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

[FriendsFellowship]

I don't think anyone's bickering at the moment.

Good!

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

Well, kind of.

Basically we have a group of people that are asking to not be treated like dirt, not be called tools of satan, not be called "wolves and spiritual pedophiles" (a direct quote from someone) and all sorts of things. Essentially all we want is to quit being beaten with a stick.

Then we have another group of people want to keep beating us with sticks, keep treating us like second class citizens, because our mere existence is a threat to them. It doesn't matter that many of us are actual christians, nor does it matter that some of us act like christians but are not theists. Our behavior is irrelevant because no matter how we behave, we're a threat. If we have the gall to ask to be treated with basic respect, we're a threat. If we have a seeker who is interested in becoming a full-fledged christian, we're a threat. If one of us tries to remove God from the little box they've tried to keep Him in, we're a threat.

It's really, really hard to form a compromise between two groups when one of them simply can't deal with the existence of the other.

Pretty much my point, exactly.

If the "wolves and spiritual pedophiles" aren't here as their common enemy, they'll be just as loud against someone else, some other group.

Eventually, there will be no common enemies, and they'll begin eating themselves. Just as loudly. Just as rudely.

 

[Angel4Truth]

invisible trousers, real moderation with clear concise rules that are evenly applied -that moderates posts instead of moderating people and veiws -is whats needed - not allowing the same to happen to others in reverse because it feels justified.

Having no or close to no rules and no consequence for violating the rules wont stop what your complaining about it will be worse because there will be no recourse and believe me people know it which is why the site is out of control right now.

The problems werent adressed with this wiki change - it only made them worse.

 

[Axver]

Well, the current discussion is proving why polls don't work. I see multiple problems that doom this poll's results to being of low relevance:

1. The results can be fixed by various means, specifically sockpuppets and mobilising otherwise inactive members.
2. The poll is self-selective and thus cannot in any way be considered to represent the majority view of the forum.
3. The poll creates a false dichotomy. I honestly do not see how on earth this has turned into a "liberal vs conservative" debate (and as a political scientist, I believe such a distinction is grossly misleading anyway).

 

[FriendsFellowship]

Well, the current discussion is proving why polls don't work. I see multiple problems that doom this poll's results to being of low relevance:

1. The results can be fixed by various means, specifically sockpuppets and mobilising otherwise inactive members.
2. The poll is self-selective and thus cannot in any way be considered to represent the majority view of the forum.
3. The poll creates a false dichotomy. I honestly do not see how on earth this has turned into a "liberal vs conservative" debate (and as a political scientist, I believe such a distinction is grossly misleading anyway).

So which way are you going to vote?

 

[*Starlight*]

I picked the first option. The second one goes totally against the CF vision, because "uniting mainstream Christians only" is opposed to "uniting all Christians".

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

Every single problem we've had here since the change (personal issues excluded) is Erwin's fault.

Not through anything he did, but rather what he didn't do.

He sprang this on us without any form of interim structure. He nuked the place, then asked us to rebuild on the glass.

Who can vote? The most basic premise of a democracy wasn't addressed. We can't even have a vote to determine who can vote -- because we don't know who can vote.

I don't hold that against him. I think that he made a grand effort to do what he felt was right. But it involved a distinct lack of foresight.

We were allowed to build all willy-nilly -- we shouldn't have been. We should have started from the ground up. Voting regulations first, structure of the Forums and Sub-Forums next, basic rules after that.

Instead, we have only a semi-workable site-wide set of rules, a horribly unworkable Report system, and conflicting rules about socks, banned people, and returnees -- yet with Wikis aplenty about avatars, sigs, and speedposting.

Therein lies the problem. We needed a foundation to build on, and we didn't have one. So we built whatever, wherever.

 

[sk8Joyful]

A ghetto is a ghetto is a ghetto. Give it fancy names, dress it up in the Cross, it remains a ghetto
.

I Vote that another Poll be made, listing more choices

 

[ravenscape]

This thread is overheating a little. Please everyone, take a step back and try not to respond in kind. Try to respond with kindness if possible.

Thank you,

Raven
Support Team

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

Ummm, Raven... are we reading the same thread?

 

[Petunia]

Option 2.

But I don't believe there is less emphasis on outreach for this option. I believe there's more emphasis on outreach. The site was fine the way it originally was. I have always been in agreement on Erwin's original vision. But the way the site is now, with having atheists, witches in leadership here.. this is no longer a Christian ministry. I don't even think it would fall under the category of 'Christian Forum'.

 

[SumTinWong]

I voted option 1 because I feel that the old system was built on a false premise to try and unite people who all wished to be un-united.

 

[Brimshack]

I do wish Erwin had devoted his latest efforts more towards fixing the wiki system and giving his mods a workable job (either more power or less responsibility). If some of the practical problems could be resolved, I think it would help a great deal. This poll has done nothing but renew the polemics. It does look very much as though option 2 will win, and things will reverse again, so very soon after the first radical change. If those are the only options presented, then I see no other course from this point, except perhaps another reversal (ignorinhg the poll). What then?

I can't help thinking the net effect of all this will be a great deal more resentment. I don't see much lese coming from this move.

 

[sk8Joyful]

Erwin, you've stacked the decks already. Your descriptions are loaded in favour of one option, straight off the bat.

Further, there's middle ground to be had, and you know it. Neither of those options are hugely palatable. Why are you still fostering an "us" and "them" dynamic?

It's possible to be a Christian Forum and have outreach. In fact, if there isn't outreach, it's not Christian. Your premise implies it has to be one or the other. That's incorrect.

Agreed

 

[Angel4Truth]

Matthew 7:22. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23. And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
24. Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:
25. And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.
26. And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:
27. And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.

Deuteronomy 32:3 For I proclaim the name of the Lord: ascribe greatness to our God. 4. He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.

We need to building CF on Christ.

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

What is a "Christian Forum"?

A place where only Christians are welcome? A place run by Christians? A place owned by Christians? A place that's mostly Christian?

Suppose instead, this was a Christian cafeteria. What would that mean? Are only Christians allowed to eat there? Do they only hire Christians? Is the owner a Christian? Is the atmosphere Christian in nature?

What does "Christian Forum" mean?

 

[Brimshack]

What is a "Christian Forum"?

A place where only Christians are welcome? A place run by Christians? A place owned by Christians? A place that's mostly Christian?

Suppose instead, this was a Christian cafeteria. What would that mean? Are only Christians allowed to eat there? Do they only hire Christians? Is the owner a Christian? Is the atmosphere Christian in nature?

What does "Christian Forum" mean?

Just an observation. All your options center on the nature of the people here. None focus on the nature of the message, the ideas, or the practices of Christianity.

It is a sad fact that the only way people seem capable of conceptualizing the Christianity of the forum (even when really trying) is to begin by categorizing the participants.

And if that is all that Christianity is capable of producing, then it's no more than another status system.

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

Well, I SAID "atmosphere"

But, by and large, I think that it is just another status system here. "I'm more Christian than he is, so I want more rights."

 

[*Starlight*]

It's kind of scary that the second option is winning so much. I hope we don't get back to CF which judges some Christians as better and deserving more rights than other Christians...

 

[Axver]

So which way are you going to vote?

I think option 1 is the only option that approaches being reasonable and fair to all concerned.

Frankly, I think a lot of the "problems" are being overhyped. I mainly post on the Teens and Secular Music fora and lurk on a few theological ones. The first couple of days were a bit tumultuous, but it seems everything has returned to business as usual now, with a few more posters who are greatly adding to the depth and quality of discussion over on Teens.

Then I come here and read all this controversy. It honestly feels overblown and does not at all mesh with my experience post-07/07/07. Prior to the reforms, it had been a long time since I felt comfortable posting here; I'm now enjoying myself again.

What is a "Christian Forum"?

I always understood it to mean a place with a focus on Christianity - be it discussion of theology or informal interaction between Christians and those non-Christians with an interest in Christianity.