"Common Sense"

[Woody]

Poll ...

How do you feel the "common sense" rule is working out?

Are you pleased with the results?

Please indicate if you like the way the "common sense" rule is working with a YES.

Or if you feel that the "common sense" enforcement is not working ... please indicate with a NO.

[Stan]

As I have said people wo use common sense do not need rules. Those who do not use common sense do not read rules. Do they?

When someone gets out of line, other forum members give them all kinds of advice..

[CyberGuy]

Some people have lots of common sense and others do not seem to have any sense at all. So that really would not work for all people.

[David Koot]

I don't see how a 'common sense' rule, standing alone, can protect members of a forum from damage. It seems like anarchy. One person's 'common sense' can be quite different from someone else's concept. Consider another example of this principle: The Bible says to love God and love your neighbor. Some churches teach that such is "it," that and nothing else. However, God gave the Ten Commandments to specify what the loving thing to do may be. Both are needed.

Without some way of protecting members of a forum, a general appeal for 'common sense' would not seem adequate.

Dave

[LynnDel]

Hmmm... "Common sense," by definition, would be that everyone agrees with my opinion. What's wrong with you, David? Why don't you get that?

(Just kidding, of course, in case anyone is wondering.)

ROFL

Those who most need "common sense" have not made its acquaintance.

A few decades ago when I and my sibs were involved in a squabble, my dad would sit us down and not let us go onto any other of life's fun and functions until each said three nice things about the others. Maybe Stan should assign essays in a similar fashion for a similar purpose. Just a little something to keep Stan busy in all his spare time.

[David Koot]

Specifically, how would the 'common sense' rule protect a member of the forum if something is posted about him or her which is defamatory per se? What steps would be taken under that rule? For example, earlier this year, while I was out of town for a couple of weeks, one of the moderators on C/A posted something about me on a different forum (one which s/he does not moderate) which was libelous on its face, the statement falling within the categories of libel per se. It remained on the Board for about a week. When I returned, I asked that it be removed. It was. However, damage had been done. I noticed a huge spike in 'views' on that particular thread, way, way more than any other on that particular forum. Now, I must go through the formal steps of demanding a retraction and filing a lawsuit for libel. In such a case, how would the 'common sense' rule protect a member from being libeled?

Dave

[there buster]

Quote:

When someone gets out of line, other forum members give them all kinds of advice..

When some forum members get out of line in certain ways-- lots of other ways are "commonly" ignored.

[there buster]

It's not Common Sense, but it's by the same author:

Quote:

THESE are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods. . . .

[olger]

Common sense is getting more & more uncommon.

oG

[Woody]

AMEN

[Bravus]

Have to admit, sometimes it must be *awfully* tempting for Stan to put on the Big Boot and just go around and clear the decks around here by booting the '10 Most Fractious'. I reckon they'd come from all sides of debates and all persuasions. It's a measure of the man's character and courage that he has resisted the temptation so far!

(Or maybe I'm misjudging him and it's just me that's tempted!)

[jasd]

Hi! Bravus,

>>...Fractious'<<

Oh my!

Let me be fractious in my gripe...

Are we all here in some wierd quest for the Holy Treacle, or what? I mean,

the nonesuch in Townhall goes on for two entire/filled pages - of, as noted - nonesuch: while

"What Seventh-day Adventists Believe - Public Forum"

contains only the one thread attempting to deal in things Biblical - or, on what SDAs believe.

I think we all have friends. Most intelligent people do have friends. It is the natural state of things.

Okay, nice is good; safe is good; civil is good; etc; even fractious is good!

but: given the current brouhaha seemingly simply about 'whose ox is gored' - where can vigorous exchange take place without participants - simply becoming a 'blip' upon someone's screen of phosphorescent angst and agida?

[David Koot]

Quite frankly, damage has been done in a number of cases, and it has become apparent that certain aspects of the situation have gotten dangerously out of control. Until the equilibrium is restored, and there is a sense of safety, I expect that this kind of thing will continue to come up. Speaking for myself, I will honestly say that something 'snapped,' things went too far, and now I will pursue matters. I do suggest that if safeguards had been in place, this kind of thing would not be a concern. Safeguards do need to be in place. They have not been, so now it is time to pay the piper.

[Stan]

Sorry, am dealing with bigger issues right now...

[Bravus]

Absolutely.

And it'd be nice if everyone around here could agree to take responsibility for their own issues while the big guy has so much serious, real life stuff on his plate.

(psst - alternatively, lend me the Big Boot while you're gone, chief!)

[David Koot]

Stan, I can understand that you have a lot going on. All I can say is that to each person, his or her life and well-being is very, very *big.* A sense of safety develops within a community as the community and leadership recognize and respect the value of each person and of protecting each person's interests, to the extent that the community is involved. What makes a church stand out to many people as really worth something, is if the church, the members and leadership treat people as valuable, as important. For a church, for an online community, the people are the most valuable asset, and one which should be nurtured and protected.

Dave

[Bravus]

Uhuh - and in a good church, when the people realise the pastor is doing it tough, they nurture him.

[Jeannieb43]

I realize I'm probably naive, but there's been a whole lot of making mountains out of molehills here. And to the disinterested onlooker it seems like a huge waste of time - even to read it, much less comment upon it.

What was it our mothers used to say? "If you can't say something good about somebody, don't say anything at all."

"Everything I need to know I learned in kindergarten." Et cetera.

I haven't detected any libel or slander on C/A. (Of course I don't know any of you personally, so don't know what your professions are.) But what really does come through, loud and clear, is when somebody's trying so hard to make a great impression; then any little difference of opinion tends to be taken personally.

Oh well. Enough of this armchair psychoanalysis. I just get tired of hearing people calling for more rules here; demanding more work from Stan; telling other people how to think or speak. It's pure balderdash, IMHO.

[David Koot]

What was it our mothers used to say? "If you can't say something good about somebody, don't say anything at all."

[Bravus]

I absolutely understand your feelings and actions, Dave. I think you have every right to have taken the actions you have.

Having said that, though, it's now in the realm of the courts (so perhaps I can abuse my dangerous little knowledge and toss out 'subjudice' ) so there's not too much more that can be done in relation to it here - in fact we probably shouldn't be discussing it at all.

I'm making the broader point: all the people making demands of Stan are guests in a house he built with his own hands. It would be polite to put those demands on hold until he feels he has time and attention to deal with them.

[David Koot]

Thank-you, Bravus. Thank-you ever so much for understanding. That really, really means a lot. I have felt mounting concern that occurrences such as what unfortunately happened in this case are simply 'no biggie' to some on C/A. There is the term, 'brow beaten.' Some people seem to accept being 'trashed' and 'move on from there.' That is not good. It is unhealthy. IMO it dishonors God and is contrary to Scripture.

I understand what you say about not discussing such matters on this forum. Ordinarily, I would wholeheartedly agree. My concern here is broader than what happened to me, however. Safeguards should be put in place so that something like this does not happen again. And, if a person has been wronged on a Christian forum, then it is important to right the wrong. As I understand the Bible, righting such wrongs is an important condition to receiving God's blessing.

I would again urge the importance of sticking to issues on a forum like this, and avoiding personal attacks. Had that been done, much could have been avoided. But, to the extent it was not done, speaking for myself, I felt it was important to respond. Far better to avoid the whole issue and deal with it behind the scenes. 'Twould be a good rule to follow generally, I should think.

I understand what you are saying about 'the house that Stan built.' But, tell me, Bravus, if your house guest got hurt in your house, and you were busy with something in the home, would you tell your injured guest to wait for help until you got around to him?

Thanks again, Bravus, for your considerate and understanding post.

Dave

[Stan]

There is no shortage of people who feel harmed, but there is a shortage of people who even think they are harming..

There is a lot of people in various conference who spend recreational time viewing this.

Has I have stated before, this has to be bigger than Stan's playground. Not all fixes are as simple as they appear to many.

I am not sure which posts you are talking about David, perhaps you can email me the link to it.

I would suspect that the person read it, which ever it is, with some added information, that would have him/her view it different from most here would. We see bigger items that the letters when we look at someone's words.

Most people who make a strong contribution to a forum also irritate others enough to the point that they say "He goes or I go" When one gives opinion... well you know the rest.

I amy not know exactly which post it is, but I can guess the subject.

It may have been done my someone who felt cheated, and terribly injured by some posts, someone who's supporters felt it was in injustice for a certain member to even come near this forum. That is not a position that I would support, for a number of reasons none of which need to be posted.

AND perhaps we need to close every forum that does not have active moderation. AND only have it open if there is a moderator.

That complicates somethings, as, from what I understand, forums that are not moderated have less liability that those who are moderated. SOMETIMES we are so scared of liability that we do nothing. Not the example Christ gave is it?

The current moderators spend little time discussing members, I know that is huge on some boards but it is not a big issue here, and I am thankful for that.

I would prefer people used their skills to work things out rather than duke things out.

Strong opinions, or what most people call rational opinions inflict brain thinking on 'those people'

I do find it ironic, that most of those deep into things, have at least a Masters or more.. I wouldhave expected some of the comments that I have read to have been posted by.. well... NOT people with hardly any education. Others have pointed that out as well.

ANYWAY back to the harmful post, send me the post number if it is still here.

[CyberGuy]

There is no shortage of people who feel harmed, but there is a shortage of people who even think they are harming..

There is a lot of people in various conference who spend recreational time viewing this.

Has I have stated before, this has to be bigger than Stan's playground. Not all fixes are as simple as they appear to many.

I am not sure which posts you are talking about David, perhaps you can email me the link to it.

I would suspect that the person read it, which ever it is, with some added information, that would have him/her view it different from most here would. We see bigger items that the letters when we look at someone's words.

Most people who make a strong contribution to a forum also irritate others enough to the point that they say "He goes or I go" When one gives opinion... well you know the rest.

I amy not know exactly which post it is, but I can guess the subject.

It may have been done my someone who felt cheated, and terribly injured by some posts, someone who's supporters felt it was in injustice for a certain member to even come near this forum. That is not a position that I would support, for a number of reasons none of which need to be posted.

AND perhaps we need to close every forum that does not have active moderation. AND only have it open if there is a moderator.

That complicates somethings, as, from what I understand, forums that are not moderated have less liability that those who are moderated. SOMETIMES we are so scared of liability that we do nothing. Not the example Christ gave is it?

The current moderators spend little time discussing members, I know that is huge on some boards but it is not a big issue here, and I am thankful for that.

I would prefer people used their skills to work things out rather than duke things out.

Strong opinions, or what most people call rational opinions inflict brain thinking on 'those people'

I do find it ironic, that most of those deep into things, have at least a Masters or more.. I wouldhave expected some of the comments that I have read to have been posted by.. well... NOT people with hardly any education. Others have pointed that out as well.

ANYWAY back to the harmful post, send me the post number if it is still here.

I think you should have a disclaimer on the opening page of the Clubadventist Forum that the forum is not liable for the post of members or moderators. They in no way represent the feelings or words of the owner of this forum.

I have seen such disclaimers on various forums.

Also it may be a good idea that All Moderators have two accounts. One to post and one to moderate and they should NEVER post to a controversal thread with their moderator user name. It tends to give the idea that the forum owners are behind what they said when in fact they are not.

As I understand the post was deleted by Amelia but not before it was read by a lot of people. It was up for a Week as I understand it.

[Stan]

What I am trying to avoid is long responses such as what I am guilty of above..

[David Koot]

I would suspect that the person read it, which ever it is, with some added information, that would have him/her view it different from most here would. We see bigger items that the letters when we look at someone's words.