Sure, I would agree. Correct moderation is not easily definable but outright censorship is not what I had in mind.songhill wrote:First of all, what are the specific elements of a "correctly moderated" Buddhist forum? Misinformation is certainly not one of them—not in the TOSs I have read over the years. How do you determine misinformation? The term is too abstract. On one forum, I commented that Dogen's succession certificate (shisho) was a medieval forgery; I even included the citation. I was kicked out of the group. That wasn't about misinformation—it was censorship.kirtu wrote:
Correctly moderated groups have a higher signal to noise ratio and much less misinformation.
eSangha took the stance that denying rebirth and karma was out of bounds and also was somewhat restrictive on the nature of enlightenment specifically wrt Zen experience even if such views are in fact representative of streams of Zen. It should not have been so restrictive while at the same time attempting to uphold the core of Buddhism. It was concerned with creeping New Age influences but could have employed a lighter hand.
As for misinformation per se not being represented in the TOS's - the eSangha TOS from memory did explicitly address denial of karma and rebirth. I don't remember whether it codified models of Buddhahood. It thus sought to restrict misinformation through these rules.
How would you improve moderation in general?