• 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.

Rules for the new progressive section

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
It just occurred to me. Are the voting restrictions for the main forum also in force for the sub-forums?

Good question. I don't know. I just made the poll and indicated that voting would be open to all who consider themselves non-Traditional or Evangelical or Progressive Adventists. I had forgotten about the date restriction in the main forum. Does it matter here?
 
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Site Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
32,684
6,107
Visit site
✟1,047,383.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I am concerned about my vote. It is the vote that is restricted. I have been having my say (and more).

We will have to get some CF clarification, but at one time I thought sub-forums, especially those deriving from divisions, would be able to make their own rules.

I imagine the traditionals want that as much as we do.

We could always start yet another poll on the question :)

But I think your vote would count.
 
Upvote 0

reddogs

Contributor
Site Supporter
Dec 29, 2006
9,234
512
✟554,928.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Yes, I really doubt that many of them would want to argue in the PSDA sub-forum. Oh, and flaming will not be tolerated under any circumstances, whether the rule proposal passes or not.

If I can study and discuss with Stormy at BSDA and we still love each others as christian brothers, I dont see why you would think that anyone would not want or should be shut out of the 'PSDA sub-forum'. Everyone should be allowed in, but PSDA views or concerns would be the norm, just as if you went to a enviromentalist, Obama for President, or gay and lesbian, etc.. forum, everyone could give their thoughts on the matter, but the issues would be what would concern enviromentalist, Obama for President, or gay and lesbian, etc...
 
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
If I can study and discuss with Stormy at BSDA and we still love each others as christian brothers, I dont see why you would think that anyone would not want or should be shut out of the 'PSDA sub-forum'.
Read her post again, reds. That's not what she said.
 
Upvote 0

reddogs

Contributor
Site Supporter
Dec 29, 2006
9,234
512
✟554,928.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Now, you just lost me with that word.

Well you can put in or substitute its verbal cousin, "Agitated"....;)
agitate

One entry found for agitate. Main Entry: ag·i·tate
Pronunciation: 'a-j&-"tAt
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): -tat·ed; -tat·ing
Etymology: Latin agitatus, past participle of agitare, frequentative of agere to drive -- more at [SIZE=-1]AGENT[/SIZE]
transitive verb
1 a obsolete : to give motion to b : to move with an irregular, rapid, or violent action [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth]e storm agitated the sea>
2 : to excite and often trouble the mind or feelings of : [SIZE=-1]DISTURB[/SIZE]
3 a : to discuss excitedly and earnestly b : to stir up public discussion of
intransitive verb : to attempt to arouse public feeling <agitated for better schools>
synonym see [SIZE=-1]SHAKE[/SIZE], [SIZE=-1]DISCOMPOSE[/SIZE]
- ag·i·tat·ed·ly adverb
- ag·i·ta·tion /"a-j&-'tA-sh&n/ noun
- ag·i·ta·tion·al /-shn&l, -sh&-n&l/ adjective
 
Upvote 0