Seth Ananda needing to be banned

[scotty2000]

Apparently you're incapable of grasping what I said...again. So I will just not answer your stupid question. Fuck off.

[Sunya]

Apparently you're incapable of grasping what I said...again. So I will just not answer your stupid question. Fuck off.

 

It seems you're so angry you can't think clearly. By saying "if there was no moderation, Seth and I would have worked things out easily. This forum functioned awesomely in the past without mods" is basically saying, well quite obviously, that you would have preferred to work things out without getting the mods involved as they are unnecessary to the functioning of this forum. Yet, that's the total opposite of what you did. Instead of PMing Seth or me and trying to directly work things out, you chose instead to start this thread and whine, whine, whine to the mods. See the hypocrisy?

[dawei]

I'm not being provocative. I'm stating the facts.

While I can't agree with many things said in the thread, this is worth looking at; it is down right raw and real and how many people feel. One person may say you are being obnoxious and belligerent, yet you may say it is simply a fact (of observation).

 

Honestly, I think this is true in more cases than not; meaning, what we think is an obnoxious statement is to THAT person a fact (observation). Where the distortion lies is an interesting issue to consider, IMO, and where moderation finds itself entangled.

 

Although I think Sunya crossed too many lines already and should not of ever been to the point of stating this idea... I am nonetheless happy to agree with its point

 

Scotty has also crossed too many lines (and too many logins) to say more, but there is a kernel of truth in a few words shared.

Edited September 8, 2011 by dawei

[scotty2000]

WELL WHY DIDN'T YOU THEN?

 

By the way...go back to the thread and see. I actually did work things out, and Seth chose to as well, instead of continuing.

[Sunya]

By the way...go back to the thread and see. I actually did work things out, and Seth chose to as well, instead of continuing.

 

hmm... then how do you explain this?

 

http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/20404-seth-ananda-needing-to-be-banned/

[scotty2000]

I made this thread before I "worked it out".

 

He needed to be suspended (since there ARE moderators and rules here currently), but it wasn't happening.

 

So that's why. If it doesn't make sense to you, then I can't help. All I can say is: fuck off.

 

I can also say: you still need to be suspended. If there were no moderators or rules, I'd settle it with you in my favorite way! But there are, so I can't...and can only expect the mods to do their fucking job.

 

Here is a key part of the insult policy:

 

No personal attacks.

Moderators are present to enforce this

 

Are they???

Edited September 8, 2011 by scotty7000

[Sunya]

lol why do you care so much about moderators enforcing policies when you said "if there was no moderation, Seth and I would have worked things out easily. This forum functioned awesomely in the past without mods"???

 

In this case for a while there was no moderation. You could've worked things out without involving the mods. But you didn't. You whined and whined to get Seth banned and ended up getting banned yourself since you were extremely provocative and disrespectful. Well, all of this could've been avoided if you simply were respectful in the first place and worked out the issues you create with people directly, instead of running to authority to punish people who hurt your pride and then whining when this authority recognizes that you too were at fault.

Edited September 8, 2011 by Sunya

[Ambrose_Bierce]

Please stop guys.

[Stigweard]

I made this thread before I "worked it out".

 

He needed to be suspended (since there ARE moderators and rules here currently), but it wasn't happening.

 

So that's why. If it doesn't make sense to you, then I can't help. All I can say is: fuck off.

 

I can also say: you still need to be suspended. If there were no moderators or rules, I'd settle it with you in my favorite way! But there are, so I can't...and can only expect the mods to do their fucking job.

 

Here is a key part of the insult policy:

 

 

 

Are they???

Heya Scotty, if Sunya was suspended, and I agree that he should be, would you consider chilling your own heels for a few days just to get your feelings settled? Not in a "suspension" format, but just a few days away from posting with any of your logins just to let the dust settle??

 

Does that sound like a reasonable request??

 

[Sunya]

I see no reason for me to be suspended. Let's take a look at my 'insults'

 

1. I'm not Seth. I'm not posting this to defend his actions. I chose to tell you how much of an arrogant snob you are in private.

 

I was merely stating a fact, not directly calling Scott an arrogant snob, but stating the fact that I called Scott that in private rather than directly attack him in public. It wasn't an insult, but a recollection of what happened. What caused me to say this? Perhaps it was this:

 

you're just speaking out of your ass. Nothing new there, brah.

 

On the other hand, I DO claim to understand Buddhism. I know Taoism is superior. I know that Buddhist enlightenment is the first step in some schools of Taoist alchemy. I know that my realization is greater than yours (in fact, you should too since we discussed that).

 

So...fucking deal with it.

 

 

and

 

I'll just be plainly honest, since I've had quite the weekend:

 

WHO GIVES A SHIT?

 

 

I'm not interested in Buddhist nonsense, and I'm even less interested in people who feel the need to spout it out and never achieve anything substantial. Get to practice! Then I'll be interested in what you have to say!

 

and then of course Scott calling us 'pseudo-Buddhists' because we don't agree with his claim that Buddhist is inferior to Taoism.

 

2. at least sheds some light on who we're dealing with, a very angry and mentally unstable individual who doesn't like being called out on his shit.

 

Let's look at the whole message I posted:

 

I just wanted to share a message I received from Scotty in private. Not on the forum, but it at least sheds some light on who we're dealing with, a very angry and mentally unstable individual who doesn't like being called out on his shit.

 

(8:26:52 PM) Scotty: sup, you butt hurt moron. suck my rectum. :-D

(8:27:15 PM) Scotty: lick the shit clean out of it...it will be more pure than the words you speak

 

Clearly from the message he sent me, Scott was very angry and acting mentally unstable. Is it really an insult to conclude that from the message he sent?

 

3. my god Scott you're acting like such a drama queen.

 

Acting like a drama queen is an analogy for how Scott has been acting in this thread, which I doubt anyone will disagree with. He's been making a huge deal out of things would would've been forgotten by now and calling a lot of attention onto himself on purpose. If that isn't 'acting like a drama queen' I don't know what it is. An observation to describe how he's acting.

 

4. can you stop acting like such a rape victim

 

Again an analogy. Scott has been acting like he was defiled in some extreme way and is calling for justice, like a rape victim would, except the seriousness of these 'crimes' hardly justify the ridiculous behavior we've seen from Scott. So me saying he's acting like a rape victim was actually a joke to point out that he's making a huge deal out of nothing.

 

Let me repeat again that the only reason Scotty is freaking out so much about me not being suspended is because he wants me punished for hurting his pride. Not because I insulted him (clearly these are light jabs and not worth suspension) but because I called out his ridiculous behavior and shined a light upon his real intentions here, to cause drama and punish people who hurt his pride by challenging his authority as an enlightened being and sole bearer of truth.

Edited September 8, 2011 by Sunya

[Stigweard]

I see no reason for me to be suspended. Let's take a look at my 'insults'

 

I was merely stating a fact, not directly calling Scott an arrogant snob, but stating the fact that I called Scott that in private rather than directly attack him in public. It wasn't an insult, but a recollection of what happened. What caused me to say this? Perhaps it was this:

 

and

 

and then of course Scott calling us 'pseudo-Buddhists' because we don't agree with his claim that Buddhist is inferior to Taoism.

 

Let's look at the whole message I posted:

 

Clearly from the message he sent me, Scott was very angry and acting mentally unstable. Is it really an insult to conclude that from the message he sent?

 

Acting like a drama queen is an analogy for how Scott has been acting in this thread, which I doubt anyone will disagree with. He's been making a huge deal out of things would would've been forgotten by now and calling a lot of attention onto himself on purpose. If that isn't 'acting like a drama queen' I don't know what it is. An observation to describe how he's acting.

 

Again an analogy. Scott has been acting like he was defiled in some extreme way and is calling for justice, like a rape victim would, except the seriousness of these 'crimes' hardly justify the ridiculous behavior we've seen from Scott. So me saying he's acting like a rape victim was actually a joke to point out that he's making a huge deal out of nothing.

 

Let me repeat again that the only reason Scotty is freaking out so much about me not being suspended is because he wants me punished for hurting his pride. Not because I insulted him (clearly these are light jabs and not worth suspension) but because I called out his ridiculous behavior and shined a light upon his real intentions here, to cause drama and punish people who hurt his pride by challenging his authority as an enlightened being and sole bearer of truth.

Sunya I will also just point out some facts. Calling anyone arrogant snob, mentally unstable, a drama queen, and saying that they are acting as a rape victim is a public denigration of another persons character.

 

This is not you stating a fact, it is you stating your opinion. Even if you are convinced of it as a fact, it is still just your personal subjective opinion.

 

If you try and defend your right to declare your opinions as facts and therefore beyond moderation then you have invalidated any claims you might have that it is wrong from Scotty to be hounding you lads as "pseudo-Buddhists". Because on the same grounds as your argument, Scotty's opinion of you can suddenly become a "fact" and likewise be beyond moderation.

 

It means I could say, "Sunya, you are acting like a dipshit moron who has his head so shoved up his own ass he dies from Anal Asphyxiation."

 

Clearly if I said that it would be a denigration of your character ... it's an insult. But if we were to standardize your argument I could demand clemency by saying, "I was merely stating a fact. I wasn't insulting you I was just making an observation."

 

 

Now clearly Scotty needs to rethink his attitude and behavior here on the forum. No doubt about that at all. And I do think he should take a self-enforced vacation for a week to clear his head. I know he is better than some of the the verbal diarrhea he has been dishing out recently. I think he has some valuable insights and would love to see him give us the best of what he has.

 

I think the same of you Sunya. But I am sorry, your insults are still insults, and I think you should accept that this is a violation of the forum rules and, if you were man enough and achieved enough in your cultivation, you would happily agree to take a 7-day absence from posting.

 

[Stigweard]

Heya Scotty, if Sunya was suspended, and I agree that he should be, would you consider chilling your own heels for a few days just to get your feelings settled? Not in a "suspension" format, but just a few days away from posting with any of your logins just to let the dust settle??

 

Does that sound like a reasonable request??

 

PM from Scotty, I make no opinion on this, just passing the message along on request:

 

Totally.

 

Since, after I was suspended, I did break the forum rules by calling the mods idiots and saying "fuck you" multiple times...then yes I have no problem with taking a suspension.

 

I argued that insults are never justified here...so despite my feeling very strongly that they are justified in principle, they are not justified HERE at this forum. I did not need to say them...just as Sunya and Seth did not need to say what they did. So I am totally aware that I was in the wrong there and willing to take a slap on the wrist for that (and only that).

 

So if the original suspension is apologized for by the mods, if they clarify that being "provocative" is not grounds for suspending someone, if they suspend Sunya for 7 days and apologize for not doing it sooner, if they also warn him to stop harassing me, if Mal steps down as a moderator (that one is kind of optional but it'd be awesome)...then I will willingly take a 7 day suspension.

 

Please post this as my response to you on the forum, since making new accounts is kind of annoying.

 

Peace,

Scott

[Simple_Jack]

I have to adjourn from this topic.

Personally, I thought I was helping in trying to shed some light on what I thought would be what is causing the problems.

 

The only buddhist who was able to give a viable response to the 3 questions was Harmonious Emptiness. I think he deserves a medal of somekind and has astounding amounts of compassion as does Sunya on good days. This is a compliment.

 

My concern now is that people who supposedly defend themselves, or state odd things could have their words now twisted to sound like they are provoking other members.

 

My heart goes out to everyone involved. Until a way can be found to completely resolve the infighting among the neobuddhists.

I say neobuddhists because being taught the main tenets and dharmas is an intregral part of being buddhist.

Until some way to amicably get along is achieved. No rules can truely prevent it as well because there are also some buddhists which only follow some of the rules as well. I just dont see the problem going away.

 

Perhaps following the old rule of ignoring attacks and only asking questions twords those who are non-buddhist and attacking aspects of buddhism is the way to go. This "policy" in buddhism has existed for a long time.

 

So, in saying all of this. I would have to say that the problem runs a bit deeper than all of this. Buddhism is supposed to be a religion of truth and anti-ignorance. I can't agree that some of the ones that profess to be Buddhist hold to that. Attacking people or antagonizing them only adds to their suffering.

 

My concern is also for Scotty, because this makes Buddhism look bad. Sure it is rough to follow Buddhist rules, so is following the light and avoiding darkness.

Yeah, I know I didn't have to hound Scotty, but like I said: His arguments throughout that whole thread were inconsistent. He also reposted this:"Actually, "despiser of Buddhist beliefs" is harmonious with Buddhism. It does not oppose it. There are many here who cling to the belief system of (their preferred brand of) Buddhism, instead of discovering the truth for themselves...or being honest when the beliefs (usually misinterpretations) are plainly proven wrong.

 

So despising Buddhist beliefs is a call to the Buddhist practitioners here to step up their game. I consider many of them to be absolute beginners. It's a demonstration against that which opposes Buddhism...ignorance and falsehood. Laziness.

 

Basically I want to see better Buddhists here, and more respect for the tradition.

 

Funny, huh?"

So I thought I'd start to question him since he made bold claims like that. I also in the process wanted to see where his understanding was, since in that thread he cliamed to have already acheived "Buddhist enlightenment which is the first step in some Taoist alchemy schools."

 

What I chose to do reflects on ME as an individual and not on a whole tradition or it's members who post on this board. To say otherwise is a ridiculous claim. If this makes me a "neo-buddhist," then so be it.

[Simple_Jack]

How many of you Buddhists became one at a temple?

 

How many of you Buddhists became one at a temple?

 

(Evoked the 3 question tenet of Buddhism). If you are Buddhist, you are supposed to reply.

If not, then I guess that proves my point.

To answer your question though I don't call myself or refer to myself as "Buddhist." Not as anything. I haven't proven myself according to the standards of what it is to be a Buddhist, therefore I don't call myself "Buddhist."

[Simple_Jack]

Anapana only deals with the external breathing in the beginning.

 

Why exactly is focus on the dan-tien needed if jing, chi, shen are already cultivated with this method, which leads to the gradual opening of the chi channels and other esoteric structures of the body?

 

Also I remember Drew Hempel calling out a couple people on this thread a while ago who's methods included meditation on the dan-tien, which lead to the development of a "chi belly." His source of information that was used to substantiate the cliam that a "big belly" is the result of improper principles of practice, came from Tao & Longevity by Nan Huai Chin; which stated this would lead to said results. The heading of this was "A Big Belly Is Not Tao." I remember it stating that this was a result of chi bloating the lining of the intestines from concentration on the dan-tien. What is the purpose of a "chi-belly?"

"Also I remember Drew Hempel calling out a couple people on this thread a while ago who's methods included meditation on the dan-tien, which lead to the development of a "chi belly." His source of information that was used to substantiate the cliam that a "big belly" is the result of improper principles of practice, came from Tao & Longevity by Nan Huai Chin; which stated this would lead to said results. The heading of this was "A Big Belly Is Not Tao." I remember it stating that this was a result of chi bloating the lining of the intestines from concentration on the dan-tien. What is the purpose of a "chi-belly?"

 

Sorry it wasn't chi bloating the intestines, but was "Most people tend to sink the chi into the tan-tien naturally and cause the lower abdomen to fill and become convex." He then siad that continued concentration on tan-tien would cause problems for small/large intestines, kidneys, etc. He does not totally dismiss concentration on Tan-tien in that book though.

[C T]

Chi Belly?

 

My partner claims i am starting to get one.

 

Am i worried? If i begin to gather too many opinions, it could lead to that. Maybe i could reverse, divert or at the very least prolong this natural progression, but then, something else would evolve to replace the Chi Belly that went missing...

 

No matter... truth is I like not to speculate too much on mundane matters.

 

I prefer listening to the way of nature. For example, when someone gets to a point where they start losing their teeth, they should listen to that, and start reducing meat eating and adopt a 'softer' diet. But no, looking good is important, and so dentists, orthodontists, oral hygienists and oral aesthetic surgeons (all grades) gets fat paychecks while people with nice teeth suffer from indigestion, bloating, ulcer, IBS, colon suffocation... but its okay, as long as their sets of teeth look neat and tidy. Hmmm.... Smile, and flash those polished chompers!

 

 

Sorry, way off topic.

Edited September 8, 2011 by CowTao

[scotty2000]

Yeah, I know I didn't have to hound Scotty

 

Thank you SJ for having the integrity to admit it. _/\_

[scotty2000]

(clearly these are light jabs and not worth suspension)

 

Okay. I was just thinking earlier when not on the forum how much of a fucking arrogant snob you are. Not calling you that here though, of course! The way you have been harassing me clearly shows how you're completley mentally unstable and too angry to think clearly. You need to take a break from the forum. You've been acting like a total drama queen, simply due to me asking for your suspension after you've broken the forum rules...you can't handle the heat??? Then don't star the fire (which you did, go back and read the thread)...what a fucking rape victim. Go cry about it.

 

This is the kind of talk that is not worth suspension, that the moderators want to see here??????????????????

 

Besides the fact that they're insults...you have been clearly harassing me and refusing to stop. That is against the forum rules as well. Here are the rules in plain text:

 

You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this bulletin board to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law.

 

Also simplifying it:

 

Treat other members with respect. No personal attacks.

Moderators are present to enforce this...

 

The rules you've clearly broken in this thread are bolded. I was lenient towards you in not bolding some things. Just because the moderators aren't enforcing these rules, does not mean they have ceased to exist.

[Mal]

Just because the moderators aren't enforcing these rules the way that I want them to. Does not mean they have ceased to exist.

 

The bolded addition is mine, is it an unfair summation?

 

and feel free to take your time replying (7 days would be nice) as I'll be away for several hours at least.

[scotty2000]

The bolded addition is mine, is it an unfair summation?

 

Of course it is!!!!!!!!!!!!! x100000!

 

Mal, I am not some little kid who whines when he doesn't get his way, despite what you and others are assuming. What I am is someone who stands up for fairness and what's right, no matter the cost.

 

If someone else were in my place here, I'd be just as adamant if not more so about the decision to suspend them for being 'provocative', and the decision to not suspend Sunya.

 

Like you said before, I am absolutely "bewildered".

 

and feel free to take your time replying (7 days would be nice) as I'll be away for several hours at least

 

My position will not EVER change on this subject. I sent this message in a PM immediately upon seeing your message here, and it IS my reply, forever.

 

This entire thing has caused quite a bit of wounds which will not heal. This was totally unnecessary, and is directly your fault. I demand that you step down from your position. You obviously don't even have the time to be doing this job, much less the consideration when you do have the time.

[scotty2000]

http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/20314-hyok/page__pid__287783__st__0entry287783

 

Reread this thread, where hyok was suspended for 30 days for calling someone a "power hungry twerp".

 

Compare that to this thread, where Seth Ananda posted 29 insults, and Sunya posted 4.

 

Even Sunya's modest amount is 4x the amount of hyok.

 

My issue here is not just getting my way, it's ensuring that the moderation here is fair. That is not too much to ask for. Hyok was even defending others when he said that...whereas Sunya was attacking and harassing.

 

Yes, I am loud and annoying here lately...but please consider this, amongst everything else.

 

If you can't even consider it, with a clear and fair mind, then step down from your position as moderator...

[Sunya]

[scotty2000]

[Sloppy Zhang]

Scotty has taken the current enforcement style of the "no insult" policy to its logical conclusion.

 

What sunya has been pointing out (arguably in a personal, demeaning way- and someone who is trying to apply the insult policy evenly would report the hell out of you, sunya) about the nature of these threads is correct- but it's not scotty that is ridiculous, it is the nature of the "no insult" policy.

 

All was well as long as nobody really cared- because we didn't need to focus on it. Scotty has merely insisted that, in the interest of balance, we evenly apply the "no insult" policy everywhere. And it seems ridiculous because it is.

 

We shouldn't be looking at scotty and start trying to belittle him. We should look at the series of conditions which have led to these threads. Look at the "no insult" policy.

[scotty2000]

Thank you, Sloppy Zhang!

 

I just ask: when is insulting someone personally on this forum ever necessary?

 

I guess we will have opinions that differ on that, and that's fine...as long as people are at least being considerate and just. You have...so thanks again for that.

 

_/\_