This is no community.

[colinm]

Communities have members, social media sites have livestock. Members have some say in how communities are run, livestock merely has value to those who run a site.

I have reached the conclusion that this site does not represent a community as a result of an enforcement of the Site Terms and Conditions, which is misleadingly called the Site Rules Page. I refer to them below as T&C, short for "Terms and Conditions" because that is all they are. I am unsure of the last edit date of the T&C (because the page's modification date is not public,) but I suspect they have been modified since the actions and processes to which I refer, and that those modifications serve to retroactively justify those actions.

I am hamstrung in discussing my reasoned critique with you because T&C 25 explicitly forbids discussion of a specific moderator action. That T&C has the effect of preventing any member of the community, outside a self-selecting elite, from participating in or even fully understanding the T&Cs by discussion within this site. I believe that T&C 25's chilling effect is intentional.

If you are interested in the specifics of the case I am more than happy to discuss them on my blog, where there is a page dedicated to the specific issues in detail.

I think that a community which conducts secret processes of judgement is not worthy of the name. A collection of people subject to these secret processes do not, themselves, participate in the formation or evolution of the standards by which conduct is judged, and indeed might not, collectively or individually, even agree with those standards - how would they ever know? How would *you* ever know?

Enforcement of the T&Cs is conducted without the informed consent of the people using this site, but the term 'community' to describe the site falsely implies that the actions are collectively sanctioned. I know of no actual communities with analagous structure, outside of the reactive artificial communities in prisons. Prefacing the terms and conditions of the site with a plea to and pretense of community is profoundly misleading, almost cruelly so.

I post this message, in this topic, out of a feeling of community which is clearly at odds with the T&C. That's simply because those are not rules of a community, but are only the terms and conditions of use of a site. The difference between a site and a community which uses a site is precisely that the cultural norms of a community are shared, whereas site conditions are imposed.

However, I do not deny that there is a community on this site. I merely assert, with plenty of evidence, that you are probably not part of it.

[GPSGuided]

Utopia doesn't exist and the rest are just semantics. Just be happy in this virtual "community".

[corvus]

Wow what is this "rant" about please ??
corvus

[matagi]

Wow what is this "rant" about please ??
corvus

He cant tell you because of Rule 25 in the T&C's. but a bit of detective work will get you an answer. Took me all of 5 seconds.

[frenchy_84]

Most recent topic on his blog Corvus

[corvus]

I am an aged member please give me clear and easy directions.
corvus

[frenchy_84]

Go to his user profile to find the link to his blog. Read the most recent post

[frenchy_84]

Or http://panchrestomatic.blogspot.com.au/ ... y.html?m=1

[Strider]

Ok. See ya.

[corvus]

Still at at a loss ! am I that dumb? since when did Oscar Wilde go bushwalking ?? if you got "pinged" by the Mods so be it and if you don't like the outcome well just Fade Away {**part of post removed by moderator**} or accept the Mod's decision .
With a Smile,
corvus.

[GPSGuided]

Apply the meaning of "community" in a wider sense and all the worries will dissipate. Peace and calm.

[Turfa]

While I can't comment on what Jesus might think of kittens, I do know that I like cats........ But I couldn't eat a whole one !

[corvus]

Apply the meaning of "community" in a wider sense and all the worries will dissipate. Peace and calm.

What does that mean Please ?
corvus

[frenchy_84]

Your sanctimonious over dramatized writing style will limit any favorable responses on here. Although I do agree that there is an over zealous moderation and over sensitized response to differing opinions on here but you can never please everyone so it is what it is.

[MrWalker]

I'd just like to say that I'm pretty happy with the way this community functions and the way the moderators work, despite some extreme differences of view on some topics.

[GPSGuided]

Apply the meaning of "community" in a wider sense and all the worries will dissipate. Peace and calm.

What does that mean Please ?

Just in reference to Colinm's narrow definition on the word "community".

[Son of a Beach]

I've found that if you make the slightest reference to being a christian on this site, you get hammered for preaching and for enforcing your views on the other readers.

Now it seems that if you don't mention it, you get accused of being covertly christian and secret handshakes!

For the record, MOST of the moderators here are NOT christians - or at least were not when I was involved as a moderator. When religious issues came up in the past, I used to try and get one of the others to do the moderation, or at least to review what I'd done. And then I'd still get accused of inflicting my religious views on the people who felt victimised by the moderation. No, it was nothing to do with my religion in such cases. The moderated people were just not being very good at community. How ironic.

[GPSGuided]

This has been a most confusing thread... And now I finally understand that religion and associated views are at the core of it. Given religions has generated thousands of years of war and persecutions and now conflict on forums, maybe this is a God given reason to avoid the topic on a bushwalking forum, even though bushwalking is close to a religion within the community it harbours.

[Strider]

I've found that if you make the slightest reference to being a christian on this site, you get hammered for preaching and for enforcing your views on the other readers.

I think this applies everywhere these days. Modern society simply doesn't accept the discussion of faith outside of places dedicated to their worship.

[colinm]

At the core of this thread is a distinction between a community and a site. A community has rules, which represent that community's cultural norms. A site has terms and conditions of use, which are different. This site confuses the two.

Communities have members, social media sites have livestock. Churches have flocks. I can see whence the confusion arose.

I had no idea this site was founded and conducted as a christian flock, with moderators providing pastoral care, until recently.

It was an unpleasant, unwelcome, and unwelcoming surprise.

[GPSGuided]

Colinm, just don't so narrowly focus on the word "community" and you'll be right. Think of it as a puff of cloud that floats away in a virtual "community", or "site" as you prefer. At the end of the day, it's just an Internet forum for the benefit of all who cares to participate. There are a lot more woes out there in the real world to worry about. I'd worry more about the multi-thousand years Muslim vs Christian conflict in the real world than what's in the T&C of an Internet forum. Walk in or walk out ad lib.

[colinm]

Colinm, just don't so narrowly focus on the word "community" and you'll be right. Think of it as a puff of cloud that floats away in a virtual "community", or "site" as you prefer.

This makes no sense.

This site is no kind of community (virtual or actual,) as its structure represents no shared cultural norms. Redefining community to mean puffy cloud undoubtedly makes the glaring inconsistencies go away, but then so would a big shot of your choice of opioid ... no thanks.

BTW, the idea that there are virtual and actual communities, and some meaningful difference between the two, does not survive analysis.

At the end of the day, it's just an Internet forum for the benefit of all who cares to participate. There are a lot more woes out there in the real world to worry about. I'd worry more about the multi-thousand years Muslim vs Christian conflict in the real world than what's in the T&C of an Internet forum. Walk in or walk out ad lib.

At the end of the day, it's a site claiming falsely to represent a community.

[GPSGuided]

This makes no sense.

If one accepts the definition of community as "a group of people living in the same place or having a particular characteristic in common" (Mac's built-in dictionary), the usage of the term community here is perfectly legit for a group of bushwalking lovers. Fact is, if you are concerned about what you stated, then you are better to try to make a change in the Internet forumverse as a whole than to complain narrowly here on a limited view forum thread. This is just common usage of the term "community" on Internet forums. At the end of the day, the person/group who pays for the site hosting will have a far greater say in the direction and condition of the forum and community (loosely termed).

Be happy and walk plenty. There are far greater things to worry about in this world than one word on a million words forum. Or start a real forum community of your preference with T&C to match. Register a domain, pay a host, set up some simple to use software packages... Voila!

[colinm]

When religious issues came up in the past, I used to try and get one of the others to do the moderation, or at least to review what I'd done.

Yeah, that is a good idea. Shame that it appears to be impossible now.

Apparently being blind to religion now means that you don't enquire as to whether any of the moderators are not christian, then assign the consideration of a religious complaint to person you know positively to be a christian.

What could possibly go wrong?

[photohiker]

At the end of the day, it's a site claiming falsely to represent a community.

Actually, I somewhat disagree.

This site generates a sense of community among some of its members (well, the ones who aren't arguing and being hostile to each other anyway). This has nothing to do with whatever the owners or mods write in the rules or T&C's. It has to do with discussion and sharing of common interests.

I've been mod'ed in the past, and I have no issue with that. Until you made religion an issue I had no interest or persuasion that this was a christian (or any other religion) site. I still don't. I couldn't care less what faiths our hosts follow, it's their own business.

This site might not represent a community, but it has been instrumental in creating one.

[colinm]

If one accepts the definition of community as "a group of people living in the same place or having a particular characteristic in common" (Mac's built-in dictionary)

No. The set of people with red hair is not a community, although they have a particular characteristic in common. The set of people living around the Gaza strip live in the same place, but are not a community. So ... no. Surprisingly, Mac's build-in dictionary may not be the best source of understanding of commonly used terms which are also terms of art.

[colinm]

At the end of the day, it's a site claiming falsely to represent a community.

Actually, I somewhat disagree.
This site might not represent a community, but it has been instrumental in creating one.

You're probably right - there were several communities of bushwalkers, and still are, and hopefully always will be. The set of people using this site who are also bushwalkers would be another such community, and that community would have been created by the site's existence and use.

The two are, however, distinct. It is an error to confuse them and treat them as synonymous, as the community of bushwalkers who use this site do not necessarily share the values and norms of the people who own this site, and it is shared values which define the former.

So, because this site's values are not necessarily indicative of, or in any case formed by, the values and norms of the people who use it, but by the people who own it: to the extent that this site is a community, you're probably not part of it.

[colinm]

I should say: This distinction only became clear to me when it became clear to me that there's an ethnocentric christian value system pervading the administration of the site, and I ran foul of it. The monocultural christianity of the terms and conditions of service merely serves to demonstrate the main point, this is merely a site, not a community, and we are livestock, no more and no less. We wear a 'member' badge, but that's no different from an ear tag.

[GPSGuided]

No. The set of people with red hair is not a community, although they have a particular characteristic in common. The set of people living around the Gaza strip live in the same place, but are not a community. So ... no. Surprisingly, Mac's build-in dictionary may not be the best source of understanding of commonly used terms which are also terms of art.

Ok, I give you Oxford dictionary's definition. Hopefully I won't have to dig up my US English dictionary next.

a group of people living in the same place or having a particular characteristic in common

[GPSGuided]

I should say: This distinction only became clear to me when it became clear to me that there's an ethnocentric christian value system pervading the administration of the site, and I ran foul of it. The monocultural christianity of the terms and conditions of service merely serves to demonstrate the main point, this is merely a site, not a community, and we are livestock, no more and no less. We wear a 'member' badge, but that's no different from an ear tag.

Ok.

Maybe the site introduction should be something like this...

Welcome to the online community (or site or forum for those who object to the terms community) for friendly and helpful discussion of topics of interest to bushwalkers and repository of bushwalking related information submitted by bushwalkers, for bushwalkers.

Now, was it Judaean Front of the People or People's Front of Judaea?