[Muramoursuard]

hi guys,

i'm glad that this forum exists... i have been looking for a long time for a place like this, before i found it in this form. i am so glad this forum exists and is kind of the "3rd density internet home of ra and kindred spirits". words cannot express my joy.

however, i am wondering why each post has to be moderated before it comes on... this slows down discussion.. a lot. are there no better alternatives? for example like accepting new members manually, or keeping posts of new members moderated only to a certain point (like, for example the first 5 messages).

i can see that the current situation is a lot of work for the moderators, and it's always a bit discouraging to see original posts edited by moderators before they are approved. also, what if three, four, or five posts are made that are not approved beyond a certain point? the discussion then takes a direction that's very hard to follow.

ofcourse with the most kind intentions i ask this, my point being that i can think up more more reasons and alternatives against this measure than in favor of it. i'm an experienced vbulletin / system administrator myself and i have the experience to make this claim. however, whatever choice you make, i will stay thankful for allowing us to make use of the forums.

brightest blessings,
namaste,
mark.

[usaguedriedax]

however, i am wondering why each post has to be moderated before it comes on... this slows down discussion.. a lot. are there no better alternatives? for example like accepting new members manually, or keeping posts of new members moderated only to a certain point (like, for example the first 5 messages). that's a good question and i will try to answer adequately first, we only have 2 moderators, myself and light eye. currently, le is on vacation, so he has only helped out sporadically for the last 3 weeks. i work a regular 40-hour week as a human resource assistant, so i am limited to approving messages early in the morning before work, a half hour at lunch, and after work. david wilcock only moderates in extreme emergencies, and the webmaster does not moderate at all.

that said, le, myself, and dw had looked into not moderating the forum but decided not to do that. why? because, although the majority of this forum are conscientious and respective of our rules, some abuse the forum whether intentionally or not. this small tiny minority make it necessary to moderate. some of the reasons have been bad language, advertising products or services, or themselves, and excessive attention to conspiracy theories, or other fear-producing actions. some of this has frightened even me at times as an example, once i refused to let someone promote their new age product and he proceeded to threaten to kill me in an email. thus.......big breath, we moderate to protect you guys from this kind of stuff and keep dc forum safe and relatively on topic, although we have loosened up quite a bit from the asc2k yahoo group. hope this helped. take care everyone, chris

[fedelwfget]

...thus.......big breath, we moderate to protect you guys from this kind of stuff and keep dc forum safe and relatively on topic... thanks angel, i feel very safe and protected in your forums here, thank you. i can appreciate that there seem trade offs related to moderation, and
i apologize for so many episodes of pushing the limit though by doing so possibly i get better sense of what's possible without over damping myself, i.e. attempting to write within the dynamic range of what's possible here.

in this way, it seems there's a nurturing principle at work that can accelerate growth not so unlike that of children learning to play together. i don't allow my children to fight at home, feel that everyone has a right to feel safe in their home, i.e. if a person feels threatened its not going to bring out the best in them. i think by holding that value, life seems happier for all.

[Rffkwfct]

my only contribution to this thread would be to volunteer to help out if things got backed up severely...

i agree that moderation is necessary. i'm fairly certain that at some point (if it hasn't happened already) some outsiders would start attacking the forum in various ways, including negative posts, etc. we're human, and i can honestly say that i am still prone to "excessive defense"...

this forum has that element "removed" - many of us have said how glad we are to openly share, that this is a safe place, etc.

and it is this reason, again, thank you both (lighteye and chris) for the hard work you guys do.

art

[bestworkother]

soup, you just compaired the memebers of this group to children.

maybe you need to grow up

lol

[Muramoursuard]

yes, i understand your point chris; thank you for enlightening us

-- mark

[ticskebasse]

chris, your explanation helps me appreciate your and lighteye's efforts to keep things running smoothly around here. thank you for your ongoing hard work!

i wonder though about one of mark's original questions:

are there no better alternatives? for example like accepting new members manually, or keeping posts of new members moderated only to a certain point (like, for example the first 5 messages). to which you replied:

although the majority of this forum are conscientious and respective of our rules, some abuse the forum whether intentionally or not. this small tiny minority make it necessary to moderate. i wonder: given that most folks do follow the rules when posting, wouldn't it make life easier for you and le to keep an eye out for those few who don't follow the rules, and give them settings that require their posts to be reviewed beforehand, while clearing everyone else (whether progressively, or from the get-go)?

i do respect the reasons for keeping this a moderated forum, but for it to take on more of a life of its own on a daily basis, it probably would help if folks could be cleared for take-off at some point. if people did slip-up over time, perhaps the moderators could gently remind them and maybe flag them for moderation.

it's totally up to you guys, of course -- and i do appreciate your daily work. it just seems somewhat inefficient for everyone concerned to have such a narrow bottleneck, and to ask you two to be full-time gatekeepers for it.

i don't need a response to this -- just sort of thinking out loud and offering my thoughts. if they're useful, great, if not, no biggie.

thanks again for keeping things running as you have been. it definitely does feel like a safe space, and that is quite an awesome accomplishment. i remember some of the times when it hasn't felt so clean around here, and i can easily say that i held back from jumping in as a result. no longer!

fiz

[usaguedriedax]

i wonder: given that most folks do follow the rules when posting, wouldn't it make life easier for you and le to keep an eye out for those few who don't follow the rules, and give them settings that require their posts to be reviewed beforehand, while clearing everyone else (whether progressively, or from the get-go)? there may be a possibility that we could create an unmoderated discussion separate from other forums. however, this has not been implemented for the main reason that it would be labor intensive for the moderators, and i am going to explain this if i may. allowing total freedom of expression in a forum would mean that the moderators would need to review every post in that forum for content after it has posted. if a post conflicts with dw's rules it can be deleted, but it has already been emailed to many people if it is unmoderated. if that post is flammatory or reflects on david negatively in any way, there are many people who would gleefully attack david because of something he doesn't even endorse.

this forum mirrors david as much as it does all of us who contribute, so it is desirable that the most undistorted information be provided here even as we all try to understand the oneness philosophy. we also do not want the forum to be a disinformation site-we want positive, provable material to originate here, not doomsday prophecies and theories.

simply, it is easier to edit a post before it goes out then after. unmoderated posts pose too high a potential for promotions, ads, and unapproved channels getting into a forum that , imo, is high quality, with many caring individuals who want to help each other. from what i have rejected in the five years i have moderated, my opinion is supported, even if all of you haven't seen it directly.

if i get resistance with this opinion, i always tell people about the earthchanges yahoo group as an example of no moderation. i joined it for a short while, and it allows everything in it. what it has turned into is a free-for-all where no one talks to each other. they just post alarming earth changes and rant and rave all the time. it is frantic and not at all a place i would ever feel i could grow spiritually. what a zoo. anyway, i don't think any of us want that in the dc forum.

so, in my limited vocabulary, i hope i have expalined why we just haven't unmoderated in dc forum. i think you all have done a wonderful job here to make this a great safe place to explore and get to know yourselves. possibly in the future, with all of you supporting, we can have unmoderation. take care, chris

[bestgenpower]

unless a forum is moderated i don't care to invest much of myself.

the analogy of family works well for me. where is a family or tribe without elders or moderators investing themselves first? i admire the passion that is evident in the work being done around here by the moderator(s) and contributors all.

as a former chairman working with a board of directors i appreciate the job of directing conversational traffic...keeping people on topic and timely has a get the job done vitality that more than makes up for being slowed by following points of order.

sending tons of love, heaps of peace, and oodles of laughs every which way...
anne

[fedelwfget]

...there may be a possibility that we could create an unmoderated discussion separate from other forums. ... there's a psychic group out of uk that has a scheduled "chat" session, this was interesting to participate in because the words were "streaming" so fast that only a portion of the words would be ressonated to in the spirit of reply, as if several conversations taking place in parrallel with dozens of people: it reminded me of a "swarming" phenomena. from this "warm-up" the group would go into a period of silence where a channeling occured. this group seemed so energetic to me that my sleep pattern was altered - it was difficult for me to sustain participation over more than a couple weeks. i was quickly booted out because i openly shared too many opinions, ruthless moderators there that don't give one a second chance. in this case the writer is booted instead of the writings. my impression was that this group used the vehicle of "chat" to tap potentials that may not ordinarily get opportunity for expression...

[scewLacysmazy]

i also feel that the interuped flow of thought through moderation is hampering the effectiveness of this forum.

i would like to be a part of the solution to this issue.

[Qeiafib]

since having become a moderator about a year ago, the forum membership has soared. many newcomers don't read the rules, apparently, and even though the mod team now numbers five, we are very busy as mods.

there is some trade-off here, insofar as the frustration felt by some at having their posts moderated, and the 'interrupted flow'. it's not easy being a mod, as we are often the focus of some cutting pms by those whose posts have been moderated. sometimes its tough when you know someone has put a lot of work into a post, only to have it rejected for posting.

wow, if some of you could see the other side of the fence when it comes to what comes knocking at our gate. truly, if this forum were unmoderated and allowed to be as open topically as pc forum, for example, our positive focus would be submerged quite quickly imo and david wilcock and his work would no longer be our focus.

the reason for the existance of this forum is to maintain a place where the work of david can be discussed, and the majority of members, i believe, do value this place as a haven of positive spirituality free from the tides of doom and gloom, conspiracies and competing philosophies and sometimes really far out channeled stuff which so largely proliferate in cyberspace.

the work of david wilcock is far removed from much that is out there in the sense of being world class in its presentation of consciousness science and emphasis on the potential of mankind to overcome its difficulties through work in consciousness, as opposed to activism at the third density bulwarks of this world. this is a most unique and spiritually advanced approach to dealing with our issues individually and collectively - and together, we members of this wonderful forum constitute a very special 'mandala' of generating and multiplying out into the world, positive light energy.

in that we eschew the huge tides of off-topic material, we foster a cyberplace in which those who weary of the mega labyrinthine corridors of meta-physical intrigue and fear and seeming insurmountable mystery can commune with like minds without fear of ridicule or chastisement for their honest inquiry into matters of the spirit. we feel that the law of one principles which form the core of the mission of divine cosmos constitute possibly the most complete and comprehensive approach to the human spiritual question in existance today, available to the common spiritual seeker.

so, i'm often reminding myself as a mod that this forum's mandate is much bigger that my own personal biases, and i strive to subordinate my own perceived issues with the rules to the greater purpose of maintaining the integrity of our overall focus.

not always easy! mark

[HugoSimon]

this is a great thread. i really enjoy reading what the moderators think about what they do. all of you expressed such amazing selflessness and devotion to this discussion board in a way that truly expresses your high ideals for this. i am convinced by reading your words of the usefulness for what you do. its also really nice that all the moderators are regular contributors to the discussions.

thanks for taking the time to defend yourselves, mods, you've shown true leadership.

give care
agh

[wmirkru]

i also have enjoyed this thread. i never even thought about any rules before i started posting my thoughts, so excited was i to find myself among such bright and kindred spirits; therefore, it wasn't long before i crossed a line i shouldn't have. my post was not allowed, but because i received a very nice pm from a moderator explaining why, instead of a mysterious silence, i decided to take more care with my posts in the future. tonight, i even read a 'wecome to the thread" post, beforei hit 'submit'.

thanks to all of you moderators for all you do to keep this place beautiful, and for doing it with such class.

(better for your help) tuesday

[bs44MhUW]

just throw out a casting call, or select from older, experienced members and invite them to moderate.

[FYvWldC0]

that's a good question and i will try to answer adequately first, we only have 2 moderators, myself and light eye. currently, le is on vacation, so he has only helped out sporadically for the last 3 weeks. i work a regular 40-hour week as a human resource assistant, so i am limited to approving messages early in the morning before work, a half hour at lunch, and after work. david wilcock only moderates in extreme emergencies, and the webmaster does not moderate at all.

that said, le, myself, and dw had looked into not moderating the forum but decided not to do that. why? because, although the majority of this forum are conscientious and respective of our rules, some abuse the forum whether intentionally or not. this small tiny minority make it necessary to moderate. some of the reasons have been bad language, advertising products or services, or themselves, and excessive attention to conspiracy theories, or other fear-producing actions. some of this has frightened even me at times as an example, once i refused to let someone promote their new age product and he proceeded to threaten to kill me in an email. thus.......big breath, we moderate to protect you guys from this kind of stuff and keep dc forum safe and relatively on topic, although we have loosened up quite a bit from the asc2k yahoo group. hope this helped. take care everyone, chris

so how does this apply to linking other websites relevant to the discussion? it doesnt at all. why do you censor recomended authors/sites??? how is this "4th density" thinking?

no amount of spam, advertising, abuse, or critisism hurts this forum as much as censoring it does... and no amount of public hate mail wilcock recieves is bad as censoring what people are allowed to talk about.

just my two cents, hope you dont censor this.

[erroxiainsona]

so how does this apply to linking other websites relevant to the discussion? it doesnt at all. why do you censor recomended authors/sites??? how is this "4th density" thinking?

no amount of spam, advertising, abuse, or critisism hurts this forum as much as censoring it does... and no amount of public hate mail wilcock recieves is bad as censoring what people are allowed to talk about.

just my two cents, hope you dont censor this.

the censoring kinda bothers me as well as it seems to fly in the face of the main aspect of the law of one which is freedom of will...it is not like anyone is forced to click on a link or forced to buy something at a site just because it offers a product ya know and i can't help but notice david seems to advertise his science of peace with almost every blog post which is fine as we all have to get that green energy of money somehow...the censoring seems to be about controlling instead of acceptance is what i am trying to say even tho i know the people that are moderating are doing this voluntarily as an act of love and are just going by the guidelines that were developed by david

this is just an example...i am pretty close to publishing a book of all my poetry which is already offered here for free but i have a feeling i would not even be able to mention it here when it is done and well i don't know how many people in the world would even be interested in the poetry i write besides this forum and a couple others i frequent...i am seeking ways to make a living doing what i love as well as i am sure many other's here are too...i think you get my drift

maybe i am just trying to get david to respond on the forum as i don't recall reading anything from him on here in a while

perhaps the moderators could just let posts in for a couple days and see what happens...i don't know just a suggestion...i kinda see how this censorship is like related to the discipline of the personality except you might call this the discipline of the group

peace,
mikey

[Mimsykzr]

i understand both sides of this situation. but im going to have to agree with the mods and the way things are ran here, even if sometimes i feel certain things are nit picked a little too much here. ill try to explain why.

i also talk in another forum that is much bigger of an audience then divine cosmos. i call this other forum the 'lions den' and i call divine cosmos 'the garden'. there are two very different atmospheres in the two forums and i have came to learn that i post my more personal and private experiences here at dc knowing i will be treated respectfully, the mods will try to help me be protected from negative bashing and the people here understand that a positive atmosphere generates a wave of love, healing and unity. i can not find these attributes in the 'lions den'....and if i was to post some of my more personal experiences that are a little other worldly lets say, i will receive the bashes and negative egos that just want to tell me how crazy i am or how must im wasting my time.

there are several very personal things that i have shared here, knowing they are protected and respected. i knew that if i was to share these things in the other forum, i would receive some negative greatings....and even if you are surrounded by a positive vibe within yoruself, a negative greeting might be the last thing you or i are needing when sharing very private things. a negative greeting can make a unsure soul clam up really fast.

i know we are all strong enough to overcome any negative greeting....but why even give such a negative greeting the time of day within our 'garden of growth'? do we all really want to sent and spend all of our time here debating our stance when we can fully focus on positive discussions. it wouldn't take long for ego crowns to find that we allow all posts to come through unchecked, and they would sleep eat and breath here trying to cause disruption. we do not have to tolerate wasted time, we have better things to do.

i believe we need this place to remain positive, especially for new comers who are opening themselves for the first time and need to know they can trust that we will respect them and allow them to not fear bashing or negative greetings.

if the forums were not ran the way they are, i doubt that i would of ever shared so much of myself here. im sure i would of still learned here and would of still loved davids research, but i would not of shared my personal experiences like i have.

so there are pros and cons for the way it is ran....but i would rather see people feel they can trust this site to share with us their personal experiences....which is very hard to do if you fear a negative reaction by someone. the more i learned i was protected here and my feelings and experiences were safe....the more i was able to open and share.

i dont even agree with what the majority here believe, but i know im a seeker and i know here im safe. so i remain here to grow in the positive light ray that shines forth at dc.

thanks to all for all you do....
love lynette

[Larisochka]

i feel compelled to post here, even though i haven't posted any since i had one deleted several months ago. it was a silly post really, about a certain swami who predicted mass ascension on a certain date. i only shared the link because his prediction was landing on the very day of the post.

i found the email i got from the moderator explaining the censorship very offensive. he explained that i had not engaged in enough forum discussion to "just post links about what i did all day" and that he and another moderator viewed the link as a sales pitch for that particular swami.

i sent an err, expressive reply, explaining that i'd never even heard of the swami and that i posted it as relevant to the date. i apologized for not stating my intention clearly in the text. and i made a few other points that i think are relevant to the thread here...

i am a child of the '60's call it indigo, lightworker, wanderer or what you wish. my generation was awakening to the issues of censorship and the governing of thoughts and words. the entire world found out that to try to censor our voice was to issue battle, not with guns and violence, but by the massive holding of hands and making many voices one.

it is ironic to experience censorship on a forum that was borne from the very principles that were fostered by my generation.

i take serious issue with anyone assuming to know the intention behind my posts. (eg. she hasn't posted much and now she's plugging her swami) i take even more issue with someone deleting, or even worse (which i have seen on this forum) "tweaking" my words to govern or direct the intention or meaning. i can assure you, i'd rather have my words deleted than edited, outrageous. do these moderators seriously think it is within their grasp to understand and "guide" the intention behind each post? clearly, the email i received explained that i had not posted enough for them to guess my intention, so the questionable link was eliminated. i never received an apology, even after my intentions were explained btw.

in closing, do i think there is some evil plot or conspiracy behind their actions? no. i still visit dc daily and read the blogs and forums religiously, but i do avoid posting. i understand that you can feel great passion toward something and become overzealous in your duties. i understand that this typically fades with time and guidelines bend and are removed as everyone finds a comfortable place to stand. i adore david's positive message and his dedication to provide much of his prolific work for free on this site. i do think it's a shame that he and the moderators can't see that their actions are counterproductive to the overall message he's trying to send.

[Amirmsheesk]

hi lynette

i totally agree, though sometimes i felt frustration when my posts were not allowed. well, you can't have everything all the time right. time to grow up. there's enough drama in this forum and the links provided as it is, and as lynette says, i would never have opened up as much as i did if everything was allowed here.

as a matter of fact i feel some relief in the fact that what i posted some time ago will end up further and further away and most pple don't go back to read old threads through. for myself though it can be interesting to follow my own development, hopefully in a spiral upwards...

and thanks to the mods for the protection; i lacked that kind of psychological protection as a child and could use some now

transiten