25

Confidence

Posted by sdesapio 10 years, 4 months ago to The Gulch: General
65 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

There's been a bit of a ruckus in the Gulch recently regarding who should and shouldn't be here, and what they should and should not be posting.

We hear you.

And, we actually have a new tool on the way that we think is going to add a whole new level of "Confidence" to the goings-on in the Gulch. But, before we talk about that...

First, let's just summarize the recent banning of a long-time Gulch member - let's call him "MemberR."
1. MemberR was vocally anti-Rand.
2. Because MemberR was anti-Rand, MemberR's request to be a Gulch Producer was denied.
3. In retaliation, MemberR spammed the Gulch with numerous cloned comments claiming religious discrimination.
4. We banned MemberR for attacking Gulch moderators publicly via spam and false assertion.

Now, on to another troubled member, let's call him "MemberC" - who is a bit of different case.

We're going to have members with all levels of understanding. On a scale of 1 - 10, MemberC is a 1. Not a 0, a 1. He's read the books, likes them, but has yet to take the ideas to their logical conclusions.

On the road to Objectivist enlightenment, some are going to require a little help in their personal journey. MemberC is a prime example. MemberC is ignorant, inarticulate, contradictory and groping. MemberC is the "doesn't get it" poster boy. But, he is not anti-Rand. He's just stuck in a fog that has not yet been lifted.

We're either going to kick him to the curb, essentially saying, "We're glad you enjoyed the books. Too bad it didn't take. Now, how about you go f**k yourself.", or we're going to say, "We understand that it's harder for some to fully grasp the ideas than it is for others. Welcome to the Gulch. We're glad you made it this far. We're going to now show you the pieces you're missing... Dagny."

C'mon now. I got you there. You know I did. No, I'm not comparing MemberC to Dagny. But, Dagny entered the Gulch with half-knowledge at best. And, not a single Gulch resident turned their back on her. They were overjoyed that she made it that far. And they were all more than willing to spend their time helping to complete her education. Do I have to draw the analogy any more explicitly?

Before you go into attack mode, again no, I am not comparing MemberC to Dagny. I know that Dagny was well on her way to understanding already. I know who Dagny was. I know Atlas. I'm just trying to make a point. You get it and you need to shut up and give me this one.

So, here's the thing - disagreeing on the issue of politics is not grounds for banning. Politics is a corollary - a conclusion. Stated more clearly, disagreeing on conclusions is not grounds for banning. Objectivism is not about checking conclusions - it's about checking premises. If it was a requirement here in the Gulch that we all agree on our conclusions, we'd have no members.

Guys, let's all take a breath. If nothing else, our job in and out of the Gulch is to spread the word and educate. We've got a war to win. It's a war of ideas and we're not going to win if we can't articulate them consistently, without tiring.

MemberC, get your shit together already. You're a walking contradiction, and everyone's patience has worn thin. No, you can not sign up as a Producer. Producers are advocates of Ayn Rand's ideas - which you have not yet fully grasped. We do however hope to have you in the ranks eventually.

Now, to the new tool. Another one from Producer Eudaimonia, the "Confidence" meter. Only Producers get to vote on "Confidence." And, a member's "Confidence" level rises or falls on those votes - publicly. That's all I'm going to say about it for now. We're still a couple of weeks away.


P.S. If any of you are contemplating attacking me for anything I said in this post, make sure there's some meat on those bones. Some of you newbies with the "Atlas Shrugged is not about self-sacrifice! I'm more Objectivisty than you!" crap is just... no.

- - - - -

"If you are seriously interested in fighting for a better world, begin by identifying the nature of the problem. The battle is primarily intellectual (philosophical), not political. Politics is the last consequence, the practical implementation, of the fundamental (metaphysical-epistemological-ethical) ideas that dominate a given nation’s culture. You cannot fight or change the consequences without fighting and changing the cause; nor can you attempt any practical implementation without knowing what you want to implement.

"Speak on any scale open to you, large or small— to your friends, your associates, your professional organizations, or any legitimate public forum. You can never tell when your words will reach the right mind at the right time. You will see no immediate results—but it is of such activities that public opinion is made."

- Ayn Rand
Philosophy: Who needs it? "What can one do?"


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 3.
  • Posted by LetsShrug 10 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Yes...but I don't think for one second that it will help with MemberC (unless the tool is a sledgehammer...and we named it the "Peter Gabriel"...never noticed how biblical that name sounds...can I recant that idea?) ... but I don't have much info to go on (how it works). However, if I base my opinion on MANY previous interactions with MemberC I'm not holding my breath for MemberC to be suddenly enlightened by implementation of a confidence meter. I'm hoping the confidence meter tool will be a way to signal other members (particularly fresh landers) to certain comments in the effort to either advise them that the comment is questionable or well worth reading. Something along that line maybe?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • 12
    Posted by $ Susanne 10 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Thank you, Scott - I am looking forward to this new and more interactive "gulch".

    My question is (dare I ask?) - is it a Tool tool? --giggles--

    My thought is this. Some people are never going to get beyond the "1 or 2 out of 10" stage, or may take a long time to have it sink in and show growth. Although our Gulch is changing and maturing, cutting people off from it totally - save those who have obvious and blatant malicious intent - will inhibit their potential for growth.

    I will admit - some of those people here can BE PITA's, some will never get it, some are flat out trolls. But I also think to those who have decidedly non-objectivist thought processes that are here - and then someday "get it".

    It would be like "You get to read AS one time. If you get it, you can read it again, if you do not, then you are banned from reading it again". Some people (and I include myself in this group, unashamedly) can be quite stubborn and hard-headed about this - exposed to something, but have the sense and logic of it not sink in until they're surrounded by it for a while, and it processes something internally that shapes them.

    Some trolls - deserved to be banned, as they expose themselves as having no other purpse here than being destroyers, looters, and miscreants. But others - well, even IF they never become "hardcore Objectivists", still provide both an outside view and a counterpoise that enables the rest of us to check OUR Premises. That there is value in that is unmistakable, and losing that would, IMO, be a detriment to these hallowed halls....
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by LetsShrug 10 years, 4 months ago
    I think MemberC has proven his unwillingness to learn or explore the philosophy further (or let it sink in) and I believe him to be harmful to the purpose and growth of the gulch. He's been here plenty long enough to have proven his position. At this point are we seriously supposed to keep trying to cultivate a known contaminant?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • 14
    Posted by khalling 10 years, 4 months ago
    "You get it and you need to shut up and give me this one."
    "..."
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 10 years, 4 months ago
    I'm not a "producer" yet, but the new feature sounds like a good one, Scott. Thanks to you and Eudaimonia for envisioning and implementing it.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by terrycan 10 years, 4 months ago
    Helping people on their journey is a noble task. I am surprised "outsiders" would want to be here. It appears to be a problem. Been trying to spend more time here and less time in Facebook. I enjoy a civil debate with a leftie. Often they resort to name calling and changing the subject.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by richrobinson 10 years, 4 months ago
    Thanks Scott. I see this as a step forward. Looking forward to the new feature.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • 19
    Posted by Mamaemma 10 years, 4 months ago
    "yours is an error of knowledge, not a moral failure" Akston said to Dagny.
    I think what we are seeing in member C is not an error of knowledge, but I trust you, Scott, and hope you are correct.
    Most of all, thank you for addressing the issue.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years, 4 months ago
    Bravo, Scott! I can't wait to see the comments on this one.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo