At Crossroads -- Cf's Vision - Poll Vote only here

[Angel4Truth]

Dan your forum WWMC can easily be open if that is what the majority of your forum congregation wants , in fact it does say whosoever will may come.

Its not hard to add a forum for all but retain the other forums as well for those who would rather have those forums for christians only. Thats a true middle ground.

 

[Angeldove97]

I'm fine with staff forums being exactly how they are now (for the most part completely open for viewing, minus posting).

I'm fine with allowing non-Christian staff on in the majority of areas. Such areas like Friendship, Recovery, and even Debate or Theology or Support wouldn't be hurt by having non-believers as mods.

I'm even okay with staff being voted on, even though I know how easily that can be abused.

I would like to see forums set up like how they use to be Christians with Christian areas and non-Christians with their own areas, with fellowship areas for both.

And wikis are just too much for me... I basically have to bug a staffer every few days to ask about where we are with this rule or that rule because it's too confusing. When members violate a rule and then go change the wiki, I just think that's completely useless.

Btw, announcement will be made shortly---I'm waiting for some input from some staffers about it. Thank you!

 

[GreenMunchkin]

Topic drift . . . .

Wiki is nothing more than a tool. It is useful for creating multi-author documents. It can be helpful for building consensus, but it does not build consensus all by itself. The most important ingredient for building consensus is time.

But his options basically mean:

Keep *this* disaster, or go back to the last disaster.

If those are seriously the only two options he's giving us, it would behoove us to weigh up the pros and cons of both disasters.

 

[CaDan]

Dan your forum WWMC can easily be open if that is what the majority of your forum congregation wants , in fact it does say whosoever will may come.

My name isn't Dan.

Its not hard to add a forum for all but retain the other forums as well for those who would rather have those forums for christians only. Thats a true middle ground.

Is it nice and bright under that basket?

 

[FriendsFellowship]

But his options basically mean:

Keep *this* disaster, or go back to the last disaster.

If those are seriously the only two options he's giving us, it would behoove us to weigh up the pros and cons of both disasters.

I think this is it. I think will have to vote for the option that is closest to our viewpoint.

 

[CaDan]

But his options basically mean:

Keep *this* disaster, or go back to the last disaster.

If those are seriously the only two options he's giving us, it would behoove us to weigh up the pros and cons of both disasters.

I agree. That's why I abstain from this poll.

 

[Tonks]

But his options basically mean:

Keep *this* disaster, or go back to the last disaster.

If those are seriously the only two options he's giving us, it would behoove us to weigh up the pros and cons of both disasters.

I think that *this disaster* coupled with a statement on Christian Orthodoxy plus the ability to deal with posters that behave like total idiots (more than just requests for edits) will go a long way to dealing with current "problems."

As I mentioned earlier...folks that I thought I'd never agree with I have ended up agreeing with. Likewise, I see folks that desire sincere fellowship and sincere debate (which I have no problem with) that are constantly guarding the gates against those posters that want to act like complete jackasses.

 

[GreenMunchkin]

I think this is it. I think will have to vote for the option that is closest to our viewpoint.

Neither are, cos both are disasters

If you can't fully support something, it's better to abstain. Neither of the options are supportable.

With a decision this drastic, how can there only be two such extreme choices? It's ridiculous.

 

[justanobserver]

I picked option #2 but was lookin for an option #3 of where the 1st 2 options find a workable middle ground.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Im sorry you feel only one side of an issue should be comfortable CaDan. Why you would be opposed to having a section for everyone vs letting everyone in each section and eliminating the needs of several congregational forums even though your needs would still be met is beyond me. I guess middle ground isnt the ideal but liberal ideal only.

 

[Tonks]

I picked option #2 but was lookin for an option #3 of where the 1st 2 options find a workable middle ground.

Concur.

 

[D'Ann]

Erwin,

This poll is flawed. We need an 3rd option or maybe a 4th one too.

I love that the Christian forums are open to non-Christians, but we need safe guards and guidelines.

I'm grateful that we can all read the report threads and the Conference Room threads.. but I also agree with Letalis and NewMan99 (and others)...

I believe that due to some privacy issues, some staff forums most definitely should be private.

I believe that non-Christians should not be on staff. I don't mean any unkindness or disrespect to non-Christians, nor to exclude non-Christains from CF. But, how can they lead a lost soul to Jesus when in essence, their own soul is lost and needs Jesus? How can the blind lead the blind? I'm sure non-Christains can do a great job in moderating with the rules (when there are rules and structure). But CF should be a reaching out ministry (as well as a safe haven for Christians) and how can a non-Christian bring hope to the faithless, when they themselves might be faithless in believing in Christ as their Lord and Savior?

How can a non-Christian pray to Jesus for the members who are hurting and downtrodden, when they themselves do not personally believe in Jesus as being the only beloved (begotten) Son of God?

CF has a great opportunity to truly reach out to those who are seeking, to those who are lost. Why? Because all of us at one time were lost and seeking and many of us came to CF and we learned about Jesus and our faith and we hopefully by God's grace and love were able to help others as well.

I know there are great non-Christians who have great loving hearts and who are gentle and kind and probably more Christlike than some Christains in how they treat others, but they lack Christ and they cannot minister to a lost or seeking soul due to their own lack of Christianity based on the Nicene Creed.

Also... this wiki thingie... Sorry, but wiki is a nightmare. I just don't have time for it. And for me to participate in this thread and lately (last 2 weeks) for me to being actively aggressive somewhat is totally against my nature. I don't have time for debates, I don't have time for fighting and arguing over rules that can change on a daily basis.

Anyway, unless there are some other options, which, there should be... I voted for 2. But in all honesty, Erwin... I agree with GreenMunchkin.

God's Peace,

Debbie

 

[TasManOfGod]

I think we ought to choose the disaster that looks most like what Jesus would be part of

 

[GreenMunchkin]

I think that *this disaster* coupled with a statement on Christian Orthodoxy plus the ability to deal with posters that behave like total idiots (more than just requests for edits) will go a long way to dealing with current "problems."

As I mentioned earlier...folks that I thought I'd never agree with I have ended up agreeing with. Likewise, I see folks that desire sincere fellowship and sincere debate (which I have no problem with) that are constantly guarding the gates against those posters that want to act like complete jackasses.

That's the thing... you've got ideas on what could make this workable. Taking a little from column A and a little from column B. If we were able to vote on some of the blendiness and compromise, the choices would mean something, but as it stands, it's useless.

 

[Angeldove97]

I picked option #2 but was lookin for an option #3 of where the 1st 2 options find a workable middle ground.

Hi Norm
I think Option 2 does allow for alot of middle ground. Just like how I mentioned in my second post in the thread about how we can take some of the reforms made and still use them, but still make sure a definite Christian feeling is kept here.

(Btw, I haven't forgotten about your pm.... just been busy )

 

[GreenMunchkin]

I think we ought to choose the disaster that looks most like what Jesus would be part of

Or we could make it into something that isn't a disaster...

 

[Letalis]

Perhaps a separate thread should be started where the benefits of the current system and benefits of the previous system can be worked out.

 

[tbird_energizerbunny]

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.

Erwin,

(I know I may be blasted with controversy...but nonetheless, my opinion is the same.)

It was you who started this.

It is you who made the changes.

It is you who has brought CF to what it is today.

It is your vision.

It is your calling, you were not given this idea without being called to that, I believe that.

Follow what God has to say. Either way.

As for what we think, It doesn't matter, this is between you and God, and we have no right to say what God is calling you to change or not change about CF.

just my thoughts
tbird

 

[FriendsFellowship]

Erwin,
As for what we think, It doesn't matter, this is between you and God, and we have no right to say what God is calling you to change or not change about CF.

just my thoughts
tbird

So why did you vote?

 

[Tonks]

That's the thing... you've got ideas on what could make this workable. Taking a little from column A and a little from column B. If we were able to vote on some of the blendiness and compromise, the choices would mean something, but as it stands, it's useless.

I agree with you GM...I'm but one CF bubba who has a vote that is one of many.