Admin wrote: the model used to start discussion on the Code of Ethics was taken from a reputable association for psychotherapists
Uh-huh. Now that seems to explain the overkill. And it also reads like the code used as a model has been made more restrictive rather than less.
But this is a forum for all kinds of people with one commonality - the BKs. It is not a formal professional association, of therapists or anything else.
rayoflight wrote: I, personally, do not feel safe expressing my feelings about my experience when I know that BK supporters or BK believers are part of the forum.
The interesting thing here ROL is that many "believers" and "supporters" have been banned. I was re-labelled, from ex-BK to BK supporter, because I did not fit into a box easily (was told so) and dared to "explain" the BK mindset without condemning it.
I joined here in January this year. It was a place where BKs, ex-BKs, supporters, researchers etc can all seek to understand the total reality of this phenomenon called the BKs, pro's and con's. Such a place would help take each of us outside our own experiences and gain a broader perspective, making this forum more than a whipping post. Most of us were positive, even enthused, about the BKs at some stage in our lives, and need to understand others are in that space now. Wouldn't we all have liked to be welcomed to such a forum in those days? Wouldn't we all probably have started engaging by promoting the teachings and defending against allegations? But I'd also suggest that, just as all agyanis are potential BKs, so too all BKs are potential ex-BKs.
We had the open mindedness to think outside the prescribed. But patience, tolerance and sympathy/empathy are needed. Imagine if a therapist began by haranguing those who came in to try therapy out! But that is what I have seen happen here over the last few months. Some may argue that those banned did not come for therapy but to proselytise or propagandise. I'd say they showed a willingness to engage (more than some here are willing to do) and I think judgement should be suspended until they have had a chance to explore some ideas here. They won't hear some of what is on this forum after they are banned - they will just reinforce their sense of ex-BKs as embittered or wrong, or "locked intellect", or whatever their consciousness needs.
Those who don't want to engage with them can place such members on their black lists and they will never see their posts.
A forum is meant to be a meeting place for ideas. Maybe the other aims of factual news, resource library et al, need a separate section so the forum can flow without muddying those waters? A fact is a fact, but opinions & allegations are not facts. They need more dialogue and further inputs. And I'd suggest that a looser application of rules rather than tighter is conducive to a better meeting place. I have currently agreed to the new code, but out of convenience. I will post as I have always done, and if I get suspended, banned or blocked, I would have a laugh and get on with life.