Rules and Guidelines For Forum Posting

[Neil D]

Originally Posted By: Stan Jensen

So who?

You have authority to make that judgement call?

Look,I am just stating what the bible and SOP says about wheat and tares. Did not try to apply it personally to anyone.

But if you want to take it personally and justify a reason to band me or whatever that is on you, Stan! But let the record be clear, I was not talking about anyone personally, only in general, it is what the bible says too!

You know, Messenger, there is a saying...if , when praying, you bless everyone, in reality, you bless no one....Along those same lines, if you are generally speaking, you are talking about everyone...

No one here, made you into the bible....And I am more than willing to let you be yourself....but I will not let you be a bible for everyone...Nor am I willing to let you be a bible...

When you speak, you speak to everyone personally. and you expect everyone to take it personally because you want them to change....The only person who can change is you....

[Stan]

Has rule number 2 been broken?

2) No belittling of individual members, their character, or their motives.

[Woody]

All I know is that there be fur more pirate talkin here than should be allowed. If ye be not careful ... them there rules people will outlaw pirate talkin next. They are a believein that we here must be 'pure' in ur speechin. None of this here piratein talk. So, be ye here warned in.

[David Koot]

Hey's ye pirate ye ... Back Off. How's dares ye call me friend 'lazy'. What in the Dickens has gotten in ya? Those there trips to S.F. cause ye to be unKooth.

Welcome back David. Ye be here just in time for the rules controversy.

Thanks, Redwood. Good to see ya!

Dave

[Neil D]

Has rule number 2 been broken?

2) No belittling of individual members, their character, or their motives.

I don't think so....In fact, I think what I did was reinforce the rules....

[messenger]

I was only referring to these bible text:

Mat 13:24 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:

Mat 13:25 But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.

Mat 13:26 But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.

Mat 13:27 So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?

Mat 13:28 He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?

Mat 13:29 But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.

Mat 13:30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

[David Koot]

Yes I have to agree with the rest WOW! its been a long time. Good to see you.

pk

Thanks, pk! Just headed off to services, so gotta run.

Dave

[Stan]

Messenger

I have been a little to harsh on some of my comments, for that I am sorry. I hope my feelings were not fully transmitted in the post.

When someone comes in to a forum, church or community that has been operating for close to 10 years and say, 'doing it wrong', it generally does not go over that well. Several of the members here have been booted out or shunned on the very online communities you speak about.

We even have had private forums where gays meet and discuss situations. They were be burned in other places.

We have accepted many that the Church has left behind. Then there are folks who come here and call them tares. For some, this has been their last straw of a connection with the Church, others are making their way back home.

Those who open these doors we do not cast out, should that not meet your desires for an online community, so be it. There have been a few that have been shown the exit door, but not really that many, and they were generally abusers, but doing it in Jesus' name of course.

Often abusive quotes from EGW were very positive ones made at a specific time to a specific group.

ALL is well when her counsel is taken, that we are too point out what is right, not what is wrong..

[messenger]

Messenger

I have been a little to harsh on some of my comments, for that I am sorry. I hope my feelings were not fully transmitted in the post.

When someone comes in to a forum, church or community that has been operating for close to 10 years and say, 'doing it wrong', it generally does not go over that well. Several of the members here have been booted out or shunned on the very online communities you speak about.

We even have had private forums where gays meet and discuss situations. They were be burned in other places.

We have accepted many that the Church has left behind. Then there are folks who come here and call them tares. For some, this has been their last straw of a connection with the Church, others are making their way back home.

Those who open these doors we do not cast out, should that not meet your desires for an online community, so be it. There have been a few that have been shown the exit door, but not really that many, and they were generally abusers, but doing it in Jesus' name of course.

Often abusive quotes from EGW were very positive ones made at a specific time to a specific group.

ALL is well when her counsel is taken, that we are too point out what is right, not what is wrong..

Hi Stan, some of your post did come across as a little harsh the feelings were fully transmitted. But I knew you were just misunderstanding me and protecting your members. I do understand and wish to forget about it.

But please understand I believe we are all still a work in progress, Christ is not done with us yet, and there is hope for all of us. I am not here to tear down, only trying to build help build up. I was supporting the guidelines and rules that John317 was posting and felt like I was being attacked for supporting them. And today I was supporting what David Koot was saying about the rules and guidelines and again felt I was being attacked, not by you but by some. But I just want to move on, get past it.

Thanks for your apology and explaining about the members, I am a member too, we are all sinners and in the same boat. And from what I seen in other sites that did not have guidelines and rules, I was only warning about what happened to them etc.

I do appreciate you apology! I too am one of those members that was band in that other site... because I did speak up about posting guidelines, rules and enforcing them. That admin. like you took offense at it, like you did, but you a least apologized he did not, I got band for it. I am like anybody else, I do not like rejection, being band etc. But if I am going to be band for trying to do good and supporting bible truth etc. then so be it, I am not even worthy to suffer that kind of persecution etc. So forgive me also for not making my self clear and for the misunderstanding. I seek peace and Christian fellowship! But if I cannot find it here I will go elsewhere!

Blessings your brother in Christ, messenger

[ChildofChrist]

It has been a few years now but I have seen folks come and go. Some of them did not have the Spirit of God in their lives. It always saddened me. I've seen people that left because their feelings and perhaps toes were trampled on. That would hurt me as well.

In those years I met members face to face between Texas, Michigan and FL. Dear souls, each and every one.

So, in many respects this community has substained and uplifted this person when going thru hard and even dangerous times.

To have the need to revisit "rules" time after time and time to time is needed when so many come from such a varied background and when peaceful exchange is so needed.

The one rule I try to practice is...If I was receiving this feedback, how would I feel and react to it. More important though, Is this how I would treat Jesus, my best Friend?

[Bravus]

'banned'

[John317]

Great post, ChildofChrist. I completely agree.

[Woody]

'banned'

Who's banned? Was this an official banning or unofficial?

[Stan]

ehhmmm Redwood..

Teachers have had their DNA modified to want to correct typos...

The typo was band..

Just think, I noticed a typo, how weird is that?

[Woody]

Okay. I will excuse Bravus and not ban him.

Bravus ... you have my forgiveness.

[Bravus]

Yep, that's it: no-one has been banned (yet, mwahahaha - um, sorry), I was just correcting Messenger's spelling. It's an involuntary tic. {/TIC}

[Bravus]

For that, I thank you, from the heart of my... um, nevermind

[Woody]

Not to correct you or anything ... but I think you left out the 'bottom' part ... lol tic ... I hope you were not intending to add it to "the heart of my ......"

Back to the boring topic of 'rules'.

[David Koot]

I should like to comment further in regard to forum rules. I am a moderator on a different forum. The policy manual for moderators is quite extensive and comprehensive. There is a 'paper trail' for every proposed moderator action, typically requiring consensus of the moderating staff. Yes, there are rules, and the policy of the forum seeks to ensure that those rules are enforced fairly and even-handedly. One rule which I greatly appreciate is that any moderator who is active in a discussion MUST recuse himself from moderating that thread! There is a respect for fairplay and a healthy respect for the rights and concerns of the members as well as for the interests of the forum itself. It is a very healthy forum, one which has many thousands of members and as well has vigorous discussion and debates and freedom of expression. I highly recommend both the rules and the protocols for applying those rules.

Dave

[Taylor]

Originally Posted By: Stan Jensen

Messenger

I have been a little to harsh on some of my comments, for that I am sorry. I hope my feelings were not fully transmitted in the post.

When someone comes in to a forum, church or community that has been operating for close to 10 years and say, 'doing it wrong', it generally does not go over that well. Several of the members here have been booted out or shunned on the very online communities you speak about.

We even have had private forums where gays meet and discuss situations. They were be burned in other places.

We have accepted many that the Church has left behind. Then there are folks who come here and call them tares. For some, this has been their last straw of a connection with the Church, others are making their way back home.

Those who open these doors we do not cast out, should that not meet your desires for an online community, so be it. There have been a few that have been shown the exit door, but not really that many, and they were generally abusers, but doing it in Jesus' name of course.

Often abusive quotes from EGW were very positive ones made at a specific time to a specific group.

ALL is well when her counsel is taken, that we are too point out what is right, not what is wrong..

Hi Stan, some of your post did come across as a little harsh the feelings were fully transmitted. But I knew you were just misunderstanding me and protecting your members. I do understand and wish to forget about it.

But please understand I believe we are all still a work in progress, Christ is not done with us yet, and there is hope for all of us. I am not here to tear down, only trying to build help build up. I was supporting the guidelines and rules that John317 was posting and felt like I was being attacked for supporting them. And today I was supporting what David Koot was saying about the rules and guidelines and again felt I was being attacked, not by you but by some. But I just want to move on, get past it.

Thanks for your apology and explaining about the members, I am a member too, we are all sinners and in the same boat. And from what I seen in other sites that did not have guidelines and rules, I was only warning about what happened to them etc.

I do appreciate you apology! I too am one of those members that was band in that other site... because I did speak up about posting guidelines, rules and enforcing them. That admin. like you took offense at it, like you did, but you a least apologized he did not, I got band for it. I am like anybody else, I do not like rejection, being band etc. But if I am going to be band for trying to do good and supporting bible truth etc. then so be it, I am not even worthy to suffer that kind of persecution etc. So forgive me also for not making my self clear and for the misunderstanding. I seek peace and Christian fellowship! But if I cannot find it here I will go elsewhere!

Blessings your brother in Christ, messenger

Messenger...it is interesting that you really sound like a previous member we had here whose handle was "Rush4Hire" was that possibly you or are you new here?

[messenger]

Taylor you asked,

"Messenger...it is interesting that you really sound like a previous member we had here whose handle was "Rush4Hire" was that possibly you or are you new here?"

No, I never had a handle "Rush4Hire" but there was someone that came to the forum that I left with that handle, he came there just about a month ago. I am fairly new here. I first joined back around June, July,08, but got busy and only been back and posted and replied about 10 time since then. I only just came back here again within the last week or so.

[cricket]

I should like to comment further in regard to forum rules. I am a moderator on a different forum. The policy manual for moderators is quite extensive and comprehensive. There is a 'paper trail' for every proposed moderator action, typically requiring consensus of the moderating staff. Yes, there are rules, and the policy of the forum seeks to ensure that those rules are enforced fairly and even-handedly. One rule which I greatly appreciate is that any moderator who is active in a discussion MUST recuse himself from moderating that thread! There is a respect for fairplay and a healthy respect for the rights and concerns of the members as well as for the interests of the forum itself. It is a very healthy forum, one which has many thousands of members and as well has vigorous discussion and debates and freedom of expression. I highly recommend both the rules and the protocols for applying those rules.

Dave

This is the exact same forum I've been a member of for a number of years now. Same exact rules I suggested we implement the last time you were here posting, David. Same exact rules that nearly everyone here ridiculed and thought absurd that I'd suggest that we apply them.

I'll see if I can dig up that old thread. Just for fun.

[cricket]

Found it! What fun that was a year ago!

http://adventistforum.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/153909/1.html

[Neil D]

This is the exact same forum I've been a member of for a number of years now. Same exact rules I suggested we implement the last time you were here posting, David. Same exact rules that nearly everyone here ridiculed and thought absurd that I'd suggest that we apply them.

I'll see if I can dig up that old thread. Just for fun.

Neil's public potporri of thoughts regarding Rules and Guidelines

You were able to do that, and reminded me of why I am not too fond of rules in general...of which I will not venture my opinion and maybe subvert the experiement. My only purpose is to promote relationships....and increase communication.

And you are validated in suggusting which[of the many suggested] were very good rules to use...congratulations girl, you were right and you done good.

Most of the rules suggested[of the many] were 'what NOT to do'...which, human nature being what it is, tends to make those rules targets for pushing the boundarys...And everybody's boundarys are set just a bit different...

As far as I am concerned, whatever promotes relationships is good...And ClubAdventist, as Tom has suggested, has survived quite well without rules...In reviewing the threads, both where fighting was done, and just regular discussions, most of the disagreements tend to be self limiting....

I think this is done because the moderators have allowed certin couples to work it out in private forums/PMs or have come in with a "play nice" note to each....That is why the moderators insist that if there is a problem, go PM immediately...This type of communication is very self limiting....IOWs, there are many various forms of commication associated with words that are NOT communicated at all here. Tone is very much in control of the reciever, not the communicator...Certain words communicate a certain tone 'twix giver and reciever, and miscommunication is highly common...

And I think we have had this conversation regarding rules for years on a yearly basis...Every year, someone in the forum has had somehting done in the past that dominates the rule discussion....This year, the underlying discussion is "What happens when a user disagrees with a moderator? What review process can be established to resolve the situation between the moderator/user?" ....I will not say what last years underlying push was...as it pretty much removed a couple of users... I don't want to go down that graceless/toxic road again...

The enviorment for establishing rules is pretty favorable, as long as the review process is established...THAT is important for the users, so that they feel that some form of justification is allowed.

That pretty much sums up my public potporri of thoughts on this subject.

[Neil D]

Which...?

my post giving the over view or the aquiring of rules and guidlines?