Ban trads from Prog sub forum

[Adventist Dissident]

here it is.

in order to create peace and sanity and to cut the work load of the moderators down. I suggest that a ban be put in place for any one who does not identify themselves as a Progressive SDA or who identifys themselves as traditional or conservative SDA. this does not include former sda's and guests. they are welcome.

Progressive are a diverse group of people they range from small difference to major doctrional shifts in thinking. Some are threated by this open discussion and cannot handel it. In order for progressives to explore their faith in a safe and peaceful enviroment the proposal is put forth that that those identifying themselves as traditionals and conservativesd be banned from disscussion in the Progressive subforum unless other wise given permission by those identifying themselves as progressives. permission will be granted by those if a certian # for example 5 members plus the mod agree that the poster may post in the progressive sub forum. The right to post may be revoked by having a said # say 3 request a trad or conservative be denied access. unles a post is deamed vulgar, a trad or conservative will not be allowed to report a post for content they do not like. they are not allowed to respond or report any posts in the progressive sub forum. they may respond in the Debate and Discussion area


the progressive will have a progressive mod or have a non sda staff member do reports for the progressive sub forum. No Trad or conservatives may do the reports for the progressive sub forum.

 

[NightEternal]

Sounds good Ice. I'm in!

However, we already have a rule in place that states no Trad mods can work our reports from here. So, no worries there, Tall and I have already taken care of that.

Keeping them out is a good step, but we also have this problem with them reading our posts in here and reporting everything they don't like (which would be about 90% of the content.)

What do we do about that?

 

[Adventist Dissident]

i WILL MODIFY

 

[reddogs]

here it is.

in order to create peace and sanity and to cut the work load of the moderators down. I suggest that a ban be put in place for any one who does not identify themselves as a Progressive SDA or who identifys themselves as traditional or conservative SDA. this does not include former sda's and guests. they are welcome.

Progressive are a diverse group of people they range from small difference to major doctrional shifts in thinking. Some are threated by this open discussion and cannot handel it. In order for progressives to explore their faith in a safe and peaceful enviroment the proposal is put forth that that those identifying themselves as traditionals and conservativesd be banned from disscussion in the Progressive subforum unless other wise given permission by those identifying themselves as progressives. permission will be granted by those if a certian # for example 5 members plus the mod agree that the poster may post in the progressive sub forum. The right to post may be revoked by having a said # say 3 request a trad or conservative be denied access. unles a post is deamed vulgar, a trad or conservative will not be allowed to report a post for content they do not like. they are not allowed to respond or report any posts in the progressive sub forum. they may respond in the Debate and Discussion area


the progressive will have a progressive mod or have a non sda staff member do reports for the progressive sub forum. No Trad or conservatives may do the reports for the progressive sub forum.

Trying extremism doesnt work for either Trads or Progs, we need to let go of the labels and become brothers and sisters as we are shown by Christ, Ice...

 

[Adventist Dissident]

nice try Reddog,

but the trad see anything that is not in agreement as heritics and apostates. This is for progressives only.

I do not post in the Traditional sub-fourm and I leave them alone to discuss there stuff. I am asking for the same respect. live and let live. You don't have to come here and we don't want you here any more. by banning all trads we can solve a lot of problems. there is still a place for people to come and talk it is the discussion and debate forum

 

[Tonks]

You can't outright ban anyone from your forum. Posts which do not conform to progressive SDA beliefs can be removed / the person warned or infracted but you can't ban someone from posting in the forum simply because they are 1) traditional or 2) not SDA.

This will not pass staff review:

In order for progressives to explore their faith in a safe and peaceful enviroment the proposal is put forth that that those identifying themselves as traditionals and conservativesd be banned from disscussion in the Progressive subforum unless other wise given permission by those identifying themselves as progressives.

 

[RND]

You can't outright ban anyone from your forum. Posts which do not conform to progressive SDA beliefs can be removed / the person warned or infracted but you can't ban someone from posting in the forum simply because they are 1) traditional or 2) not SDA.

This will not pass staff review:

In order for progressives to explore their faith in a safe and peaceful enviroment the proposal is put forth that that those identifying themselves as traditionals and conservativesd be banned from disscussion in the Progressive subforum unless other wise given permission by those identifying themselves as progressives.

Oh, so what you're saying is that when all is said and done, common sense rules the day?

 

[Tonks]

Oh, so what you're saying is that when all is said and done, common sense rules the day?

I suppose that it can be viewed that way. I'll be the first to admit that the specifics of the issues between traditional and progressive SDAs are a bit of a mystery to me.

That being said, progressive SDAs can outline what the boundaries of acceptable posts are in their statement of faith. Anything which is contrary to whatever is developed would be assumed to be not allowed (depending on how strict folks want to be). I assume that the distinctives between the traditional and progressive sides of the house are fairly apparent. Such statements aren't supposed to be exhaustive and are supposed to affirm / detail / outline (whatever) what one believes...hopefully without reference to other denominations.

We're trying to moderate based on post content...not faith icons or people. It it not - to be quite honest - my preference but it is what we have to work with...

 

[reddogs]

nice try Reddog,

but the trad see anything that is not in agreement as heritics and apostates. This is for progressives only.

I do not post in the Traditional sub-fourm and I leave them alone to discuss there stuff. I am asking for the same respect. live and let live. You don't have to come here and we don't want you here any more. by banning all trads we can solve a lot of problems. there is still a place for people to come and talk it is the discussion and debate forum

We are all Adventist and need to shed the labels and instead work on studying what divides to overcome it...

 

[RND]

I suppose that it can be viewed that way. I'll be the first to admit that the specifics of the issues between traditional and progressive SDAs are a bit of a mystery to me.

That being said, progressive SDAs can outline what the boundaries of acceptable posts are in their statement of faith. Anything which is contrary to whatever is developed would be assumed to be not allowed (depending on how strict folks want to be). I assume that the distinctives between the traditional and progressive sides of the house are fairly apparent. Such statements aren't supposed to be exhaustive and are supposed to affirm / detail / outline (whatever) what one believes...hopefully without reference to other denominations.

We're trying to moderate based on post content...not faith icons or people. It it not - to be quite honest - my preference but it is what we have to work with...

Thanks for your honest POV.

 

[Adventist Dissident]

You can't outright ban anyone from your forum. Posts which do not conform to progressive SDA beliefs can be removed / the person warned or infracted but you can't ban someone from posting in the forum simply because they are 1) traditional or 2) not SDA.

This will not pass staff review:

In order for progressives to explore their faith in a safe and peaceful enviroment the proposal is put forth that that those identifying themselves as traditionals and conservativesd be banned from disscussion in the Progressive subforum unless other wise given permission by those identifying themselves as progressives.

tonks
i dont' want to be a problem, but I believe the trads have a sub forum where that is exactly the case. could you review their sub forum and let me know how we can set one up like that?

 

[sentipente]

I would suggest that reports of posts in the Prog forum should not be anonymous and those reports should be openly discussed in the Prog forum before the mods make their decisions.

 

[NightEternal]

Sounds good to me Senti!

That would certainly weed out the cowards who love to spite-report under the cloak of darkness.

 

[Mankin]

I concur

 

[Adventist Dissident]

so is someone going to propose it as a rule or are you just going to sit there and do nothing. or do i have to do it for you?

 

[reddogs]

so is someone going to propose it as a rule or are you just going to sit there and do nothing. or do i have to do it for you?

No one has banned anyone in any of the sub-forums, they just have to observe the guidelines as they were voted on....

 

[NightEternal]

so is someone going to propose it as a rule or are you just going to sit there and do nothing. or do i have to do it for you?

Ice, settle down man! There is a PROCESS that has to be followed. It has to go through the WIKI.

 

[Tonks]

tonks
i dont' want to be a problem, but I believe the trads have a sub forum where that is exactly the case. could you review their sub forum and let me know how we can set one up like that?

I'll check 'em out. Most of that sort of stuff will eventually be cleared out (of all forums) as we attempt to streamline site operations. Beyond guidelines being all over the map the way moderation has been handled across the site has varied quite a bit...so we're trying to streamline that as well so it doesn't seem like folks are getting whacked / a free pass - depending on your POV.

I do know that the SDA trad / prog situation is a bit of a special case, however. I think that there was a thread discussing it...lemme see if I can find it.

 

[Adventist Dissident]

I would suggest that reports of posts in the Prog forum should not be anonymous and those reports should be openly discussed in the Prog forum before the mods make their decisions.

Rule proposal;

A. In order to avoid spite reporting and retaliation through the report system, Report shall contain the name of the person reporting the post.
B. All reports in the progressive subforum shall be discussed in the forum by progressive prior to a decision being rendered.

 

[sentipente]

We will have to deal with procedure to avoid the process from going on forever. Probably, allowance of two additional posts from reporter and rebuttals to original report and reporter's additional posts by the reportee. Only one post allowed from non-parties.