Call for Conciliators!

[Joykins]

Hello!

The Ombudsman's team is looking for a few good people to serve as Conciliators. Conciliators assist members with member-staff conflicts, and with public appeals of staff actions.

We are looking for people who demonstrate Christian love in their interactions with others, are articulate, persuasive, persistent, diplomatic, fair-minded, and willing to see situations from more than one perspective.

All candidates must be approved by Erwin, and per Erwin's statement earlier this year, all candidates must be Christians who qualify to post in the Christians-Only forums.

Here's the official want ad (http://www.christianforums.com/t4195312-call-for-conciliators.html).

Please PM me if you're interested, and let me know why you think you would be a good Conciliator. If you know someone who would be good, please let them know and encourage them to apply.

Thanks,

Joy

[Matthan]

Asking a hardcore Baptist to be a conciliator, or diplomat (aka compromiser), is sort of like mixing oil and water. You can try to mix it, but it never happens because there are certain laws that simply cannot be compromised. And another unbreakable law is that Jesus was never a conciliator. The truth was the truth to Him, as it should be for each of us. So He made a scourge to clear the temple, and He told off the pharasees with quiet regularity.

Matthan

[TwinCrier]

I agree with Matthan. I've been asked to be a moderator several times, but personally, it takes a lot out of me to obey the rules myself. And I don't really want to commit that much time to a message board. ;)

[Matthan]

Thanks TC (sometimes I wish I could give you a Christian hug!!!!)

Matt

[Texas Lynn]

It appears to me posts #2, 3, and 4 provide ample evidence conciliators are needed. I have submitted my application for this to Joykins.

[aReformedPatriot]

ack, no thanks.

[No Swansong]

To be fair, I am not sure you are understanding the purpose of a conciliator. The purpose is to assist those who believe they have been mistreated by Staff, As I understand their primary purpose they assist members in appealing decisions made by staff that the member believes is unjust or not consistent with CF rules.

I would very much like conservative voices within the conciliators because as it stands right now I don't believe there are any. If I were permitted I would resign as staff and become a conciliator. At least please give this another thought. Or if you have questions ask the Ombudsman.

[mesue]

It appears to me posts #2, 3, and 4 provide ample evidence conciliators are needed. I have submitted my application for this to Joykins.
So you can fix us?

[Texas Lynn]

To be fair, I am not sure you are understanding the purpose of a conciliator. The purpose is to assist those who believe they have been mistreated by Staff, As I understand their primary purpose they assist members in appealing decisions made by staff that the member believes is unjust or not consistent with CF rules.

I would very much like conservative voices within the conciliators because as it stands right now I don't believe there are any. If I were permitted I would resign as staff and become a conciliator. At least please give this another thought. Or if you have questions ask the Ombudsman.

Who is "you"?

[Texas Lynn]

So you can fix us?

?

Who's "us"? What needs "fixing"?

IMO, I don't think that's what conciliators do.

In ministries we often use the term "broken people" as in "we are all broken people" but the CW is mostly we as Christians don't so much "heal" other broken people as Christ does.

I think I've been to some degree already an informal unofficial conciliator in that I believe at least five times I've PM'd people who seem good-hearted who have gotten heated emotions over something and I urged them informally to comply with CF rules lest they be banned.

[No Swansong]

Who is "you"?
The earlier posters who were discussing why they did not want to be conciliators.

[Matthan]

Yeah, that be "us" Baptists

Matthan

[Texas Lynn]

Fellowship? Actually I was informed of the thread elsewhere and didn't realize it's categorization. Forgive me.

BTW, Are you familiar at all with a Baptist fellow named Jimmy Carter?

[FreeinChrist]

Yeah, that be "us" Baptists

Matthan
Well, I am a Baptist and I think there is no conflict at all with being a Baptist and a conciliator.

I think you misunderstand what the role of a conciliator is.

[Matthan]

Even after it was explained by the OP? Oh well, guess I'll always be just a country boy. Not so smart as some folk who don't mind splaining why tradition should be equal with Scripture, or how demonimation X has the right to believe what she wants and God will accept it cause she has such a good heart.

[FreeinChrist]

Even after it was explained by the OP? Oh well, guess I'll always be just a country boy. Not so smart as some folk who don't mind splaining why tradition should be equal with Scripture, or how demonimation X has the right to believe what she wants and God will accept it cause she has such a good heart.
Well, now, you are showing that you don't understand the role at all.

It is a role in which one helps another poster who has received an infraction and who believes that infraction was unfair - as in they really didn't break CF rule 2.6, for example.

It isn't about compromising doctrine at all.

[Matthan]

Jimmy Carter? Say, I heard of him. Ain't he the fellow who says America should volunteer to give up its national sovereignty and place itself under the protection of the United Nations? Yep, I've heard of that guy, but I don't think I like him very much. B'sides, anyone can talk the talk and call themselves Baptists, but can they walk God's walk?

Matthan

[mesue]

?

Who's "us"? What needs "fixing"?

IMO, I don't think that's what conciliators do.

In ministries we often use the term "broken people" as in "we are all broken people" but the CW is mostly we as Christians don't so much "heal" other broken people as Christ does.

I think I've been to some degree already an informal unofficial conciliator in that I believe at least five times I've PM'd people who seem good-hearted who have gotten heated emotions over something and I urged them informally to comply with CF rules lest they be banned.
I didn't think so either, but thought perhaps you misunderstood the job as well when you said

It appears to me posts #2, 3, and 4 provide ample evidence conciliators are needed. I have submitted my application for this to Joykins.

I think FreeinChrist says it best when she says
It is a role in which one helps another poster who has received an infraction and who believes that infraction was unfair - as in they really didn't break CF rule 2.6, for example.

If it is felt that it is more than this, then perhaps some reconsideration should be pondered before applying.
The conciliator cannot impose themselves on anyone member to urge them to do anything. Especially if they don't know the member. It's one thing to give a friend a heads up, it's quite different to impose ones self on another especially in forums where the conciliator rarely, if ever, posts.

[Joykins]

If it is felt that it is more than this, then perhaps some reconsideration should be pondered before applying.
The conciliator cannot impose themselves on anyone member to urge them to do anything. Especially if they don't know the member. It's one thing to give a friend a heads up, it's quite different to impose ones self on another especially in forums where the conciliator rarely, if ever, posts.

True. We generally act at the request of members. Most of the time, by the time we get involved, someone has already got into trouble or been upset by a moderator action.

That's all it's about. Helping people understand each other and CF rules; conveying requests, information, and apologies as needed; and acting as a sort of behind-the-scenes defense lawyer in appeals cases (for example, if someone received an infraction for flaming but truly believed their post was not a flame, they might want to appeal it--and the appeals rules are a bit complicated).

It doesn't have anything to do with compromising your faith, unless it compromises your faith to help someone you may disagree with file an appeal on a messageboard, apologize for name-calling, etc.

[RED that's ME]

We have several Baptists here, who are more than capable of being a Conciliator. :) The job is a go-between person with members and staff. There are some on both sides, who don't seem to be able to work through issues. There's some members who think they can't get fair treatment from some/any staff member and the Conciliator's job is to help resolve issues. :) Some weeks there might not be any problems and then again you might have a week that keeps you busy for several hours over an issue.
All Conciliators needs to be a fair, who can help resolves issues. Sometimes the job is difficult, especially if one side won't concede & acknowledge they might be the problem.

[Texas Lynn]

Jimmy Carter? Say, I heard of him. Ain't he the fellow who says America should volunteer to give up its national sovereignty and place itself under the protection of the United Nations? Yep, I've heard of that guy, but I don't think I like him very much. B'sides, anyone can talk the talk and call themselves Baptists, but can they walk God's walk?

Matthan

I'd think being a conciliator, as Carter has, is to "walk God's walk".

[Texas Lynn]

I didn't think so either, but thought perhaps you misunderstood the job as well when you said

I think FreeinChrist says it best when she says

If it is felt that it is more than this, then perhaps some reconsideration should be pondered before applying.
The conciliator cannot impose themselves on anyone member to urge them to do anything. Especially if they don't know the member. It's one thing to give a friend a heads up, it's quite different to impose ones self on another especially in forums where the conciliator rarely, if ever, posts.

I don't disagree with any of that.

[yeshuaslavejeff]

simple

[aReformedPatriot]

weird discussion

[FreeinChrist]

Get this - members who don't have a good heart at all can get a member who has a good heart(your words) in trouble; that doesn't seem right. Yet Jesus said it would happen everywhere, so it is expected, although surprising at first to the untrained, and not even realized by the majority.


And you have just highlighted why conciliators are needed.

Just because life is often unfair is no reason not to try and get fairness....just as though there will always be the poor and hungry is no reason not to try and feed the hungry and help the poor.

There is no compromising of one's doctrine involved. However, if one feels strongly that it may compromise their doctrine, then they shouldn't apply to be conciliators.

[JPPT1974]

And you have just highlighted why conciliators are needed.

Just because life is often unfair is no reason not to try and get fairness....just as though there will always be the poor and hungry is no reason not to try and feed the hungry and help the poor.

There is no compromising of one's doctrine involved. However, if one feels strongly that it may compromise their doctrine, then they shouldn't apply to be conciliators.

Life isn't fair and never will be until
Once we get to heaven
We shouldn't ever compromise the Lord's
Say and doctrine because you know why?
He never does nor will He ever!

[Joykins]

We try to keep people from being banned. We don't ban anyone.

[No Swansong]

Life isn't fair and never will be until
Once we get to heaven
We shouldn't ever compromise the Lord's
Say and doctrine because you know why?
He never does nor will He ever!
I am not an ignorant man here, but I have yet to see how this requires one to compromose doctrine in any way.

[Texas Lynn]

I am not an ignorant man here, but I have yet to see how this requires one to compromose doctrine in any way.

That's what I was thinking. This is about the process of participation here, not about doctrine. Everyone has their doctrine. No one is being asked to compromise it for there to be a conciliation process.

[yeshuaslavejeff]

simple

[No Swansong]

As win the leaders told the disciples to be quiet - Jesus said if they were quiet the very stones would break forth!
And later, Paul said he would obey God instead of man, and thus not stay quiet, not at all, about the truth, the gospel of Jesus.
There is a time and place where believers immersed in Yahshua must speak up even if they are arrested, imprisoned, executed or , yes, even banned. The truth should not be compromised and will not be compromised by those who have already given their life over to God.
One side point, not nearly all doctrine is truth, so it isn't or may not be a matter of compromising doctrine,
but a lot of the rules obviously don't allow the simple truth to be posted, and to warn or ban someone who posts the truth, especially just when or because a "wrong-hearted" member is offended, that compromise of truth is not in line with truth.
As I understand it, all members are here voluntarily. Also as I understand it, to join, one must agree to abide by the rules of CF. We all have the option of choosing to stay or go. The Ombudsman, and the Conciliators exist to assist members who believe they have not been treated in accordance with the stated rules of CF. It is not a matter of agreeing with the rules or not. But as you see it as such then you are probably correct in that you would probably not be happy serving in the position.

And I still disagree that you are required to compromise anything. However as I am not baptist I may not debate here and will at this point bow out.