06-20-2013, 02:50 PM
I have been involuntarily involved in this discussion to the point I feel that it's time for me to actually join in.
I will firstly say that I have long given up the idea of trying to "revolutionize the forum." The state of a memory complex is dictated by the state of its members as a whole, and depending on what signals are being input into the master program, the coding that defines the state of the whole is manifested. I feel that embodying those qualities I believe to express unity, harmony, wisdom, compassion and overall unconditional love within my own being is the best contribution I can offer to the environments that I partake in. That being said, I offer mere questions based on my perceptions of what is going on.
1. The need for a strict set of rules within a community is another topic entirely. However, this community does, in fact, possess rules, and everyone who joined this community agreed to respect those rules to the best of their ability upon joining. Therefore, if you find a rule to be outdated, would it be more appropriate to voice your concerns in an open and loving sense, allowing the community the opportunity to consider the issue as a whole and inspire natural consensus evolution, or is it more appropriate to simply break the rule and do whatever you want, just because you feel personally justified in doing so? What level of respect, empathy and service is presented by either of these options?
2. I know of at least two other cases where members of this forum have openly claimed to channel/have direct contact with Ra/Q'uo, and at least one of them did so in a way that caused quite a stir amongst forum members, as it was entirely contradictory to the previous traditional material. As far as I know, no disciplinary action was taken against either of these members, so I am curious as to what brand of selective reasoning is being applied here. Where is the consistency in standards? Are decisions made entirely on executive whim?
3. Why does it seem impossible for forum members and moderators to have an open, loving, public blue ray expression? Now, I know every last one of the moderators of this forum, as well as Jim and Carla themselves, on a personal level. They are all wonderful, loving people. I also know a great many of the forum members on a personal basis, and can vouch for an underlying current of sanity and an honest desire to seek in a wise and caring way. Yet when it comes to interaction between the two, it always seems to happen in some private, covert sense that leaves at least one party feeling ashamed, confused or even bullied. I have experienced this sense of being gang banged myself in one or two instances, though most fortunately I have the ability to talk with the moderators as my friends any time I want and the feelings incurred were able to be balanced in a quick fashion. Not everyone has this privilege, though, and I have heard countless opinions that "the moderators" are just unpleasant fellows who like to lord it over the forum.
In my opinion, this is not at all true, but it is a very real and prevalent thought form. Is there no reason this thought form cannot be brought into the light by all members of this community, lovingly embraced, balanced and reintegrated? I understand that in some instances privacy is the ideal measure, yet is so much separation between executive power and general contributor really necessary? As far as I can tell, those at the helm of this forum have always done their best to consider the desires of the forum members, going so far as to create new categories for them to express themselves in new ways. However, all final decisions are still decided in private, behind closed doors, and, as far as I can tell, based around personal belief systems instead of community consensus. Is this truly reflective of the loving principles this forum strives to uphold?
I have been told in the past that the ideal of a forum run entirely upon group consensus was absolutely impossible, and, perhaps, at least in this circumstance, it is. It is perhaps not my perfect version of reality, but this does nothing to lesson the respect and love I feel for all parties involved, and not nearly enough of a break in my own personal morals system for me to feel the need to separate myself from those I feel offer great potential for collective service. Therefore, I simply let these questions stand as they are and wish everyone well. You are all dear in my heart.
I will firstly say that I have long given up the idea of trying to "revolutionize the forum." The state of a memory complex is dictated by the state of its members as a whole, and depending on what signals are being input into the master program, the coding that defines the state of the whole is manifested. I feel that embodying those qualities I believe to express unity, harmony, wisdom, compassion and overall unconditional love within my own being is the best contribution I can offer to the environments that I partake in. That being said, I offer mere questions based on my perceptions of what is going on.
1. The need for a strict set of rules within a community is another topic entirely. However, this community does, in fact, possess rules, and everyone who joined this community agreed to respect those rules to the best of their ability upon joining. Therefore, if you find a rule to be outdated, would it be more appropriate to voice your concerns in an open and loving sense, allowing the community the opportunity to consider the issue as a whole and inspire natural consensus evolution, or is it more appropriate to simply break the rule and do whatever you want, just because you feel personally justified in doing so? What level of respect, empathy and service is presented by either of these options?
2. I know of at least two other cases where members of this forum have openly claimed to channel/have direct contact with Ra/Q'uo, and at least one of them did so in a way that caused quite a stir amongst forum members, as it was entirely contradictory to the previous traditional material. As far as I know, no disciplinary action was taken against either of these members, so I am curious as to what brand of selective reasoning is being applied here. Where is the consistency in standards? Are decisions made entirely on executive whim?
3. Why does it seem impossible for forum members and moderators to have an open, loving, public blue ray expression? Now, I know every last one of the moderators of this forum, as well as Jim and Carla themselves, on a personal level. They are all wonderful, loving people. I also know a great many of the forum members on a personal basis, and can vouch for an underlying current of sanity and an honest desire to seek in a wise and caring way. Yet when it comes to interaction between the two, it always seems to happen in some private, covert sense that leaves at least one party feeling ashamed, confused or even bullied. I have experienced this sense of being gang banged myself in one or two instances, though most fortunately I have the ability to talk with the moderators as my friends any time I want and the feelings incurred were able to be balanced in a quick fashion. Not everyone has this privilege, though, and I have heard countless opinions that "the moderators" are just unpleasant fellows who like to lord it over the forum.
In my opinion, this is not at all true, but it is a very real and prevalent thought form. Is there no reason this thought form cannot be brought into the light by all members of this community, lovingly embraced, balanced and reintegrated? I understand that in some instances privacy is the ideal measure, yet is so much separation between executive power and general contributor really necessary? As far as I can tell, those at the helm of this forum have always done their best to consider the desires of the forum members, going so far as to create new categories for them to express themselves in new ways. However, all final decisions are still decided in private, behind closed doors, and, as far as I can tell, based around personal belief systems instead of community consensus. Is this truly reflective of the loving principles this forum strives to uphold?
I have been told in the past that the ideal of a forum run entirely upon group consensus was absolutely impossible, and, perhaps, at least in this circumstance, it is. It is perhaps not my perfect version of reality, but this does nothing to lesson the respect and love I feel for all parties involved, and not nearly enough of a break in my own personal morals system for me to feel the need to separate myself from those I feel offer great potential for collective service. Therefore, I simply let these questions stand as they are and wish everyone well. You are all dear in my heart.
![[+]](https://www.bring4th.org/forums/images/collapse_collapsed.png)