Moderators--a simple proposal

SassySDA · Aug 1, 2007

sentipente said:
Go here and you will see all those who were reported. http://www.christianforums.com/f638-ecumenical-reports.html

I've seen everything now.

Do you know, that on the site I work for, IF the person who's post was reported, SPEAKS ABOUT IT IN THE FORUM, they will be disciplined for that?

These are issues that are best left for staff eyes only.

This site is a MESS.

SassySDA · Aug 1, 2007

TrustAndObey said:
I like the idea of notes in the thread about a violation for instuction.

I'm just not sold on this idea. I guess I see room for error, prejudice, and gossippy situations. "oh my gosh, guess who reported me?" That sort of thing.

I'm not closed to the idea either.....

I just don't know.

"anonymous" or not, this is a train wreck.

I've got enough experience in doing this kind of thing that I KNOW what I'm talking about.

If the site goes for this, I wouldn't want any part of it.

NightEternal · Aug 1, 2007

SassySDA said:
I've seen everything now.

Do you know, that on the site I work for, IF the person who's post was reported, SPEAKS ABOUT IT IN THE FORUM, they will be disciplined for that?

These are issues that are best left for staff eyes only.

This site is a MESS.

There is no such rule here that I am aware of, so I am free to defend myself against what people are slanderously saying in my post reports. I, for one, am glad these ridiculous comments in the reports were brought to my attention.

Let us again point out that no Progressives have called for the banning of a forum member.

These cries come from one side only.

honorthesabbath · Aug 1, 2007

NightEternal said:
There is no such rule here that I am aware of, so I am free to defend myself against what people are slanderously saying in my post reports. I, for one, am glad these ridiculous comments in the reports were brought to my attention.

Let us again point out that no Progressives have called for the banning of a forum member.

These cries come from one side only.

WRONG--ICE wanted me banned.

honorthesabbath · Aug 1, 2007

SassySDA said:
"anonymous" or not, this is a train wreck.

I've got enough experience in doing this kind of thing that I KNOW what I'm talking about.

If the site goes for this, I wouldn't want any part of it.

Sassy--I just spent about an hour in this area and what I found did surprise me. First of all the SDA forum is not the worst for whinning. Some of the reports from other forums are just soooo silly and uncalled for. It's reporting for reporting sake. I did see some of that from this forum too.

One other thing I did see that concerns me though. There does seem to be some favoritism among the mods for certain ppl. I noted a few of them.

I know two years ago many of us experienced this first hand. But when you see it in their own words--it's scarry.

NightEternal · Aug 1, 2007

honorthesabbath said:
WRONG--ICE wanted me banned.

Saying he wants you banned in a thread and actually pleading for the mods to do so in post reports are two different things.

If Ice did that, he was wrong to do so.

sentipente · Aug 1, 2007

honorthesabbath said:
It's reporting for reporting sake. I did see some of that from this forum too.

Yeah! Anyone who has been an Adventist long enough would know the standing wordplay joke involving prophet and profit. The uninformed would make it a reportable event.

NightEternal · Aug 1, 2007

When an innocent JOKE gets reported, things have reached the point where I simply give up caring anymore.

I always say, if you cannot laugh at yourself, someone will do it for you. Some here apparently need to learn that.

tall73 · Aug 1, 2007

SassySDA said:
"anonymous" or not, this is a train wreck.

I've got enough experience in doing this kind of thing that I KNOW what I'm talking about.

If the site goes for this, I wouldn't want any part of it.

The site already has public reports as you can see, and according to the latest poll in Discuss rules that is not likely to change.

I guess you will have to decide if you want any part of it.

My proposal then is not about open reports as such, but using them in a way to allow us to take more responsibility as a group for our forum. It would make all of us not only able to make comments in reports but have some role in the decision. It would allow us the 24 hour coverage that we don't have now.

The reason they made reports open is that before, when they were private, there were some abuses. People got tired of it and pushed for a more open process now so that it can be challenged openly when it happens.

In one instance a thread by an Adventists was closed for discussing our view of death. Now while it was not malice here that caused it, there was no rule against that discussion. They just thought it was "unorthodox" though it was not listed as such under the rules.

Therefore I appealed to have it re-opened since I was on theology staff to see it.

Now any member can make that appeal when the rules are not being followed, because there will always be groups who are not represented on staff. If you are seeing favoritism it is your duty in my eyes to point it out in the reports, now that we have that ability.

That is a healthy check against abuse.

TrustAndObey · Aug 2, 2007

Tall, what you just said cleared a lot of things up for me. I wasn't aware that this was NEW. I thought it had been around a while and I just wasn't aware of it existing.

I still want mods though. 4-5-6 of them that we all trust.

And we do have anti-flaming rules on CF in general, so at least someone could be taking care of those. I realize there isn't a warning system in place for our forum yet, but the mods could be doing some "could you please reconsider your wording" counseling, right?

I just really feel like we need mods to help us through the rule-making process...but I know I'm sounding like a broken record.

sentipente · Aug 2, 2007

tall73 said:
That is a healthy check against abuse.

And it won't be long before petty reports, like the one against prophet vs. profit, are no longer made.

TrustAndObey · Aug 2, 2007

sentipente said:
And it won't be long before petty reports, like the one against prophet vs. profit, are no longer made.

There's some history there though that you wouldn't know about, but I don't see why it was reported either.

(Ex-Adventist...some snippy comments in the past).

He's not supposed to debate in here, and it was a problem at one point, but really not so much anymore.

And I like the guy, he's a super great person...but the current rule is no debate in the Adventist section from non-Adventist, so I can't say the person that reported it didn't have some cause.

sentipente · Aug 2, 2007

TrustAndObey said:
And I like the guy, he's a super great person...but the current rule is no debate in the Adventist section from non-Adventist, so I can't say the person that reported it didn't have some cause.

The report was made against my post in which I tried to make light of the reference to our prophet by making the juxtaposition with profit. But that is not the issue here.

longhair75 · Aug 2, 2007

For those that missed it, my analysis of the Prophet/Profit reports was incorrect due to taking the posts at face value. I was unaware that it was part of an inside joke.

My apologies

TrustAndObey · Aug 2, 2007

It was a cheap shot I thought, but I wasn't too worked up about it.

sentipente · Aug 2, 2007

longhair75 said:
For those that missed it, my analysis of the Prophet/Profit reports was incorrect due to taking the posts at face value. I was unaware that it was part of an inside joke.

That happens a lot. It happens with other groups but especially with the Adventist sub-culture. We speak an entirely differently language from most people. You must hear the jokes those of long-standing tell among ourselves.

Because of how we see ourselves we sometimes call our schools "The schools of the prophets." Those who are stung by the high price of Adventist education sometimes resort to calling them "The schools of the profit." It makes for a good chuckle.

longhair75 · Aug 2, 2007

Friend sentipente

it takes eight Episcopalians to change a light bulb: One to call an electrician, one to pour the drinks and six to form a small group to generate a report to the vestry to petition that the old light bulb be left in place while a study is done as to the appropriatness of such a radical change at this time.......

sentipente · Aug 2, 2007

longhair75 said:
Friend sentipente

it takes eight Episcopalians to change a light bulb: One to call an electrician, one to pour the drinks and six to form a small group to generate a report to the vestry to petition that the old light bulb be left in place while a study is done as to the appropriatness of such a radical change at this time.......

I guess we all have them and they keep us sane.

Moderators--a simple proposal

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Evangelical SDA

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Evangelical SDA

Senior Contributor

Evangelical SDA

Sophia7's husband

TrustAndObey

Guest

Senior Contributor

TrustAndObey

Guest

Senior Contributor

Searching once more

TrustAndObey

Guest

Senior Contributor

Searching once more

Senior Contributor

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency