Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I guess you missed the word "promoting" when I used it. If the Bible is no longer an authority, who is to say anything is wrong?[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]
Teens use drugs, are homosexual, drink alcohol and have unprotected sex why would you imagine discussing these things in a caring and compassionate way to be bad?
Am sorry, sister, but you owe him an apology for that.It is stuff EXACTLY like this that we will have to deal with..and I for one WILL NOT! A 16 year old agnostic/atheist...gay...telling us that we are childish etc cause we have concerns?? SEE THE PROBLEM HERE??? THIS IS SO WRONG!
I am done..I rest my case. I may or may not be back at this site...I am glad I never became a site supporter...sorry Erwin..but this is just not right.ONLY BECAUSE YOU WON'T LET IT WORK!
But what about GT, Eschatology, Mariology, Christian Current events?That's the idea.
The idea is not to have a blanket rule to discriminate against any CF member from serving as a moderator.
The idea is that s subforum membership will have the maturity enough to vote someone in to look after their subforum that they respect and trust - it is unlikely that for example a conservative congregational forum would vote an atheist in to moderate their forum.
But this might happen in GA, and that is fine, as long as the members of GA did the voting.
The idea is to trust the members to make the right decision for their subforum.
The rule - moderators can only moderate their own forums.
Category moderators can moderate the whole category (but all subforums in that category get to vote for a category moderator).
Supermoderators get to moderate the whole site - therefore the whole site gets to vote on supermoderators.
Based on the above model, it would make sense that only in subforums where there are a lot of non-Christians could a non-Christian be voted in to be a moderator.
Hope that makes sense.
Sooo now were throwing out the Nicence Creed and saying your a christian cuz you say your are......... OHhhh I didnt know the bible said that!
We are, afterall, supposed to dwell on that which is pure. It'll be hard for young Christians to sign in and see all sorts of threads about issues that are WRONG and SINFUL, and still consider this CF. It should be a safe place for teens to discuss things. Not a place where homosexuality and all sorts of other sin becomes commonplace.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]
Teens use drugs, are homosexual, drink alcohol and have unprotected sex why would you imagine discussing these things in a caring and compassionate way to be bad?
That's the idea.
The idea is not to have a blanket rule to discriminate against any CF member from serving as a moderator.
The idea is that s subforum membership will have the maturity enough to vote someone in to look after their subforum that they respect and trust - it is unlikely that for example a conservative congregational forum would vote an atheist in to moderate their forum.
But this might happen in GA, and that is fine, as long as the members of GA did the voting.
The idea is to trust the members to make the right decision for their subforum.
The rule - moderators can only moderate their own forums.
Category moderators can moderate the whole category (but all subforums in that category get to vote for a category moderator).
Supermoderators get to moderate the whole site - therefore the whole site gets to vote on supermoderators.
Based on the above model, it would make sense that only in subforums where there are a lot of non-Christians could a non-Christian be voted in to be a moderator.
Hope that makes sense.
no, I don't. And I won't.Am sorry, sister, but you owe him an apology for that.
http://www.christianforums.com/rules
Look at the Nicene Creed it fully supported by scripture.!!
that's a couple pastors who agree (and not even the same denomination)Only God knows peoples hearts. Only God knows if someone is Christian or not. That being so, how can we possibly say to someone that they are or not. They know their relationship with Jesus Christ not us. So yes, I would take their word for that.
Because the goals of the site haven't changed. The methods, however, have.Is it worth it call it Christian if in reality it is "Christian" but with no standards at all? If the Nicene Creed is gone what is left? If there are no standards then call it "religious forum" not Christian... why bother? IMO.
God does give us a way of knowing within reason by their fruits.Only God knows peoples hearts. Only God knows if someone is Christian or not. That being so, how can we possibly say to someone that they are or not. They know their relationship with Jesus Christ not us. So yes, I would take their word for that.
thanks for explaining..this makes sense...i like it!The idea would be that individual forums have membership that can form their own rules through a wiki/collaborative process. If the current congregational forum wants to ban debate, and if the members of that congregational forum vote to agree, then it is so. Why should a person from another section care? They can request and form their own forums for their own group. Moderation will be decentralised according to each forum/category - members that the forum members respect get voted to be their mods. Mods usually only have power to moderate their own forums. Reports go into forums that are subforums of these forums/categories. It's a massive restructure that I need to embark on.
The aim is to make this a true community where people have the power to ultimately moderate themselves.
Actually true democracy by definition is majority rule.
That's the idea.
The idea is not to have a blanket rule to discriminate against any CF member from serving as a moderator.
The idea is that s subforum membership will have the maturity enough to vote someone in to look after their subforum that they respect and trust - it is unlikely that for example a conservative congregational forum would vote an atheist in to moderate their forum.
But this might happen in GA, and that is fine, as long as the members of GA did the voting.
The idea is to trust the members to make the right decision for their subforum.
The rule - moderators can only moderate their own forums.
Category moderators can moderate the whole category (but all subforums in that category get to vote for a category moderator).
Supermoderators get to moderate the whole site - therefore the whole site gets to vote on supermoderators.
Based on the above model, it would make sense that only in subforums where there are a lot of non-Christians could a non-Christian be voted in to be a moderator.
Hope that makes sense.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?