I am new to this type of site and am still learning the way it works. I say this to say that I may have made some mistakes. However I am trying to correct them. I have been a long time follower of the LOA and have done very well. Basically a happy person following my joy. Still learning, still growing.
I very much like this format and want to contribute, I have learned a lot here. I like it that people searching Google can find answers in the vast treasure trove of spiritual understanding here.
I let an IQ member get under my skin and said some things I wish I had not. He seems to have a communication problem that may be because English is not his native language.
He seems to miss the point that others are trying to make and insists that his way is the only way and that God will punish those who disagree with him.
Recently he called me a "dirty little pig" I flagged the post to moderation.
I am not blameless in this interaction.
I am looking for an answer and ask your consideration.
It's not clear what you are asking us to do.
We don't operate a censorship policy on Inward Quest. People are free to express their points of view as they wish provided they don't abuse or intimidate others. The IQ voting system naturally surfaces the most relevant and helpful answers to the top based upon the community view.
The price of freedom of expression is that some people will express themselves in ways that others may not like. But the alternative to that is some kind of official censorship and, I'm sure you agree, that is a road that none of us want to go down.
While you did flag the "pig" comment to the moderators, you did imply first the other member was a pig in an earlier analogy of yours in a different thread. From what I can see, this subsequent "pig" comment that was made was related to that. A moderator cannot be expected to step in and issue a warning when you yourself used the term first in relation to the other member.
Regarding the flagging incident, there is no conspiracy. We simply never envisaged that the flagging system on IQ would be used in relation to established members of the site so it is not anonymized. Usually, flagging is to highlight postings by new members of the site who are obviously spamming or trolling and it doesn't matter in those cases who is highlighting the issue to the moderators.
You said at the end of your question that you were looking for an answer so, in that case, I can suggest to you an easy solution that doesn't involve us needing to impose a censorship policy. And that solution is to point out to you that it takes two people to have an argument and, at any stage, either one could stop interacting with the other and any arguments would end immediately.
answered Mar 28 '12 at 04:46
Simon Templeton ♦♦
Hi Dollar Bill,
My observation is that you may be making a mountain out of a mole hill.
Not that many people will even read all of your comments or care about what you have said in any particular comment. And because those comments are of a personal nature and are brought about by a disagreement or an argument with a another forum member; people understand that heat is generated and egos are activated. It's kind of entertaining and nothing to worry about in my opinion :)
As Simon rightly pointed out:
And in addition to that idea, if you see ego in another, the comments section can be used in ways which test the status of your own ego. And in that process you will find ways to express yourself, even more clearly than you do currently...
Have fun with it and use it to improve yourself, it's all good :)
btw does it really matter what anyone else thinks?
answered Mar 29 '12 at 01:21
Thank you Simon and Eddie. I am realizing that the biggest problem was that I was the major abrasive member. I re-programmed myself for new options and am finding his posts much more agreeable. It does take two to argue, I can change the loop by my response.
Email, lacking tempo, tonality and body language of person-to-person communication can be a tricky medium. With his, lets say "nonstandard" use of English spelling and grammar, it is difficult to understand whether he is pontificating as God or as himself, but the distinction is really irrelevant.
I can reprogram my response for my greatest happiness and that is all that matters. The process I posted of using your inner resources works in dramatic ways for me. I just need to remember to use it!
I feel a peculiar bond, now with WT. I intuit something very different here, it does seem as though he is some kind of alter ego speaking. Variances in style and presentation indicate an interesting resonating powerful personality, but the unevenness of his presentation is most curious. He has the intellect, yet makes continual easily correctable mistakes.
Intentional mistakes and misspelling can be subtle, but effective pattern interrupts that allow embedded commands greater power. I mention this with only mild curiosity.
I think that most of us, here, write like me, Eddie and Stingray, in a flow of consciousness, wondering what we will say next! Just need to stay connected to Source and it all works out.
I am here, more to learn than teach. I find my most effective process is to externalize my internal dialog, conversationally.
Regardless of the above musings, I am having a great time here! Let me get my molehills in proper perspective. Uh oh, getting an inspiration for a new post!
answered Mar 30 '12 at 07:56
@simon tempelton I appreciate your response. You ask what I want? What I would like, if possible, is to delete certain remarks that I made while I was in an un-resourceful state. I have been able to delete some of them, but as some had other members remarks as addenda, I was unable to do so.
I am embarrassed that I allowed myself to get in such a state. It is not my usual, I was dealing with some unrelated business and personal problems (which have been miraculously solved) and let that mood spill over. I do want to state that my main reason for wanting these remarks of mine deleted is that I feel it may reflect poorly on Inward Quest when other people come seeking help and direction.
I can stand by my foibles when I make them, admit and work on myself, but I don't want these silly remarks to sully Inward Quest in the eyes of those who come seeking help. Whatever else goes on as far as myself, this is really irrelevant.
I feel that caustic emails, if EVER necessary, should go on in private!
This site is dedicated to spiritual pursuits, to understanding, to helping each other attain happiness, peace and harmony
That someone calls me a pig is irrelevant. If it is true, there is no argument, if it is untrue it is meaningless. If this damages someone else, I want to somehow rectify it.
I have spent some time in reading posts made by the other member. It appears that his heart is good and he is intelligent, he makes some good points. To me, and others, he is hard to understand, grammar, syntax and spelling. But he is trying to help. Much of what he says I don't understand and will ask him for clarification.
I have learned a lot about myself in this interaction and find this personally valuable.
I am sorry that I instigated and allowed acrimonious public silliness.
I would like to know what, if anything, I can do to set this right.
I will be very careful to control this aspect of myself and if I feel it surfacing ever again, to not make any posts here until I am in a better state.
I am not suggesting censorship on IQ. I am trying to better understand what you mean by "People are free to express their points of view as they wish provided they don't abuse or intimidate others." All arguments are rules violations. You have rules and I have rules, we have arguments when your rules and mine clash.
I am a guest in your home, as such there are rules here that you (I use this 'you' in a general sense to represent IQ) want followed. What is abuse and intimidation? Personally I feel that I acted in an abusive manner, but am not sure what you meant by this in your FAQs, but in re-reading my posts, I feel I did. I am not trying to split hairs, here and recognize the difficulty in your expressing definitions of 'abuse' and 'intimidation'.
These terms vary in personal context and definition. Recently a contractor, putting a roof on one of my rentals said, "You are a wealthy old f**king, fart, aren't you?" I laughed and agreed. Not considered abuse to me, but it was considered abuse by my foreman.
We all walk a fine line between expressing ourselves and stepping on someone else's toes. I will be more careful not to violate any of my own rules as I did earlier and I think that we are enough on the same page that this will work to both our benefits.
BUT I ask that if you, or any other person on IQ feel I am being abusive or trying to intimidate someone, please bring it to my attention! If I feel, by my rules, that I have done so, I will work to correct the situation. If I feel I have not been abusive and we have a serious rules miss-match, I will quietly leave. But I doubt this will happen.
We are all strong willed and outspoken people. We have a passion in our expressions, but if that passion crosses rules in someone else's home, it is time to talk.
answered Mar 28 '12 at 21:35