I object to this overreach of moderator power into content censorship by a blatant misread of the explicit intention of this guidline. The guideline applies to members of the list, and David lynch is not a member, he is a public figure. He is not being "degraded" because he will never read this and that is not the intention of the guidleline anyway.
You are attempting to censor content to your own subjective standard inappropriately by misreading the guideline to apply to a personal opinion about a public figure. Mentioning that it is a non sequitur to the post is also a misread of the intentions of the guidelines which does not address this at all since adding new points is the nature of a public forum. Calling it "exploitative" is also a misread of the meaning of the word. Barry is "exploiting" nothing by posting his opinion about a public figure and his actual actions. Please read what Barry wrote and weigh in if the community believes this is an outrageous comment that needs the intervention of moderators: What Barry actually wrote: This is amazing. You read through this and you think, "How could anyone possibly BE so gullible as to fall for this?" But then you think about people like David Lynch, who was so gullible he paid Maharishi a million dollars so that he could attend an "Enlightenment Course," and then Maharishi didn't even have the courtesy to show up in person to teach it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote : Additionally, “Exploitative or degrading comments are not welcome in Groups.” “..and don't invade other people's privacy.” The dragging of someone in to an unrelated thread as a means to slur them using FFL, a yahoo-group.. Whoa, for instance DLynch as a practitioner of TM worked with Maharishi Mahesh Yogi quite a lot on the teaching of TM quite evidently for good reasons and quite evidently Lynch knew well enough the scope of the 'what for and why' he was there. Quite evidently Turqb here is actively trying to slur and degrade DLynch personally by jumping in to this thread with an unqualified non sequitur posting publicly using [ 'exploitative' ] a Yahoo-group [FFL]. Now in a choice of moderation Turqb can go back in and delete this posting of his post haste and protect his membership status here or will this be left to the FFL moderators to go in and do it? The choice is Turq's. -JaiGuruYou reference: FFL# 416332 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote : “ ..and don't invade other people's privacy.” In going forward in accord with Rick's original intent for protecting privacy on FFL know that in responding [replying] to posts made on FFL an unsolicited use of someone's legal name on FFL is an invasion of privacy as it also is considered a violation of the yahoo-groups guidelines here. Expect to have your writing removed from FFL. Expect to have your posts moderated. Expect to have your membership revoked if such invasion of people's privacy continues either as by impulse without intent or with meditated intent to abuse someone by invasion of privacy as used in method. For instance, as people signing on to FFL do post and people do respond with replies then for example in reply: 'Turqb isTurqb', 'Fleetwood is Fleetwood', 'CDB is CDB', 'Serious is Serious', 'Buck is Buck', 'Nablusoss is Nablusoss', and 'Authfriend is Authfriend'. Whatever their legal names in life may be, now going forward you shall be moderate in this as Rick originally intended. Show self-restraint and respect for other people's privacy here. Simple. That is part of the communal collaboration asked for in making this a particular free-speech zone as it was hoped for. Have a nice day, -JaiGuruYou ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote : Thanks A., good to know. In going forward with moderation on FFL, protection of privacy has always been a mainstay feature of FFL as Rick's free speech list. This feature of protection has been under siege and fallen to a form of a disrespect used by some writers on FFL. Everyone take this as a warning right now going forward: where someone posting to the list uses an anonymous screen name it is quite proper form on FFL as a yahoo-group to respond to posts using a person's screen name and make no mention of their real name otherwise. -JaiGuruYou! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <authfriend@...> wrote : Please ignore what he says about me. He has it completely wrong. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote : Serious_Richard brings up in this particular thread an important point about privacy on FFL. From the beginning Rick has been intent on creating a safe-space of privacy for folks to post on FFL. Rick's principles in creating safe-space have been under attack, degraded and methodically violated by some writers here evidently to abuse or intimidate other folks personally who have been members of the community of FFL. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote : Thanks for offering this, Serious. Yes I feel this is an excellent example that you offer of precedence in how to directly moderate a list that has gone so bad like this. I shall make note of it and emulate Rick in this as much as possible. The yahoo-groups guidelines themselves are quite simple and require of writers only some self-control. -JaiGuruYou! Just for the record, I should point out that Rick banned me from the group without sending me a single message or email explaining why. So, I appealed to him and he reinstated my posting privileges. Apparently an informant objected to my using their real name, although they had previously posted under their real name. Go figure. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <turquoiseb@...> wrote : Sad news. The really sad part of this is that [] has not apologized to me for over two decades for posting my real name on a.m.t. Go figure. But, this brings up an interesting subject. From what I've read, <authfriend> has never used her real name on FFL, so I guess that everyone that ever used her real name should be banned from the group. That would include almost everyone currently posting. Can anyone spell cognitive dissonance? Might I propose, before Doug starts banning people, that you and Rick insist on a few guidelines for *him* when he does this. I'm suggesting this because I think everyone here is aware that Doug is...uh...not quite in touch with reality these days, and tends to see things that aren't really there. So what I suggest is that if he is indeed given the power to ban someone, he cannot do so without reposting *the exact post* that Doug feels is in violation of the Yahoo Guidelines, and without explaining to the group *exactly why* he thinks this poster needs to be banned. Otherwise, you know what's going to happen. Doug will just ban the people he doesn't like, without telling *anyone*, and they'll just fall off the radar because they can't post any more, either to complain or to defend themselves. I think we all know that a tyrant has just been handed the keys to the kingdom. I think we also all know what he will do with them. I'm just suggesting a procedure that insures he can't do it in secret. From: "j_alexander_stanley@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, June 8, 2015 2:27 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Moderating The Peep Show As is typically the case these days, I am completely out of the loop with respect to Rick's handling of FFL. Doug's posts this morning piqued my curiosity, and it turns out that Rick made Doug a moderator yesterday afternoon. I have no idea what Doug is supposed to do in terms of enforcement. As for me, my role will not change. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote : Thanks R-V, I appreciate the perspective of your enlightened high-minded empathy in experience for the well-being of FFL. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <reverse_archery@...> wrote : Cute. When do you get to be a full moderator for this site, Doug? Is this your first official attempt? It seems you are practicing with me, or something, given the plethora of more meaningful targets available. Regardless, I wish you all the best in your new role... ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote : 'Don't be Unkind'. The Yahoo-groups guidelines are really quite enlightened in their guidance. For instance, “If one is constantly negative, one is heading towards trouble. By negative thinking, feeling and acting one creates dark patches and muddy colors in the aura which, in turn, prevent the flow of God's creative energy from reaching him. Without the light of God, the body starts of manifest various imbalances and one's health and lifespan is compromised. Turning to vitamins, minerals and excess sunlight does not help because the body is primarily sustained by cosmic current.” -Charles Lutes, Will and Desire, 5/3/91 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <reverse_archery@...> wrote : Alex, before you and Rick sprain your wrists patting yourselves on the back for creating a "free speech zone", you must be aware that, contrary to the thousands of forums on Yahoo Groups, yours is not in compliance with the guidelines. Nothing to be proud of. The guidelines are not arbitrary. They are put in place to foster discussion, about anything. If you and Rick decide hands off, there is no unambiguous solution to trolling on this forum. That is why the majority of the forums, mine included, adhere to the guidelines set out by Yahoo Groups. Rick's and yours don't, and that is no occasion for congratulations. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <j_alexander_stanley@...> wrote : Thanks. From the very start, FFL was intended as a free speech zone. When Rick asked me to be a moderator, the job description was to handle subscriptions, keep out spammers, and make sure there's no porn or other content that would get FFL categorized as an adult group, where it would be much less visible on the 'net. For a time, I was also tasked with enforcing the moronic posting limit. WRT colloidal silver, I would only add that it should not be taken on a regular basis, and even at 20 PPM, no more than 6oz should be taken per day. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mjackson74@...> wrote : [] is supposed to be the moderator, but he mostly is busy making colloidal silver and cooking meat at low temps for a loooooong time (wish I had some now). Personally I like his post on what he cooks better than I would any moderation stuff. And I appreciated him giving me the info on his silver maker. So thus far, I am quite pleased at the moderate role [] plays as moderator. From: salyavin808 <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, June 5, 2015 8:57 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Peep Show ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <reverse_archery@...> wrote : Moderation ain't working, Doug, or haven't you noticed? There basically is NO moderation on this forum. Rick has encouraged us all to ponder these deep questions, but when it attracts trolls, he bails. No problem now that I have adjusted, but let's please not act as if someone is EVER going to do anything per the Yahoo Guidelines here. It is imo a useless thing to bring up at this point. I thought you left? Left to start a group with moderation? Why not stay there if you can't cope with being here? Why the endless whining? Is it some sort of denial of service for the people who actually like it here? Are you on some sort of mission to save us from ourselves? You are the irritating troll, do you understand? You and your mates who also never contribute anything. Go away. Nothing is going to change here because we like chatting and having fun. Go away and stop spoiling it. You and your mates are tedious beyond words. Go away. You are the trolls. Go away. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote : It is true the original post by Turqb was the meme of a slur in violation of the Yahoo-groups guidelines and should have been moderated simply then by the group owner. Moderation is simple to do, either ask someone to withdraw/delete such a post themselves or a moderator remove it and suspend the perp's membership posting privilege. Either-or. Ask the person for some self-restraint and if they don't come right through then clip their membership privilege. The Yahoo-groups guidelines are quite reasonable. -JaiGuruYou! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <turquoiseb@...> wrote : From: "reverse_archery@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, June 5, 2015 8:44 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Peep Show How do you know no one here is a child molester? Since, for you Xeno, it doesn't qualify if someone suggests anal sex with babies, where do you personally draw the line, whether or not someone has such tendencies? I think you've sort of painted yourself into a corner on this one. I am not accusing [] of anything... Similarly, I am not accusing [] from the Chico, California area of anything, just reminding him that people who boast of having a huge stash of automatic weapons and ammunition and of knowing how to create IEDs and chemical weapons might just show up in the keyword scans of Internet traffic conducted by the NSA, ATF, and Secret Service, so such bragging might not be the smartest thing for him to do.
