[general] Tulpa Phenomenon Overview Guide v1

[Slushie]

False dichotomy. I don't want us associated with mental health disorders either. The difference is that this central guide associates us with ponies, which is something we have power over, as opposed to trolls calling us schizophrenics, which is something we can't help.

 

Also I'd be happy to volunteer for a mod position, I just didn't know you guys were taking new ones.

[Amadeus]

If you want to be a moderator there's no harm in asking.

 

I'm not opposed to editing out anything pony, I just find it interesting that it's complained about more than accusations that are more serious or meaningful.

[Lunanite]

I find it interesting how everyone complains about IRC moderation but I haven't heard of anyone volunteering to help. That being said, if anyone wants to be a chat mod, we can discuss it in pm or in the IRC.

 

Ponies are not part of the "hub" that's in progress. That's also why there isn't a site section for it. If it offends people so grievously to be even tangentially related to ponies by small references in a guide, I'll drop specific mentions of form and any indication that it exists.

 

I also find it interesting that the primary stigma we all seem to be worried about is association with ponies and not the association with mental health disorders.

 

I've volunteered numerous times. They think I'm not serious enough. (Who'd a thunk it?) I'm rarely on #tulpa.info , because I take it all to #tulpa or PMs. But I think thr problem isn't, moderation, it's us. Seriously, take it to an off-topic room, I prefer new users not seeing poni vore and other fuzz.

 

As far as ponies, maybe clear up #ponytulpa ? I don't dislike ponies but, image is a thing now.

[Purlox]

(I didn't have time to read the responses above me, so sorry if I'm repeating something)

 

I thought the point of the guide was to make unbiased, generic guide. When I look at your guide I see it fail in this aspect very heavily. I suggest you take a step back and look at your guide again, because it doesn't look like what I thought we wanted to create.

 

Your guide has parts that shouldn't be there at all, this mostly concerns the 1st half of your guide which talks about history, what tulpae are and aren't etc. which shouldn't be in the guide at all, instead they should have their own places on the site. Then there are many parts of the guide that are written with certain biases, with current way of thinking (do you remember that a guide that was based on the current way of thinking about tulpae at the time of creation was the reason we wanted to make a new guide in the first place?) and certain assumptions made on current observations.

 

I see too little good on this guide, so I don't think it can be saved by pointing out every single flaw and correcting it. Because of that I'll make my own generalised guide, where I will try to accomplish the goals I think this one was supposed to.

[Amadeus]

...Ouch.

[Kadoh]

Purlox I think your being a bit harsh. When I read it, Amadeus, I thought it was very well written and informative. I agree about having ponies left out, if that was the first thing I saw when I found out about Tulpae I would have left straight away. There are people here much better at proof reading than I, but to someone like me, that would have been an excellent introduction to Tulpae.

[Amadeus]

Well, the strictness of my instructions were to make an up-to-date guide, not an unbiased one. And not so much generic as general. I was asked to include modern concepts that have grown in success and appeal since the publishing of Dane's and Irish's guides. I was not asked to be bland, and I would absolutely have trouble doing so because... well, bland text is bland, and I'm trying to give the phenomenon more appeal.

 

I wouldn't worry too much about the site structure taking influence from the guide - just some informative links that split up things the guide talks about (which themselves will be heavily scrutinized, I'm sure.)

[Purlox]

I don't know if Pleeb has instructed you otherwise, but what he said few weeks ago makes me think he would want a different guide:

 

Okay, the need for a generalized, broad, guide, is growing with the influx of new users that are coming in fearing subconscious parroting, expecting long times, confused about treating a tulpa as sentient from the start, and dismissing movement that's too early (oh wait, they've always done that).

 

Anyway, with a new generalized introduction that covers a broad aspect of things without frontloading, we can allow users to gain an understanding of tulpae and then refer to the wiki (or the Guides board) for further readings, well, I already kinda said this.

 

Either way, I'm going to make my own, so it doesn't matter who is right.

[cruse]

i thought this is self-inflicted schizophrenia. Oh well, it doesn't matter to me.

 

Though i'd have to say, that guide is really a job well-done.

[Amadeus]

I've cut the 'Old and New Concepts' section. It'll have its place elsewhere.

 

No more ponies, by popular demand.

 

Including the edits made by TeryakywindAndChell. (Thanks, man.)

 

Version 1.1 is up. Have at it.

 

For those of us who can't get at the attachments for some reason:

http://www.mediafire.com/?1d8lwbvc7tade21 - the Word doc

http://www.mediafire.com/?u96dvt89y5yeqvk - the .txt file

Tulpa_Phenomenon_Overview_Guide_v1-1.docx

Tulpa_Phenomenon_Overview_Guide_v1-1.txt