Keeping WaccoBB.net safe

[Juggledude]

Oh lordy..... My fears of posting on waccobb are all coming back to me now.

I feel bad for you Barry. Youre really smart and you have a really great idea with waccobb and all, but I can't help but think that this "conscious community" will never work.

Oh contraire, it is working. Bringing light and deeper understanding to our selves, our community, our consciousness... what more could we ask for?

It seems to me, that the people who participate here think of themselves as "conscious" but are in fact, just as mentally conditioned as everyone else, and damn stubborn I might add.

I like this point immensely. We are all 'mentally conditioned' by our experiences, there's just no way around that fact in this human condition. What we do with that conditioning, what actions we put out to the rest of the world, therein lies the crux.

If waccobb is ever going to run smoothly, people need to get off their high horses and admit that they dont know everything! If everyone were to know that in fact, they cant possibly know everything, then we could have an actual intelligent, logical discussion. I think thats what "conscious" means, so stop being so unconscious everybody!!!!!

Thanks.

A nice game plan, but perhaps a little oversimplified. As complex as any one human is, the notion of community is exponentially more complex. I reiterate my concept that as far as I understand what a community "does" in order to be classified as "working", the waccobb.net community is not only "working" but perhaps even excelling. Smoothly? what's that? In encompassing the duality of reality, knowing that there can be no light without darkness, that love and pain are the twin wings of the soul, it seems like "smoothly" might be something to be dreaded, not aspired to!


As far as the banning goes, Barry, I fully support you in your choices, and concur with your process. I believe you are doing an excellent and thankless job of moderating and holding safe space for this community, and I am frankly appalled at both the content and nature of the posts in question. Keep up the good work.

Royce

[judi jewel]

I personally feel sad about Msterry being banned.

While Msterry may not have shown compassion in the Okili thread, and while he may not be fully informed about how inhuman these immigration jails are, he was still expressing his viewpoints. According to the Constitution, (though a piece of paper) we have the right to free speech in our opinion.
The Constitution recognizes Universal Law, that we have the birth right to free speech and our opinions.

Yes , Msterry may have been a "button pusher" but without us having the buttons/triggers already there, he would not have been able to push them.
There will always be a button pusher somewhere as long as we have 'triggers'. Its in my opinion we just learn how to deal with these types of people and our triggers.

I feel this whole issue on this thread is not about Msterry OR keeping wacco safe as it started off to be , but that there are OBVIOUS unresolved "old energies" coming into play here.

And the energetic charge is intense!
It feels yucky and kind of reminds me of grammer school.
It is in my opinion that this type of "old energy" charge does not belong on the forum.
It is my wish you guys and gals would clear this old energy and work this out through private emails , through face to face non-violent communication or some other form of compassionate communication however possible.

Peace and Love,

Judy

[Vet-To-Pet]

I was shocked to see the unleashed anger & venom spewed from shellebelle's post about Barry & his partner. It was as if a cork had released a really pissed off genie from a bottle, where the anger/frustration/whatever (?) had been fermenting for awhile---who knows how long & what blew the cork off? I'm sorry for those who were directly hurt by what she wrote (some of which was just weird & didn't make sense, at least to me...).

On the other hand, I have to admit that I feel, personally, like I've been validated in a way that very few people would know about, but which was strange & off-putting for me a few months ago. I posted something, or replied to a post (I can't even remember---that's how "important" the topic was...), and shellebelle replied as if I'd personally smeared her (literally) with excrement & then told everyone what a "shitty" person she was. I mean, she laid into me as if I'd said that slavery should be reinstated & child labor laws were unnecessary (sort of; I'm making a comparison here). She also brought up an older posting that was totally unrelated to the current one, just to kick me in the butt again about that topic. I was somewhat freaked about the 'energetic' reply she posted to me, and I ended up apologizing for "taking her bait", which is now what I think might have been the case. I don't know, I really don't, but I feel relieved that my "radar" for picking up on "people who are loose canons" had been more accurate than I'd thought after that encounter with her outbreaks. Bipolar? Therapy would certainly be a good place to start when someone is that angry & confused about who her friends are, as well as many other things.

I'll be around for one more week, then driving off into the sunrise to Athens, GA, on June 6th. Moving/living here for the past three years has been difficult in a few emotionally painful ways, the worst being the diagnosis & terminal ovarian cancer of my sister-in-love, who was a truly inspirational human being since the time I met her 25 years before her death. I'm pretty sure the "reason" I made my (?) decision to move here right before her diagnosis was so that I'd be able to spend as much time as I did over the following 17 months before her death. I'm extremely grateful that I had all those months right here with her, rather than being in Georgia during her final time on this planet...but it's time to return to where my own special network of friends are, my "peeps", who are, not surprisingly, mostly from places other than the Southeast---we seem to be "drawn" to each other, mixed up in the college town of thousands of folks from all over the country, we manage to find each other, and form bonds that are still tight---I'm happy to be going back to Athens, which is something I NEVER thought I'd ever say and mean so much! You folks helped me get through some of the painful time here, but I can't stay here, it's too painful & WAY too expensive!! She-yut!! (Southernese---many one-syllable words are drawn out into two syllables. Now I'll have to brush up all over again!).

Peace, Happy trails, Smiles~
Paula/Vet-To-Pet

[Braggi]

I personally feel sad about Msterry being banned. ...

One way to tell a narcissist is to note that they are the center of attention and discussion even when they're not present.

-Jeff

[Mrs. Wacco]

To all who have responded - thanks for everyone's support, public and private. Thanks also for everyone's input relative to the nature of Barry's post and the issue of respectful communication.

This leads me to ask: how to respond 100% respectfully while someone is attacking, poking, judging, pick your poison. I know there's ignore but sometimes that doesn't fulfill the need for self-respect.

I've not responded to Shellebelle thru this last episode and Barry said all that needed to be said (thank you honey!) His response is most definitely strong and pointed and exposes his/our authentic reaction to her; sometimes a person just has to take a stand. I am very proud that Barry chose to take an unequivocal stand for himself, me, and Wacco.

How to do that otherwise so that you get the desired result and the community at large is OK? I ask not because Barry should have done it another way but he certainly could have.

There are always different reasons why we say: to just feel good without a particular outcome, to clear the air, to defend, to attack, to share knowledge, to get a reaction, to get something to stop, to (maybe) get someone to change a behavior, to engender understanding, etc. The goal of why we're saying informs how we say.

In this case, the thread started with Barry announcing the banning of Ms Terry. After re-reading all of it, it seems that it went sideways when Shellebelle offered the idea that Ms Terry reflected Barry, my response (was it disrespectful?), and then her response to Lucky, not to mention her private post to me.

I am not trying to put anyone on the spot, but what would a respectful response sound like with the goals of:

• calling her on her disrespect. sorry, it's unacceptable.
• calling her bluff - she threatened me and essentially Barry, her real target, in her private post. A private response would not have achieved this.
• have her speak her truth of why she responds as she does - a little self reflection and transparency.
• banning her and why it was appropriate to ban her.

I'd be very surprised if we ever saw #3; we achieved the others, at least for now. However, if there's a better way to have done it, I'm all ears and perhaps we can all learn something. My request is for concrete examples - how we learn.

Thanks
Linda

I ducked back in. Is it safe?

In truth, if I were a newcomer, this particular thread would be just enough to turn me off from waccobb. No Joke!

From going back and re-reading this thread, one thing remains clear to me..

the need to respect and be respected has not been met.

I will offer the role of the mirror here:

I note a previous thread started by Barry.
https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco...conscious.html

"are we present? (not in our head, reliving some past childhood trauma, projecting fears or dreams)

are we witnessing?
"Cultivating an awareness that is separate from ego . An experience where we can just observe exactly "what is".

are we speaking our truth respectfully?
"saying 'what is' and being authentic while honoring everybody and their truths, even if we disagree" (and could we do this perhaps without blame/judgment? ~ which there is ALOT of that going on ehre in my perception from where i am observing/witnessing. Perhaps i am the one passing a judgment or evaluation?)

Open hearted / undefended
are we being emotionally available and compassionate while not easily going into a defensive/resistive posture?"

I enjoyed Diablo's response of : "If we ALL were practicing what we were preaching, there wouldn't be a need to control others....."

May I also add, that I love practicing!?!?

As Barry once stated, "it's more difficult to be open and compassionate."

Oreokid stated previously in here about the wonderful world of Wacco:

"The only rule I’ve noticed is one common to all civilized society:
play nice, show respect to everyone. "

I can only imagine that early on in this thread, 'being respectful' and creating a respectful environment in which to 'play in ' was a BIG need for many.
I reflect :
Was the need for respect met from the get go ?
At what point did the thread feel like it shifted gears?
Can we imagine "tone" in our typed out words?
no, but one can imagine or even feel /sense energy behind the words.

It is in my opinion/observation that though the need for respect and respectful environment was acknowledged .... that this thread early on (around 3 days ago) got side tracked and before we knew it... defenses and ego's were up and going. no blame here ..just observing.

the questions i ponder on:
Are we aware and conscious of our ego self and when we go into it ?
Can we identify when we are in 'reaction' mode versus 'responsive' mode and conscious of it?
I am aware that my whole body feels different when I find myself responding versus being reactive.

i went to a friends bbq party recently.
I felt and observed myself mainly in reactive - ego mode.
I look forward to bringing more of myself into community.
Thus, a richer experience is possible with my relations in my community!

Keep it 'safe' u cowboys/cowgirls!

(whatever 'safe' means to you!)

[babaruss]

The trick to answering your question ( a trick question ?) may be: respond only to that which is the truth. If there is no truth then there can be no response. Even the meanest, and angriest, of us manage to get a piece of the truth in our posts (even if it is a very limited truth).
There will always be something in the 'attack' which can give us latitude to offer the attacker an alternative route out of that attack mode.
I sometimes get caught in either attack mode, or defensive mode, (both probably the same) and almost always it is because something triggers fear...fear triggers all the nastiness which follows.
My hope is that we can find ways to allow people to be who they are, as they are, because really they don't have any choice in the matter do they ?
An asleep person isn't going to wake up just because we think he/she should.
First, I must recognize myself to have/be a problem before I can deal with it.
Gradually and incrementally I have been developing awareness, and understanding.
I'm hoping to grow into a better way of thinking, acting, being,...but kicking me out of the pool is not going to help me improve my swimming is it ?
I think preferring security and safety over working things out, or at least closer to a healthier conclusion, is not community but rather a barrier to developing community.
Risks must be taken if we are to inclusive.
I suspect it only the most fragile among us who will not gain in personal growth through dealing with difficult people.
Babaruss

I applaud M(r)s Wacco effort to ask the question; "How to respond respectfully to someone who is disrespectful", especially in the light that a frequent poster(s) still feels the need to beat a dead (banned) horse, literally.

[Mrs. Wacco]

Babaruss - No trick question. What I was looking for was an explicit answer, as in an example with words in direct response to Shelle's post that would achieve the goals I outlined.

You would "offer the attacker an alternate route out of the attack mode;" what words would you use to achieve that? What would "working things out" sound like?

I'm not trying to put you on the spot but I am a concrete kinda girl. I like to work with tangibles. (Probably why I like to build things). Theory is great but unless it can be applied to real life, it's only theory. I'm not saying I disagree with what you propose but how to achieve?

Just a few comments on this statement:

"My hope is that we can find ways to allow people to be who they are, as they are, because really they don't have any choice in the matter do they ?"

I'm all for people being who they are - my #1 rule. But if you choose to make a mess in the world, there are consequences.

There is always choice in the matter, unless you are psychotic, mentally deficient, or just a blockhead.(I've worked with those populations and was married to a blockhead - I am speaking from experience). It's why we choose to develop our awareness, so we make (hopefully) better choices as we go thru life. It's the basis of Law of Attraction, the Secret, What the Bleep....you are your reality and you actually have a say in the matter.

In the context of this board, words do not come flying out of anyone without choice. I carefully chose everyone one of these words just as you chose yours. I would imagine it's the same for others, whether the intentions are to do good or to do harm.


Linda

[babaruss]

I'll have to go back to the part of looking for some truth...a common area of possible agreement, and focus on that to the exclusion of all else.
Please keep in mind that I am an uneducated, semi conscious, human being trying to find healthier ways to deal with unhealthy situations.
If you go into some of my earlier posts you will readily see I'm a veritable stumble bum where it comes to actualizing healthier responses.
If I fail to attack a person who I perceive as attacking me, I may be at the beginning stages of "working things out".
As for offering an 'alternative route'..hey many times I'm jumped down someones throat on this forum, and had people come back at me in loving, instructive, ways (which not once found fault in what I said) but rather offered insight and understanding which was sorely needed.
It may not be that anything I suggest will work for a "concrete kinda gal"
because flexibility and constant shifting away from self are what is required when dealing with difficult people.
You use the word 'choose' as an accusation (or if I wish to be kinder) as an assumption.
I used the word asleep for a purpose.
Consciousness means just that..if you are not conscious/aware of where you are mentally/emotionally/psychologically then you are not awake.
Who judges, or attacks sleeping people ? Surely those who attack people who are not conscious are themselves asleep.
That miserable book 'A Course in Miracles' had a couple useful things in it. One was a question..."how can I see this in a different way ?" which for me was a reminder that the same old responses just will not apply if you want new results. In this case shutting someone out. Please note that whether you choose to ban someone, or to include them is of no real matter to me. I'm just weighing in thoughts and ideas on the matter.
The other line in that book was ..."if it is not love then it is a request for love".
So perhaps one can try meeting anger with love...bywords possibly being acceptance/tolerance/understanding.
Now back to the idea of choosing. one description of a person is 'the totality of their life experiences to date' ...and if those experiences do not include self awareness, self understanding, self love (which must exist prior to loving others) then where does this matter of 'choice' come in ?
I'll agree with you as far as 'consequences' go....being asleep does not exempt a person from consequences.
I'm going to leave your negative descriptive terms for people who do not match your particular expectations out of this post..as it leads nowhere
and somewhat puts you in a less than admirable light... as far as being a conscious person.
'Imagining things you do to be the same as others' ...is not very useful here either.
We are after all, trying to maintain community, and community consists of people who are at all levels of awareness (or lack there of) and may never match our expectations, or desires.
Babaruss

Babaruss - No trick question. What I was looking for was an explicit answer, as in an example with words in direct response to Shelle's post that would achieve the goals I outlined.

You would "offer the attacker an alternate route out of the attack mode;" what words would you use to achieve that? What would "working things out" sound like?

I'm not trying to put you on the spot but I am a concrete kinda girl. I like to work with tangibles. (Probably why I like to build things). Theory is great but unless it can be applied to real life, it's only theory. I'm not saying I disagree with what you propose but how to achieve?

Just a few comments on this statement:

"My hope is that we can find ways to allow people to be who they are, as they are, because really they don't have any choice in the matter do they ?"

I'm all for people being who they are - my #1 rule. But if you choose to make a mess in the world, there are consequences.

There is always choice in the matter, unless you are psychotic, mentally deficient, or just a blockhead.(I've worked with those populations and was married to a blockhead - I am speaking from experience). It's why we choose to develop our awareness, so we make (hopefully) better choices as we go thru life. It's the basis of Law of Attraction, the Secret, What the Bleep....you are your reality and you actually have a say in the matter.

In the context of this board, words do not come flying out of anyone without choice. I carefully chose everyone one of these words just as you chose yours. I would imagine it's the same for others, whether the intentions are to do good or to do harm.


Linda

[Barry]

Babaruss et al,

What Linda is requesting is that you post exactly what you would have posted, fully written out, for handling Shellebelle if you were in my position and her blackmail attempt was directed against you.

Feel free to include some comments before and/or after the full text of your post.

So for instance, your reply might look like:

I think the best way to deal with this situation is to be direct:

--- BEGIN PROPOSED POST ---
I am banning Shellebelle for a serious violation of our policy concerning innappropriate private replies to public posts.
--- END PROPOSED POST ---

I look forward to seeing your versions! I hope to learn a trick or two! I'd love to find some assistant moderators to help in reviewing the discussions here.

[babaruss]

I was fairly certain I gave a reasonable response to Linda's questions.
I was speaking in a general way about what I thought might be a conscious response to the difficult people who post on this forum.
There is no concrete way to deal with anyone person ever....there must be (as I suggested in earlier post) flexibility, awareness, perhaps I should have perhaps added openness to where a person is coming from...I did mention fear as a factor did I not
I'm sure you can understand how fear causes us to make stupid statements and overreact.
I had thought my response to be clear enough.
The only question i do have in all of this is: why Barry have the 'big guns' (you) been brought in as a result of my response to Linda's questions ?
Babaruss

Babaruss et al,

What Linda is requesting is that you post exactly what you would have posted, fully written out, for handling Shellebelle if you were in my position and her blackmail attempt was directed against you.

Feel free to include some comments before and/or after the full text of your post.

So for instance, your reply my look like:



I look forward to seeing your versions! I hope to learn a trick or two! I'd love to find some assistant moderators for help in reviewing the discussions here.

[Juggledude]

I had thought my response to be clear enough.
The only question i do have in all of this is: why Barry have the 'big guns' (you) been brought in as a result of my response to Linda's questions ?
Babaruss

Probably in an attempt at clarification. I hear your own opinion of your clarity, however, from this point of view (my own) it's pretty much theoretical mumbling.

I too would be interested in transitioning the gap between your concepts of inclusion and the specifics of addressing MsTerry or ShelleBelle's verbal violence. To use your swimming pool analogy, no, kicking them out of the pool won't help them learn to swim, but at some point, the lifeguard must pull the drowning person from the pool because they are killing innocent swimmers as they use them to keep their own head above water. To speak of "inclusion" and compassion toward the "asleep" members of our community is all well and good, but to what extent do you allow them to harm yourself or others? Where are the boundaries?

Royce

[Mrs. Wacco]

Yes, Barry was just trying to clarify exactly what I'm talking about with an example. It wasn't that Babaruss' response was reasonable or unreasonable, clear or unclear; it just didn't address the very specific request I made. I realize this is difficult as theorizing is so much easier than actually putting theory into action.

If we don't try it here - a very safe place to practice what we preach, then where? How do we learn a better way? This is a request for active learning.

Linda

Probably in an attempt at clarification. I hear your own opinion of your clarity, however, from this point of view (my own) it's pretty much theoretical mumbling.

[NudeTea]

If we don't try it here - a very safe place to practice what we preach, then where? How do we learn a better way? This is a request for active learning.

Linda

One problem that comes to mind, Linda, is the 'preach' word. Thank you for the opportunity to segue off of it.

I've witnessed many times that once a person posts something, a preacher mentality comes into play. It's as if people start responding with character assassinations against the preacher; referencing all kinds of previous posts as if we are held liable for things we say not just in this post but in past posts as well. Suddenly, a person's whole past is thrust in their face, overwhelming the one post they stated today.

Is that right, is it wrong? Yadda yadda, not debating that. It's simply an observation on my part which I mention because it disrupts the flow of the 'active learning' that you also clue in on. Sure, I myself have posted things in the past that I will probably forever be held liable for having said, but it's entirely possible that I've learned better things since then. Perhaps if I were to write things today, they would entirely clash with things I've said in the past. Hence, the process of active learning.

It's my every hope that after reading posts from people such as yourself, Barry, and the random other paricipants in the bb here, that I will learn; I will grow, I will evolve into a byproduct composed of good statements from good people.

Thank you for your recent posts, Mrs W, I do read them although I seldom comment.

[babaruss]

We'll start with your comment: "your own opinion of your clarity".
At which point did I insist my ideas were clarity incarnate..as in my word/opinion being sacrosanct ?
I expressed ideas, and approaches, which have worked for me in the past.
Which seem to me now to be valuable tools for dealing with difficult people.
What seems to me to be truth is just that...it is as you as say..'an opinion', and nothing more.
Taking issue with my 'opinion' makes no sense whatsoever.
However showing me alternate approaches to solving the problem may prove helpful to my own personal growth, and understanding...as well as add a bit more truth/insight to the issue at hand.
How you 'see' me is just that..it is how you see me...what you see alters my perceptions but little. 'Theoretical' means untried/unpracticed does it not ? and mumbling implies incoherency.
I think will wait to hear what other members have to say about what I have shared before considering too greatly your take on my 'incoherency'.

Verbal violence ie; does not include the 'printed word'. This is not violence...violence is what we do when we allow ourselves to buy emotionally into such things as written words. These exchanges of words...however unkind you see them to be..were nothing more than words until we placed a value to them. Couple our emotional reactions to those the potential an there the potential for damage begins.

This may be a bit to 'out there' for you...but boundaries/divisions are what cause wars. The whole idea of community is to 'include' as many people who are 'unlike us' as possible.

Your assumption that someone thrashing about in the pool is drowning may be a leap away from the truth. As far as I can ascertain...no one has been 'killed, or pulled under the water by someone thrashing about' on this forum to date.
There well may have been a few wounded egos brought about in all that thrashing...but a calm, observant, life guard, (open/loving/understanding mind) might have prevented even that.
Babaruss

Probably in an attempt at clarification. I hear your own opinion of your clarity, however, from this point of view (my own) it's pretty much theoretical mumbling.

I too would be interested in transitioning the gap between your concepts of inclusion and the specifics of addressing MsTerry or ShelleBelle's verbal violence. To use your swimming pool analogy, no, kicking them out of the pool won't help them learn to swim, but at some point, the lifeguard must pull the drowning person from the pool because they are killing innocent swimmers as they use them to keep their own head above water. To speak of "inclusion" and compassion toward the "asleep" members of our community is all well and good, but to what extent do you allow them to harm yourself or others? Where are the boundaries?

Royce

[Mrs. Wacco]

Babaruss - I'm sorry to say this but you are sounding a bit defensive, which is fine. I don't really care; I'm Ok with exchanges such as this. But I'm looking for the words of love and how you are addressing whatever truth is in Royce's note - your advice to me/this board a few posts back. And Royce isn't even being difficult compared to others who will remain nameless.

I only point it out to demonstrate how difficult it can be to exhibit the qualities you profess (which are honorable), particularly via the written word.

Linda

We'll start with your comment: "your own opinion of your clarity".
At which point did I insist my ideas were clarity incarnate..as in my word/opinion being sacrosanct ?
I expressed ideas, and approaches, which have worked for me in the past.
Which seem to me now to be valuable tools for dealing with difficult people.
What seems to me to be truth is just that...it is as you as say..'an opinion', and nothing more.
Taking issue with my 'opinion' makes no sense whatsoever.
However showing me alternate approaches to solving the problem may prove helpful to my own personal growth, and understanding...as well as add a bit more truth/insight to the issue at hand.
How you 'see' me is just that..it is how you see me...what you see alters my perceptions but little. 'Theoretical' means untried/unpracticed does it not ? and mumbling implies incoherency.
I think will wait to hear what other members have to say about what I have shared before considering too greatly your take on my 'incoherency'.

Verbal violence ie; does not include the 'printed word'. This is not violence...violence is what we do when we allow ourselves to buy emotionally into such things as written words. These exchanges of words...however unkind you see them to be..were nothing more than words until we placed a value to them. Couple our emotional reactions to those the potential an there the potential for damage begins.

This may be a bit to 'out there' for you...but boundaries/divisions are what cause wars. The whole idea of community is to 'include' as many people who are 'unlike us' as possible.

Your assumption that someone thrashing about in the pool is drowning may be a leap away from the truth. As far as I can ascertain...no one has been 'killed, or pulled under the water by someone thrashing about' on this forum to date.
There well may have been a few wounded egos brought about in all that thrashing...but a calm, observant, life guard, (open/loving/understanding mind) might have prevented even that.
Babaruss

[Braggi]

... If I fail to attack a person who I perceive as attacking me, I may be at the beginning stages of "working things out".
...

Or more likely, you won't be. No disrespect baba, but your advice doesn't fit either of the two recent situations where a member was dropped from Waccobb.net.

All these nice things were tried with ThePhiant/MsTerry and no amount of playing along, asking for improvement or warnings got through to him.

Imagine having a party. Someone comes in with a squirt gun when the house is already full of people. Every time someone says something this person squirts them in the face. So people stop saying things. Some people get real mad and scream obscenities running from the room. More people arrive and when any of them say something they get squirted in the face. So they either slink off in corners and don't talk or leave saying what a crappy party this is.

The host, friends and other guests try repeatedly to talk this intruder into putting down the squirt gun and just talking like everyone else wants to but the person just fills the gun with water again and continues shooting everyone who tries to help.

As some point the intruder needs to be asked to leave.

That has happened with ThePhiant/MsTerry and the squirting in the face went on way too long in most people's opinions. There was no other choice because all the other methods had been tried over and over to no effect for months and months. MsTerry didn't want to improve things. He enjoyed the chaos he could stir up. He'll now move on to other places where he'll be a burr under the collective saddle until he's canned from there.

In fact, I'll imagine Waccobb.net holds the record for the longest MsTerry membership to date. He's been given way more than his due.

I won't miss him.

-Jeff

[Zeno Swijtink]

I am not following this tread closely but the title, "Keeping WaccoBB.net safe," irks me.

Do a google with "internet safety" and you see it has to do with kids. People are concerned about kids getting hurt on the web.

For grown-ups, the problem with trolls is not that they make Wacco.BB less "safe."

The problem with trolls is that they are tedious, boring, move a conversation off topic, are confusing to newcomers.

Indeed, the problem with trolls is that banning them equally leads to conversation that is tedious, boring, moves the conversation off topic, and is confusing to newcomers.

[babaruss]

I could possibly have been a bit of defensiveness in my response to Royce, but there is nothing in the post which is remotely unkind, threatening, or for that matter 'unloving'.
Perceptions are not facts...they are just perceptions...be they yours, Royce's, or belonging to someone else.
Facts can generally be determined to be truth, or if you wish reality.
My perceptions were not in agreement with Royce's perceptions.
Royce's perceptions were not in agreement with mine.
Is having differing views, or dissagreement, not allowed on a forum of this kind ?

Love does not always come in a manner 'you' understand.
Offering a differing point of view/perception to some can be seen as a loving act. Your perception is that it was not.
While I do not agree with your perception of what I wrote, I am open to you expressing your perceptions.
You see an attack coming from me upon the person of Royce where there was none.
How is it that you are interpreting the words appearing on your screen to be unkind or unloving ?
Babaruss

Babaruss - I'm sorry to say this but you are sounding a bit defensive, which is fine. I don't really care; I'm Ok with exchanges such as this. But I'm looking for the words of love and how you are addressing whatever truth is in Royce's note - your advice to me/this board a few posts back. And Royce isn't even being difficult compared to others who will remain nameless.

I only point it out to demonstrate how difficult it can be to exhibit the qualities you profess (which are honorable), particularly via the written word.

Linda

[Mrs. Wacco]

Barbaruss - I didn't say anything in your post was unkind, unloving, threatening or anything of the sort. Nor did I say you cannot have differing views- read my words again. If I thought any of that I would have said so directly. I am not someone who infers - I say what I mean and mean what I say.

To review - this started with a request for a real example of a response to Shelle or Ms Terry that was undeniably compassionate, respectful, non-violent, that was different than what was posted and that achieved what I outlined. If it those posts had been directed to "you", what would you have written?

While I appreciate the discourse, I will be taking a break from this conversation.....

Linda

I could possibly have been a bit of defensiveness in my response to Royce, but there is nothing in the post which is remotely unkind, threatening, or for that matter 'unloving'.
Perceptions are not facts...they are just perceptions...be they yours, Royce's, or belonging to someone else.
Facts can generally be determined to be truth, or if you wish reality.
My perceptions were not in agreement with Royce's perceptions.
Royce's perceptions were not in agreement with mine.
Is having differing views, or dissagreement, not allowed on a forum of this kind ?

Love does not always come in a manner 'you' understand.
Offering a differing point of view/perception to some can be seen as a loving act. Your perception is that it was not.
While I do not agree with your perception of what I wrote, I am open to you expressing your perceptions.
You see an attack coming from me upon the person of Royce where there was none.
How is it that you are interpreting the words appearing on your screen to be unkind or unloving ?
Babaruss

[Vet-To-Pet]

One definition of insanity is: Doing the same thing over & over and expecting different results. Perhaps this could be applied to the Wacco community's reactions to certain toxic people who have worked their way into "the gang", but who start "stirring the pot" almost immediately with outrageous postings/replies, as well as diverting topics to ones that are more volatile...whatever they do to sabotage our goodwill towards each other. Once these people are 'discovered', I think the best thing to do is for each person who find that person offensive or disrespectful should add him/her to their "ignore" list. Eventually, there will be no one left to read their rantings & MAYbe they'll get the hint...?
Smiles,
Vet-To-Pet/Paula

I am not following this tread closely but the title, "Keeping WaccoBB.net safe," irks me.

Do a google with "internet safety" and you see it has to do with kids. People are concerned about kids getting hurt on the web.

For grown-ups, the problem with trolls is not that they make Wacco.BB less "safe."

The problem with trolls is that they are tedious, boring, move a conversation off topic, are confusing to newcomers.

Indeed, the problem with trolls is that banning them equally leads to conversation that is tedious, boring, moves the conversation off topic, and is confusing to newcomers.

[Vet-To-Pet]

I agree & think the squirt gun analogy is a good one. Eventually, there'll be no one left to squirt if no one stays to be squirted, and the person with the squirt gun will have to try elsewhere or change their ways.
Smiles,
Paula/Vet-To-Pet

Or more likely, you won't be. No disrespect baba, but your advice doesn't fit either of the two recent situations where a member was dropped from Waccobb.net.

All these nice things were tried with ThePhiant/MsTerry and no amount of playing along, asking for improvement or warnings got through to him.

Imagine having a party. Someone comes in with a squirt gun when the house is already full of people. Every time someone says something this person squirts them in the face. So people stop saying things. Some people get real mad and scream obscenities running from the room. More people arrive and when any of them say something they get squirted in the face. So they either slink off in corners and don't talk or leave saying what a crappy party this is.

The host, friends and other guests try repeatedly to talk this intruder into putting down the squirt gun and just talking like everyone else wants to but the person just fills the gun with water again and continues shooting everyone who tries to help.

As some point the intruder needs to be asked to leave.

That has happened with ThePhiant/MsTerry and the squirting in the face went on way too long in most people's opinions. There was no other choice because all the other methods had been tried over and over to no effect for months and months. MsTerry didn't want to improve things. He enjoyed the chaos he could stir up. He'll now move on to other places where he'll be a burr under the collective saddle until he's canned from there.

In fact, I'll imagine Waccobb.net holds the record for the longest MsTerry membership to date. He's been given way more than his due.

I won't miss him.

-Jeff

[Sara S]

from Michael Gerson in The Washington Post:

"The rhetoric of the rant is the dominant form of public comment on the Internet, where the pithy, personal, scatological attack has become a minor art form, rather like sculpting in excrement. The practitioners of the rant have their own television shows, radio programs, and websites. The advocates of this approach often describe it (and themselves) as courageous. But it is a strange moral inversion to talk of the 'courage' of the raised middle finger. Rudeness sets out to dominate and humiliate. Every excess provides the excuse for greater and opposite excess- a search for more vicious put-downs and more startling obscenities."

Or more likely, you won't be. No disrespect baba, but your advice doesn't fit either of the two recent situations where a member was dropped from Waccobb.net.

All these nice things were tried with ThePhiant/MsTerry and no amount of playing along, asking for improvement or warnings got through to him.

Imagine having a party. Someone comes in with a squirt gun when the house is already full of people. Every time someone says something this person squirts them in the face. So people stop saying things. Some people get real mad and scream obscenities running from the room. More people arrive and when any of them say something they get squirted in the face. So they either slink off in corners and don't talk or leave saying what a crappy party this is.

The host, friends and other guests try repeatedly to talk this intruder into putting down the squirt gun and just talking like everyone else wants to but the person just fills the gun with water again and continues shooting everyone who tries to help.

As some point the intruder needs to be asked to leave.

That has happened with ThePhiant/MsTerry and the squirting in the face went on way too long in most people's opinions. There was no other choice because all the other methods had been tried over and over to no effect for months and months. MsTerry didn't want to improve things. He enjoyed the chaos he could stir up. He'll now move on to other places where he'll be a burr under the collective saddle until he's canned from there.

In fact, I'll imagine Waccobb.net holds the record for the longest MsTerry membership to date. He's been given way more than his due.

I won't miss him.

-Jeff

[podfish]

whether the post was "reasonable" doesn't sound at issue.
I think the request was for "exactly" (Barry's words) what response - meaning specific word choices. Barry gave a sample. Another might start: "ShelleBelle, you...." and go on in your own words to make whatever point you want.
I don't quite understand the 'no concrete way..' quote below - it sounds like a comment on the need to deal flexibly with people. That's certainly true, but eventually you do have to choose words, string them together into some attempt at a sentence, and say/write them.

This post is kind of pedantic, but sometimes I think it's worth looking at the mechanics of the conversation so its meanings come through. It's not communication if it's not understood...

I was fairly certain I gave a reasonable response to Linda's questions.
I was speaking in a general way about what I thought might be a conscious response to the difficult people who post on this forum.
There is no concrete way to deal with anyone person ever...

[decterlove]

Indeed, the problem with trolls is that banning them equally leads to conversation that is tedious, boring, moves the conversation off topic, and is confusing to newcomers.

Gadz....this so much ado about NOTHING! Can't we use our collective brain power for something a little less trivial than one silly little semi-troll on a forum.

BTW, has MsT actually been banned at this point?

If she has I suggest we get back to exploring more pertinent matters....like the tiny circular piles of black bean dip that are now frequently cropping up in the Irish countryside. British tabloids are called them "Crap Circles".

[Barry]

... Now’s the time. Take your best shot. ...

All that unpleasantness went down last Friday at 6pm. It's now Tuesday morning. I'll keep my offer open for another 24 hours. If you do not respond by then you will no longer be able to post, and I will call the matter closed.

A personal note to Shellebelle: Shelley, as one human to another: I truly believe you will be doing more damage to yourself rather than to me if you choose to continue, not to mention the rest of the readers.

On that point, I request (but don't insist) that if you do choose to post, please post in the Censored and Uncensored category so that readers will not be exposed to any more of our private drama unwittingly. You are welcome to post a link here.

[Braggi]

... The problem with trolls is that they are tedious, boring, move a conversation off topic, are confusing to newcomers.

Indeed, the problem with trolls is that banning them equally leads to conversation that is tedious, boring, moves the conversation off topic, and is confusing to newcomers.

The big difference is that this conversation, about banning trolls, will wind down and end, but a troll, left as a member, will continue their disrespectful, distracting banter on into the future. Every post would run the risk of an insulting reply. Banning the pest reduces that risk. That's one definition of safety, so I'm both for banning the troll and then talking it out in community as we're doing here.

This kind of conversation is especially important for newcomers so they'll see that if they're unreasonably responded to in a post or in an offline private email that their interests will be protected. That's good for something.

-Jeff

[babaruss]

"Every post could run the risk of' inciting intelligent,, loving non-threatened responses too could it not ?
Practicing loving kindness (to so called annoying people) is a conscious, inclusive, act is this not true ?
I went back and read all of the 'offending' posts, and saw that the words expressed by Shellebelle could be offensive only to someone with an attachment to how they personally are being perceived.
If her words were not responded to at all, there would have need no need for this discussion, let alone barring her.
Non action is considered a loving response in some spiritual belief systems.
Do I need to surrender my peace and serenity over opinions/perceptionsand ideas of me offered by another ?
These are my opinions only, and their value may be zip to everyone else on this forum.
I am only offering alternative routes away from what seems to be a needless conflict.
I was asked earlier what I would have said to Shellebelle..and the answer is this: 'absolutely nothing'. She apparently gossiped... offered her views, and perceptions about someone...opinions which have value only if you invest your feelings/ego/self image into them.
Please keep in mind that I don't know any of the parties involved in this unhappiness.
I am taking no sides.
I am expressing what I think to be aspects of responding to others in community in a conscious way.
Babaruss

............ Every post would run the risk of an insulting reply. Banning the pest reduces that risk. That's one definition of safety, so I'm both for banning the troll and then talking it out in community as we're doing here.............-Jeff

[Braggi]

... I went back and read all of the 'offending' posts, and saw that the words expressed by Shellebelle could be offensive only to someone with an attachment to how they personally are being perceived. ...

But babaruss, the banning wasn't about what she posted on Waccobb.net, but about a private email the rest of us didn't see. Threatening private emails do violate the Wacco terms of service and are cause for losing membership.

I have not seen that email nor do I really want to. Threatening the owner of the site you're a member of isn't really a good idea in my way of thinking.

-Jeff

PS. FWIW, "attachment" is what life is about, in my opinion. There wouldn't be much point without it. We could start a new thread on the topic if you wish.

[babaruss]

O.K. Jeff, thanks for that info.
I was however responding to Linda's request: 'how would you lovingly respond to Shellebelles post ?' ...or something close to that.
This was what I was responding to.
Since I saw no threatening email, I can't have an opinion one way, or the other.... and since none of us on the forum have seen that email perhaps we should have no opinion on the matter either.
Maybe later we can stumble around discussing 'attachment' (for fun and profit ?) as you suggested. Good idea.
Thanks
Babaruss

But babaruss, the banning wasn't about what she posted on Waccobb.net, but about a private email the rest of us didn't see. Threatening private emails do violate the Wacco terms of service and are cause for losing membership.

I have not seen that email nor do I really want to. Threatening the owner of the site you're a member of isn't really a good idea in my way of thinking.

-Jeff

PS. FWIW, "attachment" is what life is about, in my opinion. There wouldn't be much point without it. We could start a new thread on the topic if you wish.

[nurturetruth]

Since this forum is about "keeping waccobb.net Safe"

I feel the desire to say more here and it has nothing to do with the subject matter of msterry or the unfortunate exchange between members. It does however have to do with receiving unpleasant messages.

My concern has more to do with the notion that it seems over the course of the past 2 years and most recently, that I have somehow unconsciously/ consciously allowed myself to be a sounding board for people (offline /online) who are NOT regular posters b/c they don't feel 'safe' in posting their viewpoints and or opinions.
I express this with a sad and heavy heart as the theme is the same with many different people.
I have continued to hear from people both online and offline that they wish to no longer participate on wacco b/c they have not felt "safe" or had that need met. I often hear from others that when they have tried to voice their opinion,perspective ,perhaps a review of a restaurant or tried to introduce a new product , that "they feel hounded/attacked or experience feeling judged for their offerings."
This is a concern for me b/c I wish more members would feel comfortable being active with posting posts on wacco.

It is in my opinion, the issue of keeping wacco safe and cozy for all members and newcomers is a much bigger picture than just dealing w/ msterry. ( i am using msterry's name since this thread started off being about Barry's decision concerning him/her)

Seemingly, and in my perspective (my own), it appears (NOT FACT!) that many "regulars" enjoy conversing on an intellectual level (perhaps w/healthy or unhealthy ego included?)
Perhaps a new category could be considered for "the intellects".....
giggling here!!!! JUST KIDDING!

In truth:

Many times I have shared my offerings to this community in what I perceived to be a heartfelt manner only to read that what i have to offer is not intellectual b/c I do not use the same language or meaning of words as others .
I will admit , the language I opt to use IS very different than the vast majority and very different from how I once expressed myself which I only used to do by way of intellect.
Though I can clearly understand how my language/words can lead to confusion for some, I most always appreciate and enjoy being asked for clarity versus reading how I make it difficult to have an intellectual conversation with.
I have also had the experience of it being implied/suggested that I need to somehow change the way I dialog or altar my words (or meaning behind them) if i want to participate in a good intellectual conversation and be well received. While this theoretically could be true, I use my intellect,heart and spirit to ponder some reflective questions:

1) Why does anyone need to change for anyone in order to have a productive conversation?
2) Do we (as humans) feel that others have to be other than as they are in order to do a fun stimulating dance ?
3) How can wacco as a community for the "progessive" with a quoted 9,417 member status, enable other members (not just regular posters) and newcomers to feel safe and comfortable in including themselves to post more on wacco?

With all respect, I would like to share that
a #1 rule I have with myself and with those i respect and value is:

"to be true to self and accepting myself and others for who they are and where they are at on their journey"

I personally have experienced 'waves' of feeling both safe and unsafe during my time on wacco when it comes to sharing or expressing my truth or perspective.
At times I have found myself wanting to withdraw from this community and even withdraw from offline personal relations when I start imagining or feeling that it is not possible to share my perspective/truth without reading and or hearing judgments or projections in return.
It becomes NOT FUN and it doesn't feel good!

So I have been busy reflecting on this notion of what do I need to feel 'safe' when it comes to expressing my truth?

this is what i wrote in my journal and wish to share with community at this time:

Is it safe?

"I do not need others to be anything other than as they are for my need of safety to be met. I do not need others to change. I accept myself and others for where we are at.

I do not hold others responsible to meet my need for safety.
I cannot rely on or count on others to provide a safe environment for which i can feel free to be me.

rather, it is up to me
to be

It is up to me to find ways to feel comfortable with who I am and what I have to offer. This means knowing I value myself and that I am valued by those who love me and who are in my intimate circle of friends/lovers.

Am I willing to continue contributing to this community and release the hope I will be well received without being judged or projected upon?
yes. to a point.

Do others experience either feeling un-attracted or attracted to me b/c I use such a different language to express myself? yes. (very much so!)

Do those who mind matter? NO !
Is it possible that those who don't mind are the ones who matter? YES! "

lovingly, respectfully and in truth
Kali