WWMC/CC Congregation Conflict

[Debi1967]

...where does it say conservatives aren't welcome?
tulc(just wondering)

Does your definition say that a Conservative concept would be welcomed >>>> Actually no it doesn't in fact it says this later

assertions that Liberal Christians are not Christian
assertions that Liberal Christians generally "condone sin," "rationalize their sin," or "fail to stand for the truth." (please see section on Dogmatism below)
attempts to persuade Liberal Christians that it is wrong or sinful to be a Liberal Christian.

And of course as Conservative that is exactly what we would try to do in a debate situation, so therefore we do not have the freedom to speak freely in your forum.

Our Theologies are divergent.

I do not understand the insistance why you want to be on our roll call at all

 

[Debi1967]

Well, that is fine, but what we have right now is not enforceable. We have to leave the forum open, but that does not mean we would have to leave each and every thread open.

We could by default make all threads CCC only unless we specify "Open". That is all that I am saying.

Lisa

We no longer have to leave the forum open according to Erwins new guidelelines we now have the ability to place in a system of which eliminates such a problem ......

1. It means that all members will be given the power to self-govern by collaboratively working together with coming up with the rules for this whole community, including voting for their own moderators.

2. It means that members who want their particular forums to have certain restrictions may do as this is part of self-governance. Sub-forums members will be able to develop their own rules and choose their own moderators.

 

[tulc]

I do not understand the insistance why you want to be on our roll call at all

uhmmm actually I have no interest in becoming a member, I was just curious why you wont let people who do agree with you be a member in both forums.
tulc(not a big joiner, more of a coffee drinker)

 

[Lisa0315]

We no longer have to leave the forum open according to Erwins new guidelelines we now have the ability to place in a system of which eliminates such a problem ......

So, are we now looking at closing CCC to anyone not on the membership role? I am not sure I want that either. I am somewhere in the middle where I would like the opportunity to talk with others, but I suppose that could be done in Theology.

Lisa

 

[Debi1967]

So, are we now looking at closing CCC to anyone not on the membership role? I am not sure I want that either. I am somewhere in the middle where I would like the opportunity to talk with others, but I suppose that could be done in Theology.

Lisa

Let me make this clear I agree with fellowship posts and I agree with honest inquirers as they are provided for in the rules already.

I do not however agree to making our debate subforum open to all as that can be accomplished in other areas of the board. I think that should exclusively be for the Conservative Christians that post here as we already have a diverse group of Faiths represented here to make that interesting enough.

So IOWs I am not for changing the already established rules we already have except to say that we should disallow further debate in the debate subfora from anyone outside of the Roll Call List

 

[HypnoToad]

The current rule states:

No forum (with the exception of the teen forums) will restrict entry or participation based upon a member's religious beliefs or lack thereof.

So, we can NOT stop anyone from posting.

We can limit (or prohibit) debate from non-CC's, and we can keep them from participating in forum governing. But we can NOT simply kick them out of this area, they are allowed to freely fellowship anywhere.

Link to rules:
http://foru.ms/t5692141-wiki-christian-forums-rules-draft-version-2.html

I'm not saying anyone was "trying" to kick them out, just clarifying something.

And if the Debate forum is for CC only, it is really unnecessary.

 

[Lisa0315]

The current rule states:

So, we can NOT stop anyone from posting.

We can limit (or prohibit) debate from non-CC's, and we can keep them from participating in forum governing. But we can NOT simply kick them out of this area, they are allowed to freely fellowship anywhere.

Link to rules:
http://foru.ms/t5692141-wiki-christian-forums-rules-draft-version-2.html

Exactly. We cannot limit them from the forum, but we could limit them into which threads they can participate. That was my whole idea. I am not trying to create even more ways for them to get in, but create a way to control where they are allowed to be.

Lisa

 

[nyj]

What do you guys think about adding a rule that requires us to add either "Open" or "CCC Only" to our thread titles.

NO MORE RULES.

We have enough already.

 

[Lisa0315]

NO MORE RULES.

We have enough already.

No we don't. We do not have anything that is enforceable.

Lisa

 

[Debi1967]

NO MORE RULES.

We have enough already.

Every time we turn around someone is trying to tweak the rules continuously and there has to be a time when we stop and live with the ones we have already.....

I say just close of the debate sub forum that's it and be done with it otherwise then we are all going to have to remember to have to put in our thread titles open or CCC only and what if we forget then that adds more work to the mod staff because they are the only ones that can change thread titles once they are posted.

Enough already leave the rules as they are and be done with it.

 

[Debi1967]

No we don't. We do not have anything that is enforceable.

Lisa

Yes we do

 

[HypnoToad]

Exactly. We cannot limit them from the forum, but we could limit them into which threads

No, that is restricting entry and participation.

 

[nyj]

No we don't. We do not have anything that is enforceable.

Lisa

There's that old, tired canard again.

We have enforceable rules. And as a member of this forum, I expect my moderators to enforce them.

If a liberal debates in here, their posts should be deleted. It's quite clear in our rules.

Rule: Non-Christians and Non-Conservative Christians may post questions but not give answers regarding conservative beliefs.

If staff won't use the tools they're already given, why should we bother giving them more?

 

[Lisa0315]

Yes we do

Which is why one certain poster keeps voting, keeps posting, keeps reporting...

Enforceable is not the same as just creating work for the mods. Yes, mods can edit, delete, and say NV. However, what we have does not make it stop. I am talking about a way that will end bad behavior once and for all.

Lisa

 

[nyj]

Which is why one certain poster keeps voting, keeps posting, keeps reporting...

If their posts are against our rules, report them and let the staff remove them. If they vote, their vote is discarded in the final tally (to do it any other way is a coding issue, not a CC issue). If they report, let them report ... it doesn't mean action will be taken.

However, what we have does not make it stop. I am talking about a way that will end bad behavior once and for all.

Short of a ban, this will never happen. This is also why moderators sometimes burn out. You didn't realize this going into the process?

Unless you turn this forum into a military state, with all posts needing approval before going public (WHICH I AM AGAINST), people will come along who will be pests and who will post pesty things. We have to deal with it. Plain and simple fact.

 

[Debi1967]

General Rules:

1. Only confirmed members of the CC forum may apply to be moderators of the forum, and only confirmed members of the CC forum are permitted to vote on the applicants. What part of this rule is not enforceable?
   
2. Confirmed members are listed. Any new member wishing to become a member of the congregation must be added to the confirmed list before being able to vote or debate. We also add an exception to this rule that the staff/members have discretion (on a case-by-case basis) to allow limited debate with non-members when outreach is the goal. What part of this is not enforceable, debate is only allowed at the discretion of the mods when outreach is the goal. If it can be seen or proven that this is not happening ithin the thread then close the thread.
   
3. Because of the stark contrast between the Liberal viewpoints vs. Conservative Christian viewpoints, members in this forum can only be a member of one, not both, of these fora. What part of this is not enforceable? If we see in their posting style that they are actually Liberals then we will take action at that point.
   
4. In order to become a member, you must have a minimum of 50 posts and your membership must be supported by 5 current members.The 50 post rule has been abolished however the rule about 5 member support has not and what part of this is not enforceable?
   
   [*]In order to start a thread, members must have a minimum of 50 posts. this has been abolished and someone should contact sophia to have this taken out of the rules, this is indeed unenforceable.
   
   [*]Non-Christians and Non-Conservative Christians may post questions but not give answers regarding conservative beliefs. Non-members of the forum also may not give advice to posters who come to this forum looking for help and advice.What part of this is unenforceable actually it seems pretty clear cut to me

 

[HypnoToad]

Which is why one certain poster keeps voting,

So what? Make every poll public and look at the membership list. It's easy to discount non-member votes.

keeps posting,

Which the site-wide rules allow and say we can not remove.

keeps reporting...

Limiting reports would likely have to be a site-wide rule. You really can't stop anyone from entering any forum and hitting the Report button. There would have to be a site-wide rule about spam-reporting.

 

[Debi1967]

This poster then needs to be given an FSB

 

[nyj]

So what? Make every poll public and look at the membership list. It's easy to discount non-member votes.

Agreed.

Which the site-wide rules allow and say we can not remove.

We're allowed to limit certain types of posting via our WIKI. Lutherans can't debate in the Catholic Forum. Catholics can't debate in the Reformed Forum. Liberals can't debate in the Conservative Forum. Adults can't post in the Teen Section.

Limiting reports would likely have to be a site-wide rule. You really can't stop anyone from entering any forum and hitting the Report button. There would have to be a site-wide rule about spam-reporting.

Agreed.

 

[Lisa0315]

General Rules:

1. Only confirmed members of the CC forum may apply to be moderators of the forum, and only confirmed members of the CC forum are permitted to vote on the applicants. What part of this rule is not enforceable?
2. Confirmed members are listed. Any new member wishing to become a member of the congregation must be added to the confirmed list before being able to vote or debate. We also add an exception to this rule that the staff/members have discretion (on a case-by-case basis) to allow limited debate with non-members when outreach is the goal. What part of this is not enforceable, debate is only allowed at the discretion of the mods when outreach is the goal. If it can be seen or proven that this is not happening ithin the thread then close the thread.
3. Because of the stark contrast between the Liberal viewpoints vs. Conservative Christian viewpoints, members in this forum can only be a member of one, not both, of these fora. What part of this is not enforceable? If we see in their posting style that they are actually Liberals then we will take action at that point.
4. In order to become a member, you must have a minimum of 50 posts and your membership must be supported by 5 current members.The 50 post rule has been abolished however the rule about 5 member support has not and what part of this is not enforceable?
   
   [*]In order to start a thread, members must have a minimum of 50 posts. this has been abolished and someone should contact sophia to have this taken out of the rules, this is indeed unenforceable.
   [*]Non-Christians and Non-Conservative Christians may post questions but not give answers regarding conservative beliefs. Non-members of the forum also may not give advice to posters who come to this forum looking for help and advice.What part of this is unenforceable actually it seems pretty clear cut to me

The part that is not enforceable is when a non-member says something like, "Guess that makes you not conservative enough". Great, post reported, post deleted. Then, he comes back and makes another snarky reply. Post reported. Post deleted. He can do it until the cows come home and the only thing that happens is that he is given the chance to upset people over and over, the mods have to constantly delete posts in probable multi reports, plus edit or delete anyone who replied to him, and worst of all, have to deal with reports by him when members get angry and reply in a flamable way.

In this context, the rules are not working.

Lisa