Ethics and Policies

A. G. Maisey · 3rd December 2009, 10:00 PM

Thank you RSWORD for your thoughtful post.

You are, of course, correct, in that an individual may have his own standards for ethical behaviour, however, the meaning of the word "ethics" is much broader than a set of personal rules for personal conduct.

It is generally accepted that there are three schools of ethics:- Aristotlian, then the school grounded in the philosophies of Kant, and lastly, utilitarianism. For our purposes here, we can probably direct our focus to the principles of the school of utilitarianism, which hold that the guiding principle of conduct should be that which results in the greatest happiness or benefit for the greatest number of people.

Far from the concept of "ethics" being limited to personal standards, we will find that most, if not all professions have standards of ethics, the infringement of which can result in censure of a member of the profession by the profession itself, or can result in legal action being taken against that person who has acted in an unethical way.

Ethics are real, widely spread throughout our communities, and govern the behaviour of the members of those communities.

However, the standards which various codes of ethics espouse can vary from one community to another, and in that sense, ethics are not graven in stone, except insofar as each individual community is concerned:- that which is held to be unethical for one group of people may not be held to be unethical in a different community.

In this present discussion of policies and ethics, we are discussing the ethics which we as a group would like to see apply within the community of the Keris Warung Kopi, the keris discussion sub-forum of the Ethnographic Arms & Armour Forum.

When the necessary decisions have been taken in respect of what is to be considered ethical behaviour, and what is considered not to be ethical behaviour, then the policies to govern that behaviour will be formulated and put in place.

This is the way in which those two separate concepts of "ethics", and "policies" are related one unto the other.

We could think of this exercise in this way:- if this current discussion and the decisions and actions flowing from it were occurring in the corporate world, what we would be looking at would be an exercise in corporate governance. As I am sure we all understand, proper corporate governance is essential for the continued health of any organisation.

And that is exactly what we are attempting to ensure here:- the continued health of our little keris discussion group.

It is regretable that it has become necessary to raise this matter at all, however, if we look at the history of keris discussion in public forums, it will become clear that for some unfathomable reason the things that occur which are related to keris are not necessarily echoed in the discussions and occurrences which take place in discussion of other weapon types.

The keris presents a special case, and that was the base reason that keris discussion was hived off into a separate forum.

Those of us who regularly contribute to and monitor discussion taking place within the Keris Warung Kopi have become aware that behaviour of some of our contributors might be viewed as tending towards that which could be considered unethical.

The present discussion is an attempt to gauge the opinions of regular contributors to this sub-forum in respect of what standards of ethical behaviour should govern activity within the sub-forum. Hopefully, when this exercise has run its course, management of this site will implement policies which will result in an acceptable and uniform code of ethics being followed by members of the Keris Warung Kopi, which will result in the greatest happiness and benefit for the greatest number of members of this group of people.

In other words, the practical application of the ethical philosophy of utilitarianism.

Rick · 16th December 2009, 10:45 PM

I would suggest that any comments about the recently closed thread appear in this one .

guwaya · 17th December 2009, 02:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick

I would suggest that any comments about the recently closed thread appear in this one .

Hallo to the forum and especially do David and the moderator team.

I became shortly ago a new member of Vikingsword although following as a none-member guest sporadicly over the years. I still prefer to follow the forum as 'guwaya' until I possibly decide to open my identity.

I am interested in the keris already for decades and the reason why I waited that long for becoming a member is to search in the actually demonstrated action. I recognized over the time that the forum was more and more used by persons who have only two reasons to follow here.

1. They want to get easily informations for what they otherwise have to spend a lot of time and money - doing researches is not easy and it is expensive. This might be still ok. if there wouldn't be the second reason,
namely the aim to receive this informations to know if they could sell a piece for a higher sum or a lesser - the aim is not primarily the interest into the subjct ([I]kerisolog, but more to get informations about the quality of an item, an idea for a materal taxation.

I unfortunately have to say that the behaviour David recognized presently is to be watched more and more in recent times - also mebers act or acted in this way some time ago - discussing here an item first - getting a more negative reaction and then try to offer the item at Ebay but naturally without the information received at Warung Kopi - or the other way around - good feedback - high price offer.

This evolution is a very dissapointing for me as Warung Kopi would loose it original aim it was grounded for - the discussion from people who have a same interest, namely the kerisologi and not primarily the selling of items.

2. In recent times I also recognized that people follow the forum with the aim to bee seen in the collectors world as an EXPERT. They might think that they if often sending post which counts - whatever you write ("nice item"- sudah) and receive a high posting number would help them on this way (see. already 700 postings - must be a very active member at the vikingsword expert forum a.s.o.). But a real deeper going discussion about the theme kerisologi what under my view should be the essence of the forum they never follow. Its just the hunt to get a name, to be somebody in the kerisworld - a lie to themselves. Have a look how many selfproduced books are presently published at the market - sometimes really nice picture books but with no worthfull informations for real interested collectors - just comparing-books (look, this I have, mine is better a.s.o.).

And here I come to a point I think the moderator team has also to act as perons with a wider knowledge. How can it be, that books from Tammens or Kerner (both might forgive as the already passed away and cannot answer upon this critism) are handled as a reference literature. Does anybody know how they did their researches? Did they research or is it just their own unprooved thinking which they sell/sold.

If you take the triology from Tammens for example, in one of these books he has pictures of buginese blades attributed to the javanese tangguh system - this is a more or less bad joke but says something about the quality of researching. From whom did they receive their informations? Upon which basis?

The real informations are in the old books and essays in the old peridicals mostly in Dutch language from persons who had a real interest in serious information (and naturally to get with contacts to higher ranked persons in Solo, Yogya, Jakarta a.s.o. involved in the subject - but possibly difficult to get in contact with; also in visiting STSI a.s.o.).

But these are no good picture books - people have to read and it is easier to receive informations via picture books (this is ........ and this is ........) and unfortunately these writers in some decades will be handled as experts and the real ones (Solyom for example) will slowely be fogotten and the "market" will use new terms brought up by dealers ('Sumbawa Keris' - wonder when the first 'Tanimbar Keris' will be offered). If somebody is really interested into the theme then he has to read the old books or better essays in the different scientific periodical but this means to invest time.

I think this has to be stated and at the comments upon Davis thread is already to recognize who has more the sellers interest and who is more interested to follow the forum the way it was - I suppose - basically established for: the change of information for interested people in the same subject keris without any peronal profit thinking, but I am afraid in this times this basis might get lost and I also don't know how to stop it.

I think a reaction like David did is very usefull and is one big step in the direction to keep or bring back the forum to that it was created for - persons might be ashamed to try again to use the forum in that way!

All the best,
guwaya

kai · 17th December 2009, 07:57 AM

Welcome to the forum, Guwaya! (As a posting member

)

Quote:

2. In recent times I also recognized that people follow the forum with the aim to bee seen in the collectors world as an EXPERT.

This seems to happen in about any human endeavor but I'm sure that the quality of the postings makes it very evident even to non-frequent lurkers where the knowledge among the membership resides. Having said that, I believe that our forum does benefit from all honest contributions (posting pics for comments, well thought-out questions, as well as sound answers) and I appreciate any effort for contributing here regardless wether someone is an interested newbie or an oldtimer. It's certainly worth to think twice before hitting the reply button; OTOH, I don't think we should raise the bar to high for contributions.

Quote:

How can it be, that books from Tammens or Kerner (both might forgive as the already passed away and cannot answer upon this critism) are handled as a reference literature.

I believe that these books are not mentioned that often (on average - they have been referenced a few times lately). It's my impression that about half of the citations are actually suitable (referring to an illustration or mentioning these books when other/recent keris literature is discussed) while the rest of the citations are usually given in the context of "name games" (identifying pamor, etc.).

Quote:

...and the real ones (Solyom for example) will slowely be fogotten...

Not here in the forum - this book is regularly cited as a very good starting point for folks interested in keris. And the recent English translation of Groneman's papers will make his early work more accessible.

Regards,
Kai

guwaya · 18th December 2009, 12:49 AM

"It's certainly worth to think twice before hitting the reply button; OTOH, I don't think we should raise the bar to high for contributions."

"Not here in the forum - this book is regularly cited as a very good starting point for folks interested in keris. And the recent English translation of Groneman's papers will make his early work more accessible."

THANK YOU FOR TEACHING ME . BESIDES, I STARTED WITH THE GRONEMAN - ESSAYS.

guwaya

Rick · 18th December 2009, 01:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by guwaya

"It's certainly worth to think twice before hitting the reply button; OTOH, I don't think we should raise the bar to high for contributions."

"Not here in the forum - this book is regularly cited as a very good starting point for folks interested in keris. And the recent English translation of Groneman's papers will make his early work more accessible."

THANK YOU FOR TEACHING ME . BESIDES, I STARTED WITH THE GRONEMAN - ESSAYS.

guwaya

Guwaya, are you annoyed about something Kai has said ?

guwaya · 18th December 2009, 04:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick

Guwaya, are you annoyed about something Kai has said ?

Yes Rick - I was - it is gone now after my little ironicle comment. It is ok. now and I don't want to make a wayang story out of it.

BluErf · 18th December 2009, 02:58 AM

Dear Guwaya,

Welcome to the forum. We look forward to you sharing your knowledge with us.

guwaya · 18th December 2009, 04:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BluErf

Dear Guwaya,

Welcome to the forum. We look forward to you sharing your knowledge with us.

Dear BluErf,

Thank you and I hope I can.

A. G. Maisey · 18th December 2009, 05:16 AM

I tend to agree with the points made by Guwaya, in that it is true that people have joined and contribute to this discussion group for various reasons.

One such reason is the gaining of knowledge, be it for whatever purpose.

I doubt that anybody has joined and contributes in any attempt to be seen as "expert". I could perhaps be wrong in this opinion, but if there are reputation seekers amongst us, I would need to ask the question of exactly what base are they building their reputation on? An internet discussion group? If I wanted to build a big fat rep, I'd most certainly go about it in a very different way.

But there is another reason for people to belong to, and contribute to this Forum, and that is simply the motivation to spread knowledge to a wider group of people. In earlier days when the world was full of people who read books and magazines this type of person would have regularly published articles in magazines, and perhaps even produced a book or two. In this day and age of the short attention span and the two minute time grab, perhaps a more efficient way to reach people is through the currently more popular medium of the internet.

The problem of covert dealers who milk our membership for information that in future could be used to the membership's disadvantage is a real one, and one that I believe will soon be rectified. The problem is not dealers, but covert dealers and unethical use of information gained in a devious fashion. Any special interest group will contain people who deal --- car clubs, bicycle clubs, rifle clubs, knitting circles, garden clubs, quilting circles --- etc. etc, etc. When people come together because of a common interest it is inevitable that the people who supply the members of that group will also become a part of the group. These dealers are usually welcomed into the group because they are a source of knowledge and they can assist the membership of the group. Where things go bad is when the dealer begins to use the other members of the group as milk cows. Regrettably, this has been happening here.

The books by Tammens and Kerner have been mentioned.

Again I agree with Guwaya that these books contain flaws.

Martin Kerner's work is easy to criticise on some levels, however, he did make one very major contribution to the study of the keris. This contribution is seldom mentioned, and I believe is very rarely understood by people with an interest in the keris.

Why?

Simply because it requires a lot of mental effort for somebody with no understanding of statistics to gain any inkling at all of what Martin Kerner was writing about.

This work is Kerner's statistical analysis of early keris, and I believe that this work is what Martin Kerner will be remembered for.

Ing. Tammens writings also contain flaws, especially in respect of the illogical and utterly incorrect way in which he has used the Javanese tangguh system for his classifications --- as Guwaya has already pointed out.

However, none of us are perfect, and Ing Tammens did provide a very good common reference long before Insiklopedi hit the book stores --- and let us not be of the opinion that Insiklopedi, even though written by a Javanese gentleman and calling upon Javanese resources, is perfect. It is not. There is much incorrect information in this book, and where the information can be accepted as correct, it is correct only as according to one particular school of thought.

Dr. Groneman's writings have also received mention, and it is beyond doubt that his works have very considerable historical value, but again, there are imperfections in his reporting --- which is only to be expected:- we are all human, and mankind does err.

Guwaya mentions the "old books" as the correct and accurate sources for information. I have a very great number of these "old books". Most only date from the period 1900 to 1940. To my way of thinking, this makes them recent books. Not old at all. In these "old books" I find that once again there are variations in opinion, and it seems to me, that often the opinions presented come from a very narrow base of knowledge, even though that base may have been accepted at the time as "traditional".

Then we have the matter of exactly what information one seeks in respect of the keris.

Do we seek names of various types and attributes that will permit a system of classification to be formed?

Do we seek technical knowledge?

Do we seek socio/cultural information?

Exactly what type of information do we seek?

I would suggest that that which is accepted as correct in any of these fields of keris knowledge can be shown to have varied according to time and place, and that no universally acceptable and logically accurate information base has yet been found.

In such an environment, I most humbly suggest that all contributions to the ongoing investigation and discussion of the keris can be considered to have some value.

However, this discourse on motivations for belonging to our discussion group, and motivations in the publication of books is a deviation from the central red vein of this thread.

I have been hoping to see some more opinions in respect of policy changes desired by the membership of this discussion group. Not just comment on those things that some of us may not particularly like, but clearly defined objectives to be achieved by any changes in policy.

Any more input would be most welcome.

How about you, Guwaya?

You are clearly a man with great depth of knowledge in the field of keris study, hence we could be expected to value your opinion.

What would you like to see achieved by any upcoming changes in policy?

16th December 2009, 10:45 PM	#2
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,336	If You've Something To Say .. I would suggest that any comments about the recently closed thread appear in this one .

18th December 2009, 12:49 AM	#5
guwaya Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 45	It's certainly worth to think twice before hitting the reply button; OTOH, I don't th "It's certainly worth to think twice before hitting the reply button; OTOH, I don't think we should raise the bar to high for contributions." "Not here in the forum - this book is regularly cited as a very good starting point for folks interested in keris. And the recent English translation of Groneman's papers will make his early work more accessible." THANK YOU FOR TEACHING ME . BESIDES, I STARTED WITH THE GRONEMAN - ESSAYS. guwaya

3rd December 2009, 10:00 PM	#1
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,992	Thank you RSWORD for your thoughtful post. You are, of course, correct, in that an individual may have his own standards for ethical behaviour, however, the meaning of the word "ethics" is much broader than a set of personal rules for personal conduct. It is generally accepted that there are three schools of ethics:- Aristotlian, then the school grounded in the philosophies of Kant, and lastly, utilitarianism. For our purposes here, we can probably direct our focus to the principles of the school of utilitarianism, which hold that the guiding principle of conduct should be that which results in the greatest happiness or benefit for the greatest number of people. Far from the concept of "ethics" being limited to personal standards, we will find that most, if not all professions have standards of ethics, the infringement of which can result in censure of a member of the profession by the profession itself, or can result in legal action being taken against that person who has acted in an unethical way. Ethics are real, widely spread throughout our communities, and govern the behaviour of the members of those communities. However, the standards which various codes of ethics espouse can vary from one community to another, and in that sense, ethics are not graven in stone, except insofar as each individual community is concerned:- that which is held to be unethical for one group of people may not be held to be unethical in a different community. In this present discussion of policies and ethics, we are discussing the ethics which we as a group would like to see apply within the community of the Keris Warung Kopi, the keris discussion sub-forum of the Ethnographic Arms & Armour Forum. When the necessary decisions have been taken in respect of what is to be considered ethical behaviour, and what is considered not to be ethical behaviour, then the policies to govern that behaviour will be formulated and put in place. This is the way in which those two separate concepts of "ethics", and "policies" are related one unto the other. We could think of this exercise in this way:- if this current discussion and the decisions and actions flowing from it were occurring in the corporate world, what we would be looking at would be an exercise in corporate governance. As I am sure we all understand, proper corporate governance is essential for the continued health of any organisation. And that is exactly what we are attempting to ensure here:- the continued health of our little keris discussion group. It is regretable that it has become necessary to raise this matter at all, however, if we look at the history of keris discussion in public forums, it will become clear that for some unfathomable reason the things that occur which are related to keris are not necessarily echoed in the discussions and occurrences which take place in discussion of other weapon types. The keris presents a special case, and that was the base reason that keris discussion was hived off into a separate forum. Those of us who regularly contribute to and monitor discussion taking place within the Keris Warung Kopi have become aware that behaviour of some of our contributors might be viewed as tending towards that which could be considered unethical. The present discussion is an attempt to gauge the opinions of regular contributors to this sub-forum in respect of what standards of ethical behaviour should govern activity within the sub-forum. Hopefully, when this exercise has run its course, management of this site will implement policies which will result in an acceptable and uniform code of ethics being followed by members of the Keris Warung Kopi, which will result in the greatest happiness and benefit for the greatest number of members of this group of people. In other words, the practical application of the ethical philosophy of utilitarianism.

18th December 2009, 02:58 AM	#8
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	Dear Guwaya, Welcome to the forum. We look forward to you sharing your knowledge with us.

18th December 2009, 05:16 AM	#10
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,992	I tend to agree with the points made by Guwaya, in that it is true that people have joined and contribute to this discussion group for various reasons. One such reason is the gaining of knowledge, be it for whatever purpose. I doubt that anybody has joined and contributes in any attempt to be seen as "expert". I could perhaps be wrong in this opinion, but if there are reputation seekers amongst us, I would need to ask the question of exactly what base are they building their reputation on? An internet discussion group? If I wanted to build a big fat rep, I'd most certainly go about it in a very different way. But there is another reason for people to belong to, and contribute to this Forum, and that is simply the motivation to spread knowledge to a wider group of people. In earlier days when the world was full of people who read books and magazines this type of person would have regularly published articles in magazines, and perhaps even produced a book or two. In this day and age of the short attention span and the two minute time grab, perhaps a more efficient way to reach people is through the currently more popular medium of the internet. The problem of covert dealers who milk our membership for information that in future could be used to the membership's disadvantage is a real one, and one that I believe will soon be rectified. The problem is not dealers, but covert dealers and unethical use of information gained in a devious fashion. Any special interest group will contain people who deal --- car clubs, bicycle clubs, rifle clubs, knitting circles, garden clubs, quilting circles --- etc. etc, etc. When people come together because of a common interest it is inevitable that the people who supply the members of that group will also become a part of the group. These dealers are usually welcomed into the group because they are a source of knowledge and they can assist the membership of the group. Where things go bad is when the dealer begins to use the other members of the group as milk cows. Regrettably, this has been happening here. The books by Tammens and Kerner have been mentioned. Again I agree with Guwaya that these books contain flaws. Martin Kerner's work is easy to criticise on some levels, however, he did make one very major contribution to the study of the keris. This contribution is seldom mentioned, and I believe is very rarely understood by people with an interest in the keris. Why? Simply because it requires a lot of mental effort for somebody with no understanding of statistics to gain any inkling at all of what Martin Kerner was writing about. This work is Kerner's statistical analysis of early keris, and I believe that this work is what Martin Kerner will be remembered for. Ing. Tammens writings also contain flaws, especially in respect of the illogical and utterly incorrect way in which he has used the Javanese tangguh system for his classifications --- as Guwaya has already pointed out. However, none of us are perfect, and Ing Tammens did provide a very good common reference long before Insiklopedi hit the book stores --- and let us not be of the opinion that Insiklopedi, even though written by a Javanese gentleman and calling upon Javanese resources, is perfect. It is not. There is much incorrect information in this book, and where the information can be accepted as correct, it is correct only as according to one particular school of thought. Dr. Groneman's writings have also received mention, and it is beyond doubt that his works have very considerable historical value, but again, there are imperfections in his reporting --- which is only to be expected:- we are all human, and mankind does err. Guwaya mentions the "old books" as the correct and accurate sources for information. I have a very great number of these "old books". Most only date from the period 1900 to 1940. To my way of thinking, this makes them recent books. Not old at all. In these "old books" I find that once again there are variations in opinion, and it seems to me, that often the opinions presented come from a very narrow base of knowledge, even though that base may have been accepted at the time as "traditional". Then we have the matter of exactly what information one seeks in respect of the keris. Do we seek names of various types and attributes that will permit a system of classification to be formed? Do we seek technical knowledge? Do we seek socio/cultural information? Exactly what type of information do we seek? I would suggest that that which is accepted as correct in any of these fields of keris knowledge can be shown to have varied according to time and place, and that no universally acceptable and logically accurate information base has yet been found. In such an environment, I most humbly suggest that all contributions to the ongoing investigation and discussion of the keris can be considered to have some value. However, this discourse on motivations for belonging to our discussion group, and motivations in the publication of books is a deviation from the central red vein of this thread. I have been hoping to see some more opinions in respect of policy changes desired by the membership of this discussion group. Not just comment on those things that some of us may not particularly like, but clearly defined objectives to be achieved by any changes in policy. Any more input would be most welcome. How about you, Guwaya? You are clearly a man with great depth of knowledge in the field of keris study, hence we could be expected to value your opinion. What would you like to see achieved by any upcoming changes in policy?