• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Progressives: Please Vote on New Rules

Do you approve of the proposed PSDA Sub-forum rules?

  • Yes

  • No


Results are only viewable after voting.

Bourbaki

Visiting Seventh-day Millerite
Sep 9, 2007
427
1
Land of Zog
Visit site
✟23,592.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Green
I want the ability to start controversial threads on EGW and SDA doctrine without the TSDA brigade barging in and declaring me a heretic, a false Adventist as well as an EGW hater who is attacking her.

I have serious questions, and blind SDA/EGW apologists and black and white thinkers only serve to limit, hinder and cripple the process for open and free discussion and the search for answers to the problems facing our church. I wanted a medium where only the few who can tolerate open questioning and free thinking are allowed to participate.

I may be convinced to make an exception for non-SDA's and Moderates, but I will not budge one inch on the Traditionalists. They have made it clear they do not want our presence defiling thier subforum. That is fine. I, in response to that, also demand that our subforum be exclusive as well.

Those who cannot think outside the box and only make it clear thier presence there is to criticize, judge and condemn those who question things, are neither wanted nor welcome in an area where Progressive conversation is taking place, IMO.

I am opposed to this idea. You guys are making a big mistake and I will not support it. This will render our Progressive subforum no different than the main forum and, thus, pointless. As well, nothing from the way the Progressive subforum is now has even changed as a result.

If this rule goes through, you can be sure my topics will never go beyond the sterile and the safe. That is neither a stimulating nor a productive forum practice to me.

I agree with NightEternal.

I do not want input from the apologists that I can easily get from the EGW Estate or the GC. If I desire that, I can post in the main forum or the debate area.

There are many things that the EGW Estate says that I agree with. I hope that that doesn't disqualify me from participating here.
 
Upvote 0

Bourbaki

Visiting Seventh-day Millerite
Sep 9, 2007
427
1
Land of Zog
Visit site
✟23,592.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Green
Anyone opposed to the proposal in this poll is welcome to vote against it. If it doesn't pass, that's fine. We'll go back to the drawing board and come up with something else.

Instead of just quickly voting for this proposal, I propose that we try to achieve the greatest consensus possible on the unique and distinguished purpose of a Progressive Adventist forum among those who consider themselves progressive Adventists.
 
Upvote 0

StormyOne

Senior Veteran
Aug 21, 2005
5,424
47
65
Alabama
✟5,866.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Instead of just quickly voting for this proposal, I propose that we try to achieve the greatest consensus possible on the unique and distinguished purpose of a Progressive Adventist forum among those who consider themselves progressive Adventists.
why? if the people who regularly participate understand what they are voting on, there is no reason to delay a vote.....
 
Upvote 0

sentipente

Senior Contributor
Jul 17, 2007
11,651
4,492
Silver Sprint, MD
✟54,142.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Politics
US-Others
It is obvious to me that Bourbaki is a plant who has been sent to put a spanner in the works in this subforum. He is certainly not progressive in his thinking so his opinion on what is best for the operation of a Progressive subforum is merely of academic interest.
 
Upvote 0

StormyOne

Senior Veteran
Aug 21, 2005
5,424
47
65
Alabama
✟5,866.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It is obvious to me that Bourbaki is a plant who has been sent to put a spanner in the works in this subforum. He is certainly not progressive in his thinking so his opinion on what is best for the operation of a Progressive subforum is merely of academic interest.
agreed..... seen his work before... maybe he will be different here....
 
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Site Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
32,682
6,105
Visit site
✟1,046,387.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Instead of just quickly voting for this proposal, I propose that we try to achieve the greatest consensus possible on the unique and distinguished purpose of a Progressive Adventist forum among those who consider themselves progressive Adventists.

Welcome to the forum :)

Please note the rules, and enjoy the conversation.
 
Upvote 0

Sophia7

Tall73's Wife
Site Supporter
Sep 24, 2005
12,364
456
✟84,145.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Instead of just quickly voting for this proposal, I propose that we try to achieve the greatest consensus possible on the unique and distinguished purpose of a Progressive Adventist forum among those who consider themselves progressive Adventists.

Well, the poll has closed, and the sub-forum rules passed with 84.62 percent of the vote, which included most of those who regularly post in the PSDA sub-forum. I'd say that's a pretty clear mandate. Among those who identify themselves as Progressive Adventists, the purpose of the PSDA sub-forum has been determined to be to allow open discussion and debate from anyone on any topic, as long as posters follow the general site-wide rules. However, we did put in a clause by consensus, limiting participation in the rule-making process to Progressive Adventists.
 
Upvote 0