Conflict Resolution


Hey there folks.

So it seems the time has come to set up some boundaries here at the site as discussions have exculated higher than ever. It feels like a good sign; lots of people and personalities existing here. It also looks like we may need to devise a system for dealing with conflicts as they arrive.

As much as I would like to ban Ted, or future posters like him (say whatever you want Ted, I know you will and for now I’d ask everyone to simply ignore him)

Perhaps we can come up with a system here to deal with escalated conflicts. I’ll propose a list here, and you all can chime in and we’ll have a grand ol’ discusion.

I propose we have an ordered system that looks something like this:

  1. Self-policing (don’t insult others)
  2. Report insults to moderators.
  3. Moderators connect privately with people and ask poster to de-escalate.
  4. Publically ask for conflict to end. (no more posts)
  5. Lock thread
  6. Ignore any posts by abuser.
  7. Exhile (ban user)

What do you think? For now, I will ask everyone to simply ignore Ted, rather than me ban him. How do people feel about this? Perhaps ignoring someone feels difficult. I know it was very difficult to ignore him after some of the remarks he made towards me, yet now I feel that if we collectively ignore him, we’ll work some cool system out for this site.

Okay, enough of me blabbing. What do you all think?


Ignoring sounds cool. There might be a point where it isn’t enough though, depending on the person involved and the situation.

If there need be any discussion of a conflict between the conflict creator and a mod, I would say keep it public. Not doing so has caused a lot of stupid grief in another forum I belong to. Maybe people here are cooler though.


So that’s conflict resolution?

Doesn’t “Resolution” imply…like I dunnno…grasping here…some sort of resolution to a conflict?

Could it be that I had a bad day and Jason Godesky really pisses me off? And that even though You Guys are more Buddy Buddy with him than you are with me, that maybe i have a decent beef in getting pissed off at a Guy spreading lies that I am a Neo nazi?


But I mean if you guys want to have like a little clique like atmosphere and ignore people you see as outside your group, that’s cool too.

I mean it works so well with all the popular Jocks in high school.


You know Urban Scout, you are a bright and talented Guy, you make movies, you are photogenic. I could see you building things up and becoming a popular voice in Primitivists circles.

When you start to get there that is when Jason might shit all over you. He goes after people that are closest to his position. Those are the people in direct competiion with him for the spotlight as he sees it.

So, if you want look at this as crazy rantings and ignore me or whatever, but It will happen to other people besides me.

He will pick you out and shit on you publicly and bury you with his arguments and keep it up for days. If it happened to you, you would be pissed off too.

All I am asking you is to think about it.

Is it possible I have a legitimate beef and am not simply some fucking asshole?


I’m very bad at ignoring things. Like, ignoring that, there … I swear it’s giving me a rash.


Like you don’t do that shit?

You know what you little fat fucking prick. I am not a Neo Nazi and If I see you I will fuck you up.

That’s a promise.


See you in a TAZ near you in a few weeks. I have seen a photo of your face.


So what are you going to do? Have police at your little wild gathering that has no permit anyway?


Okay, this is not in direct response to Ted, but I admit, it is inspired by his behavior as of late.

I’ve noticed a tendency in a lot of Internet debates - not just the ones here - to conflate disagreement with intent to destroy. For instance, a lot of times two people will disagree with each other and one will accuse the other of trying to destroy his/her right to free speech, or even of trying to destroy the person arguing. Hell, I’ve done this in debate. And when I haven’t, I’ve often been secretly thinking, “Fucking bastard,” and grinding my teeth. It’s so much easier to make it personal than to keep it objective. And this seems, to me, to be the main factor that causes online conversations to escalate into conflicts.

So some questions I find myself asking are:

  • Why does it so often get so personal? Is it the fault of the medium? The touchy subject matter (politics, religion, the freaking apocalypse)?
  • Is there anything we can do to discourage this line of thinking, in ourselves and in others?
  • Are there specific techniques we can use to curb this trend?
  • I know that on most of the Internet, there’s this Culture of Snark™ wherein the most respected people are the ones who can knock each other down with the wittiest sarcasm. So is it possible for us, on this site and on other primitivist/rewilding sites, to establish a counter-culture (yes, another one, this time on the series of tubes!) where respectfulness and patience is rewarded instead?


I don’t expect a wife to be unbiased towards her husband. But its not that hard to figure out not to trash someone and post on their blog for days on end burying it with diatribes and calling someone a neo nazi when they aren’t.

I think people that do that shit should get punched in the face.

Because people should have some fucking respect. You may have to face that person some day.

And yes being an influencial person and spreading false rumors about another person is distroying that person.

Its character assasination. He does it because it makes him feel superior.


So that is the technique to curb the trend. talk to people on the internet like you would talk to them to their face.


You know what. Here it is. I am sincere. I am decent person. I don’t want to go down to West Virgina and beat the fuck out of Jason in front of his wife and brother.

They seem like decent people. But Giuli posting on here just makes me sad.

That’s what Jason deserves though, the way he talks to people, and someday, if he doesn’t straighten up, someone will.

I think Jason owes me an apology and I will say this to his wife:

I am sorry.


But i’m not expecting one because Jason basically…is small.

Prove me wrong. If you don’t apologize, I am reaching out an olive branch here, if you don’t reciprocate, maybe Some one down in West Virgina next month will jump out of the bushes and fuck you up Jason, mybe they won’t.

That will give you somthing to think about while you are down there anyway.

But its up to you. Apologize and admit you get off on trashing people on the internet in order to feel superior.

its up to you. This could be a healing moment here.

There might be a point where it isn't enough though, depending on the person involved and the situation.

Yes, at which point we can move to temporary ban, and if things get worse than that, we can move to permanent ban.

I would say keep it public.

Yes, I could see potential pitfalls in keeping it private. Perhaps we should keep it all out in the open for safetys sake.

I'm very bad at ignoring things.

Haha. Oh I know from all of our boughts. I have a lot of difficulty with it too. That’s why I love you, man! Don’t give in, you have our support!

Great questions Guili. They have sparked some ideas, but I’ll have to think about them some more before I bounce them off of all of you.


You know that’s fine.

Egg me on, Urban scout. That’s fine. Some is getting fucked up in West Virginia next month.

Maybe you should go too. Drink lots of Vodka.


You know, Fuck all you guys.

Fucking losers. Fuck this forum.

And Jason, I will fuck you up. I am dead fucking serious.

You fucked with the wrong guy.


I like the system. I think having a method to go by and to point to as we have to use it, lets everybody know what’s up so that there are fewer surprises next time.

REWILD has remained a peaceful place, full of good conflict, all kinds of personalities and great discussions for its life so far–until today when the conflicts turned sour and the discussion became too much of a personal attack.

[quote=“Plains, post:2, topic:300”]Ignoring sounds cool. There might be a point where it isn’t enough though, depending on the person involved and the situation.

If there need be any discussion of a conflict between the conflict creator and a mod, I would say keep it public. Not doing so has caused a lot of stupid grief in another forum I belong to. Maybe people here are cooler though.[/quote]

I agree that any conflict between mods and users should stay in the open so that moderator activity can be discussed by the whole group.

It may take a lot of ignoring before a conflictive user calms down. Which would probably result in a lot of one-sided posts by the agressor. I’m okay with that. If we can all just agree to not give in, then the agressor will probably calm down.

I don’t like banning. I don’t like censorship. I didn’t want to ban Ted today when he started picking fights. I’m glad I didn’t, and I’m glad he calmed his name calling down when I suggested the ban.

I like the idea of temporary bans if ignoring the offender doesn’t quieten the problem down.


You think this is a fuck joke RiX?

Name calling? I am going to find Jason Godesky and beat his ass into a bloody pulp.

So laugh, act all superior. You are a bunch of fucktards. The conflict is Jason getting his ass beat.

If you wanted to resolve a conflict you dropped the ball


Alright. Scout and I just discussed this possibility on the phone, and I’m going to put it into action now.

Anyone who uses the board to threaten physical violence against someone else gets banned.

So, as soon as I click the post button, I am banning Free_Range_Organic_Human from this forum.

Feel free to keep discussing this topic, including the action I am about to take.