OBC Connect

A site for those with an interest in the Order of Buddhist Contemplatives, past or present, and related subjects.
 
HomeHome  CalendarCalendar  GalleryGallery  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  RegisterRegister  Log in  

Share | 
 

 Anonymity in posting

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
chisanmichaelhughes

avatar

Posts : 1638
Join date : 2010-11-17

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Wed May 15, 2013 2:39 am

I am pleased that some comments made towards Lise were removed,as I did not like them
Back to top Go down
Carol

avatar

Posts : 364
Join date : 2009-11-10

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Wed May 15, 2013 2:43 am

How come I keep missing the removed remarks?
Back to top Go down
Lise
Admin
avatar

Posts : 1412
Join date : 2009-11-08
Age : 43

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Wed May 15, 2013 9:10 am

Carol wrote:
How come I keep missing the removed remarks?
Hi Carol,

I think it must be because the person who is posting as Sara decided the words were not nice or preceptual, and demonstrated a lack of compassion and wisdom on his part, and he removed them during the two-hour window when posts can be edited. I'm being facetious - there are of course no rules about anyone needing to follow the OBC's version of "right speech" here. It is interesting that something about this forum does challenge their ability to keep up appearances of right speech, though. Perhaps it is a very superficial acquisition on their part, and hard to sustain outside the bubble of the monastery.

Since the person posting as Sara (who is clearly not the original Sara H who opened the account and made some posts a few months ago), admires honesty, perhaps it would have been more honest of him to leave the comments there

Michael, thank you.
Back to top Go down
http://obcconnect.forumotion.net
Jcbaran

avatar

Posts : 1614
Join date : 2010-11-13
Age : 66
Location : New York, NY

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Wed May 15, 2013 9:49 am

I must have missed something here. So Sara H are two different people - and it is a he, not a she? and posts have been deleted? a mystery.....an enigma......
Back to top Go down
Lise
Admin
avatar

Posts : 1412
Join date : 2009-11-08
Age : 43

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Wed May 15, 2013 9:52 am

Right on both counts.

I think the post deletion was done by "Sara H" during the editing window.
Back to top Go down
http://obcconnect.forumotion.net
Sara H



Posts : 23
Join date : 2012-11-17

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Wed May 15, 2013 6:55 pm

Lise wrote:
Carol wrote:
How come I keep missing the removed remarks?
Hi Carol,

I think it must be because the person who is posting as Sara decided the words were not nice or preceptual, and demonstrated a lack of compassion and wisdom on his part, and he removed them during the two-hour window when posts can be edited. I'm being facetious - there are of course no rules about anyone needing to follow the OBC's version of "right speech" here. It is interesting that something about this forum does challenge their ability to keep up appearances of right speech, though. Perhaps it is a very superficial acquisition on their part, and hard to sustain outside the bubble of the monastery.

Since the person posting as Sara (who is clearly not the original Sara H who opened the account and made some posts a few months ago), admires honesty, perhaps it would have been more honest of him to leave the comments there

Michael, thank you.

Excuse, me.

Yes, I am (me).

Thank you very much.

The reason for two accounts actually had to do with a mistake.

When I originally signed up a long time ago, I created an account, this one I think. Then, I never posted. later, (I think like a year) when I did post, I had either entirely forgotten that I had the other account, and so created the new one.

Still later, I forgot the password and username to the second one, and so found searching in my old emails a password and username for the first one, and thinking it was the second one logged in...

Well, so I'm just using this one now.

I can't really keep track of both, but they are one and the same person.

And I'm a she, thank you. I'm not Rev. Master Haryo, as you've implied elsewhere. Though I do talk to him and hold him in high esteem. I don't post comments for him, (or anyone else) nor would he ask me too.

I deleted the comments because I was making a joke, but I figured since people here are so serious, a bit of humor might be taken the wrong way.
And decided to pull it.

Though I appreciate the complement with being compared to Rev. Master Haryo.
That's a high complement indeed.

Thank you,

Sara
Back to top Go down
Lise
Admin
avatar

Posts : 1412
Join date : 2009-11-08
Age : 43

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Wed May 15, 2013 7:28 pm

Sara H wrote:
I deleted the comments because I was making a
joke, but I figured since people here are so serious, a bit of humor
might be taken the wrong way.
And decided to pull it.

No, no, you must be thinking of Bright Moon - we're the other ones.

Someone made quite a few posts under the account "Sara H", two of which generated warnings for the poster, and the last of which was removed and earned the poster a suspension for a couple of months. That person's style of writing and form of expression don't in any way match what is being posted now under this same account. Much of it looks like Shasta-speak that could be copied from any transcription of a dharma talk, or more likely, from an email exchange with a monk. If the latter is true, I wonder whether that person knows his words are posted here, without attribution.

Another possibility is that you are a current monk whose superiors in the dharma have instructed him not to spend so much time on the Internet, and in particular, not to post on this forum. Am I getting warmer

Whoever you are, I don't think it is the same lad we initially met as "Sara H". But as Kennett claimed to have said, I could be wrong.
Back to top Go down
http://obcconnect.forumotion.net
Sara H



Posts : 23
Join date : 2012-11-17

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Wed May 15, 2013 8:13 pm

Lise wrote:
Sara H wrote:
I deleted the comments because I was making a
joke, but I figured since people here are so serious, a bit of humor
might be taken the wrong way.
And decided to pull it.

No, no, you must be thinking of Bright Moon - we're the other ones.

Someone made quite a few posts under the account "Sara H", two of which generated warnings for the poster, and the last of which was removed and earned the poster a suspension for a couple of months. That person's style of writing and form of expression don't in any way match what is being posted now under this same account. Much of it looks like Shasta-speak that could be copied from any transcription of a dharma talk, or more likely, from an email exchange with a monk. If the latter is true, I wonder whether that person knows his words are posted here, without attribution.

Another possibility is that you are a current monk whose superiors in the dharma have instructed him not to spend so much time on the Internet, and in particular, not to post on this forum. Am I getting warmer

Whoever you are, I don't think it is the same lad we initially met as "Sara H". But as Kennett claimed to have said, I could be wrong.

Nope.
That was me.

Same person.

I've been trying to sit with some things and be a little less "fierce."

There's a line from Shakespeare that I think accurately describes me for most of my life. "Though she be but little, she is fierce!"

Some things have come up in sitting that have calmed that fire down quite a bit.

It's nice to know it's noticeable though.
It's kindof interesting to hear it being described as me being a different person.

Thank you.

Sara
Back to top Go down
chisanmichaelhughes

avatar

Posts : 1638
Join date : 2010-11-17

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Wed May 15, 2013 10:20 pm

The comments aimed at Lise were not funny nor intended as being funny,They were intimate sexual comments implying intimate sexual practices involving Lise,I found them very offensive, very embarressed and hurt that Lise may read them.
It reminded me of someone I know who starts his nastiness by saying
I hope this does not sound horrible but....
or I hope this does not offend you but...
there is a whole list
There is something very off center with the comments
Back to top Go down
Sara H



Posts : 23
Join date : 2012-11-17

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Wed May 15, 2013 10:53 pm




The prerequisite for something to seem funny, is first, one must have a sense of humor...
Back to top Go down
Lise
Admin
avatar

Posts : 1412
Join date : 2009-11-08
Age : 43

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Thu May 16, 2013 12:20 am

Michael, thank you for your support. If you see similar postings appear, please don't let it disturb you. I have a slight advantage here in that I met _________ (Sara H) on different occasions at the Abbey, years ago, and once I recognised his presence here, I knew what to expect. It sounds like he hasn't changed much, nor has his contact with Haryo (and aping of his comments) had much effect. Sad.

Edited by Lise: I'm in the process of removing Sara H's former name, in case there is a threat to personal safety, but further discussion is forthcoming in regard to the circumstances under which posters here can expect to rely on anonymity, and the point at which it is no longer their "right".


Last edited by Lise on Thu May 16, 2013 8:50 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
http://obcconnect.forumotion.net
Howard

avatar

Posts : 554
Join date : 2010-06-27
Age : 62
Location : Vancouver

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Thu May 16, 2013 12:51 am

Hey Lise

I am surprised that you would out [Admin delete] when it's obvious that he wished to be anonymous via the name & sex change.

It will put a serious chill on any other active OBCer's considering on posting here anonymously who worry about being likewise exposed.

Hey Sara
There used to be more anonymous posters on the OBCC than there is now. A number of folks eventually decided to stand more openly behind their postings with a recognizable name. Although I do think that anonymity is your right, can I ask why you've chosen this anonymity?



H


Last edited by Lise on Thu May 16, 2013 3:59 pm; edited 2 times in total (Reason for editing : removing a personal indentifier)
Back to top Go down
http://hrmitchell54@yahoo.com
Lise
Admin
avatar

Posts : 1412
Join date : 2009-11-08
Age : 43

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Thu May 16, 2013 1:20 am

Maybe I'm in the wrong, Howard, I don't know, but in some circumstances I think it's appropriate. Using the forum to post foul stuff and then laugh about it doesn't sit well with me. Perhaps I'll feel differently in the morning, but tonight I'm a bit fed up.

I understand your point about a possible chilling effect, but in truth, very few current sangha members post here. People mostly use this forum after they've left, not before. And once I stopped posting the second-hand dirt some of the Mt. Shasta lot were continually dishing to me about Abbey doings, they must have lost interest in the forum, at least, I never hear from them now. Anyway, I don't take this issue lightly - I will think about what you've said.
Back to top Go down
http://obcconnect.forumotion.net
Sara H



Posts : 23
Join date : 2012-11-17

PostSubject: Anonymity in posting   Thu May 16, 2013 1:31 am

This is a formal complaint.
Lise's actions are a serious violation of privacy, and discriminatory.

I am formally requesting other admin intervention.

Outing someone who is genderqueer's old name and gender, is not only extremely rude and derogatory, but completely off topic and a violation of forum rules against making personal attacks as well.

Using a genderqueer person's former name, or referring to them with different pronouns is a personal attack.

I expected better here.

If you want to disagree with someone, fine, but being that rude is completely out of line.

I am formally requesting that the posts in question be removed, and I am also going to post some guidelines that I would suggest everyone here read, regarding how to be respectful to a transgender person.

It's basic respect and courtesy.

http://www.wikihow.com/Respect-a-Transgender-Person

Please refrain from making such remarks in the future.

You can disagree without resorting to hate speech or hate crimes.
Back to top Go down
Carol

avatar

Posts : 364
Join date : 2009-11-10

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Thu May 16, 2013 2:45 am

I agree with Sara. If someone prefers to stay anonymous, their preference should be respected. Same for gender issues. It's personal to the one making the choice and his/her choice should be respected.

That said, Lise is concerned about some other sort of interference going on with this forum. If it concerns Lise, it concerns me too. What's going on?

In all the excitement, no one has responded to my post on children. I wish someone would.
Back to top Go down
Sara H



Posts : 23
Join date : 2012-11-17

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Thu May 16, 2013 3:08 am

Carol, there is no interference.

It's all in her head.

I am a layperson.

She's got it in her head that first, I was Rev. Master Haryo, then that I might be another monk, and then, when she realized I was neither, she's outing me when I'm a transgender person which is discriminatory hate speech and putting my physical safety at risk?

Ive been assaulted in real life for being transgender.

People have been beaten to death and murdered after they were outed.
This is a serious issue, this puts my safety at risk. These posts need to be removed.

This is also, exactly the kind of anti-LGBT bullying which causes so many LGBT teens to commit suicide.

This is not ok.
Back to top Go down
Sara H



Posts : 23
Join date : 2012-11-17

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Thu May 16, 2013 3:29 am

This is a second formal request.

I'm asking that all posts using my former name be removed.

This outing someone like that is anti-LGBT/anti-gay bullying.

It's hate speech,

And it puts my physical safety at risk.

People have been raped, assaulted and murdered after they were outed online.
That's not a joke. It's not an exaggeration. I know people personally that it's happened to.

Bullying someone for their sexual orientation to "teach them a lesson"
or putting their physical safety at risk is not ok under any
circumstances.

If anyone on here has any sense of decency at all, or any sense of doing as little harm as possible, please remove those posts.

It puts my real life safety at risk.



Sara
Back to top Go down
Stan Giko

avatar

Posts : 354
Join date : 2011-06-08
Location : Lincolnshire. U.K.

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Thu May 16, 2013 4:40 am

Could somebody do Sara a favor and comply with her request ?

This Forum is starting to sound like it has the same faults that
were attributed to the OBC mindset and this isn`t the only
example. Yes, the OBC has it`s faults but, they don`t need
perpetuating here...surely ?
Back to top Go down
Lise
Admin
avatar

Posts : 1412
Join date : 2009-11-08
Age : 43

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Thu May 16, 2013 8:39 am

Admin note: The cut-and-pasted posts below were moved from the "Thoughts on celibacy" thread; my apologies if the order is hard to follow but I'm doing my best. The first one followed Sara H's first comment about registering a formal complaint.



Subject: Re: Thoughts on celibacy -- assorted posts Yesterday at 22:54



Well Sara

Since
I've never seen Lise miss step before, I have to wonder just what you
publically posted at her before you removed it. Although I never saw it,
other hardier types have also mentioned how offensive it was.

Perhaps you can try re posting it publically against someone at Bright Moon to see how they respond.

Is this a question of the pot calling the kettle , black?

As it now stands, it sounds
like you were throwing rocks in a glass house and only pulled out the
transgender card when the breaking glass started impacting you.

Last edited by Howard on Wed 15 May 2013 - 23:18; edited 4 times in total


<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tr><td>Subject: Re: Thoughts on celibacy -- assorted posts Yesterday at 22:58</td><td class="post-options" nowrap="nowrap" valign="top"> </td></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="hr">
</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2">

I completely respect what you say Howard and good for you for speaking your mind. in the post before the last post

I
am completely behind Lise I feel like Lise has been verbally sexually
assualted, and I do not want to accept it at all,this is nothing to do
with someones sexuality or if they wear womens clothes or have
surgery,it is to do with being weird in side, this guy is trying to get
people to talk about their intimate side for his own fun,which might
very well stop genuine open intimate conversation which we do enjoy here




<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tr><td>Subject: Re: Thoughts on celibacy -- assorted posts Yesterday at 23:11</td><td class="post-options" nowrap="nowrap" valign="top"> </td></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="hr">
</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2">

No it isn't Howard.

The complete original post is here:

<table align="center" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="1" width="90%"><tr><td>Quote:</td></tr><tr><td class="quote"><table align="center" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="1" width="90%"><tr><td>Lise wrote:</td></tr><tr><td class="quote"><table align="center" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="1" width="90%"><tr><td>Sara H wrote:</td></tr><tr><td class="quote">I think I should speak from my own experience with sitting with sexuality, which I've done a great deal of.

For
me, as I get older in life, one of the things I've noticed, is that
orgasms (the primary reason why we engage in sexuality) seems to be a
form of intoxicant.
</td></tr></table>

Could
you be wrong in this generalisation? Orgasms are not the primary reason
I engage in sexuality. I think is likely true for others also.
</td></tr></table>
Oh come on Lise.

Are you telling me that you masturbate for some reason other than it's pleasurable?



Lets be real here for a second.
I'm not saying having pleasure is wrong, I'm just saying that's why most people do it; because they enjoy it.

Hi Howard,

There seems to be a misunderstanding, regarding what I meant by the role of of what being 'sensitive' means to training.

It's like this: monastic life is better for people who are dense, to become more sensitive.

Lay life is better for people who are overly sensitive to get more..dense? (I'm trying to think of a better word)

In
reality both helps different kinds of people to become closer to the
middle, the center. (Depending on where they started out from)

Each practice is helpful for different kinds of people for different reasons.

It's
not one is better than the other, it just depends on which side of the
middle you start out on, and which is more helpful to you.

Someone
could just as easily "sanctify" lay practice above monastic practice,
by saying that monks "can't handle" training in the world.

But in reality, both are inaccurate.

It's not 'one is better than the other' it's both are helpful for different people, for different kinds of reasons.

There is a need for both, which is why the Buddha set up the Fourfold Sangha

People
can often forget, or not fully understand that other people truly are
completely different from them and so may have other, or opposite needs.

So
they look at other people's practice and can either put it above
themselves, and think it is something better to aspire to, or think it
beneath themselves, and think their own superior.

When in reality
its just that diversity exists, -true diversity, and there needs to be
two (or more than two) different sets of practices, to meet people's
differing needs.

When Rev. Seikai answered the question of why
they do this (celibacy) in his article, he answered "because it's
helpful to them."
He answered honestly.

People can often
think that if something isn't helpful or useful to them personally, that
there must be a mysterious reason why other people do it.

When
in reality, the answer is obvious: it honestly is just helpful, and they
just have different needs personally, than the first person does.

People
really do, sometimes have the hardest time understanding that other
people really do have totally different needs from them personally.

And
so either put the other person's practice up on a pedestal (because
they feel that because they may not need it, or find it naturally hard,
they assume other people who need it are just "more skilled" or trying
to be and so look at the practice in awe) or, they do the reverse, and
put it beneath them and defame those who do it by thinking they are just
trying silly things and that one's own practice is better.

This is not the case either way.
Both
are helpful, and both are needed. It just takes an open mind and some
empathy for other people to take their word that it honestly is helpful
to them, and not just assume they are lying.

They're not lying, they're just different.

And different people have different needs.

As an aside note, just my general thoughts on the subject:
It's
actually, a little bit arrogant, I think when people start dismissing
celibacy, because it assumes other people don't have different needs
than them.

In Gassho,

Sara</td></tr></table>

The post as you can see, was entirely meant to humorous.

And, I deleted it, which I have a right to do.

And, quite frankly, I'm surprised at you Howard.

If you don't like what someone says who's black, you don't turn around and call them the "N" word.

That's exactly the equivalent of what she did here, that's not an exaggeration.

If
someone or a moderator feels that someone's post is in violation of the
board rules, they remove the post, and give the poster a warning. They
don't resort to anti-LGBT hate speech.

What this action says is that all Transgender people are not welcome to post here, for fear of being discriminated against.

My spouse saw the post, as we live together and typed something up as well:

<table align="center" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="1" width="90%"><tr><td>Quote:</td></tr><tr><td class="quote">I
highly doubt anyone here would refer to an african american person in
that derogatory, hateful, racist term. Anyone who thinks calling another
person that name is ok or right is woefully ignorant in the worst ways.
I also highly doubt anyone here would think it is ok to refer to a
woman in any of those hateful words. I would also think it is unlikely
anyone would call a gay person, male, or female any derogatory terms.
All of the above are things I think we can all agree are racist, sexist,
discriminatory, hateful things to say to any other human being and have
been the basis for many countless hate crimes all over the world.
Crimes that continue to happen. It is inappropriate. It is dishonorable.
It is wrong.

Discrimination of any kind is used to belittle,
abuse, hurt, humiliate, slander, intimidate, bully and to try to strong
arm another human being into submission of the attacker.

What lise did is exactly that.

I for one will not stand for it. Will you?</td></tr></table>

This is hate speech Howard. It doesn't matter what the justification is, it's hate speech.

There are numerous ways to either agree to disagree with someone respectfully,
Being discriminatory against a heavily bullied minority population is a hate crime, and is always inappropriate.

Sara</td></tr></table>


<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tr><td>Subject: Re: Thoughts on celibacy -- assorted posts Yesterday at 23:35</td><td class="post-options" nowrap="nowrap" valign="top"> </td></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="hr">
</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2">

Hey Sara



If this is the entirety of the deleted post, it certainly doesn't bother me.



If
someone is transgendered though , why is the mentioning of who they
were before the trangendering in your view, a hate crime?



What
was the "N" word equivilent? We are all changing whether we want to or
not. If you refer to me partying with the Hell's angels in the town of
Weed before becoming more Dharmically inclined at Shasta, does that deny
who I now am?


?

H

Last edited by Howard on Wed 15 May 2013 - 23:44; edited 1 time in total


<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tr><td>Subject: Re: Thoughts on celibacy -- assorted posts Yesterday at 23:38</td><td class="post-options" nowrap="nowrap" valign="top"> </td></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="hr">
</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2">

Why
are we having this discussion about name calling? I must have missed
something. Sexual preference or orientation has nothing to do with
celibacy as far as I can see.</td></tr></table>
</td></tr></table>

<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tr><td>Subject: Re: Thoughts on celibacy -- assorted posts Yesterday at 23:42</td><td class="post-options" nowrap="nowrap" valign="top"> </td></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="hr">
</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2">

Howard, when I was on here before, I got a verbal warning for using the word C-R-*-P in a post.

Which is a PG rated word.

But
it's ok for someone in an authority position to use Transphobic
Anti-GLBT hate speech just because they don't like their joke that they
deleted within 15 minutes because they thought it might be taken wrong?
Because, as I said, "people are so serious on here?"

So it's ok to discriminate against a minority transgender person?
Or against someone's sexual orientation, or gender identity status?

It's ok for us to talk about sex in a celibacy thread, but it's not ok for us to joke about sex in a celibacy thread?

And then the same person says that humor is welcome.

Howard, those priorities are completely skewed.

It's not just hypocritical, it's wrong.

It's doing the exact same thing that Koshin did.


<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tr><td>Subject: Re: Thoughts on celibacy -- assorted posts Yesterday at 23:53</td><td class="post-options" nowrap="nowrap" valign="top"> </td></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="hr">
</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2">

<table align="center" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="1" width="90%"><tr><td>Howard wrote:</td></tr><tr><td class="quote">Hey Sara



If this is the entirety of the deleted post, it certainly doesn't bother me.



If
someone is transgendered though , why is the mentioning of who they
were before the trangendering in your view, a hate crime? What is your
"N" word equivilent?



?

H</td></tr></table>

Howard.

Using someone who is transgender's old name or former pronouns is the Transgender equivalent of calling someone the "N" word.

Consider yourself informed.

Also, a few other terms are such:

Referring
to someone who's transgender as "it", being intentionally vague in your
pronoun use such as "them" when it is clear that they prefer she or he.

Calling someone a "tranny", calling someone a "he-she" or a "shemale."

Calling such a person "confused." etc, etc.

This is all hate speech.

Whether someone is ignorant of the subject or not, it's what it is.

Ignorance causes harm.

It'd be like if someone was Jewish, and you walked up to them, and said "Hail Hitler! It's time for the gas chambers!"

Completely inappropriate, on so many levels and just plain horrible.

Her actions are the kinds of things I would expect to see on a fundamentalist Christian anti-gay hate site.

Not
on a website of current and former Buddhists, which purpose is supposed
to be used for openly sharing experiences and welcomes a diversity of
views.

This is essentially saying that that transgender people are unwelcome.

How
would you feel, if you were black person on here and someone called you
the "N" word or were Jewish and they made a Jewish slur because they
disagreed or to "make a point."

People get and are currently being killed, murdered and assaulted for being transgender.

I've been assaulted for being transgender.

It's serious, and it's not funny.
Outing someone like that that puts my physical safety at risk.

This is not a joke.

Sex is funny.

Even Shakespeare joked about it.

Making anti-gay, or anti-trans slurs is is hate speach.

It doesn't matter what the reason, or intention, or justification is.

Putting someone's real life safety at risk, is not just a discriminatory slur, it's plain wrong, and hate speech.</td></tr></table>
</td></tr></table>

</td></tr></table>
Back to top Go down
http://obcconnect.forumotion.net
Lise
Admin
avatar

Posts : 1412
Join date : 2009-11-08
Age : 43

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Thu May 16, 2013 9:41 am

I will have more to say later, as I have to be off to work soon and will likely not be able to respond as often as I'd like during the rest of today.

First - I've no intention to discriminate against anyone, transgender or otherwise. Sara, because I saw you at Shasta and observed a number of things about your behaviour, demeanor, and overall approach to interacting with people, I had reason to doubt that your claim to be transgender was more than another dodge of some kind, an attempt at scamming. Based on the discussion above I'll assume you are sincere in wishing to be addressed as female and I will comply with your wishes. I would not intentionally insult or offend someone who has taken on a new gender identity and is disturbed by other pronouns. But if you play people for the fool here, it won't work out well for you. Based on the biographical details you've provided, you've already outed yourself some time ago. Anyone who was active in the lay sangha during the recent past will know who you are, no matter what name you use.

One other thing, for now - being accused of hate speech, anti-gay slurs, etc. - none of that has an effect on me, nor will it, if your activities here justify admin action of any kind. You have no elevated set of privileges or rights simply by claiming to be part of a disadvantaged group, and no amount of tantrum-ing will get you any.


Last edited by Lise on Thu May 16, 2013 3:46 pm; edited 2 times in total (Reason for editing : clarity)
Back to top Go down
http://obcconnect.forumotion.net
jack



Posts : 165
Join date : 2010-06-29

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Thu May 16, 2013 1:49 pm

This is an interesting mix of things.

First, I post semi-anonymously. I do so because I wanted to write without singling out specific OBC people for what would appear to be personal criticism rather than the institutional criticism I wanted to write. So its hard for me to throw rocks at people who choose for whatever reason not to disclose information like location or complete names. The internet is sometimes devastating to privacy, and remembers mostly forever -- not generally wholesome attributes for free and open conversation.

Second, I find it quite doubtful Lise would do anything to intentionally harm someone. I missed the posting that was withdrawn. It sounds as if its contents were crude, with a later attempt to claim the crudity was "just a joke." Surely Sara would object if someone crudely spoke to her, and then, instead of apologizing, only claimed it a joke, That's an old human trick of self-rationalization.

Though I've sometimes found Lise to be more on the nanny side than I am, she has been tolerant and consistent about reasonable speech -- much better than some Buddhists I know who go on and on about "right speech" or who fail to speak plainly or honestly -- even when the result is harm to others. I probably speak more directly than some others here; in the past that occasionally seemed to bother some.

Third, it seems that continuing anonymity carries a concomitant burden of behaving rationally and with integrity. Anonymity can be a mask for evil and harm. if you want to be anonymous, behave reasonably well.

Fourth, let Sara be Sara, but also insist on good behavior. I wouldn't have made the public connection about sexual orientation for others.
Back to top Go down
Howard

avatar

Posts : 554
Join date : 2010-06-27
Age : 62
Location : Vancouver

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Thu May 16, 2013 2:23 pm

Hey Sara

Thanks for explaining the "N" thing. I just don't think that anyones sexual choices, that doesn't hurt others, is any of my business. My focus tends to stay more with how any of us can let go of our grasp of identity, sexual or otherwise.

Speaking of humour, when I complained about your "outing" I thought (due to the classically male orgasmic orientation of your sexual posting) that I was defending someone who was just disguising their identity with a female name. My defence was for the right of your anonymity without knowing anything of your history. Many OBCC folks who have dealt with there own experiences of OBC shunnings tend to forgo anonymity for its an anonymity that is part of the experience enforced upon one with shunning. I thought it was you right to choose it or not.

But back to your postings...

This is such a limited medium for speaking of what we care about. So many spaces to get coloured with our history rather than what is.

I doubt any of this present hurt would have occurred with face to face communications where there are so many more ques for determining anothers true intention. It's tough to give folks the benefit of the doubt when that doubt has been what we've had to challenge before.

Anyway...

I believe you've suggested that OBCC members should let go of the past,

that what has hurt them in the past has now been corrected and

that they are not really valid stakeholders in the process of trying to effect changes in hurtful behaviours.


Just how would you feel if the OBCC had said that of your present posting situation?.

I think empathy, sympathy, tenderness, etc. are best demonstrated with a sincere widening of a heart that doesn't reserve such graces for one being over another. Admittedly a tall order but in looking around, there doesn't seem to be any better use of our time.



Cheers

H
Back to top Go down
http://hrmitchell54@yahoo.com
Sara H



Posts : 23
Join date : 2012-11-17

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Thu May 16, 2013 4:25 pm

(Howard, I'll probably respond to you in a bit.)

Lise, do I have the right to criticize your actions as well?

Or is it just one way?
Back to top Go down
Lise
Admin
avatar

Posts : 1412
Join date : 2009-11-08
Age : 43

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Thu May 16, 2013 5:27 pm

Postings that conform to the forum rules aren't a problem, and you're assumed to have agreed to all forum rules if you want to participate here.

The way you've phrased your question seems odd to me though. Two days ago - three? - you were on a different track entirely, as far as advocating your version of preceptual speech.

If criticising my actions will help you feel good for a little bit, but then make you feel crummy inside, as you've told us will happen, should I encourage you to go ahead, or should I recommend that you sit with it a bit longer, and see if you can let go of the negative energy rather than giving in to it?

What would the monks advise you to do?
Back to top Go down
http://obcconnect.forumotion.net
Sara H



Posts : 23
Join date : 2012-11-17

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Thu May 16, 2013 5:53 pm

Let me ask you something Lise.

Does this apply to you as well?

Quote :
6. Be courteous. The following are not allowed: personal
insults/name-calling, racism, swearing, gratuitously offensive material,
personal attacks, and trolling (making controversial posts purely to
stir up an adverse reaction).

Or this:

Quote :
7. You are welcome to challenge others' points of view and opinions,
but do so respectfully and thoughtfully. Keep in mind that others have
the right to disagree with you.

Quote :
18. By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will not post any
messages that are defamatory, libelous, obscene, vulgar,
sexually-orientated, hateful, threatening, or otherwise in violation of
any laws.

I think most people would consider some of the things you've posted directed at me to be personal attacks.
Or attempts to defame me.
Posting libelous stuff like some of the things you've been saying is against forum rules and applicable laws as well.
Do you think that outing a Transgender persons old name is being thoughtful or respectful?

You didn't seem very thoughtful of my feelings, or respectful of me.

Some of the posts you've made have been defaming to me, and defaming to others.

And I think that most people would say that there's been plenty of hate posted.

When exactly do you decide to enforce these rules?
And do they apply to you?
Or only selectively to others when you choose, or when they disagree with you, or make a point you don't like?

You know, in the real world. We call that a conflict of interest.

It means that someone is not ethically capable of enforcing the rules with regards to their own conduct or interests, because they have an inherent heavy bias and conflict of interest.

I mean simply put Lise, it seems like you're enforcing these rules one way, and selectively.

Every time you break them in your own favor, (or of others you favor) you rationalize such action as necessary, or minimize it as being an outlier occurrence.

Every time someone challenges your own views, (or the views of someone you agree with) you get much more strict
with the person you don't like in how you enforce the rules and even actively break them yourself, or completely disregard them.

So, let me ask you something.

Are you actually interested in serious conversation?

Or is this just a clique?
Back to top Go down
Lise
Admin
avatar

Posts : 1412
Join date : 2009-11-08
Age : 43

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Thu May 16, 2013 6:18 pm

At times I may engage in these kind of conversations if I think there may be something new for some of us to read and think about, but if it looks to be a re-hash of territory covered many times before, by me or others, I'm okay with taking a pass on it. Or if I feel the person I'm speaking with has certain walls and barriers, and we're both just shouting at the barriers, I'll pass on that too. It doesn't help anybody.

That's how I feel about this situation. I'll take a pass for now, but maybe have another look later.

I think you'll be in better position to have a reasoned conversation when you can accept that most of us haven't the faintest idea about all these transgender norms, rules, mores, requirements, verbal etiquette, do's and don'ts, sensitivities and the like, that you insist we have to know about, instantly, as if this knowledge is somehow mainstream and we all grew up with it, or live with it every day. Apparently if we aren't up to speed on what you demand from us, you say that we "hate". We don't. There's no hatred here that I can see.

Take care, Sara.

Lise
Back to top Go down
http://obcconnect.forumotion.net
jack



Posts : 165
Join date : 2010-06-29

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Thu May 16, 2013 6:55 pm

Sara wrote concerning Lise:

Quote :
Some of the posts you've made have been defaming to me, and defaming to others.

And I think that most people would say that there's been plenty of hate posted

I don't see any of this from Lise. She was trying to piece together a puzzle as to why your postings suddenly changed gender and tone. She didn't, nor would I, assume as a first possibility that the same person had changed gender. Rather it would look like someone had hijacked an account -- probably with mischief in mind. That's a rational, logical concern for an administrator.

No one here has insulted you about your change, That's in your head, not in anything objective I've seen here. I don't think people here care one way or another. I certainly don't.

Your words to Lise seem loaded with the sarcasm and peevishness you have been quick to accuse others of. That's not surprising either -- just ordinary human nature. Where's the right speech you were spouting about earlier? Read what the Buddha said right speech was if you want to preach that as a model.
Back to top Go down
Carol

avatar

Posts : 364
Join date : 2009-11-10

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Thu May 16, 2013 11:05 pm

I think this discussion should end. Who said what to whom and who insulted or didn't insult whom can go on forever and isn't a fruitful topic for conversation in this setting.
Back to top Go down
Kozan
Admin
avatar

Posts : 670
Join date : 2010-03-06
Age : 67
Location : Sonoma County CA

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Fri May 17, 2013 1:00 am

Carol, I think that your suggestion is very wise.

I've come in late to this discussion, missed several deleted comments, and am still a little confused about the details.

What seems increasingly clear to me is that this might be a good time to give ourselves a big hug--and a deep bow of mutual respect.

My best regards to everyone, in conversation, on this thread,
Kozan
Back to top Go down
Stan Giko

avatar

Posts : 354
Join date : 2011-06-08
Location : Lincolnshire. U.K.

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Fri May 17, 2013 5:13 am

I was going to have a little `mischief moment` and say that
"isn`t it time to move on" is only allowed for the OBCC and not
the OBC !
Unfortunately Kozan`s `Metta` moment came up and trumped
mine.
Darned Boddhisatvas.......Smile
Back to top Go down
Isan
Admin
avatar

Posts : 917
Join date : 2010-07-27
Location : California

PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   Fri May 17, 2013 12:35 pm

[admin hat on]
Just a few thoughts about editing/deleting content after posting...

We've experienced before that changing or removing content can cause confusion. Typically what happens is people read and reply to something and then their response is rendered inaccurate because it's no longer clear what they are responding to. There was a period of very high activity on the forum where this became a big enough problem that the admins decided to disable the editing/deleting function. That solved the continuity problem, but it was also rigid and inconvenient. Eventually the option to edit/delete was re-enabled, but I believe we should still make an effort to get it right the first time so that others don't read and respond to our unfinished words. By the way, if you make a point of clicking the quote button the content you're replying to will be included and that will eliminate any doubt as to what you're replying to.

The web interface for creating posts is very limited. When I'm creating a post that needs time and revision I turn to my word processor. It is a much friendlier environment and eliminates the risk of losing information which occasionally happens in the web UI. It also gives me time to run the message through my "is this what I really mean to say and am I willing for anyone and everyone on the web to read it" filter. Or to put it more simply does it meet my criteria to refrain from harm.
[admin hat off]
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Anonymity in posting   

Back to top Go down
 
Anonymity in posting
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Mac users - posting images
» Posting at the GEPS
» Draft IRR (Waiving of Posting Period)
» PhilGEPS Posting
» Advertising and Posting under Negotiated Procurement

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
OBC Connect :: OBC Connect :: In Theory and Practice-
Jump to: