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.
We're at yet another crossroads?
Mama mia!
ok, I concede....I think if it is done fairly...then it could work. You have a point.Remember that no moderator is going to be acting unilaterally; we have our Team for a reason.
could a non christian mod be fair modding between 2 christians? What would they have as input? The believe systems are totally different. I could see POTENTIAL problems.
Yep!I came here to fellowship with Christians, specifically Christians who do believe the same as I do. To that end, I would've voted for #2, but it is worded so poorly and other better wording suggestions have been made, so I am joining the ranks of those who are abstaining.
Erwin's site is full of good intentions, but so is the road to hell.
Saleucami was a damned fine moderator. His reputation is well deserved, and for me at least his opinion does carry more weight than usual. I say this, being completely and utterly opposed to his stance on this particular subject. But yes, I do think his views on the forum are entitled to a little more than the average modicum of respect.Wow, aren't you a nice person? I'm not going to make any comment on the quality of the people who have left/returned, because I think it's rather tactless to post that Poster X is somehow a better person than Poster Y (especially when I have had less experience with Poster Y).
I also love how you keep emphasising and bragging that you have put time into this forum. Just because you were once a moderator doesn't mean your opinion has any more worth than that of "inferior" types such as myself who have felt marginalised and been made to feel unwelcome in the past.
Why don't we just give the new system time to prove itself? It seems to be working. Everywhere I post/lurk, I haven't seen any significant problems.
amenI came here to fellowship with Christians, specifically Christians who do believe the same as I do. To that end, I would've voted for #2, but it is worded so poorly and other better wording suggestions have been made, so I am joining the ranks of those who are abstaining.
Erwin's site is full of good intentions, but so is the road to hell.
I think the wikis were intended to give us time to put in that sort of thought and effort, rather than immediately framing every issue into some sort of either-or, pollable question before other options could be considered.Well the wiki car-crash has showed us some rules are absolutely necessary, for sure. But some of them also completely alleviated the need for accountability, which led to some abuse.
Non-Christians felt unwelcome before; conservative Christians feel unwelcome now. Both are as bad as the other.
There are benefits to both systems, and if we could have the best of both and leave behind the worst of both, CF could be wonderful. Neither of the options given allow room for that, though. It's not good enough to have to choose the lesser evil when a little thought and effort could make it better.
I voted option 1, but why must we have a name change? Can't we just keep the name we have now? If Christian Forums is changed to "everyone forums", CF, imo, will no longer be a Christian forum, but just another forum on the internet.
I don't like the name change option, and I hope it won't happen if option 1 is the winner. If option 2 wins, we're automatically labelled as stuck-up and I don't want to be called that.
So, I vote option 1! No discrimination! Everyone is equal! But please Erwin, don't change CF's name. It's fine the way it is.
Not all Christians are to be exposed to everything all at once.It's really difficult when you present no reasoning for your position.
Hi members
This poll, started by drstevej, was PMed to me recently. I think that it does make a good point and I wanted it moved out of the Conservative Christians forum to the Announcement forum to gather input from other members as well.
The issue here is whether CF's name should be changed and its vision modified to reflect its current framework.
This site at the moment is at a cross-roads, and can go either way. It can either become:
1. A safe social community site with a heavy and strong Christian influence (with the vision being to offer a safe online community, and a secondary vision being to allow Christians to outreach to non-Christians) - which will allow for a name change;
OR
2. Return to a more restricted Christians-only site with a heavy emphasis on uniting mainstream Christians only with a less emphasis on outreach, in which case we keep the name.
Bear in mind that options 1 and 2 are both valid - there is a place for either forums.
I think that at this moment members are frustrated because CF is halfway between options 1 and 2, so members are confused as we have a vision that belongs to option 2 but a setup that is more like option 1.
Therefore, I think we need to make a decision.
I'm going to leave this up to the community. I've extended the above poll to 3rd of August.
I will listen to the members here, and will defer to the final decision.
Please feel free to discuss this issue in this thread.
Phooey.
It's a beautiful day. I'm gonna go ride my bike.
I have to ask again: what do you think a mod should do, and why do you think a non-Christian could not do it?could a non christian mod be fair modding between 2 christians? What would they have as input? The believe systems are totally different. I could see POTENTIAL problems.
My thoughts are that neither option is palatable, although I favour option 1 over option 2 in their present forms. However, I am not voting in this poll.
Erwin wrote this in his opening post:
I'm going to leave this up to the community. I've extended the above poll to 3rd of August.
I will listen to the members here, and will defer to the final decision.
If he will, indeed, leave this up to the community, that leaves the way open for the community to hold fast to their dissatisfaction with the either/or aspect of this poll, as I've read here in many posts, and to insist that no change be made until further options and opportunities for discussion on those have been provided.
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?