The movement promises a society weher everyone can participate and everyone is included regardless of background....

In what or any way does the movement now operate at all like what it says it promotes?

No votes, no consultations. They say no leaders but it seems Peter's word is law. I am not getting on at the guy he is a great speaker and i loved his vids, they really made me think. And now we are excluding people based on a questionable test.....

I am I the only one that fears where all this is going?

Fox wrote:
So basicly zeitgiest excludes those that either dont believe exactly what Peter does or are not academics of all his litrature?

Isnt that what this test is?

No.. why do you want to read far more into it than what it is? I am not even sure I agree with the test but at least I know it has absolutely nothing to do with reasons like that.

The movement promises a society weher everyone can participate and everyone is included regardless of background....

In what or any way does the movement now operate at all like what it says it promotes?

No votes, no consultations. They say no leaders but it seems Peter's word is law. I am not getting on at the guy he is a great speaker and i loved his vids, they really made me think. And now we are excluding people based on a questionable test.....

I am I the only one that fears where all this is going?

I'm sorry you feel this way Fox, but I think you need to step back and recognize the context and function. As of now, the test has served an important role for quality and helping the Mods. I don't think you understand the amount of BS we have dealt with on this forum thus far and the amount of time wasted. The test is a technical solution to a social problem.
To say it "excludes" people is erroneous for it is nothing more than a simple, open book test, with the sources provided. It shows a basic dedication to the movement and if repeat trolls can get in through the test, which they still do, than others who actually care about the movement will spend some extra time.
As far as feedback, most I have talked to found it fun and informative. Sorry, but this is needed. I have been working 12 hour a day for 17 months on getting this website and community going and this little quiz to gain access to the community forum is a minor issue for anyone who truly appreciates the Movement. not to mention dozens of people pass it everyday, so I dont know where this "exclusion" idea comes from. Nothing stops anyone but their own level of interest.

As far as "Peter's Law", where is it you would like to participate? Are you in a regional Chapter? Do you attend those meetings and give your input? This is a bottom up collective. There is nothing on the global site that needs to be "voted on" and it is literally created by suggestions by members.

Also, with reference to your other post saying " the test is about agreement", this is wrong. Please read the header for the test, where it distinctly states that the test is about learning the materials/understanding the Movement, not "agreeing with" each point. This is very clear. In other words, it doesn't matter if you agree with the Qs - it isn't about that.

I took the test twice. I got a 13 the first try (no books) and an 18 the second try (with books). I didn't consider the test THAT hard.

Fox, if you are conditioned so that testing on a given material means you are expected to believe it all faithfully, I am deeply concerned. You are not questioning things enough. You are not attempting to come to a complete and well-informed conclusion for yourself. What you describe is an attempt to merely memorize facts rather than comprehend them with objective reasoning.

Consider for a moment what this forum's purpose is. The way I see it, this forum is a place for discussion and learning, but most of all a tool for extending the movement. Suggestions are made and decisions are arrived at on this board. As such, we must have decisive discussions by well-informed individuals. TVP advocates that decisions should be arrived at by reviewing the available information, rather than making them based on half-baked opinions as our politicians do. I respect this position.

The overall questions here, as I see it, are 1) whether or not a person should be expected to prove they are sufficiently informed before engaging in potentially decision-making discussions and 2) whether or not a person who is proven to be NOT sufficiently informed has the right to influence those decisize discussions.

Considering politicians have no such assurances, I'm compelled to support the test in order to encourage people to do their homework. If they choose not to do their homework, I don't really see how they could contribute solutions.

I have been reading this thread with interest and my sympathies swinging from one side to the other. I didn't like the test and failed in every time in 6 attempts. This made me worry about new recruits turning away from the movement. However, as has been shown, It matters not if you agree with the test. It serves a function and if you want to post on the forums you will take the time to pass it. It is assumed that you agree with and believe in what TZM advocates or else you would not be here.

As for people fearing that there is a hierarchy developing or that we must learn Peterjosephs 'law', as far as I am concerned this whole idea of a brighter shared future belongs to nobody. The vision can't happen with old thinking like that. It deserves to be heard by everybody. I am a self appointed regional co-ordinator and I will spread this idea to everyone for as long as I believe in it myself.

Lets remember what we have to do. Its about giving people a chance to imagine the possibilities, if not just see the glaring recurring problems!

We can't have our own members thinking of us as a cult. For the record, to me a cult is for the gullible and usually entails money for salvation. The reason I trust TZM is because we don't ask people for money. Its that simple.

The whole concept of "Peter Joseph's Law" sounds like a blaring fallacy to me. Peter does not provide instruction. He does not dictate our actions. He does not enforce his word. He doesn't do anything except share his personal views for the asking and encourages us to question those views if we feel the need. He's not the leader of this movement, just its founder!

Come on guys, it is just a test. And a relatively easy one if you are familiar with the movement and if you are not take some time and study our material, it wont harm you. There is no time limit and its an open book exam.

Maybe we're all looking at it from an "insiders" point of view. By that I mean everyone who is posting here was either here before the test was installed, or has managed to pass it since and so feel somewhat complacent....and please don't deny that without thinking on it a wee bit. If you think deep down I'm sure you'll realise what I'm saying here has a basis of truth to it.
Those of us who have been around a while have seen the troubles caused by a few members who have crossed the line and understand from an "insiders" point of view the troubles they have caused, but new members have no idea of that. To them it's probably not even evident nor relevant, yet.
So, how about we look at it from an "outsiders" possible point of view, and I'd like to use an analogy here.
Imagine you see an advert telling you there's a really cool new debating club in town, one where you can talk about interesting, relevant stuff. There's an open invite at the end of the advert to join for free, and everyone is welcome. It sounds good, you maybe aren't too sure about exactly everything that people talk about there, but what you've heard so far catches your attention, you get fired up and you decide to drop by one day to find out more and maybe get involved in a deeper fashion.
When you get to the door, you find you have to fill in a questionaire to be allowed in. There would be an explanation of why the questionaire is enforced, because of past troubles. You have no intentions of making trouble, you know you just basically want to test the water, get the feel of the place, before going further.
Now just how would that add up in your mind, specially if you are still in a semi-conditioned state? Would it make you feel welcome?
I think it would be more of a bucket of cold water which would make a lot of people think "Oh stuff it!" and not bother.

Ok, next scenario. Suppose you decide to take the test and you don't pass. You are then told that if you really want to join, you have to prove it by going away and reading up on the topics the club talks about. You are given the info and left to it.
By now wouldn't you be thinking "wtf?" and be thinking twice about wanting to join already?

Now, another possible scenario staying within the club analogy.
Imagine that everyone was welcomed personally when they arrive at the door and say their first words to the club. A friendly doorman would explain the different debating areas and how they work, mentioning clearly that certain topics which have been well thrashed out previously, can be touched upon in a specific room where they don't disturb the flow of new topics being currently discussed. If they don't understand and insist on bringing up worn out topics in public areas, regular members should ignore them and a specialised public relations member would take them to a private room to have an in depth conversation with them until the matter is cleared up. If after all efforts made by the PR, or maybe PRs in plural, the newbie still doesn't keep to the lines of courtsey the club stipulates, after say two or three warnings depending on the gravity of their lack of respect, they will be shown the door.
I really believe that to be treated as a possible problem, rather than a possible asset to the club is an insult, a kind of guilty before proven innocent mind state, and definitely not welcoming. Why not try positive treatment instead of the reverse?
Hmm?
ZG Hugs

Its quite ironical, indeed
It will scare off, that's for sure -
but we aren't quite the generating force for that fear

This is challenging. Zeitgeist is.