I just fired Winchester

[Ash Wednesday]

Wow this was fun to read, but it must be pretty embarrassing for you all having all that dirty laundry in public. 

Just a thought: I don't think we need to change the rules, but it would be nice if people didn't flirt with the line so often. Being a total jerkwad without technically violating the personal attack rule is basically just as bad as a personal attack. When random people like me can read what you say and know that it's done in the spirit of a personal attack but doesn't count because you've been around long enough to not precede it with the words, "You are a...", there's a problem.  We can't change the policy because it would be impossible to Mediator of Meh. But come on. Indulge in a little self-moderation. 

+1. I'm actually a little surprised nobody has nominated you to be a Meh. 

It would help dial down unnecessary drama. There have been people on here who have posted things to me that I felt were rude and I was a bit hurt by, but as a Mediator of Meh I have to detach myself from it because it's not worth getting too emotionally invested in. There are times when we want to return the venom or rudeness, but in the end it's usually not worth it.

[Basilisa Marie]

+1. I'm actually a little surprised nobody has nominated you to be a Meh. 

It would help dial down unnecessary drama. There have been people on here who have posted things to me that I felt were rude and I was a bit hurt by, but as a Mediator of Meh I have to detach myself from it because it's not worth getting too emotionally invested in. There are times when we want to return the venom or rudeness, but in the end it's usually not worth it.

Lol I appreciate the compliment but dUst probably thinks I'd turn phatmass into a nanny state social justice warrior paradise (is he wrong? Only one way to find out...). Plus I'm not around enough to remotely qualify.   

I used to HATE when dUst would say that it's just the internet and doesn't matter. But now I think there might be some wisdom to that. 

[Benedictus]

@dUSt

We also REALLY need to have the phorum rules clearly posted. It's a little unfair to level discipline on someone if they don't actually know what the rules are. If I'm warning someone, usually in the case of someone who I don't think may be fully familiar with the rules or has forgotten, it's helpful to actually cite the rule in place that's been violated. If the old ones have been lost, then perhaps a few of us can collectively help draft a new one up.

Thanks for all that you do.

I'd agree. I come to think the board didn't really have rules as such because things were sometimes done in such a random and unfair way. Giving people tags and banning without early warnings or guidance because it suited a certain group of people etc to do so in a post. No clear rules on having decisions reviewed or time periods before settings were restored etc. The debate section should have a warning sign: if you try to debate or have an opinion here, even as devils advocate, you might as well have a leper bell. All too often peeps play out their ego and build up their faith by bringing someone else down here. There's often no attempt to win that person back or help them. It all smells of cheesy feet frankly.

[Ash Wednesday]

I'd agree. I come to think the board didn't really have rules as such because things were sometimes done in such a random and unfair way. Giving people tags and banning without early warnings or guidance because it suited a certain group of people etc to do so in a post. No clear rules on having decisions reviewed or time periods before settings were restored etc. The debate section should have a warning sign: if you try to debate or have an opinion here, even as devils advocate, you might as well have a leper bell. All too often peeps play out their ego and build up their faith by bringing someone else down here. There's often no attempt to win that person back or help them. It all smells of cheesy feet frankly.

Yeah, you see there were a written set of rules posted in the past, but I'm not sure what happened to them. They DO exist. Somewhere.

[Gabriela]

I'm reading for an intercultural communication course and just finished the section on directness/indirectness. It made me think we should have this rule:

"Never criticize a person, but only their statements.

If you are criticizing a person's statements, assume that the person will interpret it as a criticism of their person, and word it gently.

If your person is being criticized, assume that the criticizer intends to criticize only your statements, and respond gently."

[Luigi]

Joan Baez had been friends with Bob Dylan for decades when she wrote this song to him. He was doing a lot of stuff that she didn't consider very "friendly." The song is called "Oh, Brother" and it's written as an answer to Dylan's song "Oh, Sister." So not everything in this song relates directly to the discussion in this thread, but the tone and attitude and advice in the chorus do apply.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_sW_HWWxog

[Credo in Deum]

+1. I'm actually a little surprised nobody has nominated you to be a Meh. 

It would help dial down unnecessary drama. There have been people on here who have posted things to me that I felt were rude and I was a bit hurt by, but as a Mediator of Meh I have to detach myself from it because it's not worth getting too emotionally invested in. There are times when we want to return the venom or rudeness, but in the end it's usually not worth it.

Worth it.

 

[veritasluxmea]

The debate section should have a warning sign: if you try to debate or have an opinion here, even as devils advocate, you might as well have a leper bell. All too often peeps play out their ego and build up their faith by bringing someone else down here. There's often no attempt to win that person back or help them. It all smells of cheesy feet frankly.

Yes, I agree with the bolded. Before giving someone a phisy tag for for promoting heresy, they should have the posts with questionable beliefs pointed out to them as why they're wrong (Catechism quotes, bible quotes, whatever) shown to them. Either in public or via PM. If they deny that, then they do deserve the phisy tag.

But honestly, some people do not realize what they are saying is against Church teaching, especially if they are converts. RCIA doesn't cover everything, and let's be honest, a lot of RCIA programs are sadly lacking the ability to engage people on sexuality and Theology of the Body. Some new Catholics aren't really taught exactly what the Church teaches on hot-button issues and their masculism/feminism and they don't know how to figure it out on their own. They honestly think it's a matter of opinion because they just don't know better. Having their mistakes laid out before them and giving them an option of backing out, is fair. Otherwise just giving out a phisy tag is frustrating and confusing for them. 

I know it asks a lot of the Mediators of Meh... so maybe when we're all engaging with a Catholic who is confused, try and keep that in mind and lay it out clearly? See if they're a convert or not. That's what I've personally decided to do anyways. 

Edited September 5, 2015 by veritasluxmea

[Gabriela]

I don't see what being a convert has to do with it. Catechesis is terrible for everyone. I don't say that out of sensitivity because I'm a convert, just because I haven't noticed any difference between cradle Catholics and converts on this issue.

Otherwise, though, I totally agree with you, veritas.

[IgnatiusofLoyola]

To give the Mediators of Meh and dUSt due credit, I'm not aware of someone being given a Phishy tag lightly--normally it's based on a number of problem posts, and not used to punish a new convert who simply has poor catechesis. Obviously I'm not aware of the circumstances under which every single person with a Phishy tag received it, because normally it is not my business. But, in the situations I am aware of, the Phishy tag was not only deserved, but probably overdue.

[veritasluxmea]

To give the Mediators of Meh and dUSt due credit, I'm not aware of someone being given a Phishy tag lightly--normally it's based on a number of problem posts, and not used to punish a new convert who simply has poor catechesis. Obviously I'm not aware of the circumstances under which every single person with a Phishy tag received it, because normally it is not my business. But, in the situations I am aware of, the Phishy tag was not only deserved, but probably overdue.

Yeah, a lot of behind the scenes work and drama on the threads. But it's not always clear to the person receiving the tag exactly what was said or done that is in disagreement with the Church and exactly how (assuming they're not a badly written semi-troll. I still think we need to have a separate troll tag instead of lumping trolls under the phisy tags with bad Catholics because right now the phisy tag is used for both, and that's two different tag uses there). To them it can simply look like a mess of Catholic phorum politics. Again, I think it should be clearly defined and they should have an opportunity to back out due to ignorance. That will help them better on their faith journey than what is perceived by them to just be a politics disagreement on some issue that they think they're right on. It's true other users will get offended and take it seriously if someone posts wrong ideas under a Catholic banner- how is the person receiving a phisy tag supposed to tell the difference between overemotional reactions and them actually being in the wrong if they genuinely don't know their Faith to well? 

[SaintOfVirtue]

deleted

 

Edited September 5, 2015 by SaintOfVirtue

[BarbTherese]

@dUSt

We also REALLY need to have the phorum rules clearly posted. It's a little unfair to level discipline on someone if they don't actually know what the rules are. If I'm warning someone, usually in the case of someone who I don't think may be fully familiar with the rules or has forgotten, it's helpful to actually cite the rule in place that's been violated. If the old ones have been lost, then perhaps a few of us can collectively help draft a new one up.

Thanks for all that you do.

 

 I underscore the above.  The rules for all phorums posted somewhere very visible and pinned.  If any phorums have specific rules (such as VS) include that in the pinned rules too.  And a big underscore for "Thanks for all you do".

(I can't do the @‌dust as link [including for other members] for some reason)

[Gabriela]

I still think we need to have a separate troll tag instead of lumping trolls under the phisy tags with bad Catholics because right now the phisy tag is used for both, and that's two different tag uses there).

That's a good point. I second that.

[Socrates]

Meh.