We need some SDA moderators

[erin74]

Hi again,

As you are probably aware, with Sophia7 and Tall73 stepping down from staff there is now an absence of SDA staff members. This is something I am keen to alleviate.

We want to be careful to get a balance on staff though. What would be terrible is if there were a stack of new SDA moderators and they were all of the same viewpoint. Not because we don't believe that people could moderate fairly, but because it can give that perception.

Something we've tried to do in the Anglican forum is to make sure that we have a balance of staff members, from a theological perspective. Our theology does not often have any bearing on our decisions, but I think it helps members to feel secure that they are not being treated unfairly.

So I have a proposal. Rather than telling us which of your friends you would like to see as a mod, I would like you to tell us which of the people who you differ with theologically you feel you could trust as a moderator. Who do you respect, even though you differ with? So traditionalists can only tell me about progressives, and visa versa. Tell my who, and why you think they'd make a good mod.

This doesn't mean that person will automatically become a mod. They have to go through the usual application process, and have to want to be on staff. But it would be helpful for staff, and I hope helpful for each other. You might also want to think of people who don't frequent the SDA forum, and yet are SDA, who might be suitable.

If you don't want to post publically feel free to pm me. I'd be happy to chat about it.

This is your subforum - I'd love for you guys to do me out of this job. Not because I don't like you though!

erin

 

[tall73]

Cliff2 would make a good moderator, has the required time at the board, and has a level head. In the past he has been reluctant, but I think if you could convince him he would work out well. He is pretty traditional still last I checked

And just to clarify, while I was a moderator on Friendship, Theology team and had a brief stint on the Pastoral team I never served on the Ecumenical team or in the Adventist section.

 

[erin74]

Sorry Tall - I should have made that clear in the OP.
Thanks for being first cab off the rank.

 

[woobadooba]

I think Tall73 would be good for the job, since he is more patient than most people that I disagree with in here.

Moreover, he has a solid reputation on CF, experience, and already has moderator know-how.

Now if I could pick someone that I could agree with I would pick myself AND ban everyone that I disagree with! Muhahahaha... Just kidding I am quite frustrated right now about some personal things and am trying to smile

Anyway, like I said, I think Tall is good for the job.

 

[Adventist Dissident]

I think freeindeed2 would make a good moderator, but i guess i can't nominate him

 

[tall73]

edit...thinking

 

[TrustAndObey]

Erin, is there any way we could get a list of who is Progressive? I honestly don't know all the Progressives on this board.

So the only criteria is that they're Adventist and Progressive if we're Tradtional, and vice versa?

That's easy enough! Right now I have a silent vote, but I'd really like to see a list if there is one. Is that doable?

 

[DarylFawcett]

One important criteria for a good moderator is that he/she be consistent in the enforcement of the forum rules showing no impartiality, which isn't easy, but is possible.

 

[Adventist Dissident]

Erin, is there any way we could get a list of who is Progressive? I honestly don't know all the Progressives on this board.

So the only criteria is that they're Adventist and Progressive if we're Tradtional, and vice versa?

That's easy enough! Right now I have a silent vote, but I'd really like to see a list if there is one. Is that doable?

Erin that is not really a good idea,

 

[Adventist Dissident]

Um, I think that would come under the heading of a progressive nominating a former! Probably not what they are looking for

free would still make a good mod.

 

[tall73]

free would still make a good mod.

Perhaps so, but it is just not the criteria she asked for.

 

[tall73]

Erin that is not really a good idea, since trust and the conservatives have wanted to run every progressive out of town.

Agreed. I have been giving this some thought and it doesn't make sense to draw up battle lines in order to unite.

Do we really need a "balance" of people chosen for their particular bias? In some cases it is unavoidable such as those forums where all denominations will post (GT). But we have seen the results when it goes bad and mistrust sets in. It works fine when things are calm, but it is a recipe for disaster when rumors of bias start.

We are better off right now with people who have no stake in the fight. You might not know all the details of fry chik or the 2300 days but you can see a flame.

Any person you put in that position right now will be suspect and harassed. Then there will be the questions of which mod, traditional or progressive, is more active, who is working more reports etc. Therefore I do not think there will be more trust as you say by putting in Adventists in the middle of a fight.

Perhaps what we need is not a reward for our fighting by putting in new moderators, but a break before any moderators are looked at, because we have not proven to be very moderate.

There was talk of Adventist moderators during the intense fighting at the first of our forum too. But it was not until things calmed down that we actually got any Adventist moderators.

From what I have seen of the moderators here lately you all are doing a good job. I imagine at times you get confused. But you have been fair that I can see.

If we want to do our part, then our part should be to act like people who deserve a forum. Then your load can decrease and we can get back to healing the divides instead of accentuating them.

 

[TrustAndObey]

Agreed. I have been giving this some thought and it doesn't make sense to draw up battle lines in order to unite.

Do we really need a "balance" of people chosen for their particular bias? In some cases it is unavoidable such as those forums where all denominations will post (GT). But we have seen the results when it goes bad and mistrust sets in. It works fine when things are calm, but it is a recipe for disaster when rumors of bias start.

We are better off right now with people who have no stake in the fight. You might not know all the details of fry chik or the 2300 days but you can see a flame.

Any person you put in that position right now will be suspect and harassed. Then there will be the questions of which mod, traditional or progressive, is more active, who is working more reports etc. Therefore I do not think there will be more trust as you say by putting in Adventists in the middle of a fight.

Perhaps what we need is not a reward for our fighting by putting in new moderators, but a break before any moderators are looked at, because we have not proven to be very moderate.

There was talk of Adventist moderators during the intense fighting at the first of our forum too. But it was not until things calmed down that we actually got any Adventist moderators.

From what I have seen of the moderators here lately you all are doing a good job. I imagine at times you get confused. But you have been fair that I can see.

If we want to do our part, then our part should be to act like people who deserve a forum. Then your load can decrease and we can get back to healing the divides instead of accentuating them.

I think the current moderators are doing a great job too. And seriously, in order to "choose" from Progressives, we'd have to know who all of them are. So far I just know you, Sophia, and RC.

And Ice, I haven't tried to run any Progressives off. You and I had some "words" about you leaving the Adventist chuch altogether and that's totally unrelated to Progessive Adventism.

I really would like to see peace on this forum. Even in a thread promoting peace, there is division.

I agree with Tall. I don't know anyone that would WANT the position of moderator right now, because they'll be accused of bias. We aren't giving each other the benefit of the doubt.

 

[erin74]

Erin, is there any way we could get a list of who is Progressive? I honestly don't know all the Progressives on this board.

So the only criteria is that they're Adventist and Progressive if we're Tradtional, and vice versa?

That's easy enough! Right now I have a silent vote, but I'd really like to see a list if there is one. Is that doable?

I couldn't do this even if I wanted to. I have no idea.
I would assume that you all know each other better than I do.

If it helps I'm happy to hear suggestions about those who don't fit into these two categories too if there are some that don't fit in either.

 

[erin74]

Agreed. I have been giving this some thought and it doesn't make sense to draw up battle lines in order to unite.

Do we really need a "balance" of people chosen for their particular bias? In some cases it is unavoidable such as those forums where all denominations will post (GT). But we have seen the results when it goes bad and mistrust sets in. It works fine when things are calm, but it is a recipe for disaster when rumors of bias start.

We are better off right now with people who have no stake in the fight. You might not know all the details of fry chik or the 2300 days but you can see a flame.

Any person you put in that position right now will be suspect and harassed. Then there will be the questions of which mod, traditional or progressive, is more active, who is working more reports etc. Therefore I do not think there will be more trust as you say by putting in Adventists in the middle of a fight.

Perhaps what we need is not a reward for our fighting by putting in new moderators, but a break before any moderators are looked at, because we have not proven to be very moderate.

There was talk of Adventist moderators during the intense fighting at the first of our forum too. But it was not until things calmed down that we actually got any Adventist moderators.

From what I have seen of the moderators here lately you all are doing a good job. I imagine at times you get confused. But you have been fair that I can see.

If we want to do our part, then our part should be to act like people who deserve a forum. Then your load can decrease and we can get back to healing the divides instead of accentuating them.

I totally hear what you are saying. That is why I'm interested to hear who people respect despite difference, who they would trust even though they know they hold differing beliefs.

The differences haven't really made any problems in the STR forum. Well not that I know of - we have all worked well as a moderating team as far as I can gather. And that is because each staff member has been taken on with their ability to relate to others being taken into consideration. It is far more important how they act toward others than what theology they hold.

But I have noticed when a forum is moderated by only one theological persuasion that it doesn't seem to matter whether this person is fair or not, suspicion that they are biased arises. That is why I like to find a balance.

I am also taking into account the amount of time it takes to get someone through training, etc. I suspect that those of us currently modding this forum will probably be around for quite some time, and will be here to train and help new mods.

For an example.

If Fred and I hold the same views it usually becomes easy for me to relate with Fred and to think Fred would be a good mod.

But Fred might be someone who rubs everyone he disagrees with the wrong way. That is not what we want to see.

However if there is someone who you disagree with, but still respect and like because of the way they treat you then that is the kind of person I would like to see moderating.

So it's not that we necessarily want to set up a tension model, it's that we are looking for people who are respected by all members, no matter what theology.

I hope that helps a little....

I'd love to hear your thoughts - they are always welcome.

 

[Dathen]

I don't really fit into either catogory of Traditional or Progressive.

I'd be happy to help mod, and would of applied by now, if I wasn't under 'age'.

i don't know what type of SDA they are, but I recommend Ptilinopus and cliff2.....

 

[freeindeed2]

I think freeindeed2 would make a good moderator, but i guess i can't nominate him

Thanks ice, but I don't fit the criteria of what they're looking for. Plus, since I've already been told more than once by SDA members to 'go away', I guarantee I wouldn't be accepted here, regardless of how fairly I moderated, and would be frustrated having to moderate with the way the rules are structured. I'd be more interested in a board that allowed for open dialogue and pursuit of truth by all believers in Christ, not just limited to one sect. Thanks though!

 

[Cliff2]

I am honoured to think that some would put my name up as a Mod.

The reason why I say NO is that I do not have internet access right now and may not have it for some time in the future.

As you can see I do not post here vvery much because of that.

I am due to start another job in a few weeks which will leave me even less time to come here.

But sincerely thank you anyway.

I must say how well Tall and Sofia have done since they have been associated with the Forum here and thank them for the work they have done. It really is appreciated by all here.

 

[Dathen]

That's a shame.. Well my number one vote is ptilinopus!!!

 

[woobadooba]

The issue of bias is irrelevant to the task. A Mod's job isn't to worry about what people think about him/her, but to maintain peace and order within the forum that he/she has been assigned to oversee. It doesn't matter who you are, people will always assume things about you that are not true. This really can't be prevented because not everyone fosters pure thoughts about others, especially when they are corrected by such people.

Truth is, we do need an SDA Mod in here. And it is right that we should have at least one, since this is the SDA forum.

This Mod should be one who will not seek to take revenge on those that he/she has disagreed with in the past, but will seek to correct hostile behavior, and try to get people to be more loving to each other.

It is not a sin to disagree with each other; but there is a manner in which one ought to disagree if disagreement is called for. And that is to disagree respectfully.

Moreover, a Mod should not wait to receive a report before acting on something that is inappropriate. Things that ought to be reported are often left unattended too. Thus this only furthers the problem of division that exists amongst the brethren. This is not to say that a Mod should see everything. There are times when a Mod just can't keep up with everything that is going on in a thread, much less a forum. But there are things that are obvious, and should be acted on even before a report is made (before excessive damage is done). The 3ABN threads come to mind here!

Also, I believe that it is important that we have an SDA Mod in here because there are views that are being inculcated in here that both conservative and liberal SDAs generally do not support. Thus such views are not SDA, and only an SDA Mod would be able to detect such errors, since other Mods have expressed that they really don't know what we believe in detail.

Anyway, that's what I have to say about this.