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.
I like the idea of a CO forum as a SUB-FORUM to the main forums.ok do you mean in like two new separate forums, or under the banner of teens.
I am not openly emotional but I will tell you with tears in my eyes that if it were not for someone in university, on this board, telling me that things are really different and that highschool doesn't set the course of your life (or something very significant), I would be in a very bad place now. Such a fact may be painfully obvious to those of us who have not followed stereotypical routes, but it is as alien to many of us as much as raising a child is alien to many new parents.
What happened to the Serious Stuff subforum?I am not sure if it ended up being an official proposal or just an idea we discussed briefly. I know that I was discussing it with Ron (I think) at one point. It was quite a while ago though and didn't go ahead due to the low staff numbers in the society area who wouldn't be able to handle another forum. I think most of it was on MSN or possibly in the staff forums but I can try to find anything that might still be on my computer if you like.meh said:To the idea of having a sub-forum in Society for the political/ethical debates- that's an interesting idea. Was there a proposal about this before that had some more details?
It was still in existence, especially since the plan for this never went ahead but we were looking at moving Serious Stuff to the Society area of the board with a link from teens. The forum would remain pretty much the same (only teens up to 21 allowed, discussing serious issues) but would be moderated by a team that is used to moderating debates and would also remove it from the general teen area where parents were concerned about their young children seeing those kinds of debates.
That is a great idea!It was still in existence, especially since the plan for this never went ahead but we were looking at moving Serious Stuff to the Society area of the board with a link from teens. The forum would remain pretty much the same (only teens up to 21 allowed, discussing serious issues) but would be moderated by a team that is used to moderating debates and would also remove it from the general teen area where parents were concerned about their young children seeing those kinds of debates.
Agreed entirely.I agree with a CO SUBforum. For all ages, only Christians maybe? Then if parents are still concerned about older people, then a CO subforum (or non CO, whichever you'd like) for those 15 and under?
Then I agree with merging Young Adult and College, and making the age restriction 17 to 25 or 28 or so. Perhaps a CO section there as well. And some kind of link to a special society forum for serious issues would be awesome.
The teens love the non Christians. We appreciate a CO section, but believe it's important to mingle with them and love them, just as Jesus would. What it boils down to is respect. We do get some who harass people and disrespect Christians and Christianity...But the same could be said for some "Christians" we've had on the board.
As I recall, you people were in the minority, and others, who were Christians, not Non-Christians, pointed out why it wasn't going to work.Those were the non-Christians who said it would never work. As I recall, the majority of us wanted one. A lot. In the end, the CO tags were settled on. But like someone stated earlier, once it was found out that the rule wasn't official, no one listened to it.
I have to address this post because it used several debating techniques that trouble me:As I recall, you people were in the minority, and others, who were Christians, not Non-Christians, pointed out why it wasn't going to work.
All that was needed was some enforcement of the CO rule (which worked pretty well, by the way) and there would have been no problems. And even then, the offenders would leave if they were asked to. It was not a story of "non-Christians running amok", but rather of people obeying the rules like they were supposed to, and those who weren't were scolded. To think that even a small minority of atheists were posting in CO threads is absolutely ludicrous and a total fabrication. If that happened, it was maybe once or twice in a long time, not all the time, not regularly, nothing of that sort.
But some people are not satisfied with the "atheist menace" stuck on the outside of the thread, they wanted them gone entirely. And myself and others have routinely pointed out the flaws of this idea, and good reasoning people (such as yourself, meh) have always seen the logic and truth to our arguments and decided in our favor.
We only humbly suggest that you, dear administrators, remember all of our arguments presented from this thread and the many before like it, and use logic, good reason, and faith in God to come to a fair and honest decision, like I am sure you will.
You and S53 just disagreed over the facts from memory, yet you decided to go further and say what he was saying was a complete fabrication and completely ludicrous?To think that even a small minority of atheists were posting in CO threads is absolutely ludicrous and a total fabrication. If that happened, it was maybe once or twice in a long time, not all the time, not regularly, nothing of that sort.
I was one of them, mind you, that wanted the entire forum as Christian Only.But some people are not satisfied with the "atheist menace" stuck on the outside of the thread, they wanted them gone entirely.
Now this makes little sense to me. You are utilizing very strong rhetoric on what appears to be an unimportant topic. Why?And myself and others have routinely pointed out the flaws of this idea, and good reasoning people (such as yourself, meh) have always seen the logic and truth to our arguments and decided in our favor.
You just defined in your previous paragraph a "logical well reasoned and faithful" position would be the one you hold.We only humbly suggest that you, dear administrators, remember all of our arguments presented from this thread and the many before like it, and use logic, good reason, and faith in God to come to a fair and honest decision, like I am sure you will.
As I recall, you people were in the minority, and others, who were Christians, not Non-Christians, pointed out why it wasn't going to work.
All that was needed was some enforcement of the CO rule (which worked pretty well, by the way) and there would have been no problems. And even then, the offenders would leave if they were asked to. It was not a story of "non-Christians running amok", but rather of people obeying the rules like they were supposed to, and those who weren't were scolded. To think that even a small minority of atheists were posting in CO threads is absolutely ludicrous and a total fabrication. If that happened, it was maybe once or twice in a long time, not all the time, not regularly, nothing of that sort.
But some people are not satisfied with the "atheist menace" stuck on the outside of the thread, they wanted them gone entirely. And myself and others have routinely pointed out the flaws of this idea, and good reasoning people (such as yourself, meh) have always seen the logic and truth to our arguments and decided in our favor.
We only humbly suggest that you, dear administrators, remember all of our arguments presented from this thread and the many before like it, and use logic, good reason, and faith in God to come to a fair and honest decision, like I am sure you will.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?