13
14

Code of conduct for conversations (self.zen)

chintokkong が 投稿

Personally, I find disagreements and passionate arguments fine. There are some other things that I find don't contribute to this sub though, like these:

  1. Trying to scare people by claiming violation of redditquette. If a redditor is sincere, he/she should inform the mod of the violation.

  2. Pretending to be an authority. Like telling people of mistranslation of chinese texts but refusing to answer if he/she can read chinese.

  3. Judging content without reading it. Like claiming the content of a pdf is Soto without even reading it.

  4. Making imaginary accusations. I think this is the worst and typical of people who can't respond to questions posed to them.

Not sure what other code of conduct to add at the moment, but I'm thinking if you feel someone is breaking the code, you probably can type something to activate the bell thingy?

That should be interesting and might help keep one another honest and humble. I sure can do with some help keeping my ego in check too! As to the recalcitrants, well... I don't know, hahaha. That's the mods' business.

Also, maybe we can give a special signal when we are switching from conventional conversation to zen conversation? Like typing ZC at the start of the comment, so that the other party knows the mode of conversation is switched? Then we can launch into bizarre but insightful comments every now and then, hahaha.

Any other fun suggestions to add?

全 66 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]grass_skirtacademic 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (6子コメント)

I once challenged /u/ewk to report me to the mods if he thought I was violating some rule. He hand-waved "That's not how I roll."

In other words, all his weeping about reddiquette and forum content is nothing but a paper tiger.

[–]ewk 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I ask people what their consciences tell them.

i learned about you by reporting you to yourself.

[–]grass_skirtacademic 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I believe you (think this).

[–]mackowskiim different if the music is 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

if you draw that inference, then you are lost

[–]grass_skirtacademic 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

You got a better inference?

[–]mackowskiim different if the music is 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

all is one?

[–]grass_skirtacademic 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I don't agree with "all is one".

[–]zenthrowaway17 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Alternative proposal for a code of conduct.

[–]TheSolarian -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Hahaha. Oh man, you do have a good sense of humour which I appreciate.

[–]Dhammakayaram 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (5子コメント)

Redditquette has no actual rules hence no violations.

Reddiquette is an informal expression of the values of many redditors, as written by redditors themselves. Please abide by it the best you can.

As for the rules of this particular community (/r/Zen) it is basically anything goes, even mockery and character assassination.

[–]TwoPines 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Agreed. ;) Completely. This is character assassination central. And it all goes studiously un-moderated. Having seen the way things operate here, I am in no hurry to say anything about myself, to point to anything I've published, or to name anybody I've studied with. That's all just asking for trouble.

[–]Dhammakayaram 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

This sub can be nothing but trouble at times. The mods, IMO, have let Ewk more or less run this sub, who is most always off-topic. And it doesn't matter that he is a self-admitted character assassin—a venomous troll, in other words.

[–]mackowskiim different if the music is 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

if you come on discord and listen to us voice chat youll notice 0 hostility

[–]Escarpmentsbad student 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

This was always the confusing part to me.

[–]Jetstream-SamGrand Marquis of titles 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

That's why I don't have a character to assassinate. Makes everything much easier

[–]ac4a23bfe649927f 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

https://redd.it/5nho7i

[–]dec1phahZenIsPsychology...GetOverIt! 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

BS for bullshit then?

Can't help it, but I think you've addressed that code to one certain user 😏

Except that authoritative thing...

[–]chintokkong[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Haha, I've been using this word 'bullshit' rather frequently in real life too.

[–]zeroeqn三蔵 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Following the rules and protecting the regulations is binding oneself without rope.

[–]mackowskiim different if the music is 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

you are very organized, we are not, !

behold!!!!!!!!!!!

[–]NegativeGPA 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

fun suggestions

Well, I think we should crank up our Automod to rival that of r/oldpeoplefacebook

I recommend linking to T Swift's "Shake it Off" everytime some posts a forum complaint and linking to "Never Gonna Give You Up" every time someone says "ewk"

[–]zaddar17th zen patriarch 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (7子コメント)

 

there's no greater authority than the 7th zen patriarch, deny me and you deny the last and first authenic zen/ch'an !  :  o)

 

[–]grass_skirtacademic 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

deny me and you deny the last and first authenic zen/ch'an

Ah, but what happens when we affirm you? Asking for a friend.

[–]zaddar17th zen patriarch 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

of course affirmation and denial are easy words to fling about when the reality is much more blurred

the dai kensho process which is the literal reality of other worlds is what is of intense interest and not really conveyable to others

if you deny me you deny those worlds, if you affirm me you don't necessarily affirm those worlds . . .

so the sixth patriarch vision is a world i know the truth of, but really i would not have believed it prior to having that vision and i don't expect others to now

all i expect with 'affirmation' is to give some credence to what i say because those who affirm are somewhat in an aporetic process, asking what is so and where does one go from there !

so i think "affirmation" is to also be on the process and looking for useful guidance . .

that is, one engages in the process to and past enlightenment as per the ancients and actually not so ancient

[–]grass_skirtacademic 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Thanks for the answer, very comprehensive. It pretty much covers any supplementary questions I may have otherwise asked.

[–]elbowbrunchPunch Flavor 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

I here publicly deny you Zaddar1 the 7th zen patriarch.

[–]zaddar17th zen patriarch 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

deny me and you deny the last and first authenic zen/ch'an

[–]elbowbrunchPunch Flavor 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I deny that too!

[–]zaddar17th zen patriarch 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

well that's exactly where we are, we don't approve of each other !

it would worry me if we agreed ! : o)

[–]TheSolarian -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (3子コメント)

My only suggestion, would be to get a grip.

This is how you want things to be.

When you start wanting, you start blinding yourself, which is normal and always difficult.

[–]tostonotogozo 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

some new tools migrating towards you, they are at your disposal as you see fit

[–]ewk -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (30子コメント)

  1. If you aren't violating and reddiquette and you can show this, then you don't have to be afraid. If you are afraid, why not ask questions and sincerely familiarize yourself with the subject of the forum? If you are a troll who isn't interested in studying Zen and routinely violates the reddiquette, then shouldn't you be warned that you will eventually be banned for your conduct?

  2. Who pretends to be an authority? Can you give an example of a discussion about mistranslation was not supported by evidence?

  3. Are you saying that people who reject religious materials should have to read every pamphlet ever spammed by a religious nutbunker? How much of a pdf should someone read before they can tell it's not Zen?

  4. Do you have an example of an "imaginary accusation"?

It sounds like these problems are mostly in your head, not actually in the forum. Perhaps if you try to find examples, and fail, you will be able to see that these problems are not real problems, but imaginary accusations.

[–]chintokkong[S] 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (17子コメント)

  1. Are you an authority on redditquette in this sub?

  2. See my point 1.

  3. You are obviously confused. There's no problem rejecting materials you have not read. But to make a judgement on something you have not read at all is just plain silliness. This is the conversation we have over the pdf issue. You made a judgement based on an irrelevant reading list that's not even in the pdf. Is this how you read your zen books and make conclusions about what zen is? Using reading lists? Come on, man...

  4. See my point 3.

[–]Escarpmentsbad student 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (5子コメント)

Has anyone ever been banned for violating the reddiquette? Or just the site-wide rules?

Seems like the moderators here only really step in if someone's doing something that puts the subreddit at risk should they fail to respond. Whether that's right or wrong I don't know, but it doesn't really matter.

I mean the reddiquette is just "an informal expression of the values of many redditors" anyway. Is something like that even worth following?

[–]ewk -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (4子コメント)

I think that's a super awesome question, actually.

In my experience the mods of /r/Zen have really only banned people for disrespecting the mods. That sounds funny, but hear me out. The /r/Zen mods, as I understand it, PM people and try to resolve conduct issues that have multiple problems. When this doesn't resolve the problem because the mods aren't respected, BLAN! (Blam+Ban) It almost never goes this far.

Could failure to follow the reddiquette go that far? Oh, I think so. Generally though failure to follow the reddiquette is a sign of a serious personal problem, the kind that leads a person to disrespect themselves and everyone they encounter, so the disrespect the mods end up getting is really all the to-be-banned person has to offer.

So, in my experience there's three possible scenarios for a repeat offender reddiquette violator's future.

  1. The repeat offender can't answer questions about the moral implications of his/her violations and eventually goes off for awhile to consider things.

  2. The repeat offender becomes incensed about the questions the reddiquette violations raise, begins to violate other rules, gets contact by the mods, disrespects the mods.

  3. The reddiquette violator can't answer questions but refuses to reflect on their behavior, so plays a game of chicken with their conscience and the subreddit, breaking the rules as much as possible without drawing the mod's ire and ignoring questions, criticisms, challenges, or the posts that shred the violator's claims.

[–]Escarpmentsbad student 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (3子コメント)

That's sort of what I'm getting at, I think. Without the reddiquette and the process of adhering to it, wouldn't literally none of that happen?

This is just something I've noticed, but you're really the only person around here I've seen even mention the reddiquette with any sort of frequency (the OP notwithstanding, since it was clearly directed at you). Zen subtweeting aside, the mods didn't even mention it in the announcement that likely started this whole fiasco.

I'm not saying you're wrong for bringing it up. We're on reddit -- it's obviously relevant. And maybe it's a question of people's reactions to your bringing it up, and not your bringing it up itself. In fact it's definitely that. But the other fact is, this community isn't going to ever be what the reddiquette wants it to be. And it's not going to be what the OP wants it to be either, haha. That's just not how that works.

[–]ewk 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Oh. Well, one of my strategies in dealing with people who push their religion on people in this sub is to make the morality of their choice the subject. I've found that studying their religious views leads to the kind of ridiculousness that my posts this week have exposed. You'll note that nobody cares. Religions are frauds. It's old news. Plus talking about it on their terms (that is, without context, arguments, or citations) invariably derails the sub.

But asking these proselytizers about the morality of their decision to proselytize here is a gold mine. The violation of the reddiquette is only one aspect of that. When these proselytizers can't discuss the morality of any aspect of their conduct it puts all their "contributions" to the sub in a dishonest light, since religion is a system of morality as much as anything else.

[–]Linchimodo 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

🔔

reply with silence to silence the bell

[–]grass_skirtacademic 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Haha, you've been following /u/ewk around a lot today. No prize for guessing the summoning word.

[–]XWolfHunterhunter-gatherer at heart 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Are you saying that people who reject religious materials should have to read every pamphlet ever spammed by a religious nutbunker? How much of a pdf should someone read before they can tell it's not Zen?

If it doesn't seem zen to you, fine, stop reading and go to another post, nbd. You don't have to read all of anything, but if you want to comment on the character and content of it, even by dismissing it, you ought to have read the whole thing, yeah?

[–]ewk 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Why complain about my view?

If I'm wrong, point it out. If I'm not, then "go to another post."

Or can't you take your own advice?

[–]mackowskiim different if the music is 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

what do you sense with chintokong? he seems to be a good balance

[–]ewk 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

He never seems to have any content to contribute to support any of his opinions about anything... but he's real eager to give his opinion about everything and complain when nobody takes it.

[–]mackowskiim different if the music is 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

hm, he does write and submit the writing it looks like

ive been judging his effect, but i guess im limited there

im also limited in guessing if he is secretly religious, but thats your expertise.

i wonder why he hasnt given you enough to guess, i imagine its because hes just writing and submitting and is confident and stuff.

complain?

[–]ewk 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

He started posting in the forum by explaining that he could practice Zen without ever studying it. When he got shot down he declared himself the only person with secret knowledge. Nowhere to go with that.

[–]sdwoodchuckThe Funk -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Just sounds like a list of "things I don't like." That's no basis for moderation policy.

[–]chintokkong[S] 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Oh no, I'm not asking for a moderation policy. I thought the mods already have one?

I'm more interested to hear what other redditors value in a conversation and what we can do about this sub ourselves. And sharing a so-called list of 'things I don't like' is one way to start the discussion rolling.

What do you value in a conversation?

[–]deepthinker420 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

"nuh uh" isn't much of a reply, either, bub

[–]Mentioned_Videos -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Videos in this thread:

Watch Playlist ▶

VIDEO COMMENT
Two Men Enter One Man Leaves 5 - Alternative proposal for a code of conduct.
Ringing the bell in Buddhist Temple, Korea 2 - GONG! reply with silence to silence the bell
Bell Scene 2 - 🔔 reply with silence to silence the bell
Cows with bells in Switzerland 2 - 🔔 reply with silence to silence the bell
Pirate Code 1 - This was always the confusing part to me.

I'm a bot working hard to help Redditors find related videos to watch. I'll keep this updated as long as I can.

Play All | Info | Get me on Chrome / Firefox