea, but how they deliver that disagreement.
    Likes prplchknz, CitizenErased, Ivy, Hard, Oaky and 3 others liked this post

  3. #23
    darkened dreams labyrinthine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    isfp
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    8,595

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Anaximander View Post
    @Wind Up Rex @highlander @mystik_INFJ

    That's my point. It's a niche forum. Eliminate superfluous politics, entertainment, et al subforums and associated discussion unless any discussion of those topics ties to typology in some form--what is Trump's/Clinton's type? Perfectly fine. Why is Clinton lying about emails/why is Trump orange and bloated? Not acceptable. Feminism rocks/sucks? Not acceptable. What is Gloria Steinem's type? Acceptable.

    I've no problem with it being a safe space for type discussions, but the problem is the mods seem to want the best of both worlds and straddle the fence between safe niche forum and anything goes, all topics are allowed, feelings may be potentially bruised smorgasbord. Still allowing discussions on non-type, potentially controversial topics while enforcing a safe policy that might be difficult to objectively enforce could be problematic.

    My solution will also make the mods' jobs much easier.
    The following comments do not refer to any one individual, but to the principle of this issue.

    I have never seen topic discussion as the problem because a lot of it relates to the typology forum in general. How do different personalities approach politics, etc.

    The problem is when debate turns into an avalanche of personal attacks, so that no topic is being discussed, but rather people are just in pure social power dominance play at a low level of intellectual exchange. Differing opinion is never a problem when the debate is conducted with some tie to rationality. When "debate" turns into nothing but emoticons and personal attacks, then they should be on a trolling site, not a typology site. There are sites designed for people who just want to fight and say hateful things. Is 4Chan still up and running? Even some of the type specific sites allow more rough play. Those are the sites for that sort of discourse. People have complete freedom to behave any way they want if they just find the right forum -or create their own.

    And yes, there is an issue for personal emotional safety here. We each have some responsibility for how we affect other people. People discuss rape, assault, divorce, depression, relationship issues, death, mental illness, etc. as an extension of psychology and personality. So if people are attacking others, the people for whom a forum like this is designed will leave and all the people who just enjoy fighting will stay. There is going to be some type of culture here, so who gets to decide?

    If you subscribe to the field of psychology, which this forum does, then you subscribe to the issues of how words injure people because psychology research has verified this as fact. The personal desire to have no responsibility for what you say does not mean that you are not responsible for what you say, it just means that you are causing more harm in this world than you choose to be conscious of causing.
    Step into my metaphysical room of mirrors.
    Fear of reality creates myopic morality
    So I guess it means there is trouble until the robins come
    (from Blue Velvet)

  4. #24
    darkened dreams labyrinthine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    isfp
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    8,595

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mystik_INFJ View Post
    Well said indeed. I don't think limiting the topics is the way. Just clearing out some of the subjective and irrelevant rules that are there to protect the feelings of a irrelevant minority that can't stand having their opinions challenged, even if done so harshly.
    What if YOU are the irrelevant minority that can't stand having their opinions challenged, even if done harshly?
    Step into my metaphysical room of mirrors.
    Fear of reality creates myopic morality
    So I guess it means there is trouble until the robins come
    (from Blue Velvet)
    Likes prplchknz, yama, Hard liked this post

  5. #25
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    175

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yamato Nadeshiko View Post
    I don't understand the controversy. This is only a problem for people who don't have common sense or decency. People who don't act like assholes don't get banned. It really is not hard. The people who get banned aren't being banned for disagreeing with an idea, but how they deliver that disagreement.
    Indeed, you don't understand. The problem isn't that people don't have common sense or act like assholes or how to deliver an idea. The problem comes from "who decides what is common sense, the level of assholeness, or if a delivery is good or not"? You can try and present abstract concepts like "objective morality" but when I ask you to clearly define, to the letter, what is considered OK and not, you will fail. I challenge you to get rid of all the gray areas in anything concerning the forum and leave only clear cut black and white situations. Because if you can actually do that, I think that the rules to cover everything you can think of may be more than the constitution of a country. This is why fewer but more efficient rules are better than more and needlessly complicated ones, like "catering to fee-fees", of some oversensitive 3rd party that has daddy issues. Comprendes ahora, amigo?

  6. #26
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Interestingly, I know of a safe-space forum dedicated to supporting a particular minority group.

    While there are some "free" areas topically, all discussions on religion and politics are banned because they inevitably disrupt the forum purpose, and the admin is very strict on that matter. The forum doesn't have a ton of traffic, but what traffic there is can rely on the space being safe and serving the overall purpose of "support."

    I think it was understood when the forum here was created that the core was typology but there was some desire to give freedom for other topics of discussion because people had such interests. It just seems nowadays that "Politics / Social Issues" ends up dominating a lot of the daily activity, and with a lot of intense backbiting crap. (It's not just here on this forum, I have been watching it on the other two type forums I've participated on.) It would be a shame if those kinds of areas had to be shut down completely; I think enforcing a particular environment was the alternative to doing something severe and having to make particular topics off-limits.

    Is that "having your cake and eating it too?" Is it possible to actually talk politics and social issues without being an asshat? I would hope so. The problem is the lowest common denominator usually dominates said discussions because it gives them more power in the conversation and drives off people who don't want to deal with (or don't benefit from) that level of animosity, and then that can filter into other areas of the forum as well.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  7. #27
    breaking out of my cocoon SearchingforPeace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/so
    Socionics
    EIE None
    Posts
    6,596

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Anaximander View Post
    I see this as a well intentioned, well thought policy change, ON PAPER. I can already see how it won't work as well as intended.

    As much as it would suck to see happen, I think the solution might be a straight, across the board ban on any non type related discussions. This is a niche forum, so treat it as such. Controversial topics and speech, as others have noted, have venues on a number of other forums and social media subgroups dedicated to those non-type niche subjects..
    The problem is all the non typology threads also have typology elements. They really illuminate how type impacts how people that appear rational and reasonable can interprete the same data and come up with widely different perceptions and understanding.

    The process can be messy. And without the benefit of face to face interaction, we all have the regular limitations of the Internet to deal with.

    Additionally, while typology is the main focus, psychology is a significant element as well. And psychology can both be the idea in the macro, but also in the very personal. Only a few here, if any, are truly self-actualized and free from ego constructs without room for growth.

    I really appreciate what @PeaceBaby wrote in the soft censorship thread. There is often an appearance of arbitrariness.

    I do feel like there is a type related issue in some of the bans of the past year, as well as political bias ones. Some appear to have been really unfair. And one seemed to be more about discomfort with what the banned member perceived than any behavior.

    Plenty of things can feel offensive. I don't do trolling. I don't enjoy trolling. But I do understand the necessity of highly provocative behavior against entrenched beliefs. People easily get stuck in a mindset and can't see the issues with the mindset. They believe things without understanding. And so radical confrontation can be necessary. Or just memes and videoes.

    The civil rights movement was a great example of this. So many didn't see the problem with how things were, so it took brave folks to move a nation.

    The problem is that such behavior can cause cognitive dissonance. People can't see how horribly wrong their own thoughts and mindset can be. So, it causes pain. They get triggered. Simple basic statements of facts result in extreme responses.

    But it is through this process that people can grow and learn.

    So pain is not fundementally bad. Learning to confront it and understand it leads to growth.

    Tightly moderating the forum isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it can kill it as well. In looking over old threads here, I saw a lot of very interesting and profound discussions, some that were pretty heated. When I first joined, I soon learned that many here were burned out and battle scared from typology discussions. Often, new members step on a land mine without understanding (such as Fe vs Fi).

    I like this forum a lot. I find it wonderful that we do have people of so many different viewpoints and types interacting.
    Quote Originally Posted by Archilochus
    The fox knows many things--the hedgehog one big one.
    And I am not a hedgehog......

    -------------------

    Jesus said "Blessed are the peacemakers" not "blessed are the conflict avoiders.....

    9w8 6w5 4w5 sx/so

    ----------------------

    “Orthodoxy means not thinking--not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.”
    ― George Orwell, 1984
    Likes Wind Up Rex, Floki, FutureInProgress liked this post

  8. #28
    my floof is luxury Wind Up Rex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    853 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mystik_INFJ View Post
    Aye, but there is one big flaw in your logic regarding this. You see, this is a typology forum. However, the thread about "dear men" which brought up so much attention, wasn't in an area connected to actual types. It is located under -> Psychology -> Relationships. See for yourself.

    So, if this is a forum that ONLY wants to deal with personality types, then it should restrict itself to that alone and be done with it. However, if you actually want to deal with general issues, that are happening elsewhere without the need of "safe spaces", then the rules of engagement change. Typology topics aren't restricted just to people interested in typology just as general topics aren't restricted to general users. To me, this speaks again, of double think. You are either tackling generic issues and act accordingly, or you don't.

    There is a saying" People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. I think you should remember that. As far as I am concerned, that thread was in a generic section, outside the typology subforums, so I find your explanation to be weak.
    I actually get the sense that there was some point in time where the staff just sort of let it go when it came to the current affairs topics. They stepped in when things got really out of hand, but for the most part just let nature take its course.

    What resulted from that was that the frequency of controversial threads increased, and those posting controversial viewpoints started derailing threads that were more personal with those views.

    People don't compartmentalize all that well. If this forum was as big as reddit and people could post about puppies in one subforum and big bootied Aryan cheerleaders elsewhere, and never run into each other, then I think your point would follow a bit more for me. TypoC is like a little backwater town with one Walmart where everyone knows each other. If you take a shit in front of the Walmart, people will continue to feel a way about it at the Luby's. It's not logical, but there it is.

    And I think that kind of bring things to a larger point, which is that all of this is personal. If someone is shitting in front of the Walmart and then becomes belligerent because his personal freedoms are being violated when he gets banned from Walmart, it by no means follows to close down the Walmart because it's destroying the First Amendment. The issue is not the Walmart. The issue is the dude who's taking the dump. It doesn't matter if there's like...1 or 5 or whatever number of people doing this. Especially if there's dozens of other people who are able to enjoy their Walmart shopping experience and for the most part poop where it is appropriate.

    Again, it comes back to goals. There's a lot of places where someone can debate ideas, but not as many places where you can go and delve into the experiences and personality that informs those beliefs.

  9. #29
    Sweet Summer Dik Dik yama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Posts
    7,732

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mystik_INFJ View Post
    Indeed, you don't understand. The problem isn't that people don't have common sense or act like assholes or how to deliver an idea. The problem comes from "who decides what is common sense, the level of assholeness, or if a delivery is good or not"? You can try and present abstract concepts like "objective morality" but when I ask you to clearly define, to the letter, what is considered OK and not, you will fail. I challenge you to get rid of all the gray areas in anything concerning the forum and leave only clear cut black and white situations. Because if you can actually do that, I think that the rules to cover everything you can think of may be more than the constitution of a country. This is why fewer but more efficient rules are better than more and needlessly complicated ones, like "catering to fee-fees", of some oversensitive 3rd party that has daddy issues. Comprendes ahora, amigo?
    I was going to give a real response to this, but I think the end of your paragraph is a perfect example of "unnecessary assholishness with bad delivery." Your post was absolutely fine up until the fee fees and daddy issues portion with a condescending and insulting tone. Was that really necessary to get your point across? Was there absolutely no other way to word it other than in a provocative manner meant to elicit emotionally reactive responses?
    Likes prplchknz, PeaceBaby, Ivy, Hawthorne, Hard liked this post

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    10,081

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SearchingforPeace View Post
    The problem is all the non typology threads also have typology elements. They really illuminate how type impacts how people that appear rational and reasonable can interprete the same data and come up with widely different perceptions and understanding.

    The process can be messy. And without the benefit of face to face interaction, we all have the regular limitations of the Internet to deal with.

    Additionally, while typology is the main focus, psychology is a significant element as well. And psychology can both be the idea in the macro, but also in the very personal. Only a few here, if any, are truly self-actualized and free from ego constructs without room for growth.

    I really appreciate what @PeaceBaby wrote in the soft censorship thread. There is often an appearance of arbitrariness.

    I do feel like there is a type related issue in some of the bans of the past year, as well as political bias ones. Some appear to have been really unfair. And one seemed to be more about discomfort with what the banned member perceived than any behavior.

    Plenty of things can feel offensive. I don't do trolling. I don't enjoy trolling. But I do understand the necessity of highly provocative behavior against entrenched beliefs. People easily get stuck in a mindset and can't see the issues with the mindset. They believe things without understanding. And so radical confrontation can be necessary. Or just memes and videoes.

    The civil rights movement was a great example of this. So many didn't see the problem with how things were, so it took brave folks to move a nation.

    The problem is that such behavior can cause cognitive dissonance. People can't see how horribly wrong their own thoughts and mindset can be. So, it causes pain. They get triggered. Simple basic statements of facts result in extreme responses.

    But it is through this process that people can grow and learn.

    So pain is not fundementally bad. Learning to confront it and understand it leads to growth.

    Tightly moderating the forum isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it can kill it as well. In looking over old threads here, I saw a lot of very interesting and profound discussions, some that were pretty heated. When I first joined, I soon learned that many here were burned out and battle scared from typology discussions. Often, new members step on a land mine without understanding (such as Fe vs Fi).

    I like this forum a lot. I find it wonderful that we do have people of so many different viewpoints and types interacting.
    I'm just concerned that statement of facts or personal opinions might be easier to write off as hate speech under the new guidelines. Maybe it won't happen, most likely it won't be a widespread problem, but the possibility is still there. Then I only see more people becoming alienated and leaving. Some will be undesirables who won't be missed by a majority of members, but what happens when valued members start leaving?
    Likes SearchingforPeace, gromit liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. Would you vote hel's cat for forum moderator?
    By magpie in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 93
    Last Post: 10-10-2017, 11:54 AM
  2. Replies: 370
    Last Post: 02-07-2016, 09:54 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO