One of the forums I'm on has very strict rules about what to avoid
discussing. My bet is that the original founders had a BBS back in the
1980s and watched as flame wars developed. So they barred religious and
political discussion. And being a forum where there are specific topics
moderators will delete posts when they go off topic. That's why a lot
of forums have an "anything goes" discussion section. I've always said
FFL fills that need for folks who are or have been involved in TM to
discuss stuff that might be considered "off-topic" in pure spiritual
forums. It's often interesting to see where people are going with their
lives, what they like to cook or what TV shows or movies they've seen.
Either Rick gave the moderation to Doug to watch him fail or kill off
FFL so he didn't need to do so.
On 06/21/2015 07:50 AM, j_alexander_stan...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote:
Regardless of how folks feel about Turq, moderation should be carried
out transparently, and not in a secret, undefined manner. So far, this
experiment with Doug as moderator is starting to remind me of when
Rick put an Amma fanatic in charge of moderating the Amma free speech
group, with the end result being the loss of free speech and the
creation of the Amma Real Free Speech group.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <steve.sun...@yahoo.com> wrote :
Turq's posting is exactly the reason so many social sites have shut
down their comment sections.
Excessive and abusive trolling.
I see little downside to having his participation here terminated.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote :
I sincerely hope that TurquoiseB is never allowed to post here again.
He is toxic for the entire group and should have been removed a long
time ago.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <j_alexander_stanley@...> wrote :
Gonna ask again, Doug: did you ban Turq for good or will you be
restoring his posting privileges at some point?
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <j_alexander_stanley@...> wrote :
I looked at the activity log, and Turq is still subscribed; all Doug
did was kill his ability to post. Whereas, Rick booted *and* banned
the one who shall not be mentioned (I think the banned list prevents a
person from even sending a subscription request.) The only people I've
given the boot are spammers, and I don't regard them as worthy of any
kind of explanation. But, in the case of people who are actual
participants, I think full disclosure is in order. In Turq's case, the
reason is apparent, but it has not been disclosed if this is just a
temporary time-out or permanent. The fact that Doug didn't actually
unsubscribe him suggests the possibility that it isn't permanent.
What sayest thou, Doug? Is Turq gone for good?
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <curtisdeltablues@...> wrote :
Thanks for posting this Alex. Perhaps Buck/Doug will share the
rational here so we can understand which of his interpretation of the
previously never enforced vague Yahoo guidelines Barry violated.
In the spirit of Barry's sense of humor here I think the only
appropriate thing to do now is to initiate a "dead pool" list of who
is going to be next in the the current purge.
1. Salyavin808 for his last brilliant, scathing indictment of Buck/Doug
2. Michael for his consistent efforts to put his finger in the eye of
the pompous powers that be in the movement.
3. Me for trying to focus my lens more and more precisely on what it
is that I object to in Buck/Doug's misuse of moderator power here. (I
am speaking about his threat to Barry for stating his opinion of David
Lynch, not for getting banned. Until he reveals it I don't know what
his reasons were for that.)
Game on! Who will be next?
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <j_alexander_stanley@...> wrote :
I have zero idea what's going on, but I'll at least let him say goodbye.
----- Forwarded Message -----
*From:* TurquoiseBee <turquoiseb@...>
*To:* Alex Stanley <j_alexander_stanley@...>
*Sent:* Friday, June 19, 2015 5:46 AM
*Subject:* Alex, can you post a question to the forum for me?
*/It appears that Doug has gone ahead with his threats and has deleted
my access to Fairfield Life. I'm just wondering how he justifies doing
this based on supposedly "offending" posts of mine made back in May
when on June 9th in post #416493
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/416493?soc_src=mail&soc_trk=ma>
he explicitly said:/*
In moderation at this point I feel “the past is a lesser state of
evolution” and I am going forward with a clean slate on everyone and
not one is on moderation in any way from this point. I would only
suggest in our going forward that folks take the time to actually read
the Yahoo-groups guidelines if they want to continue fluidly posting
on FFL. We should appreciate your cooperative collaboration on this.
-JaiGuruYou!
*/Seems to me there is more than a little hypocrisy, double-dealing,
and outright dishonesty going on here, and since Doug has eliminated
the possibility of me bringing this question up to the group myself, I
figured I'd ask you to do it for me.
/*
*/
/*
*/Thanks for everything. You have been more than fair in all of your
dealings with Fairfield Life and with the odd group of characters who
have posted there over the years. I wish that sense of fairness and
honesty was equally present in the newest moderator.
/*
*/
/*
/Barry...ooops, do I get in trouble for using my own real name? :-)/
/
/
/P.S. To everyone else, so long and thanks for all the fish.../
