Forum Governing

Status
Not open for further replies.

DavidPresently

Senior Member
Jun 29, 2007
1,184
80
45
Ohio
Visit site
✟16,731.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
I propose that we keep our rules in this section simple and to the point, allowing for open communication among people, but providing guidelines for dealing trouble.

We do not share a core set of beliefs here as ND people, other than being Christians, which we had to agree to to join as Christians at CF.

ND DEFINITION: ND is also such a broad term, that it is hard to define such, to determine who is coming in as ND in their mindset (icon aside) and who is not.

VOTING RULES: Concerning voting, however, for governing this forum together, we need to agree first that only those having an ND icon because they are a part of an ND assembly, can vote. If a person with the ND icon becomes a recognized trouble maker, bringing in strife among us, then there should be a rule to remove their voting right, and if necessary, even their posting (to discuss, debate, or teach) rights banned from this ND forum.

Colossians 4:5-6 MKJV Walk in wisdom toward those on the outside, redeeming the time. (6) Let your speech be always with grace, having been seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer each one.

Colossians 3:8-9 MKJV But now also put off all these things: anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, shameful speech out of your mouth. (9) Do not lie to one another, having put off the old man with his deeds

PROPER AND IMPROPER POSTING:

1. Speaking angrily toward one another, causing strife, will not be accepted. No personal attacks.

2. Pronouncing personal judgment via personal attacks will not be accepted here. Judgments made with witnesses and proof for the good of the group are not personal attacks, and will be made against rule breakers.

3. Speaking against God will not be accepted here, for any reason. Posts may be reported and deleted.

4. Vulgar speech will not be accepted here, to avoid offending or being a stumbling block to others. Posts containing vulgar speech will be dealt with by the general membership on a case by case basis. If at least two or three witnesses believe a post is vulgar, the matter is established, the post may be reported, and then deleted. If the person repents and edits there own post, the post will not be deleted.

5. In keeping to redeeming the time well, endless debating back and forth between people is strongly discouraged. Those who do so continually, when it is stirring up strife among the brethren, can lose their posting rights. This will only be done for this particular rule through a due process, of the matter being taken before the whole forum that "insert name" continually comes in and debates in a manner that causes frustration and strife among us, and that the voting membership will now vote concerning whether to allow the poster to continue, or to ban them from posting in this section. A majority vote is required, among the voting membership, for a judgment.

PERSONAL ATTACKS: We are to guard against being easily offended, and being over-sensitive to others disagreeing with us in their statements. IT IS NOT PERSONAL and is not to be taken as such, unless a direct personal attack against the actual person is clearly stated. Those who do actually begin personally attacking others will be given grace to repent, but if they will not ask for forgiveness and repent, their posting rights here will be suspended.

An example of a personal attack is, "You idiot! You're such a retard! I can't believe you are so stupid!!"

Any such posting will not be tolerated - posts will be reported by the others here, and posts deleted ASAP.

An example of what is not a personal attack, but if someone allows it, it could offend: "That is messed up theology! I don't know where you get that junk from!"

Such is not attacking the person, it is disagreeing boldly with a point of view. We are not to take disagreement with our point of view as personal, and get personally offended over it. We are to be good witnesses, that are long-suffering and kind, here to serve others, and not just ourselves.

Theological disagreements are to be handled per case in the threads, by the ND forum participants. We are not afraid of what we see as false theology coming in here, because we have not been given a spirit of fear, but rather of power, love, and a sound mind. If the theology is truly false, it can be shown to be so from the Scriptures, and we should not be afraid of such discussions.

THE SCRIPTURES: To enter into theological or doctrinal discussion, debate, or teaching, one must agree that the Scriptures (Bible) is the foundation for correct doctrine and theology, and that all doctrine and theology must first be founded in the Scriptures. If you cannot agree to this, you cannot debate or teach, but you may fellowship and ask questions here.

If you prove by your posts that you do not believe this, because you continue to argue for non-scriptural doctrine or theology, or another book as the authority, your posting rights to discuss, debate, or teach may be revoked.

An example of this is posting with a Book of Mormon doctrinal or theological point, that is not also in the Scriptures (Bible) accepted by most Christians. However, anyone can quote from any literary source, as long as they are not using it for the foundation of doctrine and theology to teach or debate.


These are just some simple thoughts on it. It seems harder to come up with rules for here because of the ND differences already, that denominational forums don't have. I'm just typing out as I thought of such in rough draft form. If you see parts that need edited or modified somehow - speak up. If you have another idea altogether, speak up. We just need to get the ball rolling.

The first order of business even before we finish the rest of the rule set, is to agree on the voting rules, concerning who can vote here, and who cannot vote. Then, once that is in place, we can move on and start coming up with the rules and voting on them. And if in the future we see something needs added to the rules, or taken away, we can vote for that also.
 

HypnoToad

*croak*
Site Supporter
May 29, 2005
5,876
485
✟82,302.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
we need to agree first that only those having an ND icon because they are a part of an ND assembly, can vote
What about members like me?

My icon is Protestant, but there is no "Protestant" forum. I certainly am Protestant, but I don't subscribe to one particular denomination within Protestantism.

No home for me?
 
Upvote 0

OldChurchGuy

Regular Member
Feb 19, 2007
195
24
✟15,752.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
What about members like me?

My icon is Protestant, but there is no "Protestant" forum. I certainly am Protestant, but I don't subscribe to one particular denomination within Protestantism.

No home for me?

Similar problem for me because I listed myself as Presbyterian when signing up.

What exactly are the problems with the current guidelines / rules?

OldChurchGuy
 
Upvote 0

jive4005

Senior Veteran
Jun 14, 2007
1,997
149
Rhode Island
Visit site
✟10,380.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I'm an Independent Baptist minister quite Pentecostal in Spirit and actions, railing against denominationalizm.
Got a special room for me!?

Rules can be nice... the fewer the better. God only needed 10.


PS: I don't really care how you run your forum... as long as I get to do what He told me to do... tell everybody about Jesus.
 
Upvote 0

GraceLikeRainFallsDown

Everyone Needs Grace
Mar 15, 2006
1,265
125
✟1,986.00
Faith
Calvary Chapel
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
As far as voting goes, I think that we should include the Christian and Protestant icons with ND. A Christian that is a Protestant that does not have a denomination is ND in my mind.

Personally, I would like to see only two rules to start.

1) Posts must be "clean" and polite. All posts deemed not polite will be deleted.

2) All those with the generic Christian/Protestant or ND icons may vote.

I would like to see a place where all are welcome to post. I know that so few rules can open up problems.

We may need to add rules in the future, but I would like to start with as few rules as possible.

Just my opinion . . . :)
 
Upvote 0

DavidPresently

Senior Member
Jun 29, 2007
1,184
80
45
Ohio
Visit site
✟16,731.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
As far as voting goes, I think that we should include the Christian and Protestant icons with ND. A Christian that is a Protestant that does not have a denomination is ND in my mind.

Personally, I would like to see only two rules to start.

1) Posts must be "clean" and polite. All posts deemed not polite will be deleted.

2) All those with the generic Christian/Protestant or ND icons may vote.

I would like to see a place where all are welcome to post. I know that so few rules can open up problems.

We may need to add rules in the future, but I would like to start with as few rules as possible.

Just my opinion . . . :)

I agree with the icon and voting deal you mention. But, I think that voting for those who are a part of a denomination should be left to voting in their own forum, though they are free to post here.

The rules I listed allow for free posting in here by anyone until they prove to be a trouble maker, and then the rules are only there to guide us who can vote, and the mods we vote in, concerning how to deal with such trouble makers, with one standard of judgment, so we aren't respecters of persons, judging differently for different people.

This is why I didn't stick with just a couple of rules, so that it can be clearly defined for us how to deal with trouble makers coming in stirring up strife and talking to others in a wrong manner, with the same measure of judgment for all people - which is just and right.
 
Upvote 0

DavidPresently

Senior Member
Jun 29, 2007
1,184
80
45
Ohio
Visit site
✟16,731.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
I'm an Independent Baptist minister quite Pentecostal in Spirit and actions, railing against denominationalizm.
Got a special room for me!?

Rules can be nice... the fewer the better. God only needed 10.


PS: I don't really care how you run your forum... as long as I get to do what He told me to do... tell everybody about Jesus.

I think all are welcome here to post, as long as they do not become creators of strife among brethren.
 
Upvote 0

DavidPresently

Senior Member
Jun 29, 2007
1,184
80
45
Ohio
Visit site
✟16,731.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
What about members like me?

My icon is Protestant, but there is no "Protestant" forum. I certainly am Protestant, but I don't subscribe to one particular denomination within Protestantism.

No home for me?

I agree with adding generic Christian icons to the ND icon as those who vote. The reason for not including other voters, such as the Presby guy posting after you, is because they have their own forum to govern and vote in. This is a place we who have ND and generic icons can govern according to the new CF way.

But, all are welcome to post in here if they keep the rules, which guard against trouble makers only.
 
Upvote 0

GraceLikeRainFallsDown

Everyone Needs Grace
Mar 15, 2006
1,265
125
✟1,986.00
Faith
Calvary Chapel
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
This is why I didn't stick with just a couple of rules, so that it can be clearly defined for us how to deal with trouble makers coming in stirring up strife and talking to others in a wrong manner, with the same measure of judgment for all people - which is just and right.

I understood why you put so many rules down, I just personally would like to see less to start. Most of your rules fall under the be polite category. (Rule 1, 2, 4 and personal attacks) You were giving examples of what polite posting would be. I would rather see it simplified to start. I feel the more rules we have, the less welcoming the board will be.

Can you give an example of your rule number 3 - speaking against God? I assume I know what you mean, but I want to be sure I am reading it how you mean it. Do you mean to not call God names? Or, are you talking about against His Word?

If you mean against His Word. I am not sure about that one. On the surface, it makes complete sense. We are Christians and should never speak against God. But, if we allow all to post here, views are different. What you feel is against God's Word may be interpreted differently by people of other denominations.

As far as rule 5 - endless debating goes, I think that if the people want to endlessly debate, so be it. If I do not want to read it or tire of it, I will not go into that thread or hit ignore. But, you never know who learns from what conversation. If the person is ignored, they will go away.

Just my thoughts . . . :)

When are the rules supposed to be completed by??
 
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

DavidPresently

Senior Member
Jun 29, 2007
1,184
80
45
Ohio
Visit site
✟16,731.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
I understood why you put so many rules down, I just personally would like to see less to start. Most of your rules fall under the be polite category. (Rule 1, 2, 4 and personal attacks) You were giving examples of what polite posting would be. I would rather see it simplified to start. I feel the more rules we have, the less welcoming the board will be.

Can you give an example of your rule number 3 - speaking against God? I assume I know what you mean, but I want to be sure I am reading it how you mean it. Do you mean to not call God names? Or, are you talking about against His Word?

If you mean against His Word. I am not sure about that one. On the surface, it makes complete sense. We are Christians and should never speak against God. But, if we allow all to post here, views are different. What you feel is against God's Word may be interpreted differently by people of other denominations.

As far as rule 5 - endless debating goes, I think that if the people want to endlessly debate, so be it. If I do not want to read it or tire of it, I will not go into that thread or hit ignore. But, you never know who learns from what conversation. If the person is ignored, they will go away.

Just my thoughts . . . :)

When are the rules supposed to be completed by??

The reason for the details about what is a proper post, instead of just saying "polite" is because we have different view of what being polite is. It is very hard to govern with such generalities, which is why we have to agree to more specific definitions of what is meant. But I get what you are saying. They'll never go for it here, as they are more interested in more closed rules, than more open, for their own sub forum (I say they meaning icon bearers).

Your suggestion to define what is speaking against God is good. I mean in regard to the persons of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, there will be no posting against them in any way. Concerning the Scriptures, people are going to disagree, and such is not speaking against the Word, but speaking against what you see as someone else's opinion of a matter (doctrinal, theological, etc.

And example of speaking against God would be calling God a derogatory name, or an atheist coming in and speaking against his very existence. That rule primarily was suggested by me to protect here against atheists and agnostics coming in and posting - warning them with the rules in advance, that such posts will be deleted ASAP. That is a way of telling them before they come in "don't even try, it will be fruitless and a waste of your time."

The rules are only good for that if they are brief and concise, however. The long rules of the past most will not read, because when they see these long and many paragraphs of this and that rules they just hit the back button or something thinking, "I'm not giving my time to that."

I recommend very simple clear rules - but, it appears Dave01 and some others are in favor of lengthy and very detailed rules, to guard their inner sanctum.

What they may not be picking up on, is I'm giving a good portion of my time just to help serve them, with no benefit of power or position myself, as I've even refused myself the right to vote, even before they ratify such a rule. I hope my service can be of good help. I am gifted in administration and leading (shepherding). But I only desire to use it to serve others, not to be self-seeking.

David
 
Upvote 0

DavidPresently

Senior Member
Jun 29, 2007
1,184
80
45
Ohio
Visit site
✟16,731.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
hummm ????????????????????? bring in strife oka thinks to her self never mind

I'm not sure what you are stating.

This is what strife is:

Main Entry: strife
Pronunciation: 'strIf
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English strif, from Anglo-French estrif, estri, of Germanic origin; akin to Middle Dutch striden to fight, Old High German strItan to quarrel -- more at [SIZE=-1]STRIDE[/SIZE]
1 a : bitter sometimes violent conflict or dissension <political strife> b : an act of contention : [SIZE=-1]FIGHT[/SIZE], [SIZE=-1]STRUGGLE[/SIZE]

No one here is causing strife right now - in any threads I've read since here.

The suggestion that is made to others, or even a strong disagreement with a viewpoint, is not strife. Questioning the motives of others is also not strife.


IF I'm wrong, just correct me, as I haven't seen strife, but I may have missed something as I didn't get what you were saying,

David
 
Upvote 0

jsimms615

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 21, 2006
10,996
1,713
✟143,480.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
As far as voting goes, I think that we should include the Christian and Protestant icons with ND. A Christian that is a Protestant that does not have a denomination is ND in my mind.

Personally, I would like to see only two rules to start.

1) Posts must be "clean" and polite. All posts deemed not polite will be deleted.

2) All those with the generic Christian/Protestant or ND icons may vote.

I would like to see a place where all are welcome to post. I know that so few rules can open up problems.

We may need to add rules in the future, but I would like to start with as few rules as possible.

Just my opinion . . . :)
It seems to me that we already have a standard set in our behavior or what should be our behavior. Jesus summed it up by saying that we should treat others as we would want to be treated. Now, if we did that then we wouldn't have any problem at all seems to me.
 
Upvote 0

DavidPresently

Senior Member
Jun 29, 2007
1,184
80
45
Ohio
Visit site
✟16,731.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
It seems to me that we already have a standard set in our behavior or what should be our behavior. Jesus summed it up by saying that we should treat others as we would want to be treated. Now, if we did that then we wouldn't have any problem at all seems to me.

No kidding, bro. But sadly, that isn't the case on the earth today, as very few, including believers, are lawful, loving God, and their fellow man as themselves.

You're right, if everyone would keep the Law, we wouldn't have a problem. But, you cannot expect everyone in the world to keep such, who don't even believe, and can come on this forum, and you can't expect Christians to when their pastors tell them they don't need to be lawful but just "believe." This has raised up generations of Christians who "believe" and then act like the devil.

So, to help out with getting the world where it should, I recommend these steps for everyone who is a believer:

1. receive the empowerment promised in Acts 1:8 and then abide in it and get increase as you are faithful with a little, God giving more.
2. preach "repent for the Kingdom is at hand," like all of the prophets and Jesus did. Repent being the key word, and meaning from sin, sin being defined in the Scriptures as transgression against the Law of God (not Jewish law which is their added traditions).
3. Learn, do, and teach the Law, which tells us HOW to love God and one another in our actions, and stop teaching people to just "love" by their own definition of what love is, without the Law. The scriptural definition of love is found in 1 John 5:2, 3.

If we all can do those 3 simple things, we'd be much more effective salt and light in the earth, and the world would change from being so wicked, to being more and more made righteous. As is in the past 1700-1800 years, the world has just gotten more and more wicked, despite there being 2-3 billion Christians right now, out of 6-7 billion people.

That is 1/3 of the world claims to be Christian and look around. Then ask yourself, "Who's fault is it?" The answer is the churches. Not the sinners. Sinners sin. The saints are the ones who are supposed to be changing the world, like they did in the first century.

I'm seeking always to be doing my part, I hope more will start doing their part in power and love, :)

David
 
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

Svt4Him

Legend
Site Supporter
Oct 23, 2003
16,711
1,132
52
Visit site
✟53,618.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Having been a ND mod for a while, few rules cause lots of trouble. See, if you say that anyone can post, what happens when a RCC posts something we ND believe is not true and start debating? Can we then exclude the RCC because they don't agree? Or do we say only those who agree with the ND belief may debate, what is the ND belief? Or do you wait until someone disagrees with you then say they can't post? The reason we chose icons is to identify with denominations or lack thereof that we most closely align with. I can't say I like some of the things about Orthodox so I can go debate there (or maybe I can) as some of my beliefs are orthodox, so why is is different when someone says Well, I'm baptist, but don't like denominations." If they were ND at heart, then they should be ND.

So no, not a lot of rules, but enough so that people here don't feel the rules are totally subjective and at the whim of whomever they have issue with.
 
Upvote 0

DavidPresently

Senior Member
Jun 29, 2007
1,184
80
45
Ohio
Visit site
✟16,731.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Having been a ND mod for a while, few rules cause lots of trouble. See, if you say that anyone can post, what happens when a RCC posts something we ND believe is not true and start debating? Can we then exclude the RCC because they don't agree? Or do we say only those who agree with the ND belief may debate, what is the ND belief? Or do you wait until someone disagrees with you then say they can't post? The reason we chose icons is to identify with denominations or lack thereof that we most closely align with. I can't say I like some of the things about Orthodox so I can go debate there (or maybe I can) as some of my beliefs are orthodox, so why is is different when someone says Well, I'm baptist, but don't like denominations." If they were ND at heart, then they should be ND.

So no, not a lot of rules, but enough so that people here don't feel the rules are totally subjective and at the whim of whomever they have issue with.

Agreed, the rules need to be simple, concise, yet block trouble makers from having free reign here.

That is possible, if we put our minds together quickly and just start getting it done, rather than talking about it.

We can also always propose rule updates later, if new problems arise we need to deal with, and then vote on them.

There is no commonly held statement of beliefs for ND's, since that is such a wide brush stroke, unlike others such as "baptist" or "word of faith." So, we just have to live with that. If people don't like that and find another group they can agree in belief with, then they can go from here to there - no big deal.

I'm going to start a new thread to try to get some people actively involved in voting in some essential rules we need right now, including how voting is done, and mods.
 
Upvote 0

FreeinChrist

CF Advisory team
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Site Supporter
Jul 2, 2003
145,072
17,410
USA
✟1,751,968.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
First of all, there will be the overall CF rules. Flaming, blasphemy, spamming, copyright, for example will be handled by them. Subforum rules will probably have to not clash with them.

Howwever, Erwin has stated that subforums - like this forum - can set up their ownsubforum rules and limit debate.

Meaning - you can vote to keep the definition of Nondenom. as in the forum sticky that we already have:
http://www.christianforums.com/t2936040-please-read-before-posting-.html

And since the compliance to the Nicene Creed is now not the determiner of what is Christian, you can vote to furthur define Nondenom members as Trinitarian (that is a biggy in my book!!)

You can vote to limit debate in this forum to only nondenom members - in other words, you can vote NOT to let nonChristian religions/beliefs (aka atheism, hinduism), and nonTrinitarian beliefs (example Mormonism , JW) be promoted in this forum

Hope this helps!!
 
Upvote 0

ozell

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2007
4,777
60
chicago il
✟5,327.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
HI

I don't but into the denominational doctrine its all centered around there interpretation. The church I attend we consider ourselves as servants of God. We only call ourselves that if we are trully trying to following everyword of God.

servant of God :amen:

ozell
 
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
Status
Not open for further replies.