Who Wants to be a Mod?

[StormyOne]

The biggest problem on this forum is personal attacks. Those aren't too hard to spot, so a huge list of rules shouldn't be a problem.

Plus if a forum is labelled "no debate" then that's a pretty easy violation to spot too.

personal attacks I agree... debate I disagree.... how is debate different from discussion? Or if a person doesn't feel like answering a question is that when an exchange becomes a debate?

 

[sentipente]

personal attacks I agree... debate I disagree.... how is debate different from discussion? Or if a person doesn't feel like answering a question is that when an exchange becomes a debate?

Usually. It is a ridiculous restriction but what do I know.

 

[sentipente]

The no debate rule works in favor of the one who responds first. If I respond to a question then that is the end of that because no one is allowed to disagree for fear of being accused of debating.

 

[TrustAndObey]

You can't make everybody happy.

 

[StormyOne]

You can't make everybody happy.

you are not grasping the point... from day one people here have said, "no debate, no debate" yet what constitutes a debate has never been defined... so the concept is vague and that works in favor of those who want to blast another person then claim, we are not to debate....

 

[JonMiller]

In my mind the no debate rule in the main forum is that only the official church position get's represented. Anything more, or different, gets classified as debate. I had at least thought to, if I am a moderator, to move debate posts/threads to the debate and discussion forum.

JM

 

[sentipente]

In my mind the no debate rule in the main forum is that only the official church position get's represented. Anything more, or different, gets classified as debate. I had at least thought to, if I am a moderator, to move debate posts/threads to the debate and discussion forum.

JM

But only the official church can provide official church positions. The interpretation of a TSDA is not official.

 

[TrustAndObey]

In my mind the no debate rule in the main forum is that only the official church position get's represented. Anything more, or different, gets classified as debate. I had at least thought to, if I am a moderator, to move debate posts/threads to the debate and discussion forum.

JM

Then there would be absolutely no consequence for starting a debate in a no debate section?

I don't think that's right. I do not think we should move posts from non-debate to debate.

Visitors will have the option of posting in a no debate or a debate section and WE have to respect that.

 

[StormyOne]

Then there would be absolutely no consequence for starting a debate in a no debate section?

I don't think that's right. I do not think we should move posts from non-debate to debate.

Visitors will have the option of posting in a no debate or a debate section and WE have to respect that.

again... define "debate" just start there....

 

[TrustAndObey]

But only the official church can provide official church positions. The interpretation of a TSDA is not official.

We have a list of the fundamental beliefs of the Adventist church...straight from our baptism certificates.

Copy/pasting doesn't leave room for interpretation.

If the OP has a problem with one of those beliefs, then as a whole we could ask them to pose that question in the debate section.

The Main Forum is no debate.

 

[sentipente]

We have a list of the fundamental beliefs of the Adventist church...straight from our baptism certificates.

Copy/pasting doesn't leave room for interpretation.

If the OP has a problem with one of those beliefs, then as a whole we could ask them to pose that question in the debate section.

The Main Forum is no debate.

My point is that the Main Forum is doing the work of Stickys.

 

[TrustAndObey]

It's already been defined, but I'm sure we'll be more definitive in the wiki process.

It is not debate.
Those who do not identify themselves as Adventists may not discuss reasons for or against a subject being discussed on this forum. This includes questions that essentially are rebuttal or argumentative in nature.

 

[TrustAndObey]

Senti, what can I say? It was already voted in.

 

[JonMiller]

But only the official church can provide official church positions. The interpretation of a TSDA is not official.

It most certainly isn't. And posting a not official interpretation is debate just as much as a 'progressive' bringing up the issue of EGW.

JM

 

[JonMiller]

I personally am inclined to beleive that people make mistakes by accident. And so to just correct them. It is only people who are obviously being repeatedly malicious, or who can't seem to follow the rules, who I think should get harsher treatment.

JM

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

The idea of the main SDA forum is designed as put forth by several TSDA's to protect visitors from actual SDA debate.

As such the rules which I think are being voted on now are:

1. Main SDA Forum

1.1 This is a non-debate area, reserved for fellowship and questions. Questions on doctrines and beliefs can be asked in the Main SDA Forum. Questions that are likely to lead to debate should be asked in the Debate/Discussion Sub-forum.

1.2 To avoid confusion and debate, questions posed in the Main SDA Forum will generally be directed to official church statements such as the Fundamental Beliefs. This is to provide clear and consistent answers to questions without provoking debate.

This means that there are going to be very limited answers to any questions there. Links to official SDA statements and short quotes from them.

It is doubtful that it will satisfactorily answer questions but it maintains the illusion that some desire.

 

[JonMiller]

Yeah, obviously any deeper questions will be sent to the Debate and Discussion forums.

The point is that the main forum should be freindly.

JM

 

[reddogs]

Red, I was nominated and seconded already but I really cannot do it. Ironically it's because I'm already getting Spanish lessons at my local college. I start that class on August 20th.

I'm also taking 2 other classes.

My Spring semester is going to be more intense and then next fall, God willing, I start nursing school full-time. I'm going into specialized nursing and it's going to take me longer (and take more dedication) than just the regular classes.

I really do not want to disappoint anyone on here, but I'm not sure how I won't when my classes have to come first. If it came down to a choice between studying or doing homework or getting on here....obviously I have to pick school.

And Red, I have two boys. When I'm in school I already feel like they aren't getting enough of my time, and that's something you just can't get back.

I can live with you guys growing up hating me )), but not my children.

Well I guess I will have to amend and repost my idea of how we should proceed to make this work and the moderators we should try to get:

As I told TrustAndObey I accepted under one condition, that a slate of candidates be chosen and accepted and supported by all. We would present it to the 'constituents' as a package and let them know we support everyone in the slate. Everyone would stand and be voted on individually, but with united core support (thats us) presenting it as our recommended slate of candidates, I am sure the rest of the constituents would see our purpose in being united and vote for them all as a 'group' we recommend to be elected. My recommodation is for 7 moderators and one Supervisor/Super Moderator in total for the slate of candidates to be put for election as one package, and they would be:

Tall73 as (Supervisor/Super Moderator)-Nominated by Woobadooba
Seconded by Night (and Jon0388g and Red)
I know Tall73 wanted to decline, but we (the moderators) would do the work but we still need a experienced hand in guiding moderators through the changes and rules, theology and with organizing skills in setting up and guiding our forum who is seen as honest broker and respected by all.

Mjona3-Nominated by TrustAndObey (in a different thread)
Seconded by NightEternal ( and Red)


StormyOne-Nominated by Mjona3
Seconded by TrustAndObey ( and Red)
And I would like to ask Stormy to accept as moderator as I have been with him in other forum issues and back him 100% unreservedly.

TheCountryDoc-Nominated by TrustAndObey
Seconded by Jon0388g ( and Red)


Jimlamore-Nominated by Tall73
Seconded by Red
And I would like to second Jim as I have seen his grasp of theology which we will need on questions of interpretation of Adventist beliefs in the Non-Debate area.

IntotheCrimsonSky Nominated by tall73,
Seconded by TrustandObey ( and Red)


And I would like to add David as I have seen his work in other forums especially on of Adventist beliefs and been impressed.
djconklin-Nominated by Red
Seconded by ?



Reddogs-Nominated by NightEternal
Seconded by Honor (and OntheDL)

TrustAndObey has declined
Sophia7 has declined


One note, I accepted with the understanding that I can only give my undivided attention when I am not at work (9-5) and of course Sabbath I set aside, when I feel I should only 'mod' to help a brother or sister that has fallen into a 'deep hole' to help them out.....This leads me to a importan point, we need to set up a quiet time in the debate forum so moderators can also have rest from their labors if posible, coparable to a Adentist nurse or doctor not working if possible on the Sabbath.

As a alternate moderator in case we cannot reach Jim or David declines I would like to nominate jon0388g. He is young but has a keen mind and mature in his presentations and manner.

 

[TrustAndObey]

This leads me to a importan point, we need to set up a quiet time in the debate forum so moderators can also have rest from their labors if posible, coparable to a Adentist nurse or doctor not working if possible on the Sabbath.

As a alternate moderator in case we cannot reach Jim or David declines I would like to nominate jon0388g. He is young but has a keen mind and mature in his presentations and manner.

I second Jon0388g and DJConklin.

And I think the idea of a day of rest for the debate forum is an excellent idea.

 

[Sophia7]

I had a couple questions about being moderator here while I'm deciding:

1) What about Sabbaths? I normally try to avoid being here as much as possible on those days, and if I was moderator that would fit into work. I understand that mods are needed 24/7 and that it's volenteering, though..so I'm curious about how the Sabbath rest day is handled in that situation.

Mods are not required to be here 24/7. The old minimum time commitment for staff members was at least four hours per week, but most mods spend way more time moderating than that. However, your real life has to come first. You can take time off on Sabbath.

2) If someone is a traditional and a mod, are they allowed to go into the Progressive subforum and mod there, or do we need a progressive to do that? I'm completely impartial to either side but I could understand if it made people uncomfortable.

If the mods are appointed to cover the whole SDA forum, then, yes, they can mod in the sub-forums as well. When you are closing a thread or posting a mod hat or something like that, it doesn't matter what your theological beliefs are. You're not there to debate.

3) Also, since a move is possible in my near future which would limit amounts of time here..That would be okay, right? Nothing is certain yet so I feel edgy about making a desicion for or against accepting due to this possibility at this time. I'd hate to decline then find out I had the time.

Blessings and Love,
Sarah

Things come up, and sometimes people need to take time off. That's understandable. On the other hand, I would have some reservations about your going into this knowing from the beginning that your time will be extremely limited. The reality is that moderating is very time-consuming if you are going to be active in it. It's a hard and often thankless and discouraging job. If you have a lot of stress in your personal life, it may not be wise for you to add to that burden. It also takes time away from simply discussing things and fellowshipping with people, which may be another factor to consider.

I think you would be a good mod, Sarah, and I would be happy to vote for you if you decide to accept the nomination. I just want to be sure that you have some idea of what you would be getting yourself into. It's not a decision to take lightly, and I admire your taking the time to pray about it and not rushing into a decision.