The intentions and guidelines for comments are as follows:
The free exchange and critique of reasoned claims
Deliberation involves engaging in reciprocal critique of positions involving reasons rather than simply asserting positive or negative opinion.
Reflexivity
Participants must critically examine their values, assumptions and interests, as well as the larger social context.
Ideal role taking
Participants must attempt to understand the argument from the other’s perspective. This requires a commitment to an ongoing dialogue in which everyone respectfully listens to each other.
Sincerity
Each participant must make a sincere effort to provide all information relevant to the particular problem under consideration, including information regarding intentions, interests, needs, and desires.
Inclusion and equality
Every participant affected by a proposal under consideration is equally entitled to introduce and question any assertion whatsoever. Inclusion can be limited by inequalities from outside of discourse – by formal or informal restrictions to access. It can also be limited by inequalities within discourse, where some people dominate discourse and others struggle to get their voices heard.
Guidelines and Admonitions
Please keep your comments as brief and to the point as possible. Although excessively long comments will not be deleted, it defeats the function of this site, which is to gather multiple viewpoints. Please remind yourself, that while your contribution is important, it is dialogue that we are trying to promote. A post that addresses a single point is preferable to a many-pointed one, as it allows a more focused discussion. For the same reason, it is best to wait for responses to a post before posting again. Excessive posting has a dampening effect on other posters. The moderator may delay posts if they are flooding in without responses.
Try to avoid naming names, unless the story cannot be reasonably told otherwise. A little creativity will go a long way toward accomplishing this. Sometimes it will be obvious given roles and situations, nevertheless, remember that the important thing is to point out behavior for the purpose of elucidating general principles, not to assign blame. Due to retaliatory measures that have been enacted against sangha members, posting under your own name is optional, with the exception of teachers. Due to the weight of authority a teacher commands, their opinion can have an undue influence on the outcome of a deliberation, suppressing other opinions by students who do not want to be in opposition to them. To understand the importance of this rule, read the "Interdependent Deliberation" page on this site. Posts that denigrate another poster or post, rather than simply critique the idea, will also be deleted. The greatest danger of anonymous interaction is an increase in incivility. It is hoped that within the context of a Buddhist community that values Right Speech, this problem will be minimized. However, given the emotional nature of some of the topics, and previous degeneration of discussions into character attacks and name calling, even by people in the highest decision-making positions at Jikoji, you are all highly encouraged to visit this site on how to disagree well, or study this argumentative pyramid, as the last three style of "argument" will be deleted from this forum.
![[Image: 707px-Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svg.png]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7c/Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svg/707px-Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svg.png)
"Zen is actually...communication." - Shunryu Suzuki
1. Derived from Dahlberg, L., The Internet and Democratic Discourse: Exploring The Prospects of Online Deliberative Forums Extending the Public Sphere, in the Journal of Information, Communication, and Society, Vol 4, 2001.
The free exchange and critique of reasoned claims
Deliberation involves engaging in reciprocal critique of positions involving reasons rather than simply asserting positive or negative opinion.
Reflexivity
Participants must critically examine their values, assumptions and interests, as well as the larger social context.
Ideal role taking
Participants must attempt to understand the argument from the other’s perspective. This requires a commitment to an ongoing dialogue in which everyone respectfully listens to each other.
Sincerity
Each participant must make a sincere effort to provide all information relevant to the particular problem under consideration, including information regarding intentions, interests, needs, and desires.
Inclusion and equality
Every participant affected by a proposal under consideration is equally entitled to introduce and question any assertion whatsoever. Inclusion can be limited by inequalities from outside of discourse – by formal or informal restrictions to access. It can also be limited by inequalities within discourse, where some people dominate discourse and others struggle to get their voices heard.
Guidelines and Admonitions
Please keep your comments as brief and to the point as possible. Although excessively long comments will not be deleted, it defeats the function of this site, which is to gather multiple viewpoints. Please remind yourself, that while your contribution is important, it is dialogue that we are trying to promote. A post that addresses a single point is preferable to a many-pointed one, as it allows a more focused discussion. For the same reason, it is best to wait for responses to a post before posting again. Excessive posting has a dampening effect on other posters. The moderator may delay posts if they are flooding in without responses.
Try to avoid naming names, unless the story cannot be reasonably told otherwise. A little creativity will go a long way toward accomplishing this. Sometimes it will be obvious given roles and situations, nevertheless, remember that the important thing is to point out behavior for the purpose of elucidating general principles, not to assign blame. Due to retaliatory measures that have been enacted against sangha members, posting under your own name is optional, with the exception of teachers. Due to the weight of authority a teacher commands, their opinion can have an undue influence on the outcome of a deliberation, suppressing other opinions by students who do not want to be in opposition to them. To understand the importance of this rule, read the "Interdependent Deliberation" page on this site. Posts that denigrate another poster or post, rather than simply critique the idea, will also be deleted. The greatest danger of anonymous interaction is an increase in incivility. It is hoped that within the context of a Buddhist community that values Right Speech, this problem will be minimized. However, given the emotional nature of some of the topics, and previous degeneration of discussions into character attacks and name calling, even by people in the highest decision-making positions at Jikoji, you are all highly encouraged to visit this site on how to disagree well, or study this argumentative pyramid, as the last three style of "argument" will be deleted from this forum.
"Zen is actually...communication." - Shunryu Suzuki
1. Derived from Dahlberg, L., The Internet and Democratic Discourse: Exploring The Prospects of Online Deliberative Forums Extending the Public Sphere, in the Journal of Information, Communication, and Society, Vol 4, 2001.