It's that time again. We have to address the conduct in this forum.

Originally posted by NGC2736
reply to post by Fitzgibbon

 

Trust me when I tell you that it WILL be a two way function. I personally don't give a hoot which side anybody is on. It's simple really, from here on, lack of civility will be seen by me as an attack on the core values of ATS. And I wouldn't have taken this unpaid job, and it is work, if I didn't think the values of ATS were worth working for.

If someone says something nasty to you, and for whatever reason I don't catch it, (I do sleep and eat,) then hit the complaint button and state your case, then go about the rest of your business as if it never happened. IT WILL BE DEALT WITH.

By the same token, if you lose your cool over words on a screen, and start dishing trash, I will be coming to a thread near you. There are no excuses.

Fair enough. By the same token, I think there's a reticence to haul off and flag everything for complaint. Thinking of the posting history of spirit7 as an example, that didn't exactly start off especially open to discourse. Personally, I gave up on him because it seemed to me that his mindset was set and immovable and I didn't see any value in continued head-against-wall-banging.

However, others here did continue to engage him and last I checked, the general tone of his posts had changed somewhat and while I believe all and sundry appreciate that his religious fervour is honestly felt, he has also come to realise that Masons aren't blood-swilling Satanists bent on subsuming society as we know it.

So, intensity is not necessarily a bad thing.

Dang, NGC a mod?
I remember, more or less, when you were somewhat a noobie on here
well thats cool, I didnt really know you all that well but it seemed that you were ok or I wouldnt have added you as a friend.
They need good people here to keep peeps like me in check lmao

reply to post by LightinDarkness


Read my last post. It is stopping. By the same token, I don't have a lot of patience with "I'm a victim" mentality. If a poster accuses one group of "piling on" and I find no evidence of it being true, I'm going to penalize that person for filing a false report. If someone starts crying that "so-and-so" is being nasty to me, and I look into it and it isn't true, then the same thing will happen to them for making a false report.

Defend what you believe in a civil manner and NO ONE will have a problem.

reply to post by intrepid


Didn't mean to imply otherwise. Mea culpa

Originally posted by Rockpuck
I certainly hope your not suggesting that the Brethren on this board are informed of eachothers activities, and even organized a "gang" like system to gang up on "anti-Masons"

I hardly ever post on this forum, but it's terms like "the Brethren" that creep me out personally, lol. Guess I'm just TOO independent in my personal life to belong to such a group, but it's human nature for just about any group that feels attacked to come together in defense of themselves, and there's not too many other forums where there are such clear cut teams, so I think to expect emotions not to run high, or the gang mentality not to rear it's head, is a bit unrealistic.

Originally posted by Fitzgibbon
I sincerely doubt you could get us to agree on pretty much anything else.

Right, but in this forum, where your fraternity is one of the main topics, there is no need to agree on anything else, right? You all have an opinion, and you all probably want to share it when you feel attacked, but to an outsider, it is what it is. I think it's gonna be hard to define ganging up here.

reply to post by NGC2736


I appreciate this. I have found that there are a few posters who repeatedly hit the "notify" button for all manner of sundry issues that have nothing to do with said posts being against the T&C - they just disagree with the poster. I will however be using it, as I have noticed that some posters repeatedly derail topics completely with continual fervor - not accidental, not on a tangent, but on purpose. I hope that too can now be dealt with.

I'm happy to see we have such a good team of moderators on this board. We're not for the faint of heart Its like herding cattle around here!

reply to post by Fitzgibbon


Like I said, until both sides get it through their head that this forum WILL be civil, I'll do what it takes. Passion is a good thing. I'm passionate about the ATS standards. But passion is a poor excuse not to act like an adult. And all sides will come to understand this. ATS isn't middle school recess with no teacher in sight.

And I don't intend to start banning people for every infraction. But a steady drain on their points along with some cute red stickers and their offending posts wiped from the face of the earth and replaced with a Miss Manners logo, will make it less fun to play at being a poster child for Loudmouths Inc. Though if need be, bans will swiftly and surely follow repeat offenders.

reply to post by 27jd


Actually, I see lots of actual forum gangs roving these boards. That is, if we are defining forum gangs as anytime anyone in large numbers agrees and bash everyone else who disagree with them. There is a "Certain Political Administrations Are Wrong And If You Disagree You Are a Facist" forum gang, a "The Economy is Going In a Bad Direction And If You Disagree You Are A NWO Sheeple" gang, etc. In fact, I tend to see them a lot more on other boards.

On this board, you can rarely get the masons to even agree on all but the most simplest of things about the fraternity. And by simple, I mean things that are factual. Anything that requires an opinion will result in disagreement among the masons here. If you want an example, see the whole "cross dressers joining the lodge" thread, or the "role of christianity in masonry" type threads spawned by spirit7. It happens all the time. What it tells me is that when there is rare agreement, that is strong evidence.

reply to post by 27jd


I can define it real easy. You defend your own position and beliefs, and let the other guy defend his. It's called taking responsibility for your own actions, and leaving everybody else to do the same.

Sure, there are sides. But the first time I catch poster A congratulating poster B for putting somebody down heavy, then poster A gets a Miss Manners, and I double check poster B for motives. Yes, you can still agree with those that defend the same things you do, and tell them you think they were correct in what they said. But the era of post bashing parties is over.

Originally posted by Kr0n0s
Dang, NGC a mod?
I remember, more or less, when you were somewhat a noobie on here

well thats cool, I didnt really know you all that well but it seemed that you were ok or I wouldnt have added you as a friend.
They need good people here to keep peeps like me in check lmao

They were scrapping the bottom of the barrel for people willing to take the job.

Thanks for the kind words. I expect such sentiments will be few and far between for me for a while.

Originally posted by LightinDarkness
Actually, I see lots of actual forum gangs roving these boards. That is, if we are defining forum gangs as anytime anyone in large numbers agrees and bash everyone else who disagree with them. There is a "Certain Political Administrations Are Wrong And If You Disagree You Are a Facist" forum gang, a "The Economy is Going In a Bad Direction And If You Disagree You Are A NWO Sheeple" gang, etc. In fact, I tend to see them a lot more on other boards.

The lines are still not as clear cut. Those are political stances, and people can and do change their political stances frequently. Like Chris Rock said, most people are conservative on some issues, and liberal on others, based on personal experiences and influences. There are very few members who take stances on issues solely based on their political leanings, the ones that do are well known and I ignore most of what they say, because it's obviously an opinion that was given to them by someone else, lol. Whereas with masonry, I imagine there are oaths and commitments made, and the sense of brotherhood etc. I imagine it's not like a political leaning that can be changed easily, but like I said, I really don't read this forum too much as I don't really have an opinion one way or the other. It's the super rich few that run things, whether they are masons or not to me ir pretty much irrelevant, since there is no way in my opinion that average members are going to be let in on things that happen high up, just as with any institution...

Originally posted by 27jd

Originally posted by Fitzgibbon
I sincerely doubt you could get us to agree on pretty much anything else.

Right, but in this forum, where your fraternity is one of the main topics, there is no need to agree on anything else, right? You all have an opinion, and you all probably want to share it when you feel attacked, but to an outsider, it is what it is. I think it's gonna be hard to define ganging up here.

Well, I guess it could seem that way. What I meant really was in addressing the pack-mentality suggestion. There's certainly no preordained cohesion among Masons as has been suggested in other threads. I mean, if somebody was making statements and accusations about Knights of Columbus, I can't imagine that it'd be surprising if K of C members from here, there and elsewhere would step in and attempt to correct a fallacy. Same's true of any identifiable group.

Qualifying individuals responding vs. a coordinated reply as has apparently happened at some point in the past might be a challenge for a mod coming in without knowing the players (so to speak). However, I think Intrepid's been striking a pretty fair balance all in all and I find no end of irony in certain posters who've accused him of being a Mason.

Originally posted by NGC2736
reply to post by 27jd

 

I can define it real easy. You defend your own position and beliefs, and let the other guy defend his. It's called taking responsibility for your own actions, and leaving everybody else to do the same.

It's still a double edged sword of perception, IMO.

But the first time I catch poster A congratulating poster B for putting somebody down heavy, then poster A gets a Miss Manners, and I double check poster B for motives. Yes, you can still agree with those that defend the same things you do, and tell them you think they were correct in what they said. But the era of post bashing parties is over.

You honestly don't see how blurry that line is though? I think it'll be hard to fairly say what is congratulating, and what is just agreeing with somebody defending the same things you are, glad it's not my job.

I'm not trying to argue in any way, I really don't have an opinion on this issue, I just think you mods have a tough challenge ahead...

Originally posted by Fitzgibbon
I mean, if somebody was making statements and accusations about Knights of Columbus, I can't imagine that it'd be surprising if K of C members from here, there and elsewhere would step in and attempt to correct a fallacy. Same's true of any identifiable group.

Yup, exactly my point.

Qualifying individuals responding vs. a coordinated reply as has apparently happened at some point in the past might be a challenge for a mod coming in without knowing the players (so to speak). However, I think Intrepid's been striking a pretty fair balance all in all and I find no end of irony in certain posters who've accused him of being a Mason.

Again, we agree, as for others accusing intrepid of being a mason just because they step out of line and he moderates, or just because he adds his personal opinion and it doesn't agree with theirs, whatever, it's a joke. It's immaturity, and it's something else I just ignore. I've been accused of being a secret skull and bones plant in one discussion because I didn't agree with somebody and I have the evil dead skull in my avatar, lol. I got my GED at community college, hardly skull and bones material I imagine...

I think there can be a solution to the "Gang" problem. If there's a debate and one of the masons makes a good point and you, as a mason yourself, agree with the first mason posters statement...star him. Let THAT be your support of his testimony instead of posting that you totally agree and the arguer to the testimony is wrong. Each and every poster here, Mason or not, is an individual with an opinion and a viewpoint. And, instead of posting the same argument side as your brother mason, just throw a star on HIS post and let that be your support. No names or ganging, just a star that says "This is the right answer". That way you don't all show up and the ignorant, non-mason poster doesn't feel ganged up on.

We have the ability to simmer these forums down without all the mod action. NGC has really no idea as to the truths and falsehoods of the Lodges and neither do I. We were assigned these forums and so, NGC and I are going to patrol them. NGC wants to learn more fact concerning Masonry and I'd sure like to counter-act all the David Icke crap I soaked in early in my interest.
I like all you guys. I believe it takes a bit more of a person to dedicate himself to the community and make that time count. I recognize that. I recognize the pride. I even see the pride and dedication that the Shriners emote while riding in Parades in wee, little cars, to remind us that they do this all FOR something. Something beyond their own home and family. Something for their neighbor.
Is freemasonry misunderstood? I believe almost entirely. And those who misunderstand it, misunderstand it in a huge way, based on myths and anti-mason rhetoric. No argument there from me. There's a lot of ignorance and bigotry burning up out there and I am glad that we have this forum, and it's denizens, to enlighten US with some truths.
Now. Don't stop posting. Don't stop enlightening. Just do it like it's always a test to prove you're in control of yourselves. Maintain the dignity of your position in your Lodge. Maintain your dignity as a member of ATS.

Remember, you're MY brother too. My ATS brother.

Cuhail
ATS Moderator.

[edit because 4 of my 10 typing fingers rebeled and hit the wrong keys]

[edit on 1/31/2008 by Cuhail]

Originally posted by Cuhail
I think there can be a solution to the "Gang" problem. If there's a debate and one of the masons makes a good point and you, as a mason yourself, agree with the first mason posters statement...star him.

Believe it or not, even doing something like that gets Masons taken to task (whether or not t'was actually Masons doing the starring). Personally, if someone's already made a good point, I just let it sit at that and wait for a response. I'll (usually) only pop-in if I can add a slightly different perspective as a Canuck. Otherwise, I'm on the sidelines.

Originally posted by Cuhail
Is freemasonry misunderstood? I believe almost entirely. And those who misunderstand it, misunderstand it in a huge way, based on myths and anti-mason rhetoric. No argument there from me. There's a lot of ignorance and bigotry burning up out there and I am glad that we have this forum, and it's denizens, to enlighten US with some truths.

We (Masons, that is) do try to assist in denying ignorance. Short of out-and-out delineating personally everything that goes on in-Lodge, we're as a group pretty responsive to questions. As I pointed out in my reply to SO, we're also not unmindful of the presence on the Internet of most of what non-Masons think of as "the secrets" of Masonry. Now, you wanna see touchy about "secrets", just look at Scientology!

Originally posted by Cuhail
Remember, you're MY brother too. My ATS brother.

Cuhail

ATS Moderator.

Oddly enough, I've never been entirely been quite comfortable with the "brother" thing. Maybe it's because I'm adopted and you might just BE my brother.

reply to post by Cuhail


As a counterpoint to what you said, let me point out the other side of the spectrum. Those who have suspicions about the masons are not nut jobs. To be suspicious of any group with a history of movers and shakers on the global level is second nature to any person worthy of the name CTer.

I don't trust anybody. Hell, half the time, I don't really trust me.

Post about what you have read concerning the evil deeds of masons past and present. Consider that within that group there may have been a cabal of power hungry killers. Whatever. Show your evidence, logic, or theories. This is a CT site, after all.

As long as you don't take it out on the many masons here and elsewhere. I'm a Native American, but I don't hold everyone else to blame for all the past and current abuses of the white race and the policies of the United States government.

Above all, both sides need to show the maturity of being able to listen. If a non-mason shows evidence of a power grab by a group of masons, then the masons here ought to want to know about that, ought to want to understand the whys and wherefores of it. And if a mason shows where some book bashing masons has it's facts screwed up, then non-masons ought to want to know the truth, instead of following a lie.

It's hard to listen with your mouth open, especially when you're screaming.

Originally posted by Cuhail
I think there can be a solution to the "Gang" problem. If there's a debate and one of the masons makes a good point and you, as a mason yourself, agree with the first mason posters statement...star him. Let THAT be your support of his testimony instead of posting that you totally agree and the arguer to the testimony is wrong. Each and every poster here, Mason or not, is an individual with an opinion and a viewpoint. And, instead of posting the same argument side as your brother mason, just throw a star on HIS post and let that be your support.

This is a really good point, and it's something that, to be completely honest, I've never really considered. I've heard a lot of the critics of Masonry talk about "being ganged up on", and have always just dismissed it as nonsense. But your point is well-taken: he may think or believe he's being ganged up on, not necessarily because that was the Masons' intention, but because many of the Masons here are...er....."outspoken", and all have something to say.

So when 10 Masons reply to a poster separately, I suppose it could seem to him he 's being ganged up on, even though that wasn't the intention of the repliers.

[edit on 31-1-2008 by Masonic Light]

Good points all. And Fitz...you are my brotha from anotha mutha!

Look, here's my point. It takes the individual spirit to make this a gathering place to learn and teach. There are going to be exasperating buggers who speak when they should read or listen. And they will take everything countering their stance as bait. I'll keep it simple and do my best to curb it.
I support the advancing of a thread. I detest the retarding of a thread. I'll applaud and warn as appropriate.

Cuhail

reply to post by 27jd


"the brethren" .. is a term to describe all Masons.. "Members of the Craft" or what have you.. since we call eachother Brother, the Brethren is the collective Brothers as a whole...

So the Brethren means all Masons... Not creepy.. just... the English language..

As for Cuhail.. I firmly disagree and will NOT follow your advice to "star and let that be your support" .. If I have something to say, to add, to word differently.. to EXPRESS MY SELF......... I will.

Nothing against your powers as a mod or anything personal, but if I want to express my self in words...

I will.

Civily of course.