mepeace.org

Dear friend,

recently we witnessed some people who joined mepeace.org and were actively claiming the Peace is not possible. beside the unique idea they did use offended language and graphic and filled mepeace.org bandwidth with posts.

What should be the rules of engagement to mepeace, while we want open borderless community for all spectrum of peace activists and organizations. We do not want to have a place where people waste time on empty debate and aggressive language there is plenty of other places on the Internet that enable that.

At the moment we did not published etiquette and we should, what will be your main points in such rules that need to apply to all of us?

Views: 144

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

thank you Roni, I just come back from a meeting with one new friend who is mamber of mepeace, and the relevance of our community for the Peace effort is evident.

I find this discussion curry some good insight for us all.
As a guideline i want to see: Respect of others and their faith.
Whilst considering guidelines, I think that we must all be aware of the fact that peace needs to be made between adversaries and enemies but not like-minded people. And so, in my view, some robust differences must be accepted and accommodated by the guidelines. Otherwise, this will eventually become just another of the many self-selected communities of people whose members are essentially at peace with each other but not with "the others" who continue the long-ongoing conflict.

To think that peace is not possible, in my view, must not be viewed as heresy. Such views exist. And they are one of the many challenges that peace-seekers must overcome in order to try to help make peace. All that is possible providing discussions are respectful in tone and content, and members do not play the obvious propaganda, self-fulfilling prophecy and emotional-blackmail games.
Is this legitimate?

I studied it by actually looking into the Islamic texts; the Qur'an, ahadiths and the siras and was horrified as I dug in. Now I am in the mindset that Islam is at war with us and has been for 1400 years. There is no peace with Islam; never has been.

What is the principle which help us recognize people who make mepeace.org unpleasant ?
Is this legitimate?

This site at it's present state is NOT a site for peace

a person that as a member contact other members and ask them to leave.
All other members of this site, I trust, are consenting and emotionally mature adults. In my view, we must all be free to respond (or not) as we see fit to one who is so obviously and petulantly playing emotional-blackmail and spoiling games.

I note that one such private game by another player has been, in my view, appropriately publicly exposed by a very constructive member. I salute that action.

Real peace-seeking is never a pleasant experience. Pretend peace-seeking with like-minded people only is.
Dear Jon,

I am one of the members who asked to delete this letter; I see that your experience here a space where ideas can be shared so trust and cooperation will emerge of the community we are. Your post here fill me with joy.

This is a copy of the text that I faulty understood it as invitation to leave our forum. No doubt that the member Alice addressed answered much wisely then my reaction. I am sorry that it offended Alice as much.

The Bold is from the original message :
---------------------------------
I believe in solidarity - especially among people who are searching for peace. Paul is not one of them - just look who are his new buddies here.

When your friend get's blows right next to you, and you stay silent, you're an accomplice - unless you agree that he deserves what he gets.

When statements are made that making a connection between Justice and Peace is incitement and a cry for war, all those who stay silent implicitely CONDONE this statement.

What at all are we talking about on "mepeace"?

And by staying silent,
all the mepeace crew, director, board, and all my so called friends here on mepeace, including YOU, dear friend, condone this statement!

This site at it's present state is NOT a site for peace
, but (as it seems to me) a site for the glory of it's founder.
---------------------------------

Please forgive me not to understood the real message Alice published.
My preemptive response was an FFF topic.

It is at http://www.mepeace.org/xn/detail/661876:Comment:70311. Now one can add a real live sample to that thread.

To ignore such views or to pretend that they do not exist is ostrich-like. We must counter and confront and disprove such claims. They are NOT just made on this site. Doing that is one of the many challenges that peace-seekers must overcome in order to try to help make peace.

Real peace-seeking is never a pleasant experience. Pretend peace-seeking with like-minded people only is.
So we can put complex questions into debate.

but should we accept all language and response as adults? is it serve mepeace image for new-comers as we have people who say we are a platform for Palestinian propaganda and other convinced we are a platform for Zionist propaganda. as this people from both sides attack the moderates and cooperative majority of mepeace.org members for the good of Israel or Palestine.
I accept that managing and defining that sensibly is not easy, especially in a way that can be reasonably objectively implemented. I think that we are still at the problem definition and description stage and are not quite ready yet for suggesting viable solutions.

I think that those who want to should and must be able discuss and debate complex issues respectfully. OTOH those who want to should easily be able to avoid those (tedious) discussions, should also be able to do that easily. That depends on (a possibly revised) site design and the related RSS feeds.
I must note here that there have been and still are posts on this site that are implicit and explicit examples of what I see or perceive as really very bigoted or just under-informed. That is really why I started the FFF series of discussions. Some here understand and value that.

It seems to me that problematic views can and should be discussed openly before anyone is unilaterally banned by a person or persons unknown. Most often the problematic person is blissfully unaware of the problem.

Many times (not here) really nice people told me: You know Paul I did not know that you were Jewish. If all Jews were like you, I'd really like Jews. I've also witnessed similar statements made in the presence of and about Muslims. I'll just leave this at that.
PRACTICALLY:

Can people who wish to use expressive language tag themselves so people will know what to expect ?

RSS

Translate mepeace.org

Latest Activity

Dr. David Leffler posted a blog post

Cruise Ships for Peace in The Middle East

By Teresa Studzinski, Arlene J. Schar, and Dr. David Leffler Variations of this article were…See More
Nov 6
Shefqet Avdush Emini updated their profile
Oct 29
Mauricio San Miguel Llosa updated their profile
Oct 4
Amir Salameh updated their profile
Jun 25
Fredda Goldfarb updated their profile
Apr 15
Dr. David Leffler posted a blog post
Apr 9

Search mepeace.org

"Like" us on Facebook

Promote MEPEACE online

Badge

Loading…

© 2019   Created by Eyal Raviv. Supported by One Region, One Future.   ..

Feedback | Report an Issue  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service