Christian Forums Under New Management

[stumpjumper]

I think non-christians posting is AWESOME! It's a great outreach and a great place for people to get answers.

Agree.

I would only stipulate that non-Christians are genuinely seeking and asking questions with a RESPECTFUL attitude. Flaming someone for their faith is not respectful...it's mean. What's the point in that? Those people are not genuinely seeking answers they're just trying to stir the pot so that they can prove their point that Christians are "nuts".

I agree with that as well and this is coming from one who has spent a great deal of time in the open forums both in discussions as a member and as a moderator of General Apologetics.

I'll be perfectly honest. The worst flames and heated discussions on this site that I moderated in my almost year on staff were in the Christians Only theology forums not the open forums.

Some of the nastiest debates were in those forums not in places like GA but I agree with your overall point. IMO, one of the issues is that there are far too many forums here and when I was on debate staff the way of dealing with flames was generally locking and trashing the thread which was ineffective because another thread would just open up and the discussion would continue like normal... Also bans have always been too easy to bypass with the instant registration and plethora of sock accounts etc

Anyway, that's neither here nor there....

 

[scraparcs]

Just one of many differences held by (actual) Christians. So who decides?
tulc(not trying to belabor this but it is going to be a problem) )

I'm honestly most worried w/r/t the Catholics and Orthodox. I think the liberals will be mostly ok.

Yes.

I envision a return to the bad, old days.

Some of the changes were likely necessary and the wiki thing was ridiculously complicated, but this wind is blowing back in the direction of a Christian Only Country Club which never worked well.

That's what I fear.

CF has always been open to non-Christians as the Outreach (questions by non-Christians) and the previously open forums such as GA and E/C would tell you.

The problem is that the honest seekers would often be served better by the CO areas.

I suggest getting rid of the LDS (Mormon) congregational forum. Joseph Smith's lies do not deserve that sort of legitimacy.

There's a large gulf between "Joseph Smith's beliefs are wrong" and "Get rid of the LDS congregational."

 

[Glaz]

Thing is...if it works in other places. And it does. Then it is not per se a bad idea.

It was the nature of this site and the ingrained combative nature that made it a problem. And that problem was not resolved by open reports...it just spread the venom. I am not alone in that opinion.

So we should just close all access except to a privileged few who get to dole out 'justice' as they see fit? It was abused before and will be abused again. At least with open access, people were able to see what was going on, and members were actually able to defend themselves when reported instead of hoping staff would just do the right thing..

It just seems to me more about small groups wanting power instead of wanting to run a good message board. Cause the wiki's could have worked, if people had swallowed their pride and found a way to work together. But from day one, the old cliques wanted them to fail and did everything they could to make sure they did. I remember in the GPD wiki, old debate staff coming in and gloating how none of it would work and magnifying every flaw as an example of how terrible the wiki's are. People like that are the problem, not the wiki's, not the open staff forums, not the open reports. And I don't care if I am alone in that opinion, cause what I think isn't based on popularity polls.

 

[stumpjumper]

The problem is that the honest seekers would often be served better by the CO areas.

Very true.

Places like General Apologetics serve a purpose (providing entertainment for many people like myself) but they are not really the types of places to have productive discussions with people earnestly curious about Christianity.

Being able to post in places like the congregational forums or Christian theology sections is great for seekers.

There's a large gulf between "Joseph Smith's beliefs are wrong" and "Get rid of the LDS congregational."

He must have a hang glider

 

[KarrieTex]

So we should just close all access except to a privileged few who get to dole out 'justice' as they see fit? It was abused before and will be abused again. At least with open access, people were able to see what was going on, and members were actually able to defend themselves when reported instead of hoping staff would just do the right thing..

It just seems to me more about small groups wanting power instead of wanting to run a good message board. Cause the wiki's could have worked, if people had swallowed their pride and found a way to work together. But from day one, the old cliques wanted them to fail and did everything they could to make sure they did. I remember in the GPD wiki, old debate staff coming in and gloating how none of it would work and magnifying every flaw as an example of how terrible the wiki's are. People like that are the problem, not the wiki's, not the open staff forums, not the open reports. And I don't care if I am alone in that opinion, cause what I think isn't based on popularity polls.

Hey Soupy...

Doesn't that remind you of a certain gov't trying to form?

I actually agree with you.

 

[stumpjumper]

Secrecy and accountability anyone?

 

[psalms 91]

Yes, the new reforms are a return to sanity. The cries being heard now are the samew ones that led to the insanity that was called reform and caused so many to leave. I am glad that a voice of reason has been heard.

 

[Oxy2Hydr0]

The names or titles of God, including Jesus Christ and the Persons of the Trinity (Father, Son, or Holy Spirit), in any language, are not to be used as expletives or interjections or in an abusive, mocking, or insulting way.

This of course is binding upon non-Christian and can be considered a bias and unfair rule to all. However this policy perhaps needs to be modified to included with the same repect towards other religions whom are non-Christians and do not worship the Christian deity.

The current policy leaves room for fanatics to use content against another religion's deity that the forum prohibits from being used against it self.

If this rule is not modified to protect all religions then it can be held as bias and prejudice rule exempting to insult, mock, degrade etc another religion's deity.

 

[TankGirl]

Actually, I think you'll find this is a Christian Forum - non-Christians are under absolutely no obligation to post here.

 

[ParsonJefferson]

This of course is binding upon non-Christian and can be considered a bias and unfair rule to all. However this policy perhaps needs to be modified to included with the same repect towards other religions whom are non-Christians and do not worship the Christian deity.

The current policy leaves room for fanatics to use content against another religion's deity that the forum prohibits from being used against it self.

If this rule is not modified to protect all religions then it can be held as bias and prejudice rule exempting to insult, mock, degrade etc another religion's deity.

You make a good point.

But I think it's important to understand that this forum originally was a CHRISTIAN forum. So when non-Christians come in here, and start bashing and mocking Christians, there's a real problem. I cannot speak for anyone else here, but I would NEVER go to a Muslim forum and start saying stuff like, "Allah is a pig and Mohammad is a harlot" or some such offensive tripe.

I think non-Christians owe us the same respect on what was/is supposed to be a Christian forum.

 

[*Starlight*]

Actually, I think you'll find this is a Christian Forum - non-Christians are under absolutely no obligation to post here.

Well, Christians are under no obligation to post here as well...

 

[ParsonJefferson]

Well, Christians are under no obligation to post here as well...

And, if you take a closer look, you'll find that there are less than one-third of the people here who used to be here.

So, obviously, a LOT of Christians voted with their feet.

 

[psalms 91]

Well, Christians are under no obligation to post here as well...

True, but it is a Christian forum not the other way around. It is changing the name back as well as many of the rules that were in place. If I go to a non-christian board then I am a visitor and not someone who should be trying to change the site to another point of belief. I see no difference here.

 

[ParsonJefferson]

True, but it is a Christian forum not the other way around. It is changing the name back as well as many of the rules that were in place. If I go to a non-christian board then I am a visitor and not someone who should be trying to change the site to another point of belief. I see no difference here.

BINGO!

 

[Nadiine]

True, but it is a Christian forum not the other way around. It is changing the name back as well as many of the rules that were in place. If I go to a non-christian board then I am a visitor and not someone who should be trying to change the site to another point of belief. I see no difference here.

AMEN

 

[Jazzedforhim]

True, but it is a Christian forum not the other way around. It is changing the name back as well as many of the rules that were in place. If I go to a non-christian board then I am a visitor and not someone who should be trying to change the site to another point of belief. I see no difference here.

Yep!

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

This of course is binding upon non-Christian and can be considered a bias and unfair rule to all. However this policy perhaps needs to be modified to included with the same repect towards other religions whom are non-Christians and do not worship the Christian deity.

The current policy leaves room for fanatics to use content against another religion's deity that the forum prohibits from being used against it self.

If this rule is not modified to protect all religions then it can be held as bias and prejudice rule exempting to insult, mock, degrade etc another religion's deity.

Hi. What do you mean "Christian Deity"? Your religion is the one that believes JESUS was not sent to the World.

http://foru.ms/t5615012-jesus-christ-was-he-sent-for-all-mankind.html
-jesus-christ-was-he-sent-for-all-mankind

Hello.We muslims believe he was sent to the sons of Israel not for all mankind.This doesnt mean the one who follows Him in real does a wrong job but this is God's plan for He sent Muhammed-aleyhissalam-to all mankind.Which proofs do christians have to claim that Jesus was sent to entire humanity and not only to the israelites?

 

[stumpjumper]

Yes, the new reforms are a return to sanity. The cries being heard now are the same ones that led to the insanity that was called reform and caused so many to leave. I am glad that a voice of reason has been heard.

That "sanity" of the past CF is nothing but a chimera.

I certainly think the reforms of this past July went a bit far but going back to the way things were is not the answer...

 

[KarrieTex]

The best thing to do is to pull the best from both time periods.

Unfortunately, though they weren't the best fo times before 7/7/07, the manner in which this site has been afterwards is horrid....in most aspects.

 

[TheBear]

I'm noticing the way different people are giving this website different treatment. Some are giving the site the status of a church. To others, a community gathering.

Personally, I like the Round Table approach, where every community member has an equal voice.