i have an idea.........

Sigh. I think we're seeing exactly what will happen if such a forum is formed... then all my talk of my personal faith would be expected to only be displayed in that one forum, and those who have no faith in anything would also come in to say that, when in reality they are insisting they have no reason to be there.

My faith is a part of me. There is no separation of mind/body/spirt for me.

> Sigh. I think we're seeing exactly what will happen if such a forum is formed... then all my talk of my personal faith would be expected to only be displayed in that one forum...

I guess the idea would be that posts that had a significant religious / spiritual component would be shifted to that forum yes. Just like how now posts that have a significant focus on a particular disorder are moved to the appropriate forum, posts that are significantly about peoples t's are moved to the therapy forum etc.

> and those who have no faith in anything...

people who don't have faith in religion / god / spirituality still have faith in lots of other things. i have lots of faith. i'll give you a couple examples:

- i have faith that people are generally well intentioned (that exceeds the available evidence as i have no reason to believe that they are or that they are not when i have never encountered them before)
- i have faith that the future will resemble the past in certain respects (in the sense that the laws of nature are constant) that gives me faith in a whole heap of stuff e.g.,
- i have faith that the sun will rise tomorrow
- i have faith that if i drop my computer it will hit the ground and break :-(
- i have faith that human beings are gradually evolving into greater social and natural awareness. that while some use their enormous brains to devise means of destruction we will evolve to appreciate that our wellbeing and our descendents / genes wellbeing is dependent on our looking out for this planet of ours.

and so on and so forth...

i also have faith that there will be no life after death for me
to which i say WOOOOOO HOOOOOOO thank god for that no more pain and suffering for me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(though i also allow that future technology may make survival after death possible)

i'd leave a religous / spiritual faith forum alone. i'd let people support each other in their religous / spiritual faith. pray together. whatever. i'd leave them alone. 'cause my beliefs aren't considered to be supportive of religous / spiritual faith and i understand that.

Though I do like to discuss arguments for the existence of god :-)

> My faith is a part of me. There is no separation of mind/body/spirt for me.

you wouldn't have to seperate them... just because there are boards that are designed for people to post about their mental illnesses (bi-polar and the like) it doesn't mean that they have to seperate themselves from their illness on other boards (and indeed i appreciate that they could not).

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
think the notion would be that it could have its own forum so that posts with those themes / that topic could be redirected there. so there would be less discussion of religon / religious themes on the present board.</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
but i'll admit that i'm a bright / atheist so that is typically considered 'unsupportive' of religious faith / belief anyhoo...

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
i don't consider myself to be any of those things so a religion / spirituality / god / higher power forum wouldn't be something i'd go to... But that being said if there was one then those kindsa posts could be redirected there so they would appear less on other boards...

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

I think you said it all. TC!

which would of course enable people to get more support (on their very own special board) than they find now (with religious threads tending to escalate).

i'm not hostile to religous faith...

remember that religious faith... is hardly supportive to atheists or brights either. it goes both ways.

how would it be different to having a relationships board to discuss relationships?

You know... Doc John has spoken. Seems you might be beating a dead horse...

hrm.

well...
if my only reason in posting was to effect change then you might be right.

i was actually interested in discussing the issue, however.

in talking about whether people did / didn't like the idea...
reasons why people do / don't like the idea...

sometimes if you talk things through people reach something of a consensus.

...i would have thought it would be a win-win situation for all concerned...

also... he didn't say 'no for now and forever'...

and he didn't say we should stop discussing it either...

But it's beginning to sound like a child arguing with a parent that has already said "NO, not now! Maybe later!" We need to accept what Doc John says if we have any faith in him as a good leader. I for one, certainly do!

I know when I kept bugging my mom about letting me do something, the more I bugged the less chance I had of getting to do it. It was the same way when I was raising me kids. If you argue, you can forget it! LOL

oh.

i mean... sure the thread was started with a question... and then other people were saying what they thought about the idea. cool. then docjohn said what he thought... but i don't understand why the thread stops there... why can't we continue to talk it through? maybe... there are considerations i hadn't thought of and i'll actually end up changing my mind and thinking it is a bad idea. maybe other people didn't think through all the considerations and they'll actually end up changing their mind and thinking it is a good idea. only one way to find out though.

i guess i just like discussing things.
its not really about WAH!!! But I want that!!!
its more about... hmm... lets think about this some more.

i like thinking about things...
coming to a considered opinion for myself.
i don't care particularly whether doc john agrees with me or not...

maybe in your culture it is considered impertinent to question (that is no criticism it is just an observation).
i always question...
it is part of who i am.
i respect people who consider reasons and weigh pros and cons. hard to weigh pros and cons when all the reasons aren't out there. there can be different weightings assigned to pros and cons too. if you don't consider things... well... i'm not sure that is best at the end of the day... even if nothing changes... can't help to be better informed... can it?

My culture??? You have NO IDEA what my culture is... unless, of course, *I* know you as someone else, perhaps?

At any rate, you can rave on. I'm done with it. The Doc has spoken.

culture / subgroup whatever. family. perhaps i should have said family.

do you distinguish between questioning and being impertinent?

how about discussing and arguing?

how about arguing and throwing wobblies?

sorry if i've upset you that wasn't my intention. point is that the thread was started with a question... or an idea really... so people were posting what they thought.

how come people stop caring what people think just cause john has spoken?

i don't understand...

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>

how come people stop caring what people think just cause john has spoken?

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

Please show Dr Grohol some respect. He is DocJohn to us. and we become quite protective around here.

i didn't mean (not even to imply) any disrespect whatsoever.

i'm really very confused with how this thread is going...

is it really that people see questioning as impertinent?

i wasn't even questioning docjohn.

i was just saying... that i wanted to think on it some more...
and i thought other people might be interested in thinking it through some more as well.

strange... i'm very confused...

I don't see questioning as impertinent (although at some point, you might want to think about the reaction the questioning is causing if more than a few people respond the same way). I can relate to wanting to discuss even with the intent to effect change. However, it would be a good idea to start your own thread on this topic, and those who are not into continuing this discussion can ignore it more easily.

Once there was a man called Socrates. He used to go around asking questions. He used to ask people what they thought 'justice' and 'wisdom' and 'goodness' and 'knowledge' were, given that they thought they had those things and given that they were paid to teach other people what those things were.

They couldn't answer his questions so well. He exposed their ignorance. They turned on him. He faced trumped up charges of 'corrupting the young' and 'believing in false gods' and he was sentanced to death by being made to drink Hemlock.

Socrates is a tragic hero. For philosophers and all people who like to question. He was not well received by society and by his culture. Philosophers tend not to be. I know I'm not well received at times because people are afraid of questioning. People are afraid that that the process of questioning... Makes them look stupid.

It doesn't make people look stupid. But for those who cling to ideals and are afraid of questioning I ask... What are you afraid of?

I don't understand... But then I've never been ashamed to say 'I don't know' and 'Oops I was wrong'.

Regarding starting my own thread...

What happened to the original topic of this one?

Oh yeah... People want to ignore it.

Put me on ignore peoples.

I'd much prefer it to your posting and attempting to get other people to ignore me.

I think people don't care to discuss it more (or most I see don't) for a couple of reasons.

1) A forum was requested because this is such a touchy subject, and too much discussion may cross the boundaries set forth for the community, and

2) Most of the discussion ended for many when docjohn stated his intent, or lack thereof and respectfully accept his input as to what he's willing to do, or not do, and are satisfactorily appreciative of the much he already does.

I think that's how I see it from my chair. Further discussion of a touchy (to the guidelines) subject doesn't appeal to some when the question has already been answered.

KD

> I think people don't care to discuss it more (or most I see don't)...

yep, all four of them.

> Most of the discussion ended for many when docjohn stated his intent, or lack thereof and respectfully accept his input as to what he's willing to do, or not do, and are satisfactorily appreciative of the much he already does.

Right. But don't people also have an opinion of their own?
Or... Aren't they interested in developing one?
To develop an opinion of ones own isn't to disrespect another person (Doc John lets say) having a different one.
In fact... I would have thought that his opinion would largely have been based on what people on the boards thought. Hence something approaching consensus on the boards...

Maybe it is about... We aren't really asked to / taken seriously for imput, eh? Sorry... Having hard time adjusting. I think... Culture shock. I'm not tryin to be funny. I'm not tryin to create trouble. Culture shock. Jeepers...

> Further discussion of a touchy (to the guidelines) subject doesn't appeal to some when the question has already been answered.

Ah. I guess I had a more liberal reading of the question... 'Cause of how people were starting to say what they thought and were starting to discuss that.

Nevermind...

"Right. But don't people also have an opinion of their own? Or... Aren't they interested in developing one?"

I think the responding members have developed their own opinion on this and chose not to discuss it further and carry on. Just because someone chose to *accept* a response and go with it (while in agreement or not), does not mean to say that they don't have their own opinion, but possibly are picking their battles for the moment. Accepting John's response is making what they want of the issue.

It doesn't mean to say they don't have opinions of their own, or are afraid to express them. I've seen many expressions of opinion on this thread. It's more about choice and acceptance I think.

KD

I'll just preface this by saying thanks for taking the time to respond to me on this. I'll also take the time to reiterate that I'm not attempting (or even attempting to imply) any disrespect to anyone at all. Most certainly not to DocJohn. I was just trying to have a discussion on the topic that this thread began with...

>I think the responding members have developed their own opinion on this

Yeah. Seems that they are in agreement with DocJohn and are thus attempting to get the discussion to stop.

> Just because someone chose to *accept* a response and go with it (while in agreement or not), does not mean to say that they don't have their own opinion, but possibly are picking their battles for the moment.

Though of course wanting to continue the discussion doesn't entail that I don't accept DocJohn's response. I do accept his response. That is fine. I wanted to continue the discussion to hear what other people thought though. Also (and more importantly) to consider the REASONS people have for their opinions. Whether they agree or not. Also... I'm not meaning to pick a battle. I'm not attempting to have a battle. I'm not attempting to change his mind. I'm not attempting to change anyones mind. Though I am of course open to the possibility (indeed probability) that minds do tend to change over the course of dialogue. Maybe my mind even. All I was attempting to do was to continue the discussion.

If people don't want to discuss it they can stop reading / posting to the thread. I just don't understand why people post in the attempt to get other people to stop reading / posting to the thread. Why can't people just leave it if that is what they want and leave other people to continue to post to it / discuss it if that is what other people want? I don't really understand that...

I think we've all heard your opinion on the topic and it would be nice and interesting to see what other people's opinions are on it. Re-stating your opinion in a half dozen different ways doesn't make it any more (or less) valid, it just makes others feel like you're pushing an issue into their faces.

Just because I've spoken doesn't mean others can't add their two cents. We, in fact, have a thread entitled, "What you'd like to see in an ideal mental health site" that provides a rich experience of people's opinions of things they'd like to see. But generally I don't change a long-standing community guideline on a whim (or even a single discussion).

My reasons are simple -- I've seen far more communities run more smoothly in the past 15 years I've been doing one form of community or another online with this type of guideline in place. When such a guideline wasn't in place, I found a few key community members would orient toward this issue and spend all of their time in the community focusing on it, to the detriment of general emotional support and sharing that communities like this are about. It only takes a handful of people in an online community to cause misery to a far greater number of people. So it is experience-based. (The same reasoning also goes to the discussion of administrative issues.)

So we've heard your opinion... now if others want to share their opinions about this topic, I'm happy to listen. Thanks!

DocJohn

> Re-stating your opinion in a half dozen different ways doesn't make it any more (or less) valid, it just makes others feel like you're pushing an issue into their faces.

I appreciate that restating an opinion in half a dozen ways doesn't make it any more (or less valid). I don't think I did this, however.

> it would be nice and interesting to see what other people's opinions are on it.

It surely would.

> But generally I don't change a long-standing community guideline on a whim (or even a single discussion).

Sure. As I said (and sometimes when people misunderstand it IS worth repeating a point so as to clarify) it isn't about effecting change so much as it is about having a discussion.

> When such a guideline wasn't in place, I found a few key community members would orient toward this issue and spend all of their time in the community focusing on it, to the detriment of general emotional support and sharing that communities like this are about. It only takes a handful of people in an online community to cause misery to a far greater number of people. So it is experience-based. (The same reasoning also goes to the discussion of administrative issues.)

Okay. Though of course there are many different online forums with many different ways of doing things. I'm not trying to effect change so much as I am trying to get people to think.

Why? Because I have this funny ideal of what is called a deliberative democracy. The idea with a deliberative democracy is that people talk about their reasons and stuff. What tends to happen with a deliberative democracy is that consensus is reached - or that if consensus is not reached at least people have a good understanding of what the points of difference are. For example, in the course of this discussion you have clarified your stance so that people can better understand your reasons.

It is a process thing (the deliberative democracy idea). It only works insofar as you have a population who can think critically and discuss things without degenerating to personal attacks and insults and so forth. Critical thinking skills improve with practice...

I like to think that one day... There won't be wars because we won't have to use force to assert our will. Rather a deliberative democratic process will ensure everyone is heard and their rationale is taken into account and that consensus is the aim - even if it is not achieved.

Anyhoo... I'll leave the thread now (I guess that was the suggestion)...

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
Why? Because I have this funny ideal of what is called a deliberative democracy.

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

The thing is, this site is NOT a democracy and the majority of the members WANT it that way. If you like, call it a BENEVOLENT DICTATORSHIP, although that's pushing it a bit, because Doc John does listen to our wants and needs and if it's doable, he does it for us.

The subject of a Religion Forum HAS been discussed at length and in the end, the majority of the membership did NOT want one. I hope you can understand that.

The reason I said "Doc John has spoken" is because although I don't always agree with him, I understand that he has experience and our best interest at heart. I have faith in his experience and knowledge and defer to his wisdom. I think most of us do.

You wanting the membership to "think" is coming across as forcing the issue and it's causing too much upset. I'm not alone, as a member, in asking you to please STOP! Again, Doc John, the OWNER and ADMINISTRATOR of this site has given you his thoughts. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.

I thank you in advance for your respect to these wishes.

What forces anyone to keep reading this thread if it's so upsetting or if the matter is not worthy of discussion?