• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: Xorkoth | Madness

⫸STICKY⫷ Growing this forum- Suggestions for Improving P&S

I interpreted Foreigner's comment as a general thing... throughout the course of the forum's history there have existed people who have a tendency to do this, and it has been disruptive. There will be more people who do this in the future too. It's a general problem that comes up and it's frustrating for everybody. I'm talking about when, for example, two people will always respond to each other antagonistically in any thread, and it's always the same root issue and rarely actually has to do with the thread... this kind of posting is disruptive to everyone else. Often it's one person antagonizing and the other defending and in this case the real issue is the antagonizer. I certainly understand that it's possible or even likely that this kind of behavior is facilitated by emotional/mental issues, but the fact remains that it's disruptive.

I'd actually say that right now I don't see any seriously problematic regulars either, it's been like that for a little while. :) But I bet we can all think of some that we've had before.
 
I rarely disagree with you, Xorkoth (and I don't entirely)...
But, I'd like to say a thing or two in response.

I certainly understand that it's possible or even likely that this kind of behavior is facilitated by emotional/mental issues, but the fact remains that it's disruptive.

I just think it could be dealt with a little more delicately, that's all. Three or four users, now, in this thread, have referred to *someone* and how disruptive they are and how little they contribute... It seems really bitchy to me, and - ironically - I don't see how it's actually contributing anything to the forum or the thread.

The solution, I guess, is for moderators to be a little more heavy-handed?
And, if so, why do we need to make these comments about unwanted forum members?
It could've been worded differently, without (potentially) making anyone feel stupid or unwanted.

...

You're a mod, Xorkoth.
So if it's frustrating for everyone or problematic or whatever - and you recognize that - then do something about it.
Not doing anything about it, and then saying it's frustrating later doesn't make any sense to me.

As far as I can see, it's really more the moderators fault than anyone else, especially if you accept the fact that certain behaviors are motivated by mental health issues and withdrawal symptoms.

First and foremost, this is a harm reduction forum.
The last thing we should do is make people feel uncomfortable.
Whether or not we're having valuable philosophical discussions is not the number one priority.

Sometimes people get carried away.
But, that's okay IMO. Just as it's okay for people to be upset and confused in rehab.
It should be expected in the philosophy sub-forum of a site devoted to harm reduction and drug abuse.
There are always other philosophy forums that aren't frequented by drug addicts...

...

How would any of you feel if you were the person/s being singled out?
There's probably a bunch of members who suspect you're talking about them. (I know I did.)
And, like I said earlier, it doesn't seem right to me (no matter how much it is justified).

...

I started a philosophical thread, by the way.
But I feel a bit insecure about it, after reading all these comments.
I didn't spend too long writing it and I'm not sure if it's going to live up to a respectable standard.
But, it's been on my mind and I've been meaning to create a thread about it for some time.

http://www.bluelight.org/vb/threads/764697-Charity-Selfishness-amp-Human-Nature

I'm going to stop posting in this thread now, because I've said all I want to say... and - frankly - I suspect that I'm not wanted here.
 
Last edited:
I agree, it's largely the moderators' faults when things get out of hand for an extended period, and nothing is done. It's a difficult line especially in this forum. In the focus forums, the rules are a little more clear: no sourcing, no ID threads, etc. In a forum like this, it's difficult to determine, since we're unable to ever totally separate from subjectivity, whether removal of a post is warranted or not. That said, in the time I posted here before I was a moderator, I saw some cases where I thought action against a poster was not only warranted but needed. I'll just come out and say I'm thinking of our old pal turk, who is the only poster in recent memory I can think of who I would call a problem poster. At some point warnings were given and bans happened and it worked, though it took awhile. Since I became a mod here I haven't really seen anything I consider problem posting, it's been running pretty smoothly from my perspective.

The thing that, to me, makes this forum trickier to moderate than most others is that by the nature of the types of discussion here, people are going to feel strongly and sometimes get carried away. This is true in any forum but in here it happens a lot more frequently. And it's hard to know when to take action because it's okay for people to be passionate and emotional about issues they care about, it shouldn't be punished. And sometimes that passion causes threads to go off-track, usually because of a back-and-forth exchange between 2 or more people that becomes personal. Would you suggest that the mods remove these exchanges and advise the posters participating to take it to PMs (it's a serious question, because I'd like to moderate in ways that the community sees as fair and unbiased)? It seems that such action might help to save threads from derailing and people getting annoyed and no longer posting in them. But just because two people are heatedly debating back and forth doesn't mean that they're necessarily overstepping any bounds or being disruptive, even if it can be annoying for others to read through a bunch of long and sometimes aggressive posts.

I'm sorry you feel unwanted. <3 But just so you know, you're one of my favorite posters in here.
 
I don't know, honestly, whether I want moderators to be a little more heavy-handed.
Like you, I don't have any issues with anyone at the moment.
But, others do. So maybe they should answer that question.

just so you know, you're one of my favorite posters in here.

That means a lot.
Thank you.
 
I'm glad it's not me. But, it doesn't matter if it's me.
It's a bit bitchy to single anyone out. Isn't it?
(I thought it was me, for the record, and it contributed to my depression).

...

I realize that we all find certain people frustrating.
I find you frustrating sometimes, Foreigner.

...

Same goes for Nina, although - admittedly - I was getting seriously fed up with the "channeling" threads.

I never singled anyone out. You, on the other hand...
 
I don't really want to edit anyones post in here, so lets drop this particular disagreement and focus back to the threads purpose. Again, this is not the place to have a personal disagreement and is not the place to name names (or even imply), so anyone doing so is off-topic and should be aware of that. I'd love it if you guys were willing to whittle down your posts a bit, to this end. I've no desire to censor anyone, but I am also unwilling to fan the flames. Please, use discretion and stuff. If you think there is a troublesome user, PM me, Xorkoth, Ebola or Sekio and we will look into it.

In truth, so far this thread has been really useful, and a good springboard for creating change.

I really want more of the regulars to drop in; but moreso, I'd love the input of greenlighters or 'irregulars'. :)
 
Agreed. I didn't mean any harm, Foreigner.
I just think we failed turk, a bit. The guy was clearly having issues.
And we were all more concerned about having an interesting discussion.
I really tried to tolerate his behavior, though, and found it quite difficult.
But, I could have done better.

I don't like how people are labeled "trolls" on the internet, but I especially don't like it on support forums such as this.
It happens all the time, unfortunately. People are quick to label anyone who is behaving badly a troll.
Eventually they believe it and act accordingly....

I'm guilty of this, too. I'm not separating myself from the issue.
But I don't really want to discuss it, further.
I - for one - feel bad about turk.
No happy person behaves like that.

NSFW:
willow, I'd appreciate it if you didn't snip my post.
I'm not going to get into a debate about this.

Thanks.
 
^I like the sentiments behind your post there foreverafter. More compassion is always going to be a good thing; and should be a focus for Bluelight. As a summarised whole constituted of many, many parts, the community itself is the one that needs to manifest this, though it can either start from the top-down or from roots up. I prefer the latter, I think its more elegant and neat and more likely to work.

Agreed. I didn't mean any harm, Foreigner.
I just think we failed turk, a bit. The guy was clearly having issues.
And we were all more concerned about having an interesting discussion.
I really tried to tolerate his behavior, though, and found it quite difficult.
But, I could have done better.

I don't like how people are labeled "trolls" on the internet, but I especially don't like it on support forums such as this.
It happens all the time, unfortunately. People are quick to label anyone who is behaving badly a troll.
Eventually they believe it and act accordingly....

I'm guilty of this, too. I'm not separating myself from the issue.
But I don't really want to discuss it, further.
I - for one - feel bad about turk.
No happy person behaves like that.

That whole situation wasn't great, at all, and I was involved in that, unfortuantely. I'd listen to suggestions on what is the right way to deal with this sort of thing. Its really hard, though, to help people who don't want help. But, then, I don't know if he wanted help or not, because I didn't ask. I guess I could have; but he's autonomous, he could have found the recovery forums, he could have reached out. I truly wish he had, if he was going through some difficulty. I'll try and note that, and see what can be done in future. He really wasn't a troll, in my books too; he actually contributed things of value, but that doesn't negate the other stuff. If he wants to return to Bluelight in the future, perhaps he can and start afresh. He as given several chances and made a choice. I don't think you need to feel guilty or responsible for his behaviour at all; the last communication I had with him was not especially repentant as much as abusive.

You can't be everything for everyone. But I really dig and respect that you are reflecting on this and I share the flavour of those thoughts. At times, you just need to trust your decisions.

I just ask that we maintain the focus. Its pleasing, in a sense, that a lot of users have mentioned being relatively happy with the current format. Of course, it needs work, but I'd like to think that this thread could sort of begin that sort of change.
 
Its really hard, though, to help people who don't want help. But, then, I don't know if he wanted help or not, because I didn't ask.

It's certainly difficult.
I feel like - a lot of the time - the people who REALLY need help can't ask... and even if you ask them (if they need help), they say they don't.
People who are abusive are in pain. I know because I've been in pain and I've been abusive.
I resented people for not helping me, but I made it damn near impossible.

For the record, I think you tolerated a lot of abuse in that situation (more than anyone, I think) and you did it like a fucking pro.
I suspect that none of it was personal, at all, and that turk was trying to get himself permanently banned from the site.
But, I think I contributed to events that lead him to make that decision, so I can't remove myself from it entirely...
And - pro or not - we could all be a bit more compassionate.
(Although: you, sir, are approaching Ghandi.)

I used to act out, as a way of reaching out. (Because I was too proud/afraid to directly ask for anyone's help.)
And, when people re-acted in the opposite way I needed them to, I didn't understand.
"Can't they see how much pain I'm in?" I would think to myself. "Fuck them!"
And the cycle would go on, and on.

Like I said, I feel like I failed him a bit...
But next time I'm going to do better.

:)

(edit: I'm sorry if I'm rambling.)
 
Last edited:
FOREVERAFTER said:
Who is stopping anyone from discussing philosophy or non-religious spiritual topics

I think you have homed in on something with that statement.
Theological and philosophical discussions can often overlap.
For example, I just made a philosophical thread relating to what does it mean for something to exist/ definition of existence? When giving my thoughts on why I think 'I' exists ( and what I mean when I say 'I' exists) I happened to envite and invoke God (according to my understanding) into the discussion to explain existence of 'I'.
I don't see any problem with this for many reasons, mainly it was appropriate in context.

Someone in the thread objected to me bringing God into the discussion. I found this odd.
If you do not feel 'I' exists than all you have to do is explain why. Or if you feel 'I' exists but has nothing to do with God/supernatual, you're free to give your thoughts on that too. If you don't want to even talk about the existence of 'I', you can do (not) that too.
The thread was entirely open to discuss what does it mean for something/anything to exist. It has/had the possibility to go in many directions. And that is just fine with me.

If you want to discuss philosophical topics without any religious input/overtones, all one has to do in making thread X and state -I would like to keep all theological thought/implications out of this thread please.

FEA said:
I have studied academic philosophy at University and it's a bunch of horseshit as far as I'm concerned.

Me too, and I agree. IMO they try to shape your way of thinking way too much.

FEA said:
don't like academic philosophy. I think it's (largely) a bunch of crap... I don't believe in the idolization of philosophers or writers I don't see why everyone isn't qualified to make threads about philosophy.

Everyone should feel qualified to make threads about philosophy. All that is basically required of a philosopher is to be a thinker/questioner and open-minded.
Honestly, I think some people appeal to authority way too much when giving their musings. Personally, in a one- on -one discussion I am more interested in what you think- not- Plato, Socrates, Voltaire, Descartes, Spinoza, Kant etc. etc. etc........
I already have investigated what their thoughts are/were.

Philosophy is not something that requires education, IMO.
Academic philosophy is largely bullshit.

It does provoke your own thought when you contemplate the thoughts of others, so I see the value there. But I totally agree a big portion is b.s. I agree philosophy doesn't require a university education.

Philosophy should be accessible to everyone.
I don't see why fancy terms or academic references are required.

Yes it should be. The fancy shmancy terms intimidate many.

Maybe you shouldn't overthink it / question whether or not you're capable of making a "worthwhile" thread. I don't know if everyone thinks like that, but - if so - maybe that's the reason people don't post as much philosophy stuff. You don't need to be familiar with Camus, or Kirkegaard.

This goes back to what I think you have really touched on......

You are the only thing stopping you from creating/having more philosophical discussion.
 
Last edited:
they try to shape your way of thinking way too much

Yep. The vast majority of University students don't do much thinking.
When I was studying philosophy, everyone was so eager to lick Neitzsche's asshole, most of them didn't stop to actually think about what he was saying.
Tertiary students, for the most part, are like sheep (or recording devices).

I think some people appeal to authority way too much when giving their musings. Personally, in a one- on -one discussion I am more interested in what you think- not- Plato, Socrates, Voltaire, Descartes, Spinoza, Kant etc. etc. etc........ I already have investigated what their thoughts are/were.

+1000
Well said, meth.

The fancy shmancy terms intimidate many.

Yes. It comes across, to me, as intellectual elitism.
In a public forum, such as this, language should be as accessible as possible.
If inaccessible terms are used, they should be (at least briefly) defined.

...

Has everyone here seen Tim Blake Nelson's film, "Leaves of Grass"?
Edward Norton plays twins: a respected philosophy professor; and a down-to-earth pot dealer.
It's not a perfect film. But, it's definitely worth a watch. (Available for streaming on Netflix.)

There's a conversation between Norton and Norton about how academic philosophy largely consists of people talking about other people's takes on other people's takes of other people's ideas.
It's a funny and thought-provoking film (I think), despite the simplicity and (relative) lack of pretentiousness.

I, honestly, think Tim Blake Nelson is more advanced - philosophically speaking - than most academics that spend their lives dissecting other people's ideas.

NSFW:
image24.jpg

image8.jpg
 
Last edited:
When I was studying philosophy, everyone was so eager to lick Neitzsche's asshole, most of them didn't stop to actually think about what he was saying.
Tertiary students, for the most part, are like sheep (or recording devices).

http://www.critical-theory.com/march-madness-the-overrated-championship/

Don't know if your familar with march madness but is super huge in the US.
They had this a couple years back as a humorous spin. Chomsky won.
My pick would have Descartes all the way.
Can't believe he didn't win. He had to have been a number 1 seed. ☺
Maybe we should start a bracket on this forum next time march madness roles around.


It comes across, to me, as intellectual elitism. In a public forum, such as this, language should be as accessible as possible.
If inaccessible terms are used, they should be (at least briefly) defined

Yeah, sometimes some people over do it on this forum. I've literally had a hard time reading some peoples post because they use four or five showy words per sentence. It's like they are trying to communicate in another language or something. They end up just coming off looking pretentious IMO. I think it was Albert Einstein who said,
" any fool can make something more complex, it takes a genius to make something simple"


everyone here seen Tim Blake Nelson's film, "Leaves of Grass"?
Edward Norton plays twins: a respected philosophy professor; and a down-to-earth pot dealer.
It's not a perfect film. But, it's definitely worth a watch. (Available for streaming on Netflix.)

No, but I seen the one where he plays a "down to Earth" heroin dealer ? (25th hour)
Sounds good, I like EN need to check it out.
 
I've literally had a hard time reading some peoples post because they use four or five showy words per sentence. It's like they are trying to communicate in another language or something. They end up just coming off looking pretentious IMO. I think it was Albert Einstein who said, "any fool can make something more complex, it takes a genius to make something simple"

+1000000
 
They end up just coming off looking pretentious IMO

If you really want people to alter the way they communicate for you, isn't that almost asking for pretense? I'd rather people expressed themselves in whatever way feels best, and there's no way to arbitrate that sort of thing.

I really wish we could focus on discussing things that are achievable and useful. The off-topic stuff is getting a bit annoying TBH. I created this thread to try and figure out ways to create an inclusive and inviting forum. It is not the purpose of it to air grievances and make people more uncomfortable about contributing here. I feel like its being abused a tiny little bit right now.

I really don't want to start editing, so I will have to start vanishing things that are not on topic.
 
Last edited:
It's not off topic.

Yes. It comes across, to me, as intellectual elitism.
In a public forum, such as this, language should be as accessible as possible.
If inaccessible terms are used, they should be (at least briefly) defined.

This is a genuine suggestion. I don't see why it isn't achievable.
People are concerned about philosophical (and academic philosophical) discussions not being embraced.
If an effort is made to make academic discussions more accessible, that might solve the problem.

Don't abuse your position.
meth and I have the right to express ourselves.
We're not being vindictive. We're being honest.
 
i agree, willow.

there are two sides to any equation - in this case a supply side and a consumer side. it's the 21st century and people have dictionaries at their fingertips. it's an invitation to learn.

it's interesting that some people assume that anybody using certain words in this forum is doing it "to be pretentious". maybe be word just fits and it's use is entirely appropriate?

alasdair
 
alasdairm said:
it's interesting that some people assume that anybody using certain words in this forum is doing it "to be pretentious". maybe be word just fits and it's use is entirely appropriate?

I was not assuming anything.
I didn't say that "anybody using certain words" is doing so "to be pretentious".
I was saying (said) if you ( apply only if applicable) are using four or five words per sentence that the average person has to have a dictionary handy in order to extract meaning of your sentence, it can be construed as a little too extravagant/overdone. Regardless of your motive.


If you really want people to alter the way they communicate for you, isn't that almost asking for pretense? I'd rather people expressed themselves in whatever way feels best, and there's no way to arbitrate that sort of thing


I'm not asking anyone to arbitrate anything.
You ( meaning anyone) can communicate anyway you like.
I was only suggesting that if you are talking to an audience of people that you sincerely want to hear your ideas/thoughts, you might want to take into consideration the totality of the group's vocabulary vs yours- so that your ideas are adequately conveyed to all.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with a having a vast vocabulary, but when overly implemented, you run the risk of the information you are trying to covey being lost in translation. As well as being viewed as pretentious.
Sometimes less is more.


really wish we could focus on discussing things that are achievable and useful. The off-topic stuff is getting a bit annoying TBH.
really don't want to start editing, so I will have to start vanishing things that are not on topic


Sorry for the off topic stuff, but I think I (and Forever) are reasonably on topic.


is not the purpose of it to air grievances and make people more uncomfortable about contributing here. I feel like its being abused a tiny little bit right now.

I assume you mean personal grievances, you should expect some complaint with respect.
Criticism can be helpful.
I haven't meant anything I said to be
be taken personally.
I know what your saying tho.
Suggestions of change are more helpful than complaints.

Here is a suggestion. Maybe make a sticky or thread asking people to just list some philosophical topics of intrest. Then maybe a discussion/thread on one will spring forth.

Foreverafter said:
for meth (is that who we're talking about?), I like his contributions more than most.

Although we have went " back and forth" many times,
I feel the same about your contributions.?
I try not to take disagreeing personal.
 
alasdairm said:
i agree, willow.

Thanks Ali. Good to get some support and understanding. Google is basically a dictionary. Its not difficult to use.

This is about one month old:

Top Posters over 3 months

Ninae 304
willow11 258
ForEverAfter 184
murphythecat 177
turkalurk 104
Xorkoth 91
socko 87
Erikmen 84
What 23 76
NOtoInvega 53
Journyman16 52
ebola? 52
Voyager3 42
nuttynutskin 40
Flickering 36
Shrooms00087 35
methamaniac 34


If you feature in there, you can be part of a changing culture.
 
Would it be possible to allow people to bump threads from the archives?

thanks
 
^Good question. It depends what*- do you have any topics you would like to see back in the forum?

*If its been archived as over 1000 posts (I can't imagine there being heaps of them) I'd be happy to restart the topic (or you or anyone can). Threads with over 1000 posts are usually archived for bandwidth sake (I think).
 
Last edited:
Top