What would option 3 look like

[GenemZ]

I still don't see why a non-Christian who is respected on a particular subforum and who is able to evenhandedly and fairly apply the rules shouldn't be a moderator for that area, especially in light of the actions I'm seeing attributed to some Christian mods here. The moderators don't set the rules, they enforce them, so surely ability to do the job well should be a more important qualification than faith?

Because you are a guest here. Just like I would be in an Atheist forum. I do not think I could mod there. Do you?

This is a Christian Forum that you choose to access. You are welcome to be here.

But for you to mod? It would be like me wanting to visit a foreign country and then running for office for governor in a country that I am not a citizen of. Yet, I would be welcomed as a guest.

The problem you mentioned about certain Christian mods? Is not to be solved by assigning the position to an Atheist. It would be to get better Christian mods.

You can never comprehend completely the correct thrust for having certain sub sections which are offered to you in a Christian forum. Even a sub forum has a certain thrust purposed in a Christian mind set.

You might not sense certain offenses that an atheist could present, when you would feel its a perfectly legitimate attitude to take.

I think that may be the reason.

But? If you wanted to moderate a sub forum on sharing pictures of cars? Or musical tastes? Who knows? Maybe.

IC, GeneZ

 

[MarcusHill]

Because you are a guest here. Just like I would be in an Atheist forum. I do not think I could mod there. Do you?

I'm not a guest, I'm a member. Think of it like a naturalised immigrant - I may not be a Christian, but I like to think I'm part of CF. For the record, I think that if you were a regular and respected contributor to an atheist site, you'd be welcome to moderate.

This is a Christian Forum that you choose to access. You are welcome to be here.

But for you to mod? It would be like me wanting to visit a foreign country and then running for office for governor in a country that I am not a citizen of. Yet, I would be welcomed as a guest.

You'd never get an Austrian as governor of a US state, would you...

Seriously, though. I wouldn't dream of suggesting anyone moderate a subforum where they're not a regular, respected and valued contributor. I'm not proposing some sort of "atheist invasion". For example, I can't see anyone from outside a particular denomination moderating (or wanting to moderate) that denom's fellowship board. On the other hand, many of the debate boards (Ethics, GA, CrEvo) and others (like the UK board) have long-term non-Christian contributors who are respected by Christians and non-Christians alike. Are you saying that their lack of faith would make them less able to moderate the part of the community where they are known and respected?

The problem you mentioned about certain Christian mods? Is not to be solved by assigning the position to an Atheist. It would be to get better Christian mods.

Absolutely right. Sorry if I wasn't clear, I was merely pointing out that being Christian doesn't necessarily make one a good moderator.

You can never comprehend completely the correct thrust for having certain sub sections which are offered to you in a Christian forum. Even a sub forum has a certain thrust purposed in a Christian mind set.

You might not sense certain offenses that an atheist could present, when you would feel its a perfectly legitimate attitude to take.

I think that may be the reason.

Now you're coming across as a bit condescending, though I don't think that was necessarily your intention - a good example of your point, I guess.

However, there are two things to unpick there. Firstly, acceptable behaviour is laid down by the rules, not by whether the mod is offended. The rules should definitely have a Christian basis, as it's a Christian site. Furthermore, if something is offensive to Christians but the mod misses it, anyone offended will point it out in the report. Secondly, the general tone and level of acceptable debate is something the mod will know from being a regular contributor to the subforum, not from his or her faith.

But? If you wanted to moderate a sub forum on sharing pictures of cars? Or musical tastes? Who knows? Maybe.

That's big of you. I don't actually want to moderate anything - I don't think I've been here anywhere near long enough to have earned that right. However, if I stick around long enough, I think I should be able to apply to be a moderator on one of the areas I frequent - and the success of the application should be based on whether I'd do a good job as a moderator.

 

[GreenMunchkin]

[/size]

However, there are two things to unpick there. Firstly, acceptable behaviour is laid down by the rules, not by whether the mod is offended. The rules should definitely have a Christian basis, as it's a Christian site.

Well now, this isn't entirely true. Report decisions are coming down to staff discretion. Go through any of the report fora and you'll see the level of inconsistency because the rules are so fluid and full or holes, reports are being judged subjectively. The issue isn't whether non-Christians can be fair, because that's a ridiculous premise. The issue is this is a Christian forum, and subjective opinions need to be from a Christian perspective.

Furthermore, if something is offensive to Christians but the mod misses it, anyone offended will point it out in the report. Secondly, the general tone and level of acceptable debate is something the mod will know from being a regular contributor to the subforum, not from his or her faith.

Staff are in positions of authority, and it's nonsensical to argue otherwise. Can the rest of us delete posts/ban people?

The issue comes back to the fact that Erwin has always maintained that CF is a ministry. Within a ministry, non-Christians should never be in positions of authority.

Do you feel Christians are incapable of fair treatment of all? Because, given this is a Christian ministry, if Christians are able to treat people fairly and openly regardless, why is it even *necessary* to have non-Christian mods?

 

[MarcusHill]

Well now, this isn't entirely true. Report decisions are coming down to staff discretion. Go through any of the report fora and you'll see the level of inconsistency because the rules are so fluid and full or holes, reports are being judged subjectively. The issue isn't whether non-Christians can be fair, because that's a ridiculous premise. The issue is this is a Christian forum, and subjective opinions need to be from a Christian perspective.

That's not an argument against non-Christian mods, it's an argument for clearer rules. Besides, I doubt you'd find there is a consensus even among the Christian moderators. I would further conjecture that any non-Christian who has enough respect from his or her peers to become a moderator would need to have demonstrated an ability to at least see and understand the "Christian perspective" - not to mention that many of the people in question are well aware of this perspective from the time they spent as Christians.

Staff are in positions of authority, and it's nonsensical to argue otherwise. Can the rest of us delete posts/ban people?

The issue comes back to the fact that Erwin has always maintained that CF is a ministry. Within a ministry, non-Christians should never be in positions of authority.

Do you feel Christians are incapable of fair treatment of all? Because, given this is a Christian ministry, if Christians are able to treat people fairly and openly regardless, why is it even *necessary* to have non-Christian mods?

I would never claim Christians are incapable of being fair, nor have I claimed it is necessary to have non-Christian mods. My only argument has been that, as with any job in the real world, the criteria for choosing a moderator should be how well the person will do the job. These criteria, IMO, are:

Is the moderator a regular contributor to the area in question who is known and respected by a wide cross section of other regulars?(For some areas, religion will have a great bearing on this one.)

Does the moderator know and understand the rules and levels of acceptable behaviour relevant to the area? (For some areas, I'd say religion has a bearing on this one too.)

Is the moderator able to apply these rules fairly and evenhandedly, regardless of his or her personal opinions on the rules and members involved?


So you see that, in a lot of cases, being a Christian is liable to make the prospective moderator more fit for the job - I just don't see why you couldn't have non-Christians moderating in areas where they meet the criteria. One of the gripes I've seen in these discussions is about poor moderation, so shouldn't an aim be to get the best moderators possible?

 

[GreenMunchkin]

That's not an argument against non-Christian mods, it's an argument for clearer rules. Besides, I doubt you'd find there is a consensus even among the Christian moderators.

In one way you're right, which brings us back to the wiki debacle, but I don't suppose that's the issue we're discussing at the moment.

But the fact is Christians and non-Christians do just have an entirely different world-view. It's like we're coming at it from diametrically opposing positions, and if this is to be a Christian ministry, the people maintaining order need to see this as a Christian ministry and feel spiritually led to help.

That's sort of the point. Non-Christians may see CF as an online message board with a Christian bent; but a ministry is a spiritual entity, and its medium is irrelevant. Even that it's seen that way may seem peculiar to you, and that's a part of how we differ in terms of our perspectives.

I would further conjecture that any non-Christian who has enough respect from his or her peers to become a moderator would need to have demonstrated an ability to at least see and understand the "Christian perspective" - not to mention that many of the people in question are well aware of this perspective from the time they spent as Christians.

This is something that strikes me as particularly strange. Why would someone who has rejected Christ have any interest in working for Him? How can they?

I would never claim Christians are incapable of being fair, nor have I claimed it is necessary to have non-Christian mods. My only argument has been that, as with any job in the real world, the criteria for choosing a moderator should be how well the person will do the job.

No, I know you didn't say it's necessary. I'm sorry if my question was poorly phrased. But given how contentious this issue is, to some it would appear it is absolutely necessary.

And you raise another interesting point. In the real world, things are secular, and in a secular world, in a job, someone's faith should have no bearing on their suitability for a job. But within a church? Or within a religious organisation? At a Christian school, for example, would there be non-Christian staff? At a Jewish newspaper, will there be non-Jewish staff? No.

CF isn't a real world secular entity. It's an online Christian ministry.

These criteria, IMO, are:

Is the moderator a regular contributor to the area in question who is known and respected by a wide cross section of other regulars?(For some areas, religion will have a great bearing on this one.)

Does the moderator know and understand the rules and levels of acceptable behaviour relevant to the area? (For some areas, I'd say religion has a bearing on this one too.)

Is the moderator able to apply these rules fairly and evenhandedly, regardless of his or her personal opinions on the rules and members involved?

Were this a board for anything else, you'd be spot on. The "rules" change when it's a matter of spirituality and Christ, because those are bigger than the world's rules.

So you see that, in a lot of cases, being a Christian is liable to make the prospective moderator more fit for the job - I just don't see why you couldn't have non-Christians moderating in areas where they meet the criteria. One of the gripes I've seen in these discussions is about poor moderation, so shouldn't an aim be to get the best moderators possible?

Absolutely. But there are enough wonderful Christian moderators. There has been poor treatment of non-Christians in the past, but we solve that by choosing staff more prayerfully, and more wisely, and having more transparency so non-Christians don't feel marginalized.

The problem is, while this board has fora that are secular in topic, they are still a part of a wider Christian ministry, so non-Christian staff don't meet the criteria. Not because they don't meet the criteria to moderate an internet forum, but because they don't meet the criteria to minister to people within a Christian ministry.

And Erwin emphasised to all staff that their main role was to minister to people. Mods at CF don't simply enforce rules (which we don't even have at the moment), they minister to people who come to a Christian ministry.

 

[MarcusHill]

This is something that strikes me as particularly strange. Why would someone who has rejected Christ have any interest in working for Him? How can they?

Have you ever played "devil's advocate" in a debate (strangely appropriate expression)? If someone is moderating properly, they have to think about what is appropriate for the site. The fact that someone no longer believes doesn't mean he or she doesn't understand how a believer would think - and be able to act accordingly.

But you're right. I don't see that any non-believer could be actually actively "working for Christ", even if their actions were identical to a believer who was. It boils down to whether you think the forum moderators should be active Christian ministers (as is your position) or whether they are there to help the discussion on the boards stay civil and within the rules of the various fora (as I think should be the case). To give a (not very good) real world church analogy, I think forum level moderators are more like the handyman who keeps the lawn tidy and patches the holes in the roof, an important person in the church but not one who absolutely needs to be a believer. That one is a call for Erwin to make, I think.


ETA: Would have repped you again if I could! This is exactly the kind of civilized discussion that attracted me to CF in the first place.

 

[GreenMunchkin]

Have you ever played "devil's advocate" in a debate (strangely appropriate expression)? If someone is moderating properly, they have to think about what is appropriate for the site. The fact that someone no longer believes doesn't mean he or she doesn't understand how a believer would think - and be able to act accordingly.

And if this were a forum where theology in general was discussed; an inter-faith message board, weighing up the pros and cons and discussing the minutiae of varying theistic and atheistic world-views, that ability to play "devil's advocate" would be a real benefit. In fact, it would be a necessity, but there are things that are wrapped up with being in a position of authority within a Christian ministry, and a non-Christian is simply unable to meet those needs.

But you're right. I don't see that any non-believer could be actually actively "working for Christ", even if their actions were identical to a believer who was. It boils down to whether you think the forum moderators should be active Christian ministers (as is your position) or whether they are there to help the discussion on the boards stay civil and within the rules of the various fora (as I think should be the case). To give a (not very good) real world church analogy, I think forum level moderators are more like the handyman who keeps the lawn tidy and patches the holes in the roof, an important person in the church but not one who absolutely needs to be a believer. That one is a call for Erwin to make, I think.

Agreed I think we're all just twiddling our thumbies until he tells us once and for all what this forum is to be. It's either a Christian ministry, or it's a message board owned by a Christian. It was a ministry, but now maybe it's not. Once we know either way, we can all make value judgements as to what happens next, but for now... thumbies.

ETA: Would have repped you again if I could! This is exactly the kind of civilized discussion that attracted me to CF in the first place.

It was my turn, anyway

 

[Robinsegg]

I don't trust reps. I don't trust committees.

How would you feel if there was a committee designed to propose rules that were then voted upon (ratified) by the general populace?
Rachel

 

[CaDan]

Because you are a guest here. Just like I would be in an Atheist forum. I do not think I could mod there. Do you?

Yes, because I'm doing it right now.

 

[dignitized]

powned!

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

How would you feel if there was a committee designed to propose rules that were then voted upon (ratified) by the general populace?
Rachel

I still wouldn't trust them.

Look at the site-wide rules, for instance. The contributors have done an amazing job (yes, I'm looking at you, Glass*Soul, PurifyingFlame, Lisa, et al....), and the current product is fantastic.

The scant handful of rules that have been agreed upon have taken weeks to iron out. Untold numbers of people had a hand in carving them out.

Arguments over one word here, discussions on the future ramifications there... no committee could do what's been done there. No committee is going to have enough fresh insights to craft a decent set of rules.

 

[sparklecat]

This is something that strikes me as particularly strange. Why would someone who has rejected Christ have any interest in working for Him? How can they?

I don't want to really get into this outside of GA, but you're working from the premise that ex-Christians rejected Christ. In many cases, that's simply not so.

At a Christian school, for example, would there be non-Christian staff?

Actually yes, in my experience.

 

[dignitized]

The old rules were written more or less by committee - NUFF SAID.

 

[Debi1967]

The old rules were written more or less by committee - NUFF SAID.

No actually they were written by two members then voted into place by committee

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

Ugh!

 

[GreenMunchkin]

I don't want to really get into this outside of GA, but you're working from the premise that ex-Christians rejected Christ. In many cases, that's simply not so.

Their *reason* may vary, be it poor treatement by other Christians, re-analysis of the "evidence", etc, but rejecting Christianity boils down to rejecting Christ.

Actually yes, in my experience.

Wow. Then, genuinely, I'm astonished. I've never once been to a Christian school where the staff didn't reflect that. To be honest, I think that's incredibly remiss of them.

 

[CaDan]

No actually they were written by two members then voted into place by committee

Two members under enormous time pressure.

 

[Debi1967]

Two members under enormous time pressure.

No denying that as I know at the time you were very busy with it.

 

[Victory of the Cross]

Possible Solution
http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=5811137

 

[Orontes]

I think that this poll (if I say so myself) allows for a better divide on what people may want or expect any future CF vision to be:

http://www.christianforums.com/t5804518-attempting-to-clarify-a-future-christian-forums-vision.html