BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Moderating the Temple

 
  

Page: 1 ... 910111213(14)1516171819... 35

 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
17:05 / 16.01.07
I don't see how a move to the Convo or Creation will automatically result in ill-willed pisstaking, esp. since Evil Keg will also be there to soak up such jibes. Think of it as giving the old dear a change of air and a chance to make new chums.
 
 
illmatic
17:16 / 16.01.07
A new thread could be set up to discuss or critque the whole idea of servitor creation while we're at it. I'd probably have nothing to say, as my head is about 9 million miles away from this subject area for the immediate future, but I'd read with interest.
 
 
Ticker
17:26 / 16.01.07
Okay what's the function of GEK as servitor? Is that function better served in a new Temple thread revamped for the times and climes or the thread as is going elsewhere?

I think we've established it is not working as is where it is, so where and what is the best fit?

I'm inclined to think that we are viewing the basic form of the current thread as let's say maladaptive and not the most constructive. Does it make sense to put the servitor in the Convo pool in this form? Would we just be promoting the same sloppy ass slipshod use that we don't care for in the Temple? Personally, as we are board wide members, I suspect it will bother us on some level to see the same behavior elsewhere on the 'Lith with what could be a useful magical tool. It's not GEK we have a problem with it's the way people are using hir. So why just change the group of people? That doesn't seem to really addressing the problem just shifting it out of direct line of sight.
 
 
Seth
17:38 / 16.01.07
I'm inclined to agree with Justrix. I can't see any harm in the thread. The arguments about sending the wrong message, what people outside of Barbelith will think of the forum and leaving the assumptions behind the thread unchallenged don't really convince me because it's all been critiqued within the thread itself. The people who only ever post there seem pretty contained so I'm inclined to live and let live there too. I think a decent and rigorous reappraisal of servitors would be an interesting thread in the light of everyone's current best thinking. People have already taken the piss in the Temple forum and it's only likely to increase in the Conversation. And people often make wishes /pray in Temples so it seems appropriately placed. Can't find it in myself to see much that needs changing.

If people want to take a stab at improving on the idea that would also be cool.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
17:41 / 16.01.07
Could we at least change the topic summary, since we're no longer really discussing Gek in that thread? Maybe add a note suggesting that people back up their random requests for aid in the manner proposed by 2HRB?
 
 
Ticker
17:48 / 16.01.07
Could we at least change the topic summary, since we're no longer really discussing Gek in that thread? Maybe add a note suggesting that people back up their random requests for aid in the manner proposed by 2HRB?

me confused..are you talking about the GEK thread or the KEG thread, MC?

How would folks feel about kicking off a new GEK thread (locking the old) inspired by 2HRB's suggestion on how to use it?
 
 
Seth
17:49 / 16.01.07
You could amend the abtract to include links to discussions on servitors in general and a critique of GEK in particular. It would look messy because they wouldn't be proper links, but it allows the thread to continue while allowing curious people to follow up on what some people now think of such workings. Some nice non-judgemental text would be good, just to act as a pointer. I mean, we've all been the equivalent of GEK thread regulars at one point in our lives, right?
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
17:49 / 16.01.07
The Gek thread.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
17:54 / 16.01.07
That last to XK. Seth, good idea but you can't put links in the abstract because HTML doesn't work in that field. I was thinking of something non-judgy but reflecting that the mood and culture of the Temple has changed since 2001 and that the Gek thread is perhaps not the greatest example of where we are now.

Links to servitor critique threads could be included on the initial page. The second post is by me and I certainly don't object to editing it to include a few links. I've been thinking of adding note to that post anyway to reflect the way my thinking has, changed, but it felt too much like trying to re-write history.
 
 
Seth
18:00 / 16.01.07
Seth, good idea but you can't put links in the abstract because HTML doesn't work in that field.

That's what I meant by

It would look messy because they wouldn't be proper links
 
 
electric monk
18:00 / 16.01.07
How's this grab ya?

"GEK is a wishing-well servitor. State your intended offerings and your requests for aid here. Please keep yourself appraised of GEK's operational procedures by reading the entire thread. GEK is a collaborative servitor project and is subject to occassional reprogramming, critique, disassembly, reassembly and the evolutionary pull of time."
 
 
electric monk
18:02 / 16.01.07
Oh, sorry. I should note that I'm of the opinion that the links should go in the thread. If Mordant is amenable the editing them into hir first post to GEK, then that's fantastic.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
18:03 / 16.01.07
I was thinking something like grafting an abbreviated version of 2HRB's new requirements into the summary sort of like:

"Thread for discussing Alex Thoth's wish-granting servitor, Gek. Participants make a wish and offer milk, cookies or other comestibles. In veiw of the way the Temple has evolved since 2001, they should also agree to 1) make an effort to contribute productively to the Temple forum by starting a new thread or by making a post to an existing thread, and 2) experiment with at least one new magical practice that they find challenging."

Sound fair?
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
18:04 / 16.01.07
x-post with everybody ever AGAIN. Actually, I think I prefer monk's offering.
 
 
Seth
18:08 / 16.01.07
Not really. A bunch of people that we know next to nothing about (and therefore can't really judge) seem to occasionally like to use it as it is. I don't understand why those people are doing anything any harm, they just seem to crop up in that one thread. I can see no reason to make them change their approach just because we think they should and have some kind of idea about what's good for them and the Temple forum.
 
 
Seth
18:15 / 16.01.07
I guess I just don't want to take someone's wishing well away from them. I don't feel like I have the right. I can offer suggestions as to other things they might consider in addition to it, and maybe even give them ideas for replacements for it, but now that we've had one I kinda think it should always be there.
 
 
grant
18:17 / 16.01.07
I second MC's abstract proposal.

Is good.
 
 
grant
18:18 / 16.01.07
And agree with Seth -- you should see the amount of wishing that goes on in cathedrals & Buddhist temples. Lots things set on fire.

"Hear me, divine person, and fulfill my wish."
 
 
Ticker
18:21 / 16.01.07
.... the solution might be to leave the thread as is and hopefully someone might start a '07 version for GEK that works for them if the existing one doesn't? I'm still not comfortable with the KEG thread as it seems to be purely satire of the GEK but it maybe a required steam release valve? hands off would mean just that and we let threads rise and fall as they will unless they are clearly offensive in nature?


Is there room in the Temple for non serious non academic exchanges or one off posts?
Can we house straight up silly magic?
 
 
electric monk
18:22 / 16.01.07
I can see no reason to make them change their approach just because we think they should and have some kind of idea about what's good for them and the Temple forum.

I don't think this is really about changing the way these people work their magic. Rather, I see it as defining how the Temple's going to use and view servitors, and how Temple space is going to be used for acts of magic. We're not saying, "You shouldn't ever!" We're saying, "If you're going to do it, try it this way." At least, that should be the aim.
 
 
Seth
18:25 / 16.01.07
You could start a concurrent thread in which every fresh post to the GEK thread is quoted in its entirety, followed by the member who posted the quote offering their two cents on other ideas that might work better than a wish to GEK. Then PM the original wisher to let them know we're interested in making their wishes come true.

Starting from when the new thread starts, of course. Otherwise that's a lot of backdated wishes to assist with.
 
 
Seth
18:27 / 16.01.07
monk: I'm talking about replacing GEK's original mandate in its entirety, ie; making people think that it won't work in the old way. If we're adding extra ways of using it rather than removing old ones then I'm cool with that.
 
 
electric monk
23:20 / 16.01.07
Okay, I getcha. My bad.
 
 
rosie x
08:08 / 17.01.07
While the KEG folks actions may have kicked off this productive discussion their approach was born of frustration and as such was not really the best way of keeping heads cool.

No frustration here, really. Just having a laugh! Y'all do what you will with 'em both... x
 
 
petunia
10:53 / 17.01.07
The first word in the summary of the Temple forum is 'Faith'.

While other people may have a different take on the concept, faith for many people seems to consist of wishing that another entity enact a desire for you.

While this approach is definitely at the suckier end of the spiritual spectrum, it is an approach that is taken by many millions (billions?) of people in this world.

Recent discussions have been held in the forum on the subject of acceptance and tolerance of other people's faith/religion/practice. I'd suggest that this may be an instance where we take the this approach.

It sucks that there are people who appear only for this thread, and it sucks that their only interaction with the board is that of asking favours, but what harm does it actually do?

If there is a concern that this thread will lead to waves of new recruits who want only to beg favours, then why hasn't this already happened? (Yes, people come and beg favours, but not tons) If someone is seeking an online wishing well, there are tons more easily-accessed one on t'internets.

If the worry is that it will be bad for the image of the forum - that it will make it seem less rigorous and thoughtful than it is - then i'd suggest that a lazy thread which pops up every few weeks does nothing to alter the content of any other thread in the forum.

If the thread is to stay open, then it should stay in the temple - it being a magical servitor and a practice in faith. Convo would just be a dumping ground for it. As the thing is no longer a properly creative project, it doesn't seem to fit in Creation.

I'm resistant to ideas of changing the remit of the thread to one which requires other magical work/discussion, mainly for the reason that it would do nothing. As has been shown in-thread, the wishers seem pretty ignorant of anything else going on in the thread (or even the forum).

If we tried to force them to involve themselves in the forum by locking the thread if they didn't discuss things, they'd either leave or post the kind of 'tool = truthtellers for the new millenium' shit we specifically don't want on the forum.

If the abstract is to change, perhaps change it to something a bit realistic and/or embarassing:

'Gek is a temple servitor who most people seem to use to fix their backpain or car problems. Many people like to sort their own problems, but if you find that too daunting, ask Gek! You get to eat some cookies too!'

And if people are still a bit worried about the thread reflecting poorly on their current state of progress/maturity, we could get a post done in Mordant's old post saying something along the lines of:

'As you can see by the dates of the posts, this is an old thread and, as such, does not really reflect the current disposition of the Temple.

While it started as an experiment, with the intent that it would evolve and grow, it has become a place for people to drop in a quick request to Gek and eat a votive.

In the Temple, we encourage people to explore and expand upon their spiritual and/or magical practice (practice being the key word here) but we also accept that many people's interaction with 'the spiritual' is through simple faith. For this reason, we have left the thread running.

We would encourage any posters in this thread to make, or attempt to make, a contribution to the rest of the forum. It's the polite thing to do.

x
teh admin'
 
 
Papess
11:16 / 17.01.07
I'm still not comfortable with the KEG thread as it seems to be purely satire of the GEK but it maybe a required steam release valve?

XK, that is a good point. Keg is a satire, it is not charged (as Gek is), nor magickal, and has no place in the Temple, IMHO. I appreciate the humour, and it was useful to point out the general abuses of Gek, but it is more about mocking other posters, and is indeed, largely a joke with a point. Gek is not a joke. Don't we have a Barbeannoy thread for releasing steam? The KEG thread served one purpose and that purpose is now served.

I really like Mordant's abstract. This idea, that I believe GL had once posted in the thread also, is more conducive to the climate of the Temple as a forum of learning and discussion, by encouraging growth in the individual.
 
 
Papess
11:49 / 17.01.07
I'm resistant to ideas of changing the remit of the thread to one which requires other magical work/discussion, mainly for the reason that it would do nothing. As has been shown in-thread, the wishers seem pretty ignorant of anything else going on in the thread (or even the forum).

I understand what you are saying with this point, trampetunia, but I think the guidelines in MC's and GL's posts are really part of an understanding that just went unsaid at the time. Practitioners worth their salt know that empty wishes with no effort in place to back them up, are not going to amount to much. That is not our problem, however. The problem that setting guidelines within the abstract addresses is to protect the integrity of the Temple and Gek, not to protect certain posters from their own shoddy practices. Changing the abstract and tweaking the programming of Gek is a good measure, IMHO.
 
 
Ticker
12:34 / 17.01.07
I'm trying to come up with analogy that works in terms of a shared space akin to the forum. The best I can do is think in terms of when I'm around other people's ritual that has perceived techincal flaws I don't push them out of the way, shift stuff around, and take over. I might politely mention, at some other time, my opinions or invite them to participate in some of my ritual.
In rereading Seth's posts above I can see what he means about us changing the existing GEK thread. it feels a bit invasive as if out of frustration we're taking something away from someone because they're not using it the way we think they should.

As for the KEG thread after an evening of thinking about it I'm of the opinion that we let both of them sink or fall as they will. I'd encourage someone with a progressive relationship or vested interest in GEK to step up and create a new thread with Mordant's, THRB's, and monk's suggestions in mind. I'm against moving or editing the orginal thread at this point.
 
 
Papess
13:10 / 17.01.07
As for the KEG thread after an evening of thinking about it I'm of the opinion that we let both of them sink or fall as they will. I'd encourage someone with a progressive relationship or vested interest in GEK to step up and create a new thread with Mordant's, THRB's, and monk's suggestions in mind. I'm against moving or editing the orginal thread at this point.

Yes, a new thread for Gek would be great. Although, I don't think KEG has any place at all, in the Temple.

I would also like to invite Alex Thoth to be a part of the GEK2 thread, as ze is the orignal author and creator.
 
 
electric monk
15:42 / 17.01.07
sink or fall

And that would be fine for both threads, IMO. I'm not convinced, however, that the solution to the issue of the GEK thread is the creation of another GEK thread, unless locking the original is on the table. I do support bringing Alex Thoth into the process, should GEK_2.0 proceed. Hell, I think someone should contact The Player and bring hir in on it too. Ze's the one with the closest relationship to GEK these days based on what we know. There's at least the vested interest there, which I agree is important.

I've PM'd Alex and asked him to join us here, BTW. He, more than anyone, should be involved in this discussion.

-------

Compiled Summary just for Kicks:

'Thread for discussing and contacting Alex Thoth's Gek. Gek is a temple servitor who most people seem to use to fix their backpain or car problems. Participants make a wish and offer milk, cookies or other comestibles. In veiw of the way the Temple has evolved since 2001, they should also agree to:
1) make an effort to contribute productively to the Temple forum by starting a new thread or by making a post to an existing thread, and
2) experiment with at least one new magical practice that they find challenging.'
 
 
Papess
15:58 / 17.01.07
I have paged Alex Thoth in the Pager thread.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
16:29 / 17.01.07
OKay, I'm going to put in a request to alter the summary to the one above. If it needs changing later, we can always do that.
 
 
Seth
16:55 / 17.01.07
Again, I'm resistant to switching to monk's above abstract because it feels like we're deciding for the only people who still actively use GEK. I don't know that any of us talking here actually do. I might disagree with what they seem to be doing (and I repeat that I don't really know them and so can't judge them), but I don't feel right with amending GEK's programming so that they *should* participate more and try other techniques. I really don't feel right with the word should.
 
 
Seth
17:03 / 17.01.07
I disagreed the moderation action based on the above reasoning. I'm happy to be open to other arguments if I find them convincing that this change is a good one, but I'm not into it as is. If it's an additional way of using GEK while the old way still works then cool, if it replaces the original programming (meaning users have to do milk, cookies and contribute to threads and and learn new techniques to get one wish granted) then I wouldn't with my current best thinking agree to it.

I'll be offline in an hour, so if people really want this change to go through unchallenged then I won't be up and running here for the rest of the day.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
17:11 / 17.01.07
Okay, how about if we change "should also agree to" to "are also encouraged to"? That way, the original intent is still there but people going to the thread are prompted to go a bit further.
 
  

Page: 1 ... 910111213(14)1516171819... 35

 
  
Add Your Reply