Perhaps. Or perhaps not! It seems like a version of the basic introductory guide, maybe?
1 Like
I have made the mistake of discussing politics here a couple of times and have deeply regretted my decision in both cases. There are thousands of places around the web where people can discuss politics to there heart’s content. I don’t see why another one is needed.
5 Likes
I was confused about what “trust levels” were in the flagging guide so I googled it. Since the flagging guide is locked, here is the link to what they are from the Discourse co-founder himself:
Might not be a bad idea to add that link to the flagging guide.
4 Likes
Quite right! At the same time, my personal view is that one of the most important parts of the community guidelines (current & proposed) is the bit under the “Skilful participation” heading:
Engage in discussions that make this forum an interesting place to be — and avoid those that do not.
I myself would extend this to taking up and avoiding responding to comments within discussions rather than just discussions as a whole.
Mods can respond to things that are flagged up, but I kinda reckon the overall quality of content here depends on the community at large taking responsibility.
6 Likes
I too, have been guilty of this and I too shall mend my ways. 
Dan, FWIW, I have always found these posts of yours to be thoughtful and beneficial. Just yesterday, I was reading the Summer Tricycle, and there is a discussion there about politics and Buddhism. Many people feel that Buddhist teachers should avoid political issues; others feel there is a nexus between Dhamma/Dharma and political issues. I fall in the latter group, and would always welcome your perspectives on social, global, political issues that resonate with Dhamma themes. I feel that these issues that concern the health and welfare of people and the planet are too important to not have strong Buddhist voices involved. There is an art and a science as to how this integration is done, but I feel that in the right context, it can be very beneficial. You have added to the positive side of the equation with your thoughtful posts, in my view.
1 Like
Thanks for your thoughtful, good-natured words AnagarikaMichael, but again, trying to keep things focused on revisions for the community guidelines here (as set out in the OP), would you like to formulate these ideas into a suggestion for the guidlines update?
@Aminah…sorry I drifted off topic. My impulse was to respond to Dan the way I did, and I wasn’t mindful of the OP theme.
In terms of the guidelines update, yes, I am happy to review that in some detail. If I can offer anything of value, I"ll send it you. So far, my scan of the guidelines revealed excellent work on your and other’s parts in amending the guidelines. They look great so far. I’ll review, and if I feel I can offer anything of value, I’ll write in…
1 Like
1 Like
back atcha
1 Like
I was thinking that it might be beneficial to require all participants to use their real name and a picture of themselves as their username and avatar. I feel this would remove some of the anonymity that empowers some people to say things they would never say in a public setting such as a temple. I know the difficulties involved in enforcing this rule, but it might be worth some strong consideration.
Thank you, moderators, for all of your time and effort! You are collectively doing a fine job!
With Metta
3 Likes
The biggest difficulty would be knowing, if the name and picture is authentic.
3 Likes
Not if you’re living in a country more religious than Iran (Romania), with 0,2% of the population non-religious and the rest christian, most of them medieval type of christians. Nobody except my Gf knows that I’m a buddhist and I’m pretty much the only one in the country.
Even in less religous countries, it’s very strange for a person to be a buddhist and it’s not something they would want others to know. It’s probably almost as worse as being gay. I am speaking here about all other central and eastern european countries, to say nothing of the middle east. (I’ve seen a buddhist from Jordan on DW)
PS: I felt pretty strange writing “I am a buddhist” in this message, it’s the first time I say this in my life. For a moment I wanted to write “have an interest in buddhism”
EDIT: Now that I stopped to think about it, having people know that you’re gay is definitely much worse than knowing you are a buddhist or atheist. It’s not like in the middle east but definitely not too far away from that. We also just modified the constitution yesterday to make gay marriage unconstitutional and the vote was unanimous, even the party voted by hipsters voted for it. But being gay is probably a little acceptable at least among some hipsters in bucharest and in the fashion industry, while the same can not be said about buddhism since all hipsters are christian.
I actually have a gay super hipster friend and I never told him that I’m a buddhist cause just like the rest 99,8% of the population, he is a devoted christian. He’s 26 and never had a boyfriend in his life because of how hard it is to find such persons while staying undercover. He never admitted being gay to me either, he claims he is “pansexual” or “bysexual” despite being 101% gay and I’m a pretty liberal person. That’s how important it is to keep things secret in some places.
The chiefs of the romanian orthodox church, witch are known to be pretty fundamentalist, some times have claimed in the media that other christian denominations such as Catholics, Protestants etc. are worshipers of the devil and their churches to be houses of the devil, that we should burn their books and work against their proselitizing efforts, etc. So imagine how bad most people see buddhist or atheists. There was a fire in a club last year in witch 55 people died, biggest catastrophe in last 30 years in romania. The chief of the church said they deserved it because it was a rock concert (actually it was pop-rock, not even hard rock) and “I always told you that rock music is the work of the devil but you never listened, now look what happened”. And saying something “is the work of the devil” is something very serious over here, basically the worst thing you can say about something.
1 Like
Much thanks, Timothy. I really see the logic of your point and also know that eg. Ven. Anālayo asks for a similar thing (at least including a picture of themselves) when participants of his online courses wish to take part in forum discussion.
At the same time, the point @dxm_dxm has articulated is an extremely real concern and surely has to outweigh attraction to the benefits of trying to remove anonymity. Actually, for myself, although I agree that at times it can give cover to people with ill-intentions, anonymity isn’t inherently problematic and there are many fair reasons for wishing to remain anonymous, from simple shyness, to the fear of persecution, to whatever else.
Saying this, this issue of opening ‘fake’/multiple accounts for disruptive purposes is also a real issue, so I don’t know if it’s worth considering including something like “where we are confident a user has created a second account in order to distort discussion or create chaos, such accounts will be closed.”
- I also found it highly peculiar that someone like me would end up saying something like that.
3 Likes
This sounds great and I hope would minimize the noise in the forum. I was once, in my late teenager years, one of weird internet patterns (I would definitely call myself a troll!), and this was one of the ways I would choose to create havoc.
Hence, speaking from my own experience and long abandoned unwholesome habits, I reckon it is important to make explicit the policy around this terrible and lamentable practice.
3 Likes
By the way, that’s a very stylish new avatar!
4 Likes
I agree. Prospective employers might also google names so it would make sense to play safe to prevent any potential discrimination. I think there is also something freeing in the anonymity (not that I’m anonymous but…) which allows someone to discuss things openly. Openness/transparency is important to avoid corruption in politics and at a personal level honesty and truthfulness is important, I think.
with metta
1 Like
@Aminah here are some thoughts in rough form for language for the political discussion guidelines. For comments and critique.
If posting to the Watercooler category please take particular care to make sure your post belongs there. As noted above, this forum is about Early Buddhist Texts. We do, nevertheless, have a Watercooler category for more informal, relaxed, light-hearted Dhamma exchange. Whether posts to this category are directly on the EBTs or not, there is an emphasis on the “cooler” part of “Watercooler”. It’s a place to support each other and make connections, not to prove a point or for heated debate so if a thread strays too far from this category’s purpose it will be moved or closed.
One nuance to the general Watercooler guidelines is the subject of political themes. Few subjects engender more heat and potential for incivility as political subjects,and many religious forums ban political themes and discussions outright. However, there is a recognition that the Buddha did not isolate himself from Dhammic discussions with kings, and it seems appropriate that some discussion of social, cultural and political themes have resonance within the Buddha’s focus on ethics, wisdom, and compassion . As Buddhists, it may be, within the confines of Right Speech, most appropriate and even necessary to weigh in on matters such as war and conflict, injustice, climate change, poverty, human rights, animal rights, and any number of subjects that involve the wellbeing of people and the planet. Bhante Sujato himself has said “if Buddhists do not speak up with voices of compassion and wisdom, that vacuum will be filled by voices of delusion and violence.” So, with these words in mind, the Watercooler can be a place for cool, balanced and thoughtful discussions of Dhamma as the Dhamma intersects with issues that may be viewed as political.
4 Likes