Times, they are a changin' More Guidelines Need Here

[Dr. Shane]

In the Spanish forum there is as much arguing and disagreement as there is here and yet in the past few years I may have only received about a dozen complaints. Of course, those resulted in two people being banned which I only did after posting a poll in the moderators section and the majority of them voting to do that.

[Amelia]

we have banned very few. I can count them on one hand.

[Woody]

Originally Posted By: Stan Jensen

What must not happen, is to comment or tear apart someone else's statement in this thread

Read repeated as needed..

This is a good thought. Perhaps the moderator or Stan should go through and delete all those who did not follow HIS advice. Usually the ones pointing the fingers have more fingers pointing back at um.

[melvin mccarty]

I understand this to apply to posts that take mine apart sentence by sentence or word by word and then try to destroy my point out of context. I consider this to be rude. Am I correct?

mel

[Bravus]

Hmmm... but that's the usual and expected method of communication in philosophy. I agree that applying it to someone's post when the post was not written within that same tradition is unhelpful and feels rude, but this illustrates the difficulties in this issue: I would hate to ban the line-by-line approach entirely because it's useful for what it's useful for...

[Amelia]

Thank you Bravus. It is also used often in debate by politicians, lawyers and anyone who is trying to make a point for the other side. It is something I remember learning in high school. It is useful for highlighting important information in the statement. BUT NOT ABOUT THE PERSON POSTING! Or their character or their level of light.

[David Koot]

Just happened to pop in for a minute, and was reading the posts on this thread. I would like to point out that ideas are important, and can be very useful in getting a clearer picture of truth. It is very important to that process, to carefully study ideas and position statements, to see if there is useful material in the search for truth. That may at times involve detailed analysis and questions. This is one of the real benefits of discussion forums like this. As such, it is really important to safeguard that process, and to keep it focused on the issues.

Dave

[John317]

Hmmm... but that's the usual and expected method of communication in philosophy. I agree that applying it to someone's post when the post was not written within that same tradition is unhelpful and feels rude, but this illustrates the difficulties in this issue: I would hate to ban the line-by-line approach entirely because it's useful for what it's useful for...

In my opinion, if someone doesn't like the way their post is being analyzed, but yet the analysis is on topic and not a personal attack, he should simply state this opinion, and state his objection to his view being analyzed wrongly, along with an explanation of why he believes the analysis is off target; but that is not (at least in my mind) the same as being rude to the person himself. There has to be a distinction made between what is rude to the person and what is considered an inaccurate or invalid argument on the issues. They seem to me to be two entirely different things.

[Guest charis]

I thought the idea of this forum was to share ideas, discuss events, learn more about the gospel of Christ, meet people, and maybe along the way have a little bit of fun.. I didn't think the idea was to have someone's posts ANALYZED.

If the gospel is so easy to understand that a child could grasp it, why do you think you need to analyze it? Explanations are good - and needed sometimes, but analyses don't need to be done on every fricking statement that a person makes or on every single text in the Bible. To tell you the truth, that gets very boring, very fast, and does absolutely nothing to help me further down the path to Christ. Throws a lot of rocks in the road is what it does. And it makes potential members of the forum shy away from joining, and keeps the more timid members from posting.

Sheesh. Who wants to post if everything they say is going to go under the semantic microscope of the members here who think they know more than everyone else? Some members/prospective members do not have a good command of the English language....they are NOT going to want to post if their comments are always thrashed about until not even *they* remember what it was they really said.

But I may be wrong.

I could write a lot more here, but I don't want to overheat the microscope.

[Stan]

So..... any one else get the feeling this made it worse?

AND I thought it might resolve....

Someone in front of my computer is 'not that bright'

[D. Allan]

Your just too kind, Stan.

If we all had just one half of your patience with and consideration for each other... :-(

[Amelia]

So..... any one else get the feeling this made it worse?

AND I thought it might resolve....

Someone in front of my computer is 'not that bright'

Your heart was right and your thought was right. It was us that messed it up.

[John317]

I thought the idea of this forum was to share ideas, discuss events, learn more about the gospel of Christ, meet people, and maybe along the way have a little bit of fun.. I didn't think the idea was to have someone's posts ANALYZED.

If the gospel is so easy to understand that a child could grasp it, why do you think you need to analyze it? Explanations are good - and needed sometimes, but analyses don't need to be done on every fricking statement that a person makes or on every single text in the Bible. To tell you the truth, that gets very boring, very fast, and does absolutely nothing to help me further down the path to Christ. Throws a lot of rocks in the road is what it does. And it makes potential members of the forum shy away from joining, and keeps the more timid members from posting.

Sheesh. Who wants to post if everything they say is going to go under the semantic microscope of the members here who think they know more than everyone else? Some members/prospective members do not have a good command of the English language....they are NOT going to want to post if their comments are always thrashed about until not even *they* remember what it was they really said.

But I may be wrong.

I could write a lot more here, but I don't want to overheat the microscope.

The forum is for all that. When I used the word "analyze" I was describing a whole set of things, from discussing an issue to talking about the meaning of a Bible text. That is the same thing that many of the posts on this thread are talking about. I was primarily thinking of theological threads where people often want honest response to what they have written but they want the response to be about what they have written and not about them personally.

We've discussed here various ways of dealing with the very situation you have brought up. We could have different kinds of threads where people would know ahead of time that in these threads they may expect an "honest, open" debate (to use another posters expression). There could be some threads where people could simply post without any response being made. Most of these suggestions are on page 1 of this thread.

[Guest charis]

It just seems like different languages are being "spoken" here. No unity.

Kinda reminds me of the Tower of Babel.

[cricket]

That is exactly "it" Charis! All of us have different languages. Each of us speaks a language uniquely his or her own.

Perhaps, that is the most difficult aspect of on-line communication. What is taken by one to mean a certain thing, was never intended by the other as such.

[cricket]

...And not a single soul should feel apologetic for not "speaking" the language of another. We can try, but can never fully master the language as none of us are native to another.

[Stan]

Sometimes, it is like we are all pre-puberty, or ...

(Well, not me.., and not him, him, her, him and her... )

[jasd]

QR frame:

Umm, no reflection on the Stan -- he’s been eminently fair about all things concerning the scope of this forum: but, c’mon, (the rest of us) where’s all that abuse and rudeness? [deleted] happens.

Rudeness? one, reading carefully, notes the emotive or buzz words that spring up in the preceding posts. I see as much abuse occurring in some of the ‘suggestions’ being forwarded – as I’ve noticed upon the several boards under discussion. Sure, some of the list post with

the subtle scent of almonds:

but that occurs also -- within the posts of those who remonstrate upon the matter under discussion.

I can abide the ‘wolf-in-sheep’s-clothing’, the ‘idol-worshipping-Ehpraimite’, the ‘I-can’t-make-heads-or-tails-with-what-you-write’; even the “Rubbish” in describing what I’d proffered. I listed the foregoing to

amplify the fact that these sorts of lapses have emanated from unexpected quarters – given the present demurring.

Personally, I’m not complaining and think that those sorts of sentiments are rather innocuous; besides, I tend to respond in kind.

I’ve found that I learn from everyone posting in the boards I frequent and, as I said…, ‘will abide’. It is the totally egregious that elicits the worst from my lower nature. That said,

I get the impression that Administration’s concern may lie with the more adversarial posts vis-à-vis SDA orthodoxy, that is -- the concerns may be issues-related. Should that be the case

that is unfortunate, because I am one of those who simply cannot ‘woo-woo-woo’ themselves into a heart relationship; however, I take the words of Proverbs 1 to heart…

v2 To know wisdom and instruction; to perceive the words of understanding;

v3 To receive the instruction of wisdom, justice, and judgment, and equity;

v4 To give subtilty to the simple, to the young man knowledge and discretion.

v5 A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels:

v6 To understand a proverb, and the interpretation; the words of the wise, and their dark sayings.

If the .Org’s dogmas and doctrines cannot withstand scrutiny and if their worries can be assuaged by voting me off the island – no complaints from this end.

I, for one, need incisive discourse... time is too short to be simply clinging without thought to dogmas and doctrines.

By the way, it may be that people are not aware of the ‘ignore’ button… and read to their own consternation.

[Stan]

let me ask this...

Is there ANYONE here, who is willing to say, they are responsible for chasing people away???

Or is it all........ THEM???

[Stan]

ANYONE SEEN.....

Make a list of those who were, and are now not here...

[Amelia]

let me ask this...

Is there ANYONE here, who is willing to say, they are responsible for chasing people away???

Or is it all........ THEM???

/me Raising my hand.

I know I have personally been responsible for at least one person leaving.

[Bravus]

Maybe not specifically by offending a particular individual (or if so I'm not aware of it), but certainly by contributing to and continuing with an atmosphere of debate, I suspect I may have 'turned off' some who have chosen to be elsewhere. You may have noticed that I've been posting less frequently lately, and leaving arguments and provocations lie rather than take them up... still a long way to go, but trying.

[cricket]

I can't say that anyone has left because of me--but who knows, there may have been plenty I could have done to "keep" someone from leaving. In that regard, I'm as guilty as the next.

[John317]

ANYONE SEEN.....

Make a list of those who were, and are now not here...

I know of one who may leave because I asked him by PM to stop making personal attacks against a poster. I never asked or suggested that he leave. I merely asked nicely that he stop his personal disrespect and concentrate on the issues. I am sorry if he chose or does choose to leave but I certainly did nothing wrong in that instance, at least as far as I can see. I shared my messages to him with another moderator who told me it was fine. Our correspondence is evidence of that and so are the posts. I sent several PMs and this person wrote back as if it was a discussion about who had the better argument, him or the other poster he had been rude to. I told him it had nothing to do with that; it had to do with how we treat people. At that point I got a message that this person was saying good bye. I was as surprised as anyone.

[Woody]

Thank you Bravus. It is also used often in debate by politicians, lawyers and anyone who is trying to make a point for the other side. It is something I remember learning in high school. It is useful for highlighting important information in the statement. BUT NOT ABOUT THE PERSON POSTING! Or their character or their level of light.

YES !! Thank you Amelia. This is the point. No matter how angry or how right and just one feels about their interpretation of scripture ... they should not say ...

"REDWOOD ,YOU ARE OF THE DEVIL".