Request for active moderation (Page 4 of 8)

Alright, I have an idea.  When I started this forum, I had a category called "Battle Arena" and removed it soon because it was a joke. Little did I know how handy this would have been later on. 

So how about a forum category called "Free for All", which will have no moderation except for obvious stuff like spam or porn? If a thread elsewhere degenerates into total anarchy then it can be moved there. Or if someone can't stand the "draconian" moderation policy at NR, they can start a thread there and not worry about it.

Sedna, you're right.   My feeling has been to step up and be the bad guy rather than just let it go.  To whatever extent that's served to add fuel to the fire and "feed the feeders" more, that's a bad thing for sure and I am sorry for it.   If I had caught on to the intentional lack of moderation from the beginning, I'd have refrained from all comments on the subject, period.   My bad for missing or forgetting the announcement.  I hope the orchestrated drama served its intended purpose and was worth it.

I agree, and that's why I can't wait for it to start again. Morningsun, I didn't feel anything negative towards your posts. As you know, there've
been some really wrong things done on this board, and it would take a saint not to react to some of it, to some extent. Some feel that they are
saints by ignoring it, however, what we need is courage in speaking up
each time, before things really begin to be harmful to people. As to what Montalk's doing with the moderation break, I'm sure there's a good reason for it, and I don't question it, really. But what's happened in the last week really proves his point that the cowards run amok if they feel they can get away with it, and it's for those who doubt the reasoning for his bans that I am making these statements. It bothers me, and I know it bothers many others...only a few more days to go, and I will be curious to see any conclusions he reaches. If he chooses to continue to also be hilariously funny about it in some of his comments, all the better.
We are due for a real "chuckle." (hint.)

To Montalk:

Tom, you got your hands full.  Soon from now you will be making a decision which many NR members are expecting.  I know the decision will not satisfuy everybody for it is impossible to cover all the basis.  I would like to expand on the definition of "cowards".

1. The ones as you defined earlier in your post which I agree with completely
2. The ones that make accusations but fail to provide details (If I knew better I would label it as a Machiavelic tactic) which SednaSphere just joined (I hope it was not intentional)

Because negative emotions override understanding, especially when coupled with pre-programming and engineered provocations. Why is it that moon periods tend to favor such episodes, as do critical points on the biorhythm chart? Because those are weak points when judgments are off, biases are high, and anything wanting to exploit the weakness of individuals and groups would therefore have an easier time doing so.

You can control yourself, but can others control themselves also? As I said before, there are good natured people who might have bad days, and ill intentioned people who have good days when their intentions manifest. The latter always come to tango when the first are too intoxicated to resist. The only way to achieve high level harmony is through a closed forum where the varied soul frequencies all resonate to the same keynote. I am not suggesting this, but rather saying that maintaining harmony in an open forum would require some level of pruning.

Clannish...well, people try to welcome all new members, keeping an open mind and waiting for their true colors to shine before assessing the degree of mutual resonance and level of interest in further interaction. Over time this naturally causes people to move into different clusters depending on their fundamental soul vibration, their emotional learning path, their attitude and perceptions. Some could see this as clannish, but I think it's more about people of common views lending mutual support.

As for the troublemakers, if they arrive with negative intentions, then their behavior changes only in the mode of manipulation, from abrasive to charming or vice versa. You've seen it before, you'll see it again. The reason that ignoring them is not enough, is that there will always be someone who naively supports a charming troll longer than others have the patience to suffer. This means that if the charm is successful, the good natured posters will be run out of town. It's classic, and it works every time. The method is systematic and replicable.

One of the lessons of 3D/4D is to be compassionate yet wise, and there are many who give themselves over to manipulation and predation in the name of compassion until they get burned badly enough to learn to discern - the only problem is that unless they are hermits, the consequences adversely affect others. Take a mother who cycles through abusive boyfriends until learning to stay away from the charming badboys, she learns her lesson but now her children are screwed up for life. This happens to a milder extent on this forum, as this nexus of interaction provides avenues for individual learning lessons to manifest, including the one about compassion + wisdom. This results in others having to suffer the naive -- maybe their lesson then is patience and tolerance...or maybe their lesson is to speak up despite opposition.

If tensions are already taught, then I am curious to see what happens in the next seven days.

Montalk said "The only way to achieve high level harmony is through a closed forum where the varied soul frequencies all resonate to the same keynote."

Gleep --- how could I forget the painfully obvious!!  Thanks.

SednaSphere -- thanks for the clarity.  The stuff that goes on behind the scenes I know nothing about -- and to be honest "disruption and distraction leading to abduction" is honestly beyond my point of reference but certainly could happen. So, I can understand now your concern.

Warmly,
Christine

I don't know, I'm just not getting the whole clannishness thing.  I don't see that.  I don't see people getting purposely ignored in a snooty "I'm snubbing you" way.   It's quite the contrary.  Here, despite the volume of threads and posts, it still has a nice snug community feel, meaning, it's not loud and chaotic.   You don't get lost in the shuffle here.   People *see* you here.    To use the Icke forum as an example, yet again, over there there's thousands of members, and tens of thousands of posts already.   You can't keep up.  So much noise and pollution;  unless you make your presense KNOWN by posting in every other thread on a regular basis, you will drown in the crowd.   Here, it's like talking in a large livingroom, versus shouting in a crowded auditorium, or ampitheater, in the case of the Icke forum. 

I think that the idea of "clans" is a misperception, based on a wounded ego.   Sensitive people will take it majorly to heart if their every post isn't responded to be many people.  Those with a thick skin won't even notice or care.  Somewhere in the middle are those that occasionally wonder, "Huh...I wonder if they don't like what I said...?  Maybe that's why nobody responded....?  Oh well!  <shrug> "  Where one falls on the spectrum/scale depends on how sensitive they are;  how thick or thin their skin is, how easily wounded their ego can get.   So is it really a case of there being "clans" here at NR?   Or are the people who feel that way just very sensitive?   

I said this before to Cipher, back when she was all upset, saying she was going to leave, because in her mind, she wasn't getting the level of reaction to her posts that she had anticipated.  She swore she was being ignored / snubbed.  Not accepted.  Getting the cold shoulder.   In truth, many of us had read her posts, really liked them, and just simply had nothing good to add!   Her posts stood alone.   To post after them would be to take away from the power of her post.

I know that I've purposely held off on responding to quite a few posts that I really dug;  not to snub the person, but to make sure others saw their post, because it was just that good.  I didn't want to "drown it out" and take away from it.

This whole "clan" thing was mentioned before, and honestly, as somebody who's participated in other messageboards, and has really SEEN true "board cliques", I can tell you, that's not happening here.   Sure, it's my subjective opinion, but I can say it with conviction only because when pressed to try to figure out who's supposedly "in" with the whatever supposed "clan", I couldn't tell you.  I can't group anybody here together in that way.   I don't know, that's just how I see it I guess.