Change to the Appeals process, changes to Staff and a few other things

Status
Not open for further replies.

Tonks

No longer here
Site Supporter
Aug 15, 2005
21,979
722
Heading home...
✟49,042.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Politics
US-Libertarian
There are some big changes coming, some small changes coming, some internal changes coming / have already been put in place. This is a bit of an omnibus announcement...the numbered order doesn't imply primacy...just the order in which I thought while typing. The final documents etc will all be posted publicly once complete. All of these will occur during the next week or so. CF will be down on the evening of 3 July so we can make staff changes etc as we have to do each one manually. Most of this was announced to staff a few hours ago.

1) The Appeals system is being reworked to include the removal of infraction appeals. Ban appeals are still allowed. Appeals will be handled independent of the moderating staff by a rewickered Reconciliation Team who will have a stronger oversight process. The focus is going to be less 'Court of Appeals' but 'member services.' More to follow on this point.

2) The number of staff on CF is being reduced. The number of Admins is being cut in half as is the number of Supervisors. There will be some shifts in teams where necessary.

3) Following number 2, staff are going to be expected to be out in the forums actually interacting with people, actively moderating in threads. More time needs to be spent on the public boards instead of being closeted away in the staff forums. This will be reviewed continuously. If is not occurring staff will be removed.

4) There has already been a change, internally, regarding how reports on staffers are handled. Previously they were handled just like a report on any other member. Staffers working reports on other staffers was not working. Admins handle reports on staffers and will follow the staff discipline protocol (found here, section VII). Essentially three strikes...or zero strikes if the situation is bad enough. I'll update the FAQ when I get around to it...

5) The "Ask a Pastor" forum will be changed to behave (permission-wise) like the Suggestions / Complaint Box. The intent with "Anonymous Voice" was to allow members to post questions to our chaplains (all credentials are verified...no "universal life church" abracadabra pastor "certificates) about whatever is on their mind without revealing who they are. Even I can't see who is posting. The forum was left open so the general board could glean information that may help them in their spiritual walks. Unfortunately, it seemed to turn a sort of game (it seems) where people trolled the threads and mocked those that were genuinely seeking advice. This is not appropriate. The new forum will be setup so a user can only see their thread(s) and staff will not have access. While CF is certainly not a replacement for church and personal interaction member have a right to seek advice if they feel the need to do so...in a private manner without having to deal with abuse from other members.

6) Forum Specific Guidelines are being removed. Each forum will retain a basic outline regarding the purpose of the forum. The Congregational Areas will be a given a bit more leeway to include posting a statement of faith / documents about what group x believes etc. Every forum outline and statement of faith will follow a standardized format. After much review (even though I've never cared for FSGs to be honest) it seems that every single forum on the site had a completely different rule-set that staff (and certainly members) couldn't keep straight. This led to some pretty inconsistent moderating across the board, amongst other pesky issues. The only rule-set anyone should be required to follow is the standard set of site rules which applies to everyone equally, in any section of the board. The general complaint that moderating decisions often make little sense is a valid one to a certain degree...while we're certainly trying to improve on that aspect of the board in a whole bunch of different ways...we figured that the easiest was to make the same rules apply everywhere.

6a) The only place FSGs will remain are the Recovery section of the site and in Exploring Christianity

7) Some low traffic forums will be closed / consolidated. These are mainly in the leisure, occupations, hobbies, games, gallery etc sections of the site.

CF used to try / be everything to everybody. The critical mass is not really here anymore to sustain such a broad reach of forums. I think, too, that the site has lost some focus along the way. Pauler's (site owner) vision statement was, to me, a good first step. Some people liked it, some people did not. However, it really is what is driving many of the changes. There has been a certain nostalgia / longing for what CF used to be several years ago...and that has (inappropriately, in some cases) driven many of the decisions on the site in recent times...some of which worked, many of which didn't. Instead of trying to rebuild the past we're focusing on building on what we currently have. We're not trying to roll CF back to the pre-777 days. We, likewise, have rules, policies, functions which are more suited to the much bigger site that CF used to be...we're attempting to streamline those.

We, likewise, have focused for far too long on many of the behind-the-scenes technical aspects of the site and let many of the things that we should be doing get pushed to the right.

Focus areas moving foward (for me, staff, and hopefully members) are (in no particular order):

a) rebuilding some of the amazing fellowship forums we had in the past.

b) we have an incredibly strong knowledge base of Christianity here because of our members and their experiences. I learn something every day by reading the forums. Debates about various beliefs certainly have their time and place...but not to the exclusion of everything else, I think

c) we have an incredibly large number of denominational forums which allow for a greater level of interdenominational interaction than most places on the internet. I'd like to see them prosper. We can celebrated our shared faith in Christ while also embracing our denominational uniqueness.

These focus areas do not require technical changes and have been ignored for far too long. A big thing for me, I think, is best summed up by what was written by someone else in one of the staff areas of the site while all of these changes being discussed:

We have huge multitude of Christians too paranoid, too scared, or in other cases, want fellowship and not fights, who do not enter the congregational, much less theo, or debate forums at all. In addition, we have a somewhat toxic environment in some areas, thus those who do post, are often run off in short order. Many members do not uplift one another in Christ, but do a good job at shredding each other, especially if they encounter folks not like themselves, fiefdoms are rampant. Many staff do not see CF as a ministry. Many staff do not realize, that there are multitudes of people on CF, where CF is the only exposure to Christianity they have, and the resulting serious approach that needs to be taken in such cases. (some by choice, but some do not have much of a choice, for any number of reasons).
I think that these are good guideposts for us to work on. The Advisors are also drafting a staff vision detailing expectations etc...it will cover less the technical end of things but rather will more fully explain our reasoning. It will be posted publicly after it is released to staff.

Will we get everything correct on the first pass? We never do. But we do try.

In Christ,
Matt
For the Advisors
 
Last edited:
Mar 23, 2009
11
2
✟15,141.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
3) Following number 2, staff are going to be expected to be out in the forums actually interacting with people, actively moderating in threads. More time needs to be spent on the public boards instead of being closeted away in the staff forums. This will be reviewed continuously. If is not occurring staff will be removed.

And about time, too.
 
Upvote 0

Tenebrae

A follower of The Way
Sep 30, 2005
14,288
1,998
floating in the ether, never been happier
Visit site
✟33,648.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Private
(Ok, so this is not meant as sarcasm, just clarifying because text only without voice is open to misinterpretation)


By golly this is sounds like one of the best announcements to come out of here for a long time.


I look forward to seeing how this plays out
 
Upvote 0

drstevej

"The crowd always chooses Barabbas."
In Memory Of
Mar 18, 2003
47,493
27,114
74
Lousianna
✟1,001,611.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Should we have icons for ordained people to use (as well as age, sex etc etc). Saves the embarrassment of some folk arguing a point like there's no tomorrow only to discover the other person is a Minister!

At present the only ordinations that CF verifies is those of the CF Chaplains. Chaplains have the "C" icon by their names. This is done because ordination is a requirement to be a CF Chaplain.

As a minister I welcome people debating points with me and the fact that I am a minister should not minimize the discussion. I am not infallible... for sure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Philothei
Upvote 0

Tonks

No longer here
Site Supporter
Aug 15, 2005
21,979
722
Heading home...
✟49,042.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Politics
US-Libertarian
Will non-Christians continue to be locked out of all discussion of theology and apologetics?

Those areas will remain for discussion between Christians. The point of the apologetics forum under the Theology section is: A forum to discuss the systematic defense of the Christian belief system with other Christians.

Can we use our own 'cultural' language without being jumped on from on high?

I'm not sure I understand fully what you mean..are we talking HaShem, G-d and the like or something else? You'll probably have to provide some examples.

Should we have icons for ordained people to use (as well as age, sex etc etc). Saves the embarrassment of some folk arguing a point like there's no tomorrow only to discover the other person is a Minister!

drstevej's answer was correct on this point.
 
Upvote 0

Bombila

Veteran
Nov 28, 2006
3,474
445
✟13,256.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
Those areas will remain for discussion between Christians. The point of the apologetics forum under the Theology section is: A forum to discuss the systematic defense of the Christian belief system with other Christians.

Is CF about to become a Christians only forum?

It is now, for all intents and purposes, as far as I'm concerned, with one or two minor exceptions. There is no forum where Christians and non-believers can have frank discussions regarding Theology and Apologetics. Do not direct me to Exploring Christianity - that was designed as a shooting gallery aimed at conversion, not a place for discussion, and does not attract the Christian scholars who used to post in GA, and who had a great deal of knowledge to share.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Risen Tree

previously Rising Tree
Nov 20, 2002
6,988
328
Georgia
✟18,382.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
1) The Appeals system is being reworked to include the removal of infraction appeals. Ban appeals are still allowed.

CF used to try / be everything to everybody. The critical mass is not really here anymore to sustain such a broad reach of forums.

If you guys cannot see how issues such as these two are closely related, then no amount of change will ever help CF.
 
Upvote 0

Tonks

No longer here
Site Supporter
Aug 15, 2005
21,979
722
Heading home...
✟49,042.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Politics
US-Libertarian
Is CF about to become a Christians only forum?

No. There is no change of forum access across the board nor do I think that the owner's site vision supports such a change if suggested.

It is now, for all intents and purposes, as far as I'm concerned, with one or two minor exceptions. There is no forum where Christians and non-believers can have frank discussions regarding Theology and Apologetics. Do not direct me to Exploring Christianity - that was designed as a shooting gallery aimed at conversion, not a place for discussion, and does not attract the Christian scholars who used to post in GA, and who had a great deal of knowledge to share.

What suggestions would you provide, then?
 
Upvote 0

Bombila

Veteran
Nov 28, 2006
3,474
445
✟13,256.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
No. There is no change of forum access across the board nor do I think that the owner's site vision supports such a change if suggested.



What suggestions would you provide, then?

The same suggestions I have been making here and there since GA was destroyed: there is a strong desire among both Christians and agnostics/atheists for some place where we can discuss theology and apologetics and Christian history on a relatively even footing. Provide one.

There is a kneejerk reaction on the part of some that 'most atheists/agnostics just want to bash Christians/Christianity'. That is false. A good many of us are genuinely interested in religion. By that I do not mean we are interested in converting to Christianity, though that has happened and may happen. I mean that unbelievers like myself are a tiny minority compared to the number of believers in the world and as such would like to understand what it is that, in this case, Christians, experience that causes them to believe, how beliefs have changed, how different groups interpret scripture, and so on.

There are plenty Christians who are members of CF who would welcome the opportunity to converse with us on those forbidden subjects. There is no need to open the current CO areas to agnostics/atheists. Just provide one place where we can talk. One place where an errant question about the whys and hows and whens of Christianity is not deleted because it is 'apologetics and cannot be discussed'. Society has actually had to place an ALL CAPS warning on the front page to remind people not to talk about apologetics. This is beyond absurd.

CF lost members who were educated and knowledgeable Christian scholars because of this peculiar method of 'protecting' vulnerable Christians. I would argue other areas of the board are far more likely to disturb beliefs than a frank discussion of the actual subject of belief.

I ask that you at least consider this carefully, without prejudice over the fact of my being an agnostic member of CF - since 2006.
 
  • Like
Reactions: heron
Upvote 0

Tonks

No longer here
Site Supporter
Aug 15, 2005
21,979
722
Heading home...
✟49,042.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Politics
US-Libertarian
I ask that you at least consider this carefully, without prejudice over the fact of my being an agnostic member of CF - since 2006.

Start a thread here next week: Suggest New Forums - Christian Forums and send me a PM to remind me once you do. I've got to spend some time getting smart on the whole GA situation (I only have a hazy memory of GA given the fact that I wasn't involved in that change at all). My mental bandwidth is rather tied up with everything in the OP and I simply don't have the time to look into it at the moment. That way I can give the discussion the time it deserves while concentrating on all of this thread's stuff presently.

Plus I plan on enjoying my long weekend as it is sunny and warm in DC.

Remember to PM.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Tonks

No longer here
Site Supporter
Aug 15, 2005
21,979
722
Heading home...
✟49,042.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Politics
US-Libertarian
I will do so. Do have a good holiday. Ours was yesterday, so no long weekend, but lovely nevertheless.

I learned you guys have something called "Canada Cake" which sounds absolutely delicious. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bombila
Upvote 0

Catherineanne

Well-Known Member
Sep 1, 2004
22,924
4,645
Europe
✟76,860.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Widowed
6) Forum Specific Guidelines are being removed. Each forum will retain a basic outline regarding the purpose of the forum.

This is fine as long as we are all clear what is allowed and what is not.

I have found to my cost that if any denomination other than my own decides to regard even the friendliest of interchanges as 'non fellowship', or as 'debating their denomination', then I end up with warnings. They use these 'rules' as a way of keeping strangers out.

Ditto if someone else decides that what I post is blasphemous. I had a very meaningful, very loving prayer thread in WWMC closed because some troll decided to disrupt it, and accuse me of blasphemy, and it is still closed. This is not acceptable.

This gets so tiresome that the only solution is a) not to ever venture out of one's own home areas, and b) post only about the weather.

Surely that is not what this forum is intended for?
 
  • Like
Reactions: heron
Upvote 0

Tonks

No longer here
Site Supporter
Aug 15, 2005
21,979
722
Heading home...
✟49,042.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Politics
US-Libertarian
This is fine as long as we are all clear what is allowed and what is not.

I have found to my cost that if any denomination other than my own decides to regard even the friendliest of interchanges as 'non fellowship', or as 'debating their denomination', then I end up with warnings. They use these 'rules' as a way of keeping strangers out.

Ditto if someone else decides that what I post is blasphemous. I had a very meaningful, very loving prayer thread in WWMC closed because some troll decided to disrupt it, and accuse me of blasphemy, and it is still closed. This is not acceptable.

This gets so tiresome that the only solution is a) not to ever venture out of one's own home areas, and b) post only about the weather.

Surely that is not what this forum is intended for?

I'm sort of speaking off the cuff here so this is merely my opinion though I do think it is fairly representative...plus we Advisor types have been discussing this for about two months (in many cases to the exclusion of other things)...so I'd like to be able to say that we've thought a good deal regarding what we're trying to achieve.

I would say broadly with respect to FSGs the implementation (or removal) will be one of a rolling process. There are simply too many places on the site to do it at once. The expectation is, however, that the only thing people should be hearing from staff should be related to the site rules at large. There may be some rule tweaks along the way but they'll most likely be functional. Such as: forum restrictions. We have several which are restricted by age and gender. Gender is easy because there are only two choices and we can hard code to the selection. Age is not...we're not going to have a usergroup for everyone 10-100...I'd do nothing but make manual moves all day long and I'd go insane. So we'll probably make that more explicit in the rules with respect to profile elements that are not hard coded to forum access.

But that really isn't what you're asking, I think. If I were a betting man I'd say that the last to be implemented will be the Congregational ones because they're the most difficult set. We'll probably be approaching the relevant groups and soliciting their input (though with a set template). I'm certainly not going to write / provide links for "what we believe" for OBOB or STR, for example.

To be perfectly frank...all of these guidelines which state "we can't discuss, you won't discuss, you must hold this opinion" really bug the hell out of me and I don't find them particularly welcoming. I'd rather have something which states: this is what we believe.

This bit:

I have found to my cost that if any denomination other than my own decides to regard even the friendliest of interchanges as 'non fellowship', or as 'debating their denomination', then I end up with warnings. They use these 'rules' as a way of keeping strangers out.

I tend to concur with...I refer to it as the "ghettoization of CF" something which I'm not a fan of...ditto with blasphemy. I think that people define it poorly. We've actually been working on a whole big internal guidance document on blasphemy for the last month or so...sort of "what is and what is not" as I think it has gone a bit off the rails.
 
Upvote 0

MariaRegina

Well-Known Member
Jun 26, 2003
53,258
14,159
Visit site
✟115,460.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
God grant you many years, Tonks.

I agree with Catherineanne and you. Ethnocentrism and parochial religiosity do not build up the Body of Christ, but only divide it. There is only one Faith, one Baptism, one Lord, Jesus Christ.

A lot of good CF folks that I used to correspond with are now agnostic and atheists, and people have to ask why? CF should be drawing people toward Christ and not away from Him.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Protoevangel

Smash the Patriarchy!
Feb 6, 2004
11,662
1,248
Eugene, OR
✟33,297.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
In Relationship
Forum Specific Guidelines are being removed. Each forum will retain a basic outline regarding the purpose of the forum. The Congregational Areas will be a given a bit more leeway to include posting a statement of faith / documents about what group x believes etc.
Will the Congregation-Wide Guideliens stay put, as-is? With the SoF and the CWG still in place, I have no objections. My only concern in the integrity of the "safe haven" rule.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.