A new attempt at an Adventist Wiki

[DarylFawcett]

Let us keep on praying, as in an attitude of prayer, as we continue this process.

 

[sentipente]

Yes, the old rules should remain in effect here until the new ones are accomplished.

Can someone reproduce the old rules here and show me what is really wrong with them that new ones are needed. That may clinch the entire deal.

 

[TrustAndObey]

Let us keep on praying, as in an attitude of prayer, as we continue this process.

Amen.

 

[IntoTheCrimsonSky]

Hey Everyone,

I completely agree with this process. It's the best way it can be handled, I think!

Blessings and Love,
Sarah

 

[Sophia7]

I thought the old rules were in effect until we came up with new ones?

If not, we should just keep the old ones. Fat chance we're going to come up with interim rules for however long this process takes us, right?

Can we stick with what we had before?

No, the old rules are not still in effect. If you go and look at the recent reports from this forum, you will see that the mods can't take any actions because we no longer have forum-specific rules. We could vote to approve our old congregational rules in the interim. If that's what we do, we would need someone to write something up to post as a sticky, making it clear that those rules are in effect until we come up with permanent forum-specific rules.

 

[tall73]

I vote no on this whole process due to continued claims that people are not Adventist.

I am perfectly willing to be stuck with no rules for now.

 

[Sophia7]

Can someone reproduce the old rules here and show me what is really wrong with them that new ones are needed. That may clinch the entire deal.

This is what the old forum-specific guidelines said:

Welcome SDA members!

We have restructured the forum to facilitate discussion into three sections:

Traditional SDAs: a subforum for those who believe in the 28 fundamental beliefs of Seventh-day Adventists
Progressive SDAs: a subforum for progressive and liberal SDAs, meaning those who do not fully agree with the 28 fundamentals
Main SDA forum: an area where all SDAs can discuss and debate

According to Rule 1.4:

1.4 Congregational Areas

You may post in any of the Congregational Forums if you agree with the contents of the Nicene Creed and the Trinitarian nature of God, but you may not argue or debate with members of particular denominations and groups in their congregational areas unless you are a member of that particular denomination or group.

** DEFINITION OF FELLOWSHIP POST:

It is not debate.
Those who do not identify themselves as Adventists may not discuss reasons for or against a subject being discussed on this forum. This includes questions that essentially are rebuttal or argumentative in nature.

It is not apologetics.
Those who do not identify themselves as Adventists may not engage in theological discussions that defend their particular point of view on scriptural, theological, doctrinal, or political issues.

It is not answering questions.
Let's say a thread is started that asks the question, "What do you think about keeping the Sabbath?" Only Adventists can offer an opinion about that. Other Christians may not answer that question in this forum. This is not to say they don't have an opinion on that topic, but they may not answer that question here. Neither may non-Adventists offer rebuttals to opinions posted in response to a question or discussion.

It is not teaching.
If a thread is started that asks a general question, such as "What do you think _________ means?" only Adventists may give instruction on the topic. While other members may have very good ideas on the subject, they may not give instruction in the Seventh-day Adventist forum.

Earnest questions are always welcome, from anyone.

It is:
Essentially fellowship is defined as discussion of topics of association, of companionship--i.e. discussions of things like friends, family, work, etc. These are fellowship posts. And posts that offer friendship would certainly be described as fellowship.

We hope the SDA forum grows and can be a beacon of fellowship, Christ-like love, and theological growth.

Yours in Christ,
daveleau
CF Staff (temp SDA staff)

Please note that the old CF Rule 1.4 is no longer in effect. We could vote to approve such a rule temporarily for our forum. However, non-Nicene and non-Trinitarian Christians are no longer excluded from what used to be the Christians-Only sections, so that part of the old rule would no longer be applicable.

 

[TrustAndObey]

I see.

Well, do we still have the sticky from DaveLeau?

I'll go check.

 

[TrustAndObey]

This is what the old forum-specific guidelines said:

Please note that the old CF Rule 1.4 is no longer in effect. We could vote to approve such a rule temporarily for our forum. However, non-Nicene and non-Trinitarian Christians are no longer excluded from what used to be the Christians-Only sections, so that part of the old rule would no longer be applicable.

I vote for all of the above. At least for the interim.

 

[Sophia7]

I see.

Well, do we still have the sticky from DaveLeau?

I'll go check.

What I just posted is what used to be in daveleau's sticky. The old forum-specific-rule stickies are being removed from all of the congregational areas because they are now obsolete. We could put something like that back in temporarily, but, as I said, some parts are no longer applicable, so it would need to be reworked, and we would need to clarify that we were putting it in as our temporary rules until we come up with long-term ones.

 

[Sophia7]

I vote for all of the above. At least for the interim.

Should we make a poll to approve the old guidelines in the interim then?

 

[sentipente]

This is what the old forum-specific guidelines said:

Please note that the old CF Rule 1.4 is no longer in effect. We could vote to approve such a rule temporarily for our forum. However, non-Nicene and non-Trinitarian Christians are no longer excluded from what used to be the Christians-Only sections, so that part of the old rule would no longer be applicable.

It seems that the only problem would be in identifying who is and is not an Adventist. Based on evidence on the Internet Adventists cover the spectrum of beliefs to the left and to the right of the Review and Herald. That would make it useless to try to make any such identification. It would only be necessary to ask those who do not self-identify as Adventists to be respectful.

 

[Sophia7]

This is my suggestion for updating the old statement to reflect the new CF policies:
_____________________________________________________

Welcome to the Seventh-day Adventist Forum. The following temporary forum-specific rules are now in effect until such a time as we are able to finalize our long-term rules. All general CF rules also apply in the Main SDA Forum and sub-forums.

The SDA Forum includes three sections:

Main SDA Forum: an area where all SDAs can discuss and debate. Other Christians and non-Christians may ask questions or participate in fellowship only. They may not debate or teach in the Main SDA Forum or sub-forums.

Traditional SDA Sub-forum: a non-debate sub-forum for Adventists who believe in all 28 Fundamental Beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

Progressive SDA Sub-forum: a non-debate sub-forum for Evangelical/Progressive/Liberal Adventists, defined here as those who do not fully agree with all 28 Fundamentals.

** DEFINITION OF FELLOWSHIP POST:

It is not debate.
Those who do not identify themselves as Adventists may not discuss reasons for or against a subject being discussed on this forum. This includes questions that essentially are rebuttal or argumentative in nature.

It is not apologetics.
Those who do not identify themselves as Adventists may not engage in theological discussions that defend their particular point of view on scriptural, theological, doctrinal, or political issues.

It is not answering questions.
Let's say a thread is started that asks the question, "What do you think about keeping the Sabbath?" Only Adventists can offer an opinion about that. Other Christians may not answer that question in this forum. This is not to say they don't have an opinion on that topic, but they may not answer that question here. Neither may non-Adventists offer rebuttals to opinions posted in response to a question or discussion.

It is not teaching.
If a thread is started that asks a general question, such as "What do you think _________ means?" only Adventists may give instruction on the topic. While other members may have very good ideas on the subject, they may not give instruction in the Seventh-day Adventist forum.

Earnest questions are always welcome, from anyone.

It is:
Essentially fellowship is defined as discussion of topics of association, of companionship--i.e. discussions of things like friends, family, work, etc. These are fellowship posts. And posts that offer friendship would certainly be described as fellowship.

 

[Sophia7]

It seems that the only problem would be in identifying who is and is not an Adventist. Based on evidence on the Internet Adventists cover the spectrum of beliefs to the left and to the right of the Review and Herald. That would make it useless to try to make any such identification. It would only be necessary to ask those who do not self-identify as Adventists to be respectful.

Self-identification is the only practical way to do it in a setting like this. That's how it's always been done here at CF.

 

[sentipente]

Self-identification is the only practical way to do it in a setting like this. That's how it's always been done here at CF.

Agreed.

If they lie I'll put Tall on to them.

 

[TrustAndObey]

This is my suggestion for updating the old statement to reflect the new CF policies:
_____________________________________________________

Welcome to the Seventh-day Adventist Forum. The following temporary forum-specific rules are now in effect until such a time as we are able to finalize our long-term rules. All general CF rules also apply in the Main SDA Forum and sub-forums.

The SDA Forum includes three sections:

Main SDA Forum: an area where all SDAs can discuss and debate. Other Christians and non-Christians may ask questions or participate in fellowship only. They may not debate or teach in the Main SDA Forum or sub-forums.

Traditional SDA Sub-forum: a non-debate sub-forum for Adventists who believe in all 28 Fundamental Beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

Progressive SDA Sub-forum: a non-debate sub-forum for Evangelical/Progressive/Liberal Adventists, defined here as those who do not fully agree with all 28 Fundamentals.

** DEFINITION OF FELLOWSHIP POST:

It is not debate.
Those who do not identify themselves as Adventists may not discuss reasons for or against a subject being discussed on this forum. This includes questions that essentially are rebuttal or argumentative in nature.

It is not apologetics.
Those who do not identify themselves as Adventists may not engage in theological discussions that defend their particular point of view on scriptural, theological, doctrinal, or political issues.

It is not answering questions.
Let's say a thread is started that asks the question, "What do you think about keeping the Sabbath?" Only Adventists can offer an opinion about that. Other Christians may not answer that question in this forum. This is not to say they don't have an opinion on that topic, but they may not answer that question here. Neither may non-Adventists offer rebuttals to opinions posted in response to a question or discussion.

It is not teaching.
If a thread is started that asks a general question, such as "What do you think _________ means?" only Adventists may give instruction on the topic. While other members may have very good ideas on the subject, they may not give instruction in the Seventh-day Adventist forum.

Earnest questions are always welcome, from anyone.

It is:
Essentially fellowship is defined as discussion of topics of association, of companionship--i.e. discussions of things like friends, family, work, etc. These are fellowship posts. And posts that offer friendship would certainly be described as fellowship.

Sophia, that looks really good. Thank you for doing that.

I vote yes to what you've written.

I also vote that when it comes time to WRITE the rules that you be in charge. You definitely have a way with words and have done a good job so far.

And really, if you're the only one that gets to add, edit, or delete (by majority vote of course), then it would keep anyone else from being allowed to go in there and change anything.

 

[Sophia7]

Sophia, that looks really good. Thank you for doing that.

I vote yes to what you've written.

I also vote that when it comes time to WRITE the rules that you be in charge. You definitely have a way with words and have done a good job so far.

And really, if you're the only one that gets to add, edit, or delete (by majority vote of course), then it would keep anyone else from being allowed to go in there and change anything.

Thank you. Should we make a poll and put this in it and let people vote? It seems that we are voting on everything else around here.

 

[sentipente]

Thank you. Should we make a poll and put this in it and let people vote? It seems that we are voting on everything else around here.

Good. Something just told me that if we took a look at the old rules we stood a chance of clinching the deal.

 

[TrustAndObey]

Yep! LOL! Let's vote!

 

[Sophia7]

OK, I'll make a poll.