Is the Spirituality Forum actually any good?

Jonathan Brooks8 said:We really need to make this personal, Benjamin Long from Denver... the issue isn't the "approach" itself, but rather the person doing the approaching.
In other words, it isn't that the "Philosophy" subforum has an inherent problem; rather, in this specific instance, we are looking at your own expectations of what Philosophy should be... which means the problem lies with your expectations—that is, you.

🙏 🙏 🙏
Isn't it interesting how Stalin used to tell everyone who disagreed with him that *they* were the ones with the problem, right before they were sent against the wall? Boom, boom, boom! 😁
Still, can we really deny his philosophical depth? We certainly couldn't, especially since we might not even exist without it! ☕

Benjamin Long said:🙏 🙏 🙏
Isn't it interesting how Stalin used to tell everyone who disagreed with him that *they* were the ones with the problem, right before they were sent against the wall? Boom, boom, boom! 😁
Still, can we really deny his philosophical depth? We certainly couldn't, especially since we might not even exist without it! ☕

See? There I go being mischievous again...

Benjamin Long said:How can we say the content wasn't the problem if:

Wasn't it precisely because of the content that the suggestion arose?
And if no agreement was ever reached on the proposal, why was that specific decision made? Why wasn't everything just left as it was? Why did a mere "suggestion" turn into a final decision? If it truly was just a suggestion and it wasn't accepted, then nothing should have changed! Or am I perhaps fundamentally misunderstanding the definition of the word "suggestion"?

The fact that a proposal was made is simply part of everyone's legitimate right to express an opinion, offer criticism, or suggest something new.
The subject matter itself wasn't the issue; rather, the reason the thread stayed put is that there was an open possibility for it to remain within the philosophy section during those discussions.
As for why there was no formal agreement, it’s because there wasn't even a conversation happening that could have led us to one.
When you ask why this specific decision was reached instead of leaving things as they were, you're really asking about the missed opportunity for a different outcome—one that might have aligned more with what the author actually wanted—but that chance was lost because of a total breakdown in communication, which is honestly the only bridge we have to resolve or avoid any kind of dispute.
In the end, the decision was left to us, and it is what it is. Besides, there really wasn't a need for representatives here, since anyone can always just speak for themselves.

Sean Cruz said:Look, I hold that man in high regard, and that is my prerogative. You spoke in the plural earlier, so don't try to backtrack now, though it hardly matters. I have nothing against you personally, but don't go judging me based on scraps of information. It isn't my place to decide whether you remain a moderator here, but don't play God. Get back down to earth; you'll find there are actual people living there.
We don't have to agree on everything, but everyone has the right to an opinion—and the right to support whoever they choose. You're the one who accepted the responsibility of moderating; therefore, you need to be objective, rather than showing favoritism to certain users while trashing others.

Look, this guy is easily one of the sharpest minds on the forum—honestly, if you aren't paying attention to his posts, you're basically missing out on the only real substance around here.

mistyfox812 said:It’s all laid out right here.

Nah, it's just not true.
It’s pretty damn obvious, honestly. Case closed. Right here. .
Look, when the moderators over at the Philosophy Forum have an IQ that barely scrapes 140—which, let’s be honest, isn't exactly rocket science—it stops being just their own little problem. It’s not just about them being clueless or unable to wrap their heads around basic concepts; it becomes a massive headache for everyone else stuck in their orbit. It’s like living next door to someone who can't figure out how a toaster works—eventually, you're the one dealing with the smoke.
Honestly, George walked out on this whole forum because you people are just too mentally stunted to get it.
Honestly, because of how mentally stunted you all are, Percival keeps getting kicked off the Philosophy Forum—even though half the mods and users around here are constantly begging him to come hang out on their own boards.
Honestly, it’s because you guys are all so mentally stunted that I’m actually forced to hang out on this forum with some total shady characters—even if their wisdom is, frankly, nothing short of phenomenal.
Because of your sheer mental incompetence, some user named Sanja got banned from the forum—and honestly, she was just trying to point out the exact same issue for months on end. Most of us thought she was just being dramatic, and yeah, I'll admit it, most of us were totally leaning towards believing those narrow-minded moderators. Typical.

Look, when we're talking about mental limitations here—and I’m sticking to what I said at the jump—I honestly think we’re looking at an IQ north of 140. Anything less? Yeah, that's where the real issues start.

So, look, dear mods—honestly, go ahead and lose it if you want. You can take offense if that’s where you're headed, because clearly, you can see exactly how much I respect you guys.

Quinn:

I guess you could call me a hiker, though that feels way too polite for someone who spends half their life dodging rattlesnakes and sweating through three shirts a day just to stare at some rocks. Honestly, calling myself a "mountain climber" sounds like I’m trying to sell you overpriced gear from REI, but let's just say I spend a lot of time getting lost in the backcountry. It's a lifestyle, I suppose—if your idea of a good time is blisters, questionable trail mix, and wondering why on earth anyone finds peace in being exhausted and dirty. But hey, that's just how I roll. kaže: Look, we gotta stop treating this like some abstract concept—you need to make it personal, Benjamin Long from Denver... it’s not even about the "approach" itself, it's about the guy actually doing the approaching who creates the whole damn problem in the first place. Look, let's get one thing straight—there isn't actually a problem with the Philosophy Forum itself. At all. What we're dealing with here is just you having these massive expectations for what a subforum should be... and honestly? That's on you. The issue isn't the board; the issue is your own expectations. It's you, man. Period.

The problem isn't Benjamin Long—honestly, she isn't even asking for anything. She’s just hoping. Same as me, really.

The real issue here—and I’m being dead serious—is the mods. They’re out here acting like absolute tyrants, constantly belittling people and throwing insults around just because they can. It’s the same old story: if you dare to have an opinion that doesn't perfectly align with their little echo chamber, you’re getting hit with a red card or a straight-up ban. It’s pathetic, honestly. They aren't moderating; they're just gatekeeping.
Look, the real issue here is the moderators—but let’s be honest, the problem also lies with a lot of these forum dwellers like you, who just conveniently look the other way whenever things get unfair.

casualtiger2 said:Fair point—I completely missed that.
The answer? I’m still waiting for a response from Normal.
It feels incredibly hypocritical to someone citing American laws while actively breaking them. Witch described the situation perfectly. Honestly, this constant, brutal aggression is grating—it gets under your skin. Even if you don't want it to, seeing stuff like this affects everyone, especially the kids reading this forum. It just sticks in your subconscious.
And what kind of "pedagogy"—or whatever they call prevention these days—involves beating down groups of people (like addicts, for instance) who are essentially dealing with a sickness and struggling to pull themselves out of a hole?
The last thing those people need is a fist to the head.

Honestly, I think I might just steal normall's avatar.
In case you haven't figured it out yet—yeah, I am a hypocrite of biblical proportions.

.................

Just a little something for all the angry people out there to help them snap out of it.

The issue here is actually you. You’re the one out there slandering people, throwing insults around, and constantly obstructing everything the Philosophy Forum moderator tries to do just to push some niche agendas that probably only exist in your own head. Honestly, you really ought to take a moment to sit back and reflect on that. Just think about yourself for once.

steelridge58 said:The issue here is actually you. You’re the one out there slandering people, throwing insults around, and constantly obstructing everything the Philosophy Forum moderator tries to do just to push some niche agendas that probably only exist in your own head. Honestly, you really ought to take a moment to sit back and reflect on that. Just think about yourself for once.

Look, steelridge58,

How many times in a single day have you gone from being absolutely pissed at me to apologizing and thanking me? It's getting ridiculous.

And as for "obstructing" any PDFs or whatever—just ban me already if it's such a big deal. Problem solved. Simple as that. 🙏

(Yeah, I'll get right on thinking about you... 😁)

steelridge58 said:The issue here is actually you. You’re the one out there slandering people, throwing insults around, and constantly obstructing everything the Philosophy Forum moderator tries to do just to push some niche agendas that probably only exist in your own head. Honestly, you really ought to take a moment to sit back and reflect on that. Just think about yourself for once.

I simply cannot agree with this statement.
I suspect that Kenneth Peterson5, much like color, Soul sister, ja_sanja, hollowtinker18, and Batman... are all merely reacting to the blatant injustice present in this thread, as well as the sheer inability—which isn't anyone's fault, really—and the lack of expertise required from the moderator to actually lead this discussion. To properly engage with certain members here, such as Percival or George (who have unfortunately moved on due to these misunderstandings), one requires a certain breadth of perspective that is currently missing; and that is precisely the point being made! Can you see that, or not? I truly don't know, though it would be wonderful if you could, because then this entire problem would vanish, wouldn't it?
Furthermore, isn't it quite strange that you haven't even questioned the core issue when it has been pointed out so clearly? Instead, you speak of communication that is impossible unless both parties are willing, or at least capable, to meet halfway.

Kenneth Peterson5 said:Look, steelridge58,

How many times in a single day have you gone from being absolutely pissed at me to apologizing and thanking me? It's getting ridiculous.

And as for "obstructing" any PDFs or whatever—just ban me already if it's such a big deal. Problem solved. Simple as that. 🙏

(Yeah, I'll get right on thinking about you... 😁)

What on earth are you even talking about right now? You're taking one little oversight of mine where I missed your PM and had to apologize, and now you're actually trying to weaponize that as some sort of grand argument against me, which, I have to admit, feels pretty low. But hey, if you really want to dig up every single thing we've ever exchanged just to throw it back in my face as payback, then go right ahead—though it makes me wonder just how many other people out there are being just as easily manipulated by you as I was.

Benjamin Long said:I simply cannot agree with this statement.
I suspect that Kenneth Peterson5, much like color, Soul sister, ja_sanja, hollowtinker18, and Batman... are all merely reacting to the blatant injustice present in this thread, as well as the sheer inability—which isn't anyone's fault, really—and the lack of expertise required from the moderator to actually lead this discussion. To properly engage with certain members here, such as Percival or George (who have unfortunately moved on due to these misunderstandings), one requires a certain breadth of perspective that is currently missing; and that is precisely the point being made! Can you see that, or not? I truly don't know, though it would be wonderful if you could, because then this entire problem would vanish, wouldn't it?
Furthermore, isn't it quite strange that you haven't even questioned the core issue when it has been pointed out so clearly? Instead, you speak of communication that is impossible unless both parties are willing, or at least capable, to meet halfway.

One of them was actually offered this:

mistyfox812 said:Look, I don't see the point in trying to convince you of anything, but since you're insisting you have airtight arguments proving I'm an admin abusing my power, here’s my proposal:

We can try to find enough unbiased, smart users who both you and I can actually trust—people willing to listen to and weigh both our sides. If they decide your arguments are solid, then fine, I'll step down as moderator. If they decide you're just trolling, then you leave the Philosophy Forum for good. And if they can't reach a verdict, things just stay exactly as they are right now.

She turned it down.

If anyone truly believes they have the receipts to prove I'm abusing my mod powers, the offer is still on the table.

Otherwise, let's please just get back on topic.

The issue here, mistyfox812, is that it seems you haven't quite grasped what I've been saying—even though I have pointed it out several times now!Perhaps I should find a more appropriate term than "abuse" to get my point across.
As far as I am concerned, this discussion ends right here, because there truly isn't anything left to say.

steelridge58 said:What on earth are you even talking about right now? You're taking one little oversight of mine where I missed your PM and had to apologize, and now you're actually trying to weaponize that as some sort of grand argument against me, which, I have to admit, feels pretty low. But hey, if you really want to dig up every single thing we've ever exchanged just to throw it back in my face as payback, then go right ahead—though it makes me wonder just how many other people out there are being just as easily manipulated by you as I was.

mistyfox812 said:One of them was actually offered this:

She turned it down.

If anyone truly believes they have the receipts to prove I'm abusing my mod powers, the offer is still on the table.

Otherwise, let's please just get back on topic.

She had plenty of solid points during that thread over on the Spirituality Forum—you know, the "complaints and grievances" one—and then boom, banned. And you haven't debunked a single thing she said.
I've thrown plenty of good arguments at you too, and you haven't shut any of them down either.

So yeah, this whole thing is just total nonsense.
Talking to you guys, the mods over at the Philosophy Forum, is basically pointless unless you follow the script provided below:

@steelridge58, yeah, sure, whatever you say. 😍

@mistyfox812, nice one, brilliant as always. 👍

Cheers,

(And I'm done with this debate. You guys are exhausting.)

casualtiger2 said:Last thing I'll say about moderation before we drift off-topic. If you want to keep debating this, please move over to the Forum Quality thread in Spirituality.
Who's responsible for the fighting, the lies, the personal attacks?
The people doing them—the users, obviously.
Whose shame is it?
Theirs, first and foremost.
And secondarily, it's a lapse by the moderator.
What you're asking for requires 24/7 moderation, seven days a week. Do you honestly think anyone—myself included—is crazy enough to sign up for that?
That's why nobody sticks around in moderation for long. You give so much of yourself, and what do you get back?

I'm no better than the moderators who were here before me, but I know exactly what I want, and I'm pushing for it with everything I've got—stopping the bickering, staying objective, and trying to build a better atmosphere. Basically, all of it is aimed at finally getting back to discussing actual spiritual topics. If it works, great. If you guys vote me out? Fine by me too.

There's an old story about a guy—I think he was a Mexican—who set off on a journey riding a horse while his wife walked beside him.
A passerby (a liberal) saw them and told him it wasn't fair to the wife.
So, he got off and walked, and she hopped on the horse.
Then another passerby (a traditionalist) told him it wasn't right for him to walk while his wife rode.
In the end, they both walked.
A third passerby (an economist) said it was foolish and inefficient to walk when they had a horse available.
So, they both rode the horse.
A fourth passerby (an animal rights activist) told them it was cruel to make one poor horse carry both of them.

Moral of the story: you can't please everyone. That's my take on objectivity.

PS
If you agree, I'd love to move these last few posts over to the Forum Quality thread.

-It's all fine, Drake. But let's be real—you can't expect justice or consistency from random forum users. Not surprising, really. That's why you pick a moderator who actually possesses—or at least tries to have—some level of objectivity. I know it's a grind and you often end up being the one getting screwed, acting as mod... wishing you patience and good luck.

Look, we absolutely have to put in the work to ensure things finally land where they belong, because frankly, we can't just throw in the towel just because some half-asleep idiot decided to blow up the room with a bunch of mindless nonsense and insults—you know, the kind of garbage that eventually blows back in his own face anyway. There is way too much at stake here, and it’s really just a matter of how long it takes for those short-lived forces of darkness to finally come knocking on our own doors. To me, failing to act when everything is on the line is basically playing Russian roulette; it’s just wandering aimlessly through a gray haze of life's setbacks, occasionally stumbling upon those brief, fleeting moments of beauty. Spirituality is that essential link, that bridge connecting us to the aspirations of every single element involved in this grand, sweeping project of building a more perfect world. This fusion of good forces starts from the smallest possible spark, and honestly, it's been gaining momentum since well before two millennia ago, and it's only getting stronger today. Of course, the dark side has been beefing up its ranks lately too, which is exactly why we need everyone on the right side of history to start acting in total sync.

Kenneth Peterson5 said:She had plenty of solid points during that thread over on the Spirituality Forum—you know, the "complaints and grievances" one—and then boom, banned. And you haven't debunked a single thing she said.
I've thrown plenty of good arguments at you too, and you haven't shut any of them down either.

So yeah, this whole thing is just total nonsense.
Talking to you guys, the mods over at the Philosophy Forum, is basically pointless unless you follow the script provided below:

@steelridge58, yeah, sure, whatever you say. 😍

@mistyfox812, nice one, brilliant as always. 👍

Cheers,

(And I'm done with this debate. You guys are exhausting.)

Do you want to know my one true grievance with the moderators? It is that they even bother to engage in debate with people like you in the first place.

Your arguments lack any substance, and you perpetually resort to whining and playing the victim.
If people conducted themselves with basic decency, moderators wouldn't even be necessary... take me, for instance. I have no need for moderation. When I encounter someone being difficult, I simply walk away (unless they send vulgar private messages—like these), rather than indulging in mindless, ego-driven bickering.

From my perspective as an objective observer, you appear to be someone who is merely running in place.

Furthermore, you cling to this forum so desperately that I am almost inclined to believe you harbor some sort of ulterior ambition.😁

Besides, why are these conflicts from the Philosophy Forum being imported here? You seem to seize upon every single opportunity to pick a fight with someone.

hiddenhound3 said:Do you want to know my one true grievance with the moderators? It is that they even bother to engage in debate with people like you in the first place.

Your arguments lack any substance, and you perpetually resort to whining and playing the victim.
If people conducted themselves with basic decency, moderators wouldn't even be necessary... take me, for instance. I have no need for moderation. When I encounter someone being difficult, I simply walk away (unless they send vulgar private messages—like these), rather than indulging in mindless, ego-driven bickering.

From my perspective as an objective observer, you appear to be someone who is merely running in place.

Furthermore, you cling to this forum so desperately that I am almost inclined to believe you harbor some sort of ulterior ambition.😁

Besides, why are these conflicts from the Philosophy Forum being imported here? You seem to seize upon every single opportunity to pick a fight with someone.

Look, please just keep any comments about the state of the Philosophy Forum over on the Philosophy Forum.

hiddenhound3 said:Do you want to know my one true grievance with the moderators? It is that they even bother to engage in debate with people like you in the first place.

Your arguments lack any substance, and you perpetually resort to whining and playing the victim.
If people conducted themselves with basic decency, moderators wouldn't even be necessary... take me, for instance. I have no need for moderation. When I encounter someone being difficult, I simply walk away (unless they send vulgar private messages—like these), rather than indulging in mindless, ego-driven bickering.

From my perspective as an objective observer, you appear to be someone who is merely running in place.

Furthermore, you cling to this forum so desperately that I am almost inclined to believe you harbor some sort of ulterior ambition.😁

Besides, why are these conflicts from the Philosophy Forum being imported here? You seem to seize upon every single opportunity to pick a fight with someone.

👍 florine

exactly....

casualtiger2—they appointed you as a representative of the owners to maintain order, assuming you’d actually do it right. This isn't some democratic town hall meeting where users elect you, so they have absolutely no right to whine or demand you serve them according to their whims.

Just stick to the rules, try to judge what’s most fair, follow your gut—you're a decent guy, so it shouldn't be hard—and once you've made a call, just stand by it without over-explaining yourself.

Don't get sucked into endless debates; otherwise, it looks like you're desperately defending your decisions. If you start over-defending, people will think you're insecure about them. And if they sense insecurity, they'll walk all over you. Pretty soon you'll be running for the exit, and you'll end up nuking the whole forum because you don't need this kind of stress in your life.

Look at someone like No One and Nothing—from what I can tell, he just does what he thinks is right, gives a brief explanation if anyone asks, and then shuts up. He shares his views on threads and engages in discussions using a different handle like any regular user. It's best to step in as a mod as rarely as possible and just quietly get the job done. It might drive some people crazy, but those people have issues with themselves, not with you.

My advice? Establish a healthy distance like that, and you'll have more authority—and more importantly, you'll actually have some peace and quiet. 🙂

I’ve been spending a little too much time lurking in these endless arguments lately, and honestly, after wading through all the bickering and constant disagreements popping up in these threads, I’ve come to a pretty firm conclusion. It is blindingly obvious that the dark forces running this world aren't just going to sit back and let everyone who is actually "awake"—and I don't care if you're a devout believer or a hardcore atheist—unite under the banner of good and find beauty in our differences without putting up a fight. We’re all walking the same path, really; we just haven't hit that specific level of maturity yet where we can truly recognize one another. Just stick to the Holy Bible and the word of God; remember, "by their fruits you shall know them." It might look to us like someone is doing something wrong, but if their actions—or even their failures—don't stem from malice, but rather from genuine love, then we're on the same side, and as an awakened soul, I simply cannot judge or cast them aside.

@ Amanda Roberts21,
thanks for the kind words.
I’m actually doing exactly what you described—except I want us to communicate more regarding moderation, at least early on. That way, everyone can voice their opinion loud and clear (myself included 🙂).
There's zero uncertainty about my decisions, and as for democracy? I’m still convinced it’s the best existing system out there—granted, with a tiny autocratic twist, like having a moderator 🙂—so whenever possible, especially for big calls regarding content and the overall vibe of the forum, I’ll be looking to the majority of users for input.
On that note, certain little cliques of 5 or 6 people need to realize they aren't the majority (even if it looks that way on some threads).
It looks like we have about 40 active users here, which means a legitimate majority is anything > 20 people.

Also, for those who value their "individualism," their "apolitical stance," or "placing themselves above the majority" more than actual voting and democracy—they don't get to complain later when the majority view overrides them.

I’ve got peace of mind, I don't need to demand authority (other than what comes naturally from the role and the arguments), and I'm not getting worked up about anything. Everything is running smoothly—the forum just eats up a bit more of my free time than I’d like, though I’m sure that’ll balance out eventually.

*******

The poll results are pretty interesting. I honestly expected most people to think the forum was bad, but instead:
~ 37% say it's good
~ 27% are neutral
~ 27% say it's bad ?!?

knock knock said:suggestion 1

suggestion 2

suggestion 3

should be plenty to get started.

Alright, I did the math wrong in my rush. Not a disaster—happens to the best of us.

The correct breakdown was:
~ 37% rated the forum good
~ 26% neutral
~ 37% bad

Here’s where we stand right now:
~ 33% good
~ 24% neutral
~ 42% bad

That shift is interesting—especially since it feels like there's less fighting lately. We're having actual discussions now, and those "hot button" topics, like that one about psychedelics and storytelling, seem to have lost their edge for arguing.

What really catches my eye is:
- how much effort you put into correcting me (dropping three links at once, no less)
- the feeling that those links were meant to say something more than just "you messed up the math"
- that these are your total suggestions for improving the site, even though you rated it "terrible"?!
- I see you're new here, so if that's actually true—welcome to the club.🙂

PS
Your posts last night in the Spirituality and Philosophy in Poetry section were lovely. Just a heads-up—maybe leave a little breathing room so others can get a word in too.😉

mistyfox812 said:Is there actually a rule about how many posts someone can leave in a row?

No rule, but I’d say it’s just bad etiquette—you know, if someone drops, say, 30 posts in a single thread back-to-back (which luckily, she didn't 🙂).
As far as I'm concerned, the person who starts the thread should set the tone—they're the ones with the vision for what the topic is supposed to be, after all.
Since Enchantress hasn't said anything to the contrary, we're all good. 👍

PS
Oh, looks like you're new here too.
Welcome to the club. 🙂