Establishing Guidelines

[Willtor]

What questions were you thinking about polling people on?

Is this going to be like my old statistics homework?

I was thinking there would be a preliminary thread where people would post doctrines that they considered important and then somebody (possibly myself) would gather them up into one big survey.

 

[Tenebrae]

Membership for voting sounds OK - as long as there aren't too many rules, please!

Love God, love each other
Doesn't that cover it?

I like this answer

 

[Willtor]

I just opened up a thread for doctrines you'd like on the survey.

 

[chaoschristian]

You know, I wonder how long we could go without having any FSR rules or doctrinal statements in place.

 

[Joykins]

Oh, a while I hope cc!

 

[Tenebrae]

Oh, a while I hope cc!

As long as we like

I suggest the rules for this forum

1. Love the Lord your God with all your heart mine and soul

2. Love your neighbour as yourself

 

[Criada]

As long as we like

I suggest the rules for this forum

1. Love the Lord your God with all your heart mine and soul

2. Love your neighbour as yourself

 

[Tenebrae]

Seriously, pretty much all our actions can be dictated by those two rules.

When I get grumpy and sarcastic to someone, am I loving them as I love myself dunno, I think its a human tendency to over analyse and over complicate things, however I think we need to get back to the basis IMO

 

[~*Lady Trekki*~]

As long as we like

I suggest the rules for this forum

1. Love the Lord your God with all your heart mine and soul

2. Love your neighbour as yourself

Sounds familiar.

 

[edie19]

I think as long as we have Wiki ( ) - we have to have a membership.

The subforums are autonomous and we need to vote on rules - being able to vote implies membership.

We can, however, make our requirement for membership as loose as we want (it can be something as simple as accepting the Apostles' Creed and signing in).

edie

 

[Criada]

I think as long as we have Wiki ( ) - we have to have a membership.

The subforums are autonomous and we need to vote on rules - being able to vote implies membership.

We can, however, make our requirement for membership as loose as we want (it can be something as simple as accepting the Apostles' Creed and signing in).

edie

Sounds reasonable!

 

[Joykins]

I don't think we have to have a membership tbut if we don't define something for voting anyone on the forum could vote.

 

[chaoschristian]

I don't think we have to have a membership tbut if we don't define something for voting anyone on the forum could vote.

That's something I would hope we'd have the patience and forebearance to experiment with for a bit.

I know the membership lists are intended to 'protect' a congregational area from those who would come in an mess with the wiki or wreck a mod application, but is that a prophylatic against a non-existant threat?

Are there really that many people who prowl the forum committing such devious acts? And if it were happening, aren't there alternative ways of dealing with it?

I guess I've always been disappointed that WWMC created a membership list. Maybe I'm too naive. Maybe we do need one.

I'd like to see if we could function normally without one. It's easy to do, not so easy to undo.

 

[Criada]

That's something I would hope we'd have the patience and forebearance to experiment with for a bit.

I know the membership lists are intended to 'protect' a congregational area from those who would come in an mess with the wiki or wreck a mod application, but is that a prophylatic against a non-existant threat?

Are there really that many people who prowl the forum committing such devious acts? And if it were happening, aren't there alternative ways of dealing with it?

I guess I've always been disappointed that WWMC created a membership list. Maybe I'm too naive. Maybe we do need one.

I'd like to see if we could function normally without one. It's easy to do, not so easy to undo.

Well - it's probably easier to see how things go without one, then add it if neccessary, rather than trying to get rid of it once it's there...
How do folks feel about just leaving it for a while and seeing what happens?

 

[Athene]

That's something I would hope we'd have the patience and forebearance to experiment with for a bit.

I know the membership lists are intended to 'protect' a congregational area from those who would come in an mess with the wiki or wreck a mod application, but is that a prophylatic against a non-existant threat?

Are there really that many people who prowl the forum committing such devious acts? And if it were happening, aren't there alternative ways of dealing with it?

I guess I've always been disappointed that WWMC created a membership list. Maybe I'm too naive. Maybe we do need one.

I'd like to see if we could function normally without one. It's easy to do, not so easy to undo.

The WWMC membership list was created after the Rochir mod application debacle, but things are different now, mod applications are posted in the forum the person wishes to mod - so it's doubtful the same thing would happen again.

How about wait and see if there is a need before creating a membership list. If countless numbers of people who never post in the MC descend here to vote in our elections and the swoop back off into the night are then yes lets consider a membership list, I'd rather see how we manage without one first.

 

[~*Lady Trekki*~]

I guess I've always been disappointed that WWMC created a membership list. Maybe I'm too naive. Maybe we do need one.

I'd like to see if we could function normally without one. It's easy to do, not so easy to undo.

 

[Rochir]

Hullo, I think I'll hang out here to see if I can hang with some of my conservative brethren and friends!

 

[Criada]

Hullo, I think I'll hang out here to see if I can hang with some of my conservative brethren and friends!

Yay!

 

[Rochir]

Yay!

 

[Rochir]

Will people posting here be prohibited from being a member in other congregational fora?