Actually, Rick didn't say anything about "trying to determine exactly who is disrupting Fairfield Life...." He simply said he might appoint a moderator because he doesn't believe in enabling abusive behavior. Presumably once the moderator has taken over, the abusive behavior here will no longer be tolerated.
I hope one thing the moderator looks out for and sanctions is misrepresentation of and/or attempts to mislead about other members' behavior. With regard to the 18 posts of mine Barry mentions below, it would be helpful to look at the posts I was responding to. (The total number of my posts to FFL between last June and today is 31, made during two brief visits.) I am not a member of The Peak, "technically" or otherwise. I have no private communication with its members but do read it off and on, as I do FFL. I have on occasion defended The Peak and its members from false and abusive comments made on FFL, of which there have been many (not enumerated here by Barry). It's not clear to me that anyone is attempting to "disrupt" FFL. As far as I can see, there is a continuation over the last few days of a long-standing FFL discussion having to do with the persistent abuse of TM supporters by non-TM supporters. It should also be noted that of the five Peak members who have been posting here, two (Doug and Steve) have been posting to FFL all along. One (Xeno) is primarily an FFL member who occasionally posts to The Peak. One (Richard) posts almost exclusively to FFL. And one (Jim) has posted very little to FFL until quite recently. The notion promoted by some FFL members that there has been a sudden invasion of FFL by Peak members bent on disruption is false. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <turquoiseb@...> wrote : Hi Rick, I am pleased to hear that you're going to look into the "moderation issue" and try to determine exactly who is disrupting Fairfield Life and creating a negative experience for posters who have chosen to remain there and post, as opposed to moving over to The_Peak. To help you decide where exactly the problem lies, and who you might need to "moderate," here are some interesting statistics for you to ponder: -- Number of posts made in June to The_Peak by FFL members that were designed and intended to complain about The_Peak and disrupt that group's ongoing conversations: 0 (zero) -- Number of posts made in June to FFL by The_Peak members that were designed and intended to complain about FFL and disrupt that group's ongoing conversations: 131 -- Number of posts made in June to FFL by Judy Stein (technically not a member of The_Peak) that were designed and intended to complain about FFL and disrupt that group's ongoing conversations: 18 Seems to me that there is a concerted effort by members of another group (The_Leak) and one of their sympathizers (Judy Stein) to disrupt Fairfield Life. Meanwhile, there is NO corresponding attempt by anyone at FFL to go over to The_Peak and disrupt *their* conversations. I think these statistics speak for themselves as to who needs "moderation," but you decide... Barry ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <rick@...> wrote : From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] I believe when you say Rick is enabling a certain behaviour, you are really saying he is not preventing behaviour you would rather not see. He is not enabling, its laissez-faire, a policy or attitude of letting things take their own course, without interfering. When you use the word enabling, you are assuming Rick wants to have that kind of behaviour to which you have so far objected. But now that you see he is just letting things take their natural course, that should not be a problem any more. I do not think Rick has an intentional stance to enable, is just letting go, as when one lets go of a mantra and it goes and changes however it goes. The individual posters enable whatever happens because they are the one producing the content. But content here comes from thought, and thought is spontaneous, it comes effortlessly and naturally, so really, nature itself is what enables what happens here, and everywhere else for that matter. I believe you are attributing intentionality incorrectly. When I say 'believe', that means it's an opinion, not necessarily true, though it could be. That’s a fair assessment. I give little attention to FFL because I’m so busy with other things. But I’ve gotten so many complaints recently that I may appoint a moderator soon, and will announce it when I do. I don’t believe in censorship, but I also don’t believe in enabling abusive behavior. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <reverse_archery@... mailto:reverse_archery@...> wrote : Sort of. It took me awhile to recognize that this place has been allowed to deteriorate one post at a time, deliberately. Once I saw that, that this is Rick's intention and legacy, I was OK with it. For the longest time, I simply thought he wasn't doing his job as moderator, when in fact he is precisely enabling the behavior he wants to see on here, and always has been. I have no issues with that at all - like I said, it just took me awhile to see it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <noozguru@... mailto:noozguru@...> wrote : The funny thing is the more they go on about FFL and the need for moderating the more Rick is likely to keep it up the way it is. After what FFL has always been is a place for people who have on thing in common, that they were involved in TM, to share their outlook on everything, not just TM or spirituality. I've always said it's like the "off topic" sections many forums have.
