At Crossroads -- Cf's Vision - Poll Vote only here

[CaDan]

[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]This is easily rectified by adding a fellowship forum stickied in each forum.

Not yanking icons can be done away with also but the site needs its congregational forums for believers to be only for believers unless open is added. Outreach is needed yes but ministry from believers to believers is also needed without interferance and debate from those outside of the church.

As far as I know, my congregational forum doesn't want to participate in policing orthodoxy. I desire to unbuild walls.

 

[GreenMunchkin]

This is easily rectified by adding a fellowship forum stickied in each forum.

Not yanking icons can be done away with also but the site needs its congregational forums for believers to be only for believers unless open is added. Outreach is needed yes but ministry from believers to believers is also needed without interferance and debate from those outside of the church.

Non-Christians being able to go in all forums was the best change made.

Transparency was a good one, but that went out the window with Steve and Miracle's bannings.

 

[ZACATK]

An idea I have that I think many people on this site have mentioned before is to have a Christians Only area, but within the CO area have a non-Christians area, such as a subforum, where they too can have the same luxuries the Christians have.. where everyone can post. I also wouldn't mind seeing the congregational areas open where non-Christians can ask questions just as Christians can from other denominations... just no debating.

 

[A New Dawn]

Option 2

Welcome back Miracle_Storm!

Option 2, but I see room for outreach, too. Though I think that if option 2 is what is chosen, it really needs to be Christian and not "almost Christian".

 

[Tonks]

Non-Christians being able to go in all forums was the best change made.

I agree that this has been a good change.

 

[intricatic]

Going with option 2 here.

 

[CaDan]

Abstain and you may loose your only ability to have a direct say in the direction of this site.

I've lived without that for three years. I think I'll get by.

 

[ZACATK]

I also believe the site needs more transparency, however I also believe the rules need to be enforced and not changing everyday through the wikis. Staff should be totally Christian, as they are the leaders of the site, and they should not be voted on. The site should have some sort of ethics team that can enforce internal and external problems within staff... for example if there is a staff/staff conflict, make sure the conflict is being correctly handled as well as staff/member conflicts to ensure fairness in all.

All staff forums should remain private, but a strict internal policy that is public should be adhered to... something along these lines is what I think could make this site better.

 

[Glass*Soul]

What does this even mean??

"Return to a more restricted Christians-only site with a heavy emphasis on uniting mainstream Christians only with a less emphasis on outreach, in which case we keep the name."

Does this mean that in a few days, if the poll is decided against our favor, that I and all of the other non-Nicene-affirming members will be kicked out of the site?? On the basis of a poll taken in which we are a small minority and have no protection except to throw ourselves on the mercy of the majority?

I'd really like to know now. I've spent hours working on the rules, up into the night, and rallying support where I thought I could for the new reforms. Which looks right about now to make me a tool and dupe to what has apparently been a whim to be discarded on the results of a single poll.

But I'm just one person.

I think I'll spend whatever is left of my freedom here discussing theology, a pleasure I have put off in favor of helping with the rules.

I think I'll also go ahead and make my faith icon visible. I changed it this morning after much thought. I'm not sure what the repurcusions will be, inwardly or outwardly, but something told me time might be short to go ahead and do what has been on my mind to do for quite some time.

 

[Letalis]

I agree that this has been a good change.

Also agreeing here.

 

[Nobility]

Hmm..

I voted option 2 but like many others, I woudn't like it exclusively christian.

How the forum structure used to be was a reasonable structure, but definately with a few changes.

 

[A New Dawn]

Non-Christians being able to go in all forums was the best change made.

I agree that this has been a good change.

I'm glad that change was made, too.

 

[TasManOfGod]

I would lke to see CF be a Christian based site that excluded heavy handed staff members who seem to get enjoyment of gloating over their legacy of banning their brothers in the Lord and who have a different understaning of how to interpret the Words "Be holy"

 

[CaDan]

Welcome back Miracle_Storm!

Option 2, but I see room for outreach, too. Though I think that if option 2 is what is chosen, it really needs to be Christian and not "almost Christian".

And who will define and enforce it? Does the Book of Life sit on your shelf?

 

[GreenMunchkin]

Wiki is an unmitigated disaster. *Everyone* loses with that one.

Also, reports being open to comments by everyone means half of them turn into anonymous flame wars, so we may have to forfeit that one for the greater good, also.

Seriously, this poll is ridiculous.

 

[Tonks]

I also believe the site needs more transparency, however I also believe the rules need to be enforced and not changing everyday through the wikis. Staff should be totally Christian, as they are the leaders of the site, and they should not be voted on. The site should have some sort of ethics team that can enforce internal and external problems within staff... for example if there is a staff/staff conflict, make sure the conflict is being correctly handled as well as staff/member conflicts to ensure fairness in all.

We have several new non Christian staff that have been beyond reproach. Should "leadership" be Christian, perhaps...I care more about fair ajudication of the rules at a staff level...whatever the rules may be.

All staff forums should remain private, but a strict internal policy that is public should be adhered to... something along these lines is what I think could make this site better.

If folks want to see the CR no big deal...it's not like I've changed my posting habits at all. I think, however, that there is a demonstrable need for at least a few private areas as there are issues that should not be public - particularly when there are predatory users amongst the flock.

 

[Miracle Storm]

Welcome back Miracle_Storm!

Option 2, but I see room for outreach, too. Though I think that if option 2 is what is chosen, it really needs to be Christian and not "almost Christian".

Thank you sis!

...and Amen!

 

[GraceInHim]

Erwin,
think we need another option. I cannot vote due to these only 2 options. Somewhat in the middle and agree with what Tonks & Newman99 stated above.

Peace

 

[FriendsFellowship]

Erwin,
think we need another option. I cannot vote due to these only 2 options. Somewhat in the middle and agree with what Tonks & Newman99 stated above.

Peace

Don't vote and others may decide for you.

 

[CaDan]

Wiki is an unmitigated disaster. *Everyone* loses with that one.


Topic drift . . . .

Wiki is nothing more than a tool. It is useful for creating multi-author documents. It can be helpful for building consensus, but it does not build consensus all by itself. The most important ingredient for building consensus is time.