BPDRecovery.com: Forums

I think Ellen raised a very salient point in this post.

I think this is a very insightful observation. That they've been called the RULES of engagement all this time has probably led a few folks to believe that they are indeed rules that can be moderated, regulated, enforced and sanctioned by the BPDR Leadership Team.

The fact is: they cannot.

The ROE are what Calista calls "a motives check." They are internal-dialogue questions. They are "treat others how we'd want to be treated." They are a way to check with ourselves if we're reacting or responding before we post.

These things are NOT things that the BPDR Leadership Team can moderate, regulate, enforce or sanction. The ROE are questions that YOU ask YOURSELVES. They are not anything the S/CLs can determine on behalf of another person.

We may ask "Are you conducting yourself in accordance with the ROE" but if you say "Yes" that's your truth, your reality, as you define it. It is not our place - nor anyone else's within the community - to define that differently for you. When we ask if you're posting in alignment with the ROE, it's not an enforcement technique. It's a reminder that we're all here to do our best, in accordance with the Four Agreements, to reach healthy happy living.

While I'm not the original author of the ROE, I'm fairly confident that Roz would not mind them being renamed here to reduce confusion about what's an "enforceable rule by the leadership team" and what's a "self-help tool toward healthy happy living." We're open for suggestions on a new name for the principles of the ROE as currently defined.

That is a good point. And I do see what you are saying.

Just a couple of questions~

Is there anything for "trolls" and/or "flamers"? I know that the best rule for that is to Not Engage. Is there a policy that the S/CL team has for these situations when they come up?

Perhaps these are better asked in the "Help" forum, but thought I'd ask here. I hope I am not veering too far off the subject of your thread.

thanks GH for asking that. i was fixing to post it.

i also want to know because while dont engage sounds good, when it goes on and on, it is extremely hard not to have a bad day in real and just snap, i think everyone has a snapping point.

Ash, you admitted you have a soft spot for one poster, but its not right to allow them to flame someone you dont like. its bad for the board, much less the person involved.

can you see that?

it isnt helping the other person at all to allow them to misbehave. just because it hurts me, who cares really. i can eventually handle it, hopefully.

there needs to be a few, hard and fast, rules. i assumed the ROE was a board rule, thanks for clearing up it isnt.

well, its called rules of engagement.

maybe the wording, same as leadership team should be changed to something more board friendly.

Trolls are few & far between around here. When the occasional spammer slips through, their account is generally deactivated and an assorted manner of other sanctions imposed.

In this case, I'm thinking "trolls" as the random spammers who wander in to promote websites, products, boards, erectile dysfunction medication, etc. or post inappropriate pictures and other juvenile, immature crap.

Flamers, on the other hand, are "those who flame another person" and are usually a case-by-case situation. More often than not, the flamer is either someone we already know. Occasionally we have someone who's been lurking a while chime in during a heated situation which can appear to be inflammatory. There's generally a little more tolerance for heated emotions around here simply because of the focus on learning to better handle our emotions.

I can think of two people in recent months who showed up and appeared to be the very epitome of flamers. If a hard-and-fast rule had been in place, they probably would have been banned toot-sweet. Instead, there were some firm words and definite boundaries communicated and they've become accepted members of the BPDR community.

The way I see it, I've been a bull in a china shop a time or two in my life. If I'd been booted out of everywhere because I was clueless, ignorant, hurting or angry, I'd've been set out on an ice floe ages ago. I want to offer other people the same level of compassion and leeway that I'd hope I would be offered if the shoe were on the other foot. As such, I don't know that hard-and-fast rules can always apply. I'd much rather look at each person, each situation, as unique and individual rather than toss out some worthwhile babies with some grungy bathwater just because the "rules" say so.

Jody, does this mean I'm allowed to speak to you now?

i CCed you ,Ash. i hope we can have a mature discussion on this.

but allowing someone you like to hurt another you dont is against every spoken and unspoken rule on this place. i wish you could see it.

i feel sad you cant.

i told Nik, i will no longer do that, Ash. i see it for what it was, a cop out on my part to avoid my own responsibility. perhaps she didnt have time to send it on to you yet.

i will not ask that again of anyone. its a cop out and my way of avoiding my own stuff. its inner child, and i wont use it again or ask it. its wrong of me.

I am only willing to discuss the board's General Guidelines and the "Rules of Engagement" in this thread.

Specifically, if anyone has any suggestions for renaming the ROE, I'd like to hear them.

I honestly think that when people call names, or insult one another blatantly (such as lack of intelligence), they should be punished, regardless of the situation. If you can't be here and at least do that, you need to be thrown off the board overnight.

I also think these "meltdowns" people do are completely and utterly unacceptable. I know for a fact I am not going to have a "meltdown" and come to the board and scream and yell, and say all sorts of absurd things. If I feel like doing that, I will find another outlet for it, such as hitting a punching bag. There are acceptable outlets for these feelings. I think if someone has a "meltdown", they should also be punished overnight. This stuff is blatantly unacceptable!

I think that if there is no question that the person went out of control, they should be punished, no questions asked.

1) No name-calling,
2) No "meltdowns" in which the person runs around the board screaming for justice or throwing insults or baiting people.

Although I don't believe a person should be punished for it, I also find that just bailing out of convos is not right either. Sometimes the reason the person wants to bail is because they cannot explain their words or actions. If you can't explain why you wrote something, or why you believe something, (and you are too chickenshit to take a good long look at your own words and explain them), then you shouldn't be writing it. I'm also tired of seeing opinions that clearly are working against the mental health of those involved. If after a certain number of posts, you can't figure out how to stop working blatantly against yourself in thought, then you need to stop posting and start thinking.

Also, if you can't go through your own posts and find where you are vying for the hypocrite of the year award, then you don't need to be pointing the finger at anyone else, or accusing anyone of anything. If you want to place expectations on others, fix your own house first.

If you are going to play with troublemakers (such as, pm'ing one another talking junk about other people on the board) and otherwise be insulting and malicious, expect to get it back. It will happen. There is no doubt of that. And don't come running to the board to be rescued when it does. If you're going to go to the playground, know the rules and know how to play. And don't expect a rescue....

I am talking extremities here. Of course someone will have a bad day. Of course someone will go out-of-line unintentionally here-and-there. But when problems go out of control, that is when I believe it needs to end there (such as when someone bad-mouths another, or when someone runs rampant around the board baiting and yelling and then blames it on a "meltdown").

And all this goes for me too. I am perfectly capable of following these rules, and if I can't, I will have to be punished for it.

And these are MY beliefs.... I am not telling anyone what to do. I am stating my own opinions right now (which I rarely do, but am constantly accused of). So now I can be accused...

Thanks Ash for answering my questions. I do understand what you are saying about allowing for others being emotional and not throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Back to the original question that you posted about the ROE. I need to process it before I think I will have anything helpful to ad. I may find I have little productive to ad.

I'm interested in what other's have to suggest about the ROE.

I don't see a problem with the title "Rules of Engagement" but I can see how others can view them as actual "rules" or "laws" being imposed upon them. So, how about calling them "Common Courtesies" or "Interaction Etiquette"? I re-read the "ROE" and Ash does make it clear that they are considerations to ponder in life in general as well as in interactions with others on this board, and don't necessarily see anything that says "do this or you will be kicked off BPDR." Just my take on things
-NAM

Also, concerning these "agreements" people make.... I made one and I forgot I made it. When I was reminded of that fact, I stopped even thinking this person existed. I can't talk to her, so why think about it?

Now, the way I figured out how to keep it was to keep a notepad beside my computer. I write the agreements I've made on that. It's a reminder of who I can talk to. And I DON'T BREAK IT. It doesn't matter how compelling it is to break it, I refuse to. It is life or death. And that's how I have to think about it. I WILL be impeccable with my word. Guys, when you make agreements and then break them, you are just stirring up more crap for yourself that will have to be dealt with. Make life easier and stop breaking your agreements. Don't waste your time mending and fixing problems you created.

:2cents

I've always thought of the ROE as more of a Board TOOL than a Board RULE. It is, after all, listed over thar in the box on the left marked "Tools"...

It certainly wouldn't be the first time that I've held a different "working definition"...But I see it a a list of guidelines that I can use to check my motives when I'm all riled up. I can't say about you guys, but trying to communicate when I'm already reacting emotionally is a guarantee for more problems. A lot of the stuff in the ROE just makes sense in that "do unto others" type of way. If I want you guys to hear what I want to say, it's a good idea to take a look at what I want to say to see if it CAN be heard (or if it's all fuss and blunder as I puke out emotions). It doesn't just work here. I've had surprisingly good result when I apply those ideas to my RL conversations, too.

Yes, I guess that what NAM points out is a good one. Common Courtesy and Interaction Etiquette. That leaves out the "rule" thing. Or perhaps, "Before You Post". (That feels like I've read that somewhere, I have haven't I? It's in there, yah?)

I'd say "The Golden Rule" but there's that rule thing again.

How 'bout "The Five Steps of Interacting on BPDR"? "The Four Agreements and How They Apply Here on BPDR?"

Just brainstorming...