It'sAdminstrators can handle the situation and posters will find out what things actually mean.
If anyone thinks Tishri1 has done something ad-hoc, take it up with her rather than posting it across the entire forum. If she doesn't listen, go to her superiors. Abide by their ruling, it is the simplest way and a biblical way of handling disputes. Especially knowing that MJism has such a variety of views on doctrine, they do not always agree.
The way I see it, life on the MJ forums is about how well people can agree to disagree. It is not about the rules, it is about a living people.
Solid observations, IMHO.
There are a host of things noted by the admin which have been shared plainly in all forums - specifically in threads where the issues came up. People in other forums were aware of the fact that it didn't have to be solely within an SoP in order to be a staff ruling since there are many other things extensive which staff do to the best of their ability that cannot always be catalogued - and there's an expectation people will be mature enough to read as responsible posters.
If a ruling came out, the chain of command would require one to go to the admin in the MEMBERS Complaint forum - and raise it there. Publically blasting Staff when a decision is made would not be respectful of the rules of the system.
Tishri hasn't done anything ad-hoc since everything she noted has been going on for YEARS - PUBLICALLY - in the forums. With the icon issue, as
noted directly 2yrs ago in September when others had questions:
Originally Posted by MarkRohfrietsch
Please understand that when we discuss policy regarding a particular forum, we desire only input from those members who call it home, for it is their home here at CF.
Thanks and God bless.
Mark
Staff Supervisor
It was clear as day what the mods and Tish noted - and anyone respectful of who they are can look it up. Once it's seen that it was said, that should be the end of it - not complaining more on a decision as if it was new and not respecting the fact that they are working hard to ensure safety and fairness for all. All other members who DID see the rule would be correct in simply being aware of it for the sake of others - and in the event that a poster complains on a situation that was addressed by a Moderator already in discussion, members aware of that would simply need to refer the poster to the appropriate thread so that they could see it for themselves. End of discussion.
Where things tend to get problematic is when long-time members choose to either forget things or simply don't remember what's said - and when other long-time members bring up the reference points (i.e. threads and postings) for discussion where Moderators clarified things(including issues pertaining to interpretation of the SoP) s, complaints arise on how nothing was ever said in the SoP rules which they may've been accustomed to referencing as the sole starting point.
This is no different than having a town hall meeting - having all sit together with their local deputies to share what the local enforcement agencies will do for the neighborhood and making a list out of it - and then having subsequent other meetings where officers further clarified the enforcement rules (with those meetings recorded/made public) but not placed within the one main writing others go to. People who see things arise would be smart not to simply go to the main list of things outlined, but to also KEEP UP with all other meetings from law enforcement that pertain to their neighborhood and how the main list is interpreted - and if something arose they didn't see in the list or clarified, it'd be logical for enforcement to reference them to further sessions on how that law was to be played out practically .....or referenced to other community members responsible for giving out the info so they could help their neighbor.
But if a neighbor says "Well this person didn't go to all the meetings and they didn't know the other clarifications!!!" - that is irrelevant. What matters is that OTHERS DID KNOW and (being our brothers' keeper) they are responsible for helping others stay up-to-date. If something wasn't known, there cannot be complaining on "Well, this wasn't in the list!!" when other neighborhood members continually encouraged others to keep up with the other town-hall meeting sessions - or when they came into a confusing situation and gave out recordings on clarifying the application of rules....only to have it ignored by other members indignant that it wasn't in the main list because they just wanted the main list to always be what people go by. At that point, it's an issue of "I didn't prefer it to be handled this way - therefore, it's WRONG and I'm going to not act as if things have been said!!!"....and that's like throwing a tantrum rather than being mature in handling it.
Things are intricate systems all are involved in - and thus, there has to be better focus to details.
And for those keeping with the details/clarifying things, as it concerns MEMBERS, there has to CEASE being a continual ignorance of what other members try to do when clarifying things based on what the Mods have said....and others wish to focus on those members rather than addressing the comments of the mods and what they laid down as Law. Many times, there was ALREADY clarity on what it meant to be a member by several - and visitors understood that because they were referenced to both the SoP Rules, the Site-Wide Rules (as it concerns non-allowable discussions) and the other updates/clarifications the Mods gave in staff. Because all worked together in unison, things were good - but when other members didn't keep up with things, that's when you saw a lot of false scenarios come up on "Defining membership isn't clear!!!!" or "Visitors cannot ask certain questions" (based on what they deemed appropriate rather than based on historical discussions that were allowed on the forum)........and that adds on to the problems staff have to deal with.
There has already been definition of what a Member is - as it pertains to this forum. The SoP lays that out nicely - from loving Israel/the Jewish people to loving celebration of the Feasts/Festivals to loving God's Torah/wanting to Grow in understanding and implementation of it.....not accepting Replacement Theology, not believing that Torah as a whole was not made for the Gentiles (as it concerns Gentiles wishing to live according to Torah to the best of their ability and not condemning them for it), not allowing for Anti-Semitism to occur as well, and supporting outreach to the Jewish people while practicing a Judaic lifestyle. Within that GENERAL understanding comes the reality that others are on differing levels of observance (some observing in one area while others do not) and mutual respect for all is expected - and if one finds themselves in a discussion they do not like, they can choose to graciously leave...
It's really not overly complicated or rocket science - and there have already been examples of those things shared by the Staff. So it's odd whenever people claim "Well, this hasn't been done!!!" when it was already covered.
Tishri has gone ALL out for a LONG time - both in asking questions and listening and making solutions that are reasonable with the sub-forums made for discussion ( #
181, #
261 #
789 ) - as seen in the following threads:
I haven't always done the best job of taking certain discussions to the sub-forums as Tishri requested - and the same goes for nearly all others as well. It's something we all have to work on. The basics on taking certain topics to the sub-forums as the rules requested have not been implemented by many complaining - and yet focus goes on something Tish did that was "ad-hoc" for not being noted repeatedly? That isn't consistent - for the real issue is where there has not been abiding by the rules as they are.
And this basic point of reference in the SoP (seen in #
2 ) often seems to be avoided by many when it comes to talking on the rules:
important info on the MJ forum
This main MJ forum is used primarily for fellowship and for information to those new to or inquiring about MJ only.
All discussions on Torah observance should be made or moved to the Everything Torah subforum.
If we're going to discuss the Staff/rules set up, then we need to also discuss how often those rules are not really adhered to when it comes to posting practices - for nearly every situation on a topic/saying another cannot post has come AFTER a long-time member may've chosen to make a thread that could've gone to the sub-forums to begin with....or chose to not encourage others to take discussion to the sub-forums
Tishri is doing all she can to help others work with one another - and she deserves to be honored for that. And if complaining on her or other staff not doing their part, it should be noted in many respects that others have not really done their part as was agreed. Contra noted it best when sharing the following from last year sometime ( #
320 /#
323 ):
Originally Posted by
ContraMundum
HI Tish,
I say there is nothing wrong with the rules, and that the sub-forums are already in place to make concessions for the "problems" pointed out by the two who are complaining.
I think that the history of this forum has always been one of making concessions for the varying positions on MJism, and therefore the complaints we are seeing is really just a lack of compliance with those concessions.
....My solution is this:
- There are already sub-forums for those who believe they are more "observant" than others. People who wish to discuss this kind of thing or be encouraged in their walk towards that should merely post there. This is not difficult.
- Don't change the rules at all- just encourage 1) tolerance and 2) posting in the appropriate sub-forums. Enforce the breaches of the rules already in place and all will be well.
- If people find that the Christian Forums MJ forum is too lax for them, then they ought to consider whether or not they are suited to it. ather than force everyone else to make even more concessions for the few, perhaps it's just not the right place for the kind of doctrinal tyranny they are standing for.
I will keep that in mind next time - as Bridge Builders is the most appropriate place to discuss issues pertaining to the Church (be it questions other Messianics and visitors raise )- and where things related to that should go with hashing them out 
there are a few MJ's out there sporting other icons who are welcome in here as they have been members for a long time....if thats you(and you know who you are
