...

[idquest]

I think that setting a limit is good. I remember of several forum members who engaged in quite a few serious discussions, elicited sincere responses from other members, and after that deleted all their posts. I believe this kind of behaviour is disrespect to the members and community. At the same time, I think 30 minutes is a very short period of time; and 24 hours would be more reasonable limit.

[三江源]

.

Edited June 22, 2014 by cat

[Marblehead]

Consequently, I'm not going to vote because I'd have to vote both.

You could have voted "Other". Hehehe.

[Apech]

You could have voted "Other". Hehehe.

 

 

Technically an other is a 'yes' vote because you are saying you want something other than the edit timer ... (think on that!)

[三江源]

.

Edited June 22, 2014 by cat

[Flolfolil]

...

Edited March 6, 2015 by Flolfolil

[Marblehead]

Technically an other is a 'yes' vote because you are saying you want something other than the edit timer ... (think on that!)

It's too freakin' early in the morning to be thinking!

[三江源]

sooooo funny.. looking at a Barefoot Doctor book... (taoist teacher stephen russell, for anyone who doesnt know his work and nick..)

 

 

just saw this by him:

 

importance of editing

no matter what medium you are working in, an effective editing process is essential. It's not what you say, show, play or sing that makes the piece complete, it's what you dont.

 

Its the spaces between the notes that lets you hear the notes. Its the action you dont see in the play or movie that gets your imagination going.Its the things that you dont say in the story that provide the spaces between the lines for you to read.

 

Never shy away from a ruthless edit session. If the material still stands up,it's a product. If not, it'll show you clearly which bits need attention. ( I wonder if this bit will survive the edit?)

p197 of Handbook for Heroes.

Edited September 6, 2013 by cat

[Flolfolil]

...

Edited March 6, 2015 by Flolfolil

[Stosh]

importance of editing

no matter what medium you are working in, an effective editing process is essential. It's not what you say, show, play or sing that makes the piece complete, it's what you dont.

 

Its the spaces between the notes that lets you hear the notes. Its the action you dont see in the play or movie that gets your imagination going.Its the things that you dont say in the story that provide the spaces between the lines for you to read.

 

Never shy away from a ruthless edit session. If the material still stands up,it's a product. If not, it'll show you clearly which bits need attention. ( I wonder if this bit will survive the edit?)

 

 

this above

quote doesnt apply --whether its valid as a stand alone idea or not - which is dubious,, because no one said -one couldnt edit at all , the issue is when ,or, how much, or ,if the collective habit of many, is a detrimental thing for TBs

and the quote below wasnt said by cat but looks like it is because of the subsequent editing

so I am demonstrating how things can get jumbled or out of context by editing as well.

Edited September 6, 2013 by Stosh

[joeblast]

I think the big issue here is that...as someone who's been here for the last 6 or 7 years, 8 maybe, I dont recall at this point...a lot of us longtime people liked the freeform wilderness that TTBs was, from its inception. That fact alone carries its own set of potential "issues," should one choose to see them that way. Or one can choose to see it as simply another dynamical representation of the tao - if you didnt catch something, perhaps you werent meant to anyway. Regardless of my own personal self inflicted decision to try and never delete something I write...that was my own personal choice, not something forced upon me.

 

IMHO...the edit rule was superfluous, whimsical, unasked for, unneeded. I dont recall seeing even a general board performance rationale for it, just some mod-initiated "appeal to aesthetics"...I mean if it were a performance related thing, I could see some justification for it, but I dont recall even seeing that.

[Stosh]

That ! Sir is a respectable statement , and I respect it. But aesthetics isn't the issue. It is whether any restricton on edits to preserve the integrity of context is more important than the ownership of ones personal text.

[Sahaj Nath]

HI Hundun, nice to see you here, last time I saw you say here you mentioned how rare it is that you can be bothered to post on any threads here, nothing here is of any interest to you really...so, thanks for dropping by on this important forum issue, which a lot of very regular posters who are part of this community are hoping to discuss meaningfully..so.....

 

can I just get this straight.. I have two questions I am unclear on:

 

1.you are saying you advocate preserving record of peoples correspondences.. against their will.

 

2. Do you often read personal correspondences here, or take part in them?

 

yes, cat, i did say something similar. my exact words were "first topic in a while that i was actually excited to open and read. "

 

you seem to have interpreted that comment in a far uglier manner than i had ever intended. i was genuinely excited about the discussion topic and couldn't wait to see where it would go. i don't feel that way very often like i used to back in '07 and '08, and i said as much. sorry if that offended you.

 

you also seem to saying (by implication) that i'm not a legitimate member of this community because i don't post regularly enough...? i could be wrong, but that's what it seems like you're implying here.

 

i've been here for 5 years, and i believe that i have made meaningful contributions to the community in written substance, personal assistance, and even financial donation. so yeah, i still say i'm a legitimate member. and i'm quite sure there will be another period in which i am posting/commenting more, it's just not now.

 

as for your questions:

 

1.) YES. that's exactly what i'm saying. and as an example my above post starts with the fact that i myself have shown my ass around here on more than one occasion. i say let the record reflect that fact. to me it's an issue of honesty and integrity. and one of the reasons i don't post as often is that i still have an intellectual tendency towards criticism and combativeness, and i'm trying to learn the lesson that tearing things/people down at every turn isn't always the best approach to get at the truth of something. i still really enjoy critical debates, but i also know that i have hurt people here when that wasn't at all my intention, so these days i prefer to shut up and read unless i have something to say that's more constructive than critical. but i am who i am, so i remain silent most days.

 

2.) when you say "personal correspondence," it sounds like you're talking about PM's. but YES, i do participate in discussions here. by READING them. by pointing out certain discussions to friends. by engaging some of our members through PM or on facebook or in-person. and yes, when i feel moved to, by contributing directly here in the forum.

 

 

maybe i'm misreading the tone of your comment, but you seem a bit aggravated by my post. but i AM a member here, and i love what this board represents. being a member here has literally changed my life. and no one can quantify or qualify that in terms of my right to participate in rules discussions.

 

it's all love. no hard feelings.

Edited September 7, 2013 by Hundun

[steve]

Which is more important to you steve, as a spiritual practitoner cultivating teh.. being a perpetrator of restriction over personal freedoms.. or allowing people their own ways of self expression and freedom over their own words?

 

I'm not sure that I agree that locking out the editing function after a finite time period is a restriction over person freedoms but allowing unlimited editing without a time frame does seem to be absolving people of accountability.

 

Each of us has complete and utter freedom to post anything we want, anything at all. If it violates the TOS, it may result in consequences, including removal. Otherwise, anything goes. The question really is, am I willing to stand behind what I posted and take responsibility for it?

 

To be honest, I don't know what we currently have in place. Assuming we have an editing time restriction currently, we are still completely free to change our post by simply quoting the original and then adding the edit below it, with or without an explanation. It may be cumbersome and take up extra space but it does maintain the integrity of the original post, for better or worse, and then shows how the author has altered the original post and why.

 

So to answer your question, as a spiritual practitioner, I think that it would be better for all participants to HAVE a time restriction in place for editing. In this way we are forced to live with our choices, we are forced to recognize that our posts have consequences - both good and bad, and if we are really open to trying to better ourselves, editing limits are clearly preferable. They force us to look at what we do with complete transparency and accountability. THAT is much more valuable for our spiritual growth than any of the words or images posted on this forum, no matter what the subject matter.

 

I have a very close friend and training partner who is a very unique human being. He is the most direct and transparent person I've ever met. He challenges everything I say. He has an uncanny memory. Having a relationship with him can be extremely demanding. It is like looking in a very accurate and unforgiving mirror. He has very few friends and he has been the greatest external support and stimulation for spiritual transformation I've ever encountered. I'm deeply blessed to have him in my life.

 

On the other hand, as a regular person, not necessarily interested in complete transparency and personal accountability, having the freedom to edit posts at any time in the future would be my preference. In this way, I don't have to be embarrassed when I make an asinine post (which isn't that infrequent...). I can correct something before others know I made a blunder (also pretty common). I can get away with making jabs at other members but making a quick edit (relatively rare). I can post emotionally and then have the opportunity to cool off and change it (rare). I can fine tune things to make myself look smarter or more insightful (I take the 5th) or to genuinely try to provide better information to others. This is much easier, cleaner, and more comfortable but I don't think it challenges anyone to be a better person. It doesn't force us to look harshly and deeply at ourselves.

 

And please don't misunderstand me here. I'm not making judgements (although as I read this, it does sound that way) or trying to push my preference on anyone else. I would personally prefer a forum where everything is etched in stone. No take backs. That is a format in which I think I will be able to actually refine myself in how I interact with other members. Not everyone wants this sort of restriction and burden and I don't feel that it's my role to impose that on anyone.

 

So, the way I see it, editing restrictions will make the forum more suitable for those who want to challenge themselves to interact at a more transparent and accountable level. This would be a forum for real cultivators! No restrictions works better for all comers. That way, those of us who want to be more demanding on ourselves are free to do so and those of us who don't want that burden don't have to bother. So I'll throw the question back at ya - which type of forum do you prefer?

[steve]

steve, thank you for your thoughtful post. TTB as a training partner!

 

One question: Why force anything? Help me to see how force is utilized in a Taoist cultivator's path?

 

Best --

Excellent question RV!

 

No reason to force anything - cultivation needs to be a choice.

 

Perhaps it would be better to substitute "given the opportunity" everywhere I wrote force.

The reason I used the word force (aside from the fact that I wasn't really thinking about it that much) is that we have developed a sort of inertia with respect to our normal interaction with others. It is so deeply conditioned in us that it can carry us from birth to death without us ever being aware of what we are doing and what effects we are having on ourselves and others. In order to deflect this inertia, one really needs enormous energy, as Jiddu Krishnamurti used to put it. We need to have the diligence and commitment to pay attention to the smallest details and the subtlest patterns. Otherwise, the inertia will just carry us along. So while "force" has negative connotations, I do think it is something that requires deep dissatisfaction with our current patterns to manifest enough energy to make lasting and meaningful change.

 

Thanks for calling me on that - but I'm not going to edit the original!!

 

[Flolfolil]

...

Edited March 6, 2015 by Flolfolil

[steve]

In keeping with what I said above, I want to acknowledge that the way I closed my first post was a bit of a challenge to cat.

I'd like to retract that last question. No need for that.

 

The other thing that occurs to me is that when the edit function is unlimited, we can sort of watch the relationships (the Dao, if you will) sort of play out in a natural, unimpeded manner - Ziran.

 

But when I think about it further, it is not what happens in our lives. When I say something mean to someone, there is memory. Memory isn't perfect and it fades with time, but the effects of our actions don't vanish like our memory. And they affect our relationship forever. And life is relationship. Same if I say something nice. So whatever choices we make are captured forever in our karma, whether you like that particular word or not. I don't get a chance to edit after I've spoken and acted in my life, only a chance to explain and, if it's worth the effort to me, anticipate.

 

So editing things on a board makes the board look neat and tidy while the feelings and relationships in the people sitting behind the keyboards is a different thing altogether.

 

So for my selfish purposes, I like the editing restrictions.

Whereas I recognize that we all should have the opportunity to choose for ourselves.

That's why I still haven't voted!

[mYTHmAKER]

it's all love.

Hey Hundun nice to hear from you

[steve]

i take issue with the word "force" and great offense with the phrase "real cultivator"

 

everyone in the world is cultivating in their own way, it is called the search for happiness

Assuming you were commenting on my post, I will happily retract the word "real" and simply say "cultivator, as I choose to approach my own life."

I already addressed my use of the word force.

Edited to add - please accept my humble apology for any offense taken as it was not intended.

Edited September 7, 2013 by steve

[joeblast]

That ! Sir is a respectable statement , and I respect it. But aesthetics isn't the issue. It is whether any restricton on edits to preserve the integrity of context is more important than the ownership of ones personal text.

I had to go around and re-read how this even came about, but it seems to me a squeaky wheel or two spoke up and it affected the entire board. Some people incredulous that they missed out on some juicy tidbit and they have an attachment to it, so let's go complain so that nobody says anything that I might miss.

 

As a result, there will now be less juicy tidbits. I don't know about you guys, but when I eat a porterhouse, if I am going to finish the whole thing, the tenderloin gets eaten last. But if not, it gets eaten first.

 

That's the crux of the matter. Drop your attachments, folks.

[Flolfolil]

...

Edited March 6, 2015 by Flolfolil

[joeblast]

At first I just said oh well, whatever, it is what it is. But having given it thought, the change shouldnot have been implemented without some board discussion. The poll should have come before the change, and do yoy think it would have been changed given the response from the community? Of course not.

[joeblast]

Understood, I still think it was something significant enough that it shouldn't have just been forced.

 

But hey, sometimes crap just gets forced upon you and there's jack you can do about it...

[Flolfolil]

...

Edited March 6, 2015 by Flolfolil

[joeblast]

That's the darn spellchecker I have to find my dictionary on here, I don't know how it saved yoy!