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.
And you can't serve the tenets of a Christian board if you think practicing Christian values is the nemesis of Christianity.I agree with you BIG time. A NON believer wants Nothing to do with the belief of God.
So why should the non believers have the mod/leader position?! Why are Christians getting kicked into the corner and being persecuted?
An non-believer DOES NOT believe in God. I don't know how someone can serve on a Christian board if they are not Christian?! It's like throwing an atheist in a Church to preach as a Pastor to church people....it's not going to work!!
Glad to see you got over that Paranoid stageI think if it weren't for the fact that the old CF was modeled on the same kind of values which lead to the Inquisition and the Crusades -- a distinctly extremist and out-dated system, it wouldn't appear that the new system is such an extreme change. Anytime you attempt to move from systems based on those found in the Dark Ages to something more akin to modern democracy, the two will seem to represent the extremes of the spectrum. That's likely because one focuses on equality and control in the hands of the people and the other focuses on dictatorial systems with the control firmly in the hands of a select few who are allowed to hide their activities and violate the very rules they're supposed to be enforcing. The only reason anyone ever has the need to hide what they're doing is when they know it's wrong and would be received very poorly by the masses.
I'm not twisting your words
I'm simply stating the facts, and the fact is, Christians persecuted non-Christians on this forum
and now they think they're being persecuted because they can't do that anymore.
Ok, can we keep this in perspective? People are being tortured for their faith in many countries. No-one on this board has been persecuted, Christian or otherwise.
Obviously I'm coming late to this party, but I'd still like to throw in my non-Christian vote, although I have a feeling that it will be swallowed by the crushing mass of people reading and commenting on this thread.
I vote for neither option. This is Christian Forums, and it is and should remain a Christian website. I've never suggested anything different and so many people that are both Christians and non-Christians have never wanted anything for this site than for it to demonstrate the best qualities of Christianity.
However, from an outside perspective, uniting mainstream Christians in a Christians-only framework is not the same thing as uniting all Christians, which I think is a much more noble goal. The Christians that I've known for years have often times told me that you shouldn't compromise on your morals, and that's what this vote seems to be doing to me.
Christian Forums should be a safe and social community site based on Christianity, and not just based on mainstream Christianity. Every Christian and Christian denomination has both positive and negative qualities that they bring to the table. I can go around the table and point out the best qualities in everyone that I meet here, and they should all be allowed to bring their contributions to the table.
For obvious reasons I wouldn't like to see the non-Christian moderators thrown out on their ears. They may not be Christians, but they're people too, and they would like nothing better to contribute to a place where then have had enjoyment and found friends. That's part of Christianity too, and if you don't believe me, then you'll have to take the word of my favorite Bible passage instead of me: Mark 9:38-41
Here's the vision that I think would best serve CF: Focus on the ministry of members rather than on the ministry of staff. There are some amazing people that would like nothing better than to evangelize and witness here at CF but are not interested in the role of staff members. That's perfectly understandable. I've been involved in moderation for two years and I have to say that most people find it tedious and boring at best and painful and agonizing at worst. It isn't a job that lends itself to ministry (in any sense of the word).
The role of the moderator is to moderate; to enforce the rules. With a simple rule set that is basically static, that's easy and it can be accomplished quickly and easily.
Of course, even though I believe America is the best country, the people that founded it were much smarter than I am. They realized that every system has it's faults. It needs review by people that are disassociated from the process of writing the rules and enforcing the rules. Someone that is going to always be in a tough position because their job is going to entail a large gray area. Even less than the normal members, these people won't be able to preach or post without hurting someone at some time. I don't envy anyone in such a position.
Here's the practical application then: Most moderators should have limited powers. They should run their forums, but not have responsibilities in all forums because that seriously curtails their ability to be friendly and part of the community. A few people, perhaps ten or so very trusted moderators should have wide ranging powers to deal with emergencies.
The people that appoint those mods and super mods though, they should be removed from the process. They should be the judges, and they shouldn't be afraid to deal with problems among moderators like the normal moderators deal with problems among their forums. They should never moderate directly, but only should change things through talking and if necessary changing the makeup of the moderation team.
Where should this happen? Mostly out of sight. I hate to say it, but even small parades have staging areas. I know that CF has had some problems in the past, so here's my suggestion for dealing with the problem of hidden staff areas: How about elected teams of observers that can view the process but not interfere. If they say that everything is going well, great, but if they say something is going wrong the Administrators can take steps to fix the problem (and not by removing the observers, either). Otherwise, the behind the scenes area for moderation should be simple and geared toward enforcing the rules, and only enforcing the rules.
Now, I'm going to say something that I don't think that I've said in a long time (if ever before): I agree with drstevej that wiki rules aren't a solution to the problem of writing rules. Any process in which the least common denominator wields as much authority as Jesus is going to have problems. Does that mean that a specific set of rules should be adopted and never changed? No. It means that a group of people need to be found that aren't afraid to change thi
ngs that aren't working (or that aren't fair) and try to make things better for all users. Different groups need different things, but everyone should be treated fairly. That doesn't mean just everyone getting their say at once but some reasoned debate about it, which we haven't really seen yet.
Still, the general gist of the rules seems pretty clear to me. The first rule should be "Love God." Simple enough. That was Jesus's first rule, so it seems good enough for CF. How should it be enforced? Well, Jesus seemed to indicate that it should be handled person by person, which seems good enough for CF as well.
The second, accordingly, should be "Love and respect others." That means that people should be polite. Anyone who deliberately hurts someone else should be in violation of this rule, but it should allow for jokes and apologies. In all honesty, this should be a rule that any moderator that sees broken can enforce right away.
Three, four and five are "don't violate copyright, don't talk about the google ads publicly, and don't spam." Again, those are fairly simple.
Six should be "No Obscene, Vulgar, Racist, Sexually Explicit or Illegal Posts and Links." What makes something obscene? Well, that depends on what forum it's in. A discussion of racism in Ethics and Morality should not be treated the same as a support thread.
Seven should be "Places within CF are different. Please understand that this is a large site, and please be understanding of the area that you are posting in or restrictions that may be enforced in some areas."
And just to be contrary to numerology, eight should be "This is a discussion board. Don't come back if your banned, don't talk about moderation in-thread, and remember that there are people behind the screens."
The simpler than those rules are, the easier it is to enforce the spirit of the law rather than the letter of the law.
Anyway, those are my suggestions in response to the vote. Have a good day.
ST
It's like throwing an atheist in a Church to preach as a Pastor to church people....it's not going to work!!
The proposed changes ARE the happy medium. Have you ever spent any time in the General Apologetics section? If you have, I suggest you pay it another visit. Things in there are running more smoothly now than at any other time I've seen. One extreme would be total control by Christians. That's what we had, though the practices were anything but consistent with Christian values. The other extreme would be total control by non-Christians and no one has ever suggested that. What was suggested was placing the control over the site in the hands of the membership -- it's called "democracy".I feel that there is a happy medium, although given the two options, I think that option two has it hands down.
There is more to being a Christian site than putting people who identify themselves as Christians in charge. Many people think they believe in Christian values until they're asked to practice them. Many people think they agree with American ideals until asked to practice them. It's true that CF has been under the dictatorial rule of those who identify themselves as Christians but there can be no valid claim to the idea that they utilized or practiced Christian values in the decisions they made or the way non-Christians have been treated.This is a Christian site. If a Christian goes onto a Muslim site he know's he's going to be the minority. Same thing here.
The same advice could be sent your direction. If you don't understand the difference between a site that claims to be Christian and one which is attempting to instill and practice Christian values, then you're time would likely be better spent ~elsewhere~.If you don't want to be a member of this CHRISTIAN site, then leave. Go join IIDB and complain, for all I care.
They never had it. Christians are people who practice Christian values such as tolerance, patience, equality and a true recognition of the value in everyone, regardless of their beliefs. CF has never operated under such principles and when it is said that it's going to start, the only people we see objecting are the very ones claiming to be Christians.It's time for the Christians to take back Christian Forums.
I suggest when they count the final totals they do an IP search and make it one vote per IP address.
THe problem with IPs is that they are not static (well, most of them) and some services such as AOL use a bank of dynamic IP addresses. That is why it is nearly impossible to IP ban some accounts, because one IP address may be used by many accounts in a rotating pool of dynamic IP addresses.
Teaching what?You're taking my words and twisting them. It's a CHRISTIAN site....where Christian should teach those who are lost. Not a non-believer teaching a Christian.
What gives you the right to define what Christianity is?They never had it. Christians are people who practice Christian values such as tolerance, patience, equality and a true recognition of the value in everyone, regardless of their beliefs. CF has never operated under such principles and when it is said that it's going to start, the only people we see objecting are the very ones claiming to be Christians.
You can't have a Christian site if you think the key is to abandon Christian values -- no matter who runs it.
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?