Advisory Committee for Christian Forums

[Lisa0315]

I have been asked by Constance to sit on an Advisory Committee for Christian Forums.

So, I need input from you guys. What kinds of things do you want to keep from 7-7-07 and what kinds of things would you like to revert back to? I need to submit a list to Constance today.

If I have heard you correctly:


Change name back to Christian Forums
Do away with Wiki
Keep visibility in reportsWhat else?

Lisa

[Rep Daddy]

Visibility of reports
Wiki go Boom
No practicing homosexual mods
No cult safe havens
No members of the RT who pronounce a divine curse on our forum
No Zoroastrian Chaplains
No non-Christians making policy
Return the Nicene Creed as a litmus test for CF purposes
No staff elections but allow members to give PM feedback on staff applicants.



then...

CF as our name makes sense.

[Tonks]

You should ask this in several forums.

[Lisa0315]

You should ask this in several forums.

I think Constance has asked many people to advise on this. I will see what she wants me to do. I am querying here, but also looking at the announcement thread.

Please do not turn this into me having some kind of agenda. I am asking those I am closest to first.

Lisa

[Tonks]

I wasn't implying an agenda. I would have said the same thing if you had posted in General Theology, TAW or wherever.

Please dial back the persecution meter as it was only a suggestion.

[GreenMunchkin]

Please do not turn this into me having some kind of agenda. I am asking those I am closest to first.

LisaThat's so not what he meant. Way I read it, he was being supportive, love.

Frankly, if staff is gonna be run on who you know, the whole thing is pointless anyway. I said it in a report, and I'll say it again: if you're friends with those in high places, you can get away with anything, and be stonewalled when you ask about it. So it'd be nice if friendships were kept out of it all as much as possible.

ETA: cross-posting with Tonks. He said it better than me :)

[Lisa0315]

I apologize. Is it any wonder that I would be a tad freaked out right now?

Lisa

[GreenMunchkin]

I apologize. Is it any wonder that I would be a tad freaked out right now?

LisaWhy?

[Lisa0315]

Why?

Are you kidding me? It was the same question Jim was asked last night. Sorry, if I put 2 and 2 together and came up with 5, but that is why. I thought it was a direct reference to Steve asking Jim why he had only made the announcement in CCC...

Lisa

[ladybug1980]

bubbleheaded question: what does visibility of reports mean?

just the way things are now in the reports section? (whatever that means:))

[ContentInHim]

Lisa - this is the best news I've heard in a long time!

1. No non-christian mods in Christian areas. Though several non-christian mods have proved themselves totally capable, it's still not right to be judged by them.

2. Re-establish Christian Only area. No non-christian or unorthodox christian posting in CO area. This hasn't been as much of a problem recently with non-christians(they probably got bored with us), it was a real problem initially. It's still a problem with unorthodox christians modding in Christian areas. :(

3. While my house church does not use the Nicene Creed, we do adhere to all aspects of it. It can and should be used to establish orthodoxy of mods and posters.

4. No mods from unorthodox branches of Christianity modding over orthodox Christians.

5. Establish conservative safehavens in the liberal congregational areas - such as Episcopalian (especially), wherever Presbyterians are meeting, Lutherans (have one currently, I believe), and soon the Methodists. They should not be called bigoted, backward, ignorant just because they adhere to the Bible.

More later! Thank Constance for the opportunity, Lisa! :hug:

[GreenMunchkin]

Are you kidding me? It was the same question Jim was asked last night. Sorry, if I put 2 and 2 together and came up with 5, but that is why. I thought it was a direct reference to Steve asking Jim why he had only made the announcement in CCC...

LisaAh. Apples n oranges. Don't worry :hug:

[Lisa0315]

bubbleheaded question: what does visibility of reports mean?

just the way things are now in the reports section? (whatever that means:))

Yeah, we now can see reports where prior to 7-7-07, we couldn't and we could not participate.

Lisa

[Latreia]

Yeah, we now can see reports where prior to 7-7-07, we couldn't and we could not participate.

Lisa

If I may, why could it be that members can still SEE the Reports Threads, but not post comments there?

Only the member reported and the reporter allowed to comment.

Also why not allow only the Staff voted on CCC to make decisions, and if higher ups on the other levels want to, uh, disagree and over ride to produce a violation, they would have to take extra steps and a lot of trouble to try to do that.

In other words, instead of a member being forced into the Appeals legalese, the Administrators must prove their case for over rides inside forum reports.

To summarize: make the reports threads cleaner and more respectful for both members and staff!

Thank you for this chance to ask.

:groupray:

[Epiphanygirl]

Visibility of reports
Wiki go Boom
No practicing homosexual mods
No cult safe havens
No members of the RT who pronounce a divine curse on our forum
No Zoroastrian Chaplains
No non-Christians making policy
Return the Nicene Creed as a litmus test for CF purposes
No staff elections but allow members to give PM feedback on staff applicants.



then...

CF as our name makes sense.:clap: :clap: :clap: Yep, Yep, Yep!!:thumbsup:

[Nadiine]

Visibility of reports
Wiki go Boom
No practicing homosexual mods
No cult safe havens
No members of the RT who pronounce a divine curse on our forum
No Zoroastrian Chaplains
No non-Christians making policy
Return the Nicene Creed as a litmus test for CF purposes
No staff elections but allow members to give PM feedback on staff applicants.
then...

CF as our name makes sense.
:wave: Hi Lisa
^ What he said &

* No non nicene section
* visibility and participation in report system

I'll keep thinking if there's anything else

congratulations too :D

[Rep Daddy]

I have been asked by Constance to sit on an Advisory Committee for Christian Forums.

So, I need input from you guys. What kinds of things do you want to keep from 7-7-07 and what kinds of things would you like to revert back to? I need to submit a list to Constance today.

If I have heard you correctly:

Change name back to Christian Forums
Do away with Wiki
Keep visibility in reportsWhat else?

Lisa

Remove Kiwimac as a Concilliator!

[Latreia]

Remove Kiwimac as a Concilliator!



Oh, my goodness! Is that what he is?

For whom?

:scratch:

[Lisa0315]

:wave: Hi Lisa
^ What he said &

* No non nicene section
* visibility and participation in report system

I'll keep thinking if there's anything else

congratulations too :D

Oh, it is no big deal. Just a committee. I am not sure how long it will last. But, thanks! :D

Lisa

[Rep Daddy]

Oh, my goodness! Is that what he is?

For whom?

:scratch:

He is a member of your team (http://foru.ms/showpost.php?p=40364101&postcount=9)


The full list is:

meh
BelindaP
Sign of The Fish Burger
ProfessorMom
ParaCristo
HeatherJay
Kiwimac
Letalis

[Tangeloper]

Hi Lisa! I'm suggesting one thing in regards to reports. The reportee HAS to have a voice BEFORE an infraction is ever placed against him/her unless there is an obvious CLEAR violation of the rules.

If it comes to a matter of opinion, or a consensus cannot be reached, or something is "borderline" or where it's he said, she said so to speak then the accused MUST have the ability to "face" their accuser and provide their own defense. I don't think perhaps reports should be viewable by all because if there is no way to comment, then we will have a huge problem with people pulling posts out of reports and starting threads in various forums full of arguing and such, IMO. However, even if privacy is afforded, the accuser must NOT necessarily be kept in confidentiality from the person reported. People have to "assume" at this point when they are the subject of a "spite" report, and I have seen problems in the past where people have thought one person accused them of something and they "went off" on that other person when it turns out that the person wasn't the one who reported them in the first place! :doh: So, I think something needs to be done to assure fairness to all concerned in a report.

Otherwise, people will feel they have no voice and situations like spite reporting could go unchecked and "innocent" people could end up getting the short end of the stick.

As for the other suggestions -- WIKIs should be GONE, period. There are WAY too many cooks in the kitchen!!!!

That's about all I have to offer at this point... I'll come back and post here if I have any other "member" concerns.

[ContentInHim]

Good one, Tangeloper!

[nyj]

Here are my thoughts on rules (not the guts of the site, but the running of the site).

1. Reports should remain open for viewing. This will help on Appeal. I'm not sure that the reported need have a say in the report, but they should be able to read everything, so if they wish to appeal ... they'll have the full record against them.

2. NO MODERATING VIA IM. If it's CF/FU related, it should be done on CF/FU.

3. SIMPLE RULES. WIKI was, in part, a total disaster because people over-analyzed every single detail. It became a total joke. We need a short and simple rule book, and then we'll see how staff make the call. They're going to do that anyways, so we may as well drop the charade that the rules lock them into ruling a particular way on any particular rule.

4. Too many fora. Drop some of the useless ones so staff isn't spread so thin, and we get better coverage.

5. In reference to #3, make sure we have a STABLE LIST OF RULES. If we're always tweaking it, we'll always have lobbying. State, flat out, there are the rules ... and while we'll consider suggestions, we will NOT roll out another rule set for a minimum of (insert time length here ... hopefully 6 to 12 months at a minimum).

That's a start at any rate.

[Latreia]

Here are my thoughts on rules (not the guts of the site, but the running of the site).

1. Reports should remain open for viewing. This will help on Appeal. I'm not sure that the reported need have a say in the report, but they should be able to read everything, so if they wish to appeal ... they'll have the full record against them.

2. NO MODERATING VIA IM. If it's CF/FU related, it should be done on CF/FU.

3. SIMPLE RULES. WIKI was, in part, a total disaster because people over-analyzed every single detail. It became a total joke. We need a short and simple rule book, and then we'll see how staff make the call. They're going to do that anyways, so we may as well drop the charade that the rules lock them into ruling a particular way on any particular rule.

4. Too many fora. Drop some of the useless ones so staff isn't spread so thin, and we get better coverage.

5. In reference to #3, make sure we have a STABLE LIST OF RULES. If we're always tweaking it, we'll always have lobbying. State, flat out, there are the rules ... and while we'll consider suggestions, we will NOT roll out another rule set for a minimum of (insert time length here ... hopefully 6 to 12 months at a minimum).

That's a start at any rate.

Your #1 implies that the Appeals have any sort of Christian basis, they are purely secular, like the trial of Christ.

Putting our Brothers and Sisters through such demeaning meatgrinder processes are working against the message of Love.

By continuing with the Appeals, we can be assured that will be a guarantee that many good folks will be forced to depart CF just to keep their dignity and sanity.

As for #4, that is strictly LeeD's call.
Just wondering if you would like that knowing that only very few groups would find any relief in this. You could most certainly kiss CCC good-bye.

:sigh:

[nyj]

Your #1 implies that the Appeals have any sort of Christian basis, they are purely secular, like the trial of Christ.My #1 hopes that we can get a fair shake.

Putting our Brothers and Sisters through such demeaning meatgrinder processes are working against the message of Love.I believe that we need to raise the bar on what's an actionable offense. I think spite reporting (I don't like this idea so I'm going to report it) should be treated very harshly.

As for #4, that is strictly LeeD's call.ALL OF THIS is his call.

Just wondering if you would like that knowing that only very few groups would find any relief in this. You could most certainly kiss CCC good-bye.
:sigh:CC is decimated as things currently are. I believe things can only get better. They HAVE to.

[nyj]

Also,

If Lee decides to stick with Forum Specific Moderators, they should be ignorable. If all they're going to do is moderate a single forum, I don't think they should be able to literally force people to read their thoughts and opinions on ALL matters ... in ALL forums. There is usually redundancy in the system (a different moderator can contact an individual if the other mod is being ignored), and report PM's should be automated so if things are filed properly, the moderators should still be able to do "work" stuff without it being ignored even if they are on an ignore list.

[IamRedeemed]

Thank you Lisa for this opportunity. I can't think of anything
I could add that others haven't already voiced.

God bless