DISCUSSION OF ANNOUNCEMENT: New Infractions & Warning System [Archive]

ravenscape

5th November 2007, 12:55 PM

This article can be used to summarize the discussion thread.

The original announcement is here: http://christianforums.com/t6377759 (http://christianforums.com/t6377759)

***************

DISCUSSION OF ANNOUNCEMENT: New Infractions & Warning System

New Infractions & Warning System
Originally published by
AngelDove97, CF Policy Manager

Dear Staff and Members,This is the initial set up for the Warning and Infractions System. It does not include all the details, so this announcement will be updated with information as we work through everything.If you have questions, please feel free to send a pm to myself or my Policy Assistant, Tangeloper. God bless and take care!~TatianaPolicy Chief

CF's Warning & Infraction System

1, Staff are allowed to give up to a two-week ban on a member's account as a cool-down period. No warning/infraction would be given.

2, Yellow warning cards are a warning only and are more commonly used if a user is on a first offense or if the issuing staffer finds it more fitting for the situation.
Yellow cards are worth zero points.

3, Red infraction cards are official record of infractions of site policy or forum-specific guidelines. Cards are given at moderator discretion and the attached PM will clearly state the reason.
Red cards are worth one point.

4, If a user reaches 4 points, they will be banned for a period of 1 month, and the subsequent ban will be permanent.

5, All cards expire 6 months from the date of issue. Cards from sock accounts will be included in an individual's tally.

There is also a rather interesting side-discussion in this topic regarding the report process, beginning more or less here (http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=42024641&postcount=199). It includes some suggestions for improving that process.

Log the number of times each member makes a report and display that number with each post.
Create a more directive form for reporting that discourages inappropriate use of the function
Allow all members to participate in reports, but require the comments to be directed to staff until necessary to reduce further fighting in that venue.This side-discussion has also spawned a new wiki specifically dealing with the question of how to reduce the number of inappropriate reports, here (http://christianforums.com/t6652584-reducing-the-number-of-inappropriate-reports.html).

Lel

5th November 2007, 11:56 PM

Unless you get some admins and RT in cahoots, and then....

Sorry, my tinfoil hat was on. :sorry:

snoochface

6th November 2007, 12:28 AM

And yes, please get the infractions off the top of my homepage. I really don't want to be greeted first-thing with the unfair and biased warning I received every time I go to my page.

snoochface

6th November 2007, 12:28 AM

And yes, please get the infractions off the top of my homepage. I really don't want to be greeted first-thing with the unfair and biased warning I received every time I go to my page.

RadicallyTransformedMom

6th November 2007, 10:12 AM

Hi Freitag. They're not addressed. You're probably thinking of the "amnesties" handed out by the Theology Team and Support Team. These were related to FSBs from our forums or any hard-bans which occurred (and were still being served) based on the rules during 777. It's a decision that each individual team could make.

Since all of the old rules were pretty much policy driven and not software driven we decided to make an internal team policy change. As such, the intent was to remove reference to any FSBs served during the past few months. If there is a member that may incur a FSB in the future the intent was to not make reference to the past...in that sense we were trying to make sure that everyone had a clean slate...in a manner of speaking.

The warnings / infractions are site-wide policy and far above my (our) level to change. So...we did what we could.

The annoucement that you saw (i'm not sure if it was in support or theology) can be found here:

http://foru.ms/t6368917-theology-team-amnesty.html
ok..well i have a question. i have an infraction showing up on my homepage that is 7 mos old. (the only one i ever recieved in my 4 yrs here..sigh). on this new system it says that after 6 mos our points/infractions are dropped. Well if thats the case..im past the 6 mos..so why is this old infraction (which was unfair and not accurate in the first place) showing up now ..making me look like a bad person..when in fact i should have never had it in the first place...sigh...???

RadicallyTransformedMom

6th November 2007, 10:12 AM

Tonks

6th November 2007, 10:16 AM

I'm not too sure about the ins-and-outs of the new system yet, to be quite honest. I'll shoot a PM to the relevant folks and see if I can track things down.

RadicallyTransformedMom

6th November 2007, 10:27 AM

I'm not too sure about the ins-and-outs of the new system yet, to be quite honest. I'll shoot a PM to the relevant folks and see if I can track things down.
thank you

Thirst_For_Knowledge

6th November 2007, 10:30 AM

Interesting. We'll see if the system will be abused once again. It should be noted that mods seem to have MORE power than they did when we had the original mod problems.

catlover

6th November 2007, 01:06 PM

And yes, please get the infractions off the top of my homepage. I really don't want to be greeted first-thing with the unfair and biased warning I received every time I go to my page.

The question is, can other people see those infractions?

snoochface

6th November 2007, 01:12 PM

The question is, can other people see those infractions?
No they can't. That doesn't matter. I can see it.

catlover

6th November 2007, 01:26 PM

No they can't. That doesn't matter. I can see it.

Oh well...I consider some of them a complement...:D

Tenebrae

6th November 2007, 03:54 PM

I'm not too sure about the ins-and-outs of the new system yet, to be quite honest. I'll shoot a PM to the relevant folks and see if I can track things down.
Thankyou

Gardener101

8th November 2007, 02:32 PM

Can we have the report announcement thread opened up again please? Surely it shouldn't take three days to clean up a thread?

I want to add this very important comment from a mod to the discussion:

There appear to be two conflicting views on this whole thing.

One view is more apt to fear the corrupting influence of power on the elite, the minority "rulers".

The other view is more apt to fear the majority and believe that there should be an elite to control the "mob."

The thing is... history and human nature prove that when an elite few are placed in authority with the attitude that the "mob" (aka the majority) need to be "kept in hand"... the elite will abuse their authority.

I used to be a moderator too and I saw other mods doing it and I found myself doing it as well. They were consistently harder on people they disagreed with, consistently more likely to issue a warning or infraction against people when those people stated a position that was against their own. They were consistently easier on people who happened to agree with them. The public reports kept this to a minimum because 1) the moderators were more aware of the scrutiny and therefore more objective and 2) if they began to be biased, the regular members had an opportunity to speak out. I personally saw several instances of this having a good effect.

My POV on it is: if the mods really are so unbiased and we really don't have anything to worry about with them, then they should have no qualms with public reports... they don't have anything to hide. And, in fact, I know of several moderators who liked the public reports because it kept them above suspicion.

from (http://foru.ms/showthread.php?t=6382796&page=8):

direct link (http://foru.ms/showpost.php?p=40539853&postcount=80)

Floatingaxe

8th November 2007, 02:40 PM

I agree wholeheartedly. I, too believe that the open scrutiny which the reports get does serve a good purpose, in that it keeps the mods fair, as I have been the subject of disdain from certain moderators in the past because of "elitism". (Not referring to here in CF, yet, btw.)

In fact, it actually frees the mods to "rule" and "decide" without the clouding of judgment. It's good for THEM.

JustOneWay

8th November 2007, 08:04 PM

Deleted

Beastt

9th November 2007, 05:17 AM

And thus the rampant post deletions and forum version of book-burning begins again. I'm sure we're in for a lot more from where this initial bout stems. Some people just can't stand allowing people to think for themselves or speak their minds. All too often this is because they make sense and can't be refuted. If someone can be refuted, then it's not a problem.

Oh well, I should have known that the emulation of an open and free society wasn't going to last long where Christians are in charge. Hopefully, this will help to demonstrate to those sitting on the fence why they need to avoid being absorbed into this rampant form of mind-control.

If you can't stand freedoms, then you really have no place claiming to value love, caring, kindness or other people.

How many of us voted on these changes? None.

How many of use wanted these changes? Apparently irrelevant to the new dictatorial regime.

How many remember what happened last time this kind of totalitarian control was instituted here? Probably far fewer than should remember.

Back to being a sulking member of the most militant, fascist and fear-driven forum on all the web.

Thanks to all of those who have worked so hard to demonstrate that you're anti-freedom, anti-equality, pro-bigotry opposed to freedom of speech and anti-free thought.

Don't worry though. If you don't like what I say yet can't offer anything to show it to be wrong, you can just delete it the way Christianity has been burning books (and authors), for as long as it has existed. Is this the true face of Christianity? Answer with your actions.

Beastt

9th November 2007, 05:36 AM

I agree wholeheartedly. I, too believe that the scrutiny which the reports get does serve a good purpose, in that it keeps the mods fair, as I have been the subject of disdain from certain moderators in thepast because of "elitism". (Not referring to here in CF, yet, btw.)

In fact, it actually frees the mods to "rule" and "decide" without the clouding of judgment. It's good for THEM.
Actually, while several will think it's good for them, it's a terrible system for the whole of the forum. Some of us have been here through this kind of system before and it will never lead to anything but what it lead to before. For starters, the forum will become vehemently divided. You'll have a secret society of winking, hand-shaking members on one side who conspire against certain members, hammer them at every possible opportunity, and then run around claiming they've done nothing wrong while keeping all of their records tightly closed.

You'll find an upsurge of complaints about this forum on other online forums. I'm not sure if the special sections devoted to the problems here still exist on other forums, but if they don't, rest assured they will be reinstated. Some people just can't seem to grasp the fact that you can't own people and shouldn't ever attempt to own people. Everyone has an opinion and attempts to quash opinions are nothing but admissions to how much those opinions frighten a given few, and of the guilt of the censors. So there will be a sudden increase in the amount of conversation you'll see on other sites, about the rampant mis-management and corruption to be found on this site.

It's not good for this site but if taken in stride, the lesson is simple; if you promote systems of inequality, secret little groups and massive corruption, you harm everyone including yourself. Unfortunately, to those who crave power, no damage to this forum will be too much damage for them to endure. And once they've chased out all the non-believers, it will be time to start closing the jaws of the vice on believers as well (as happened before). Pretty soon you won't be allowed to call yourself a Christian unless you fit their chosen definition. Then the definition will change again and become ever-tighter, weeding out more and more "undesirables".

Debate will become a thing of the past. There will still be a debate section and discussion will be allowed. Just make sure you don't make any strong points in favor of any non-Christian stance or your posts will go away. If that doesn't hide the truth sufficiently, entire threads will be zapped into the cornfield as was occurring here only a few short months ago.

Now is the time to become somewhat scarce and sit back and watch while the violence and misconduct of the Dark Ages closes in once again over this forum and destroys all the good work people have done over the past few months.

The saddest part is that some people will still allow themselves to serve here simply for the what minor prestige they can find in having some small amount of power over an Internet forum. Small minds and large egos are never far apart. Want to delete this post? Take responsibility for your actions and recognize that what you are doing is book-burning, plain and simple. You'd be better off to resign your position and leave the filthy work to those less ethically bound but even as Stalin was able to find those who would toss infants in the air to catch them on bayonets, there will always be those who are willing to perform the despicable act of censoring the work of others. Which are you, the ethical or the despicable? Only your actions will tell.

The timer starts here: 11-09-2007 01:38 MST.

Let's see how long it takes for the new king's new guards to destroy the evidence.

meebs

9th November 2007, 06:04 AM

That top figamajig..

Staff are allowed to give a two week ban on members accounts as a cool down period. No warning or infraction will be given.

What is this?? Even if no rules are being broken?If a person is just adamant about a topic and the mod happens to be on the opposing side.. poof?

It rings alarm bells doesnt it? :help:

Im all for changes to CF to take it back a bit, simpler rules and making the forums less like a political country on the verge of anarchy, agh i hate the way this has gone all political. I suppose all forums have *some* politics but only as a within forum things, not on the scale that has been seen here.

But i want to see moderation of the moderators. This is my biggest fear for the forums.

I do like the card idea though but please consider - a person has the right to be warned or told of any ban, permenant or temporary, this is also why report threads should be open/or allowed access to by those who are being reported.

Sharpay

9th November 2007, 10:57 AM

Beastt

9th November 2007, 12:55 PM

This Is Not Fair!!!!!!!!!! Freedom!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Its A Free Country Duh!!! We Need Freedom!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Don't Lock Us Up

WHO CARES These Warnings And Rules

wHY ARE YOU SCREWING UP A GOOD THING?

THIS IS SO UNFAIR

THIS MEAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In over 3-years here I've seen about 3-months (the last three), when this place wasn't a disgusting cesspool controlled by fascist, control-freaks and their pathetic fear of anything contrary to what they wish to believe. It's probably time to just let this place go to those who insist that totalitarian dictatorships are the only environment in which Christianity can thrive.

It's doubtful that they will listen to anything so I suggest contacting those who advertise through this site and let them know that as long as they continue to let themselves be represented by everything contrary to values of freedom and equality that you'll, very intentionally, avoid their products.

Tangeloper

9th November 2007, 08:03 PM

New Infractions & Warning System
Originally published by
AngelDove97, CF Policy Manager

Dear Staff and Members,

This is the initial set up for the Warning and Infractions System. It does not include all the details, so this announcement will be updated with information as we work through everything.

If you have questions, please feel free to send a pm to myself or my Policy Assistant, Tangeloper.

God bless and take care!

~Tatiana
Policy Chief

http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q40/jerseyangel0307/forumsimage/InfractionSystemImage-1.jpg

Tangeloper

9th November 2007, 08:04 PM

Please use this discussion thread to post your opinions and/or discussion of the new system. This is provided to you in order to leave the announcement thread for Questions & Clarifications ONLY.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Tangeloper
Duchess of Policy

Here is the text of the announcement that was made:
New Infractions & Warning System
Originally published by
AngelDove97, CF Policy Manager

Dear Staff and Members,

This is the initial set up for the Warning and Infractions System. It does not include all the details, so this announcement will be updated with information as we work through everything.

If you have questions, please feel free to send a pm to myself or my Policy Assistant, Tangeloper.

God bless and take care!

~Tatiana
Policy Chief

http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q40/jerseyangel0307/forumsimage/InfractionSystemImage-1.jpg

snoochface

9th November 2007, 08:43 PM

Tangeloper

9th November 2007, 08:45 PM

< snip >
I think it is ridiculous that bans go from 1-month to permanent with no steps in between. It will be exceedingly easy for a mod with a grudge to get someone perma-banned with a system like this, especially with everything so closed and secret in reports and appeals.
< snip >

There are steps in-between the 1-month ban to a permanent ban. I will attempt to explain this after I myself have been fully trained in the new system (this weekend). This way I will avoid making mistakes in any explanation I attempt. Thanks for understanding.

snoochface

9th November 2007, 08:51 PM

There are steps in-between the 1-month ban to a permanent ban. I will attempt to explain this after I myself have been fully trained in the new system (this weekend). This way I will avoid making mistakes in any explanation I attempt. Thanks for understanding.
If that's the case, the announcement does not make that clear at all. I'll wait for further explanation though. Thanks.

Tangeloper

9th November 2007, 09:26 PM

If that's the case, the announcement does not make that clear at all. I'll wait for further explanation though. Thanks.
Yep, I understand. I think that's why AngelDove97 said it didn't include all the details. :) Thanks for your patience and understanding. :)

bunced

10th November 2007, 05:49 AM

Thank you for your willingness to help and provide information too Tangerloper - it is genuinely appreciated :)

Glass*Soul

10th November 2007, 12:23 PM

May we assume that no one will be banned by means of the new system until after we recieve full and accurate information?

Rising Tree

10th November 2007, 06:56 PM

I guess this is what it means in order to return to a true Christian Forums.

RealDealNeverstop

10th November 2007, 08:11 PM

Is there any way to see the text of the system? Seems like it's in some type of image form.

Lindon Tinuviel

10th November 2007, 08:42 PM

Yeah, it's a graphic. Somebody thinks they're playing a soccer game.

CF's Warning and Infraction System

Staff are allowed to give up to a 2 week ban on a member's account as a cooldown period. No warning/infraction would be given.

Warning
Yellow cards are a warning only and are more commonly used if a user is on a first offense or if the issuing staffer finds it more fitting for the situation. Yellow cards are worth zero points.

Infraction
Red cards are official record of infractions of site policy or forum-specific guidelines. Cards are given at moderator discretion and the attached PM will clearly state the reason. Red cards are worth one point.

If a user reaches 4 points they will be banned for a period of 1 month, and the subsequent ban will be permanent.

All cards expire 6 months from the date of issue. Cards from sock accounts will be included in an individual's tally.

Absolute idiocy, in my opinion, especially these two:

Staff are allowed to give up to a 2 week ban on a member's account as a cooldown period. No warning/infraction would be given.

and

Cards are given at moderator discretion

Not to mention that the whole "card" thing is childish and absurd.

Glass*Soul

10th November 2007, 09:16 PM

Red cards are official record of infractions of site policy or forum-specific guidelines.

And from an official announcement (http://foru.ms/t6377770-announcement-forum-specific-rules-will-no-longer-be-used.html):

However, each forum is allowed to take the FSR’s that they have in place and develop them to become guidelines for that forum. This means that a member will not necessarily receive an infraction (infraction system is still being discussed I believe) for violating a guideline, but may be asked to have the post deleted, edited, or moved to a different and more appropriate forum. Staff will be moderating based on the set of General Rules that the site will have.

[emphasis mine]

Confusing.

:doh: Now I'm really getting out of this rules discussion forum before it makes me crazy(er).

Stormy

10th November 2007, 09:46 PM

I guess this is what it means in order to return to a true Christian Forums.

Well.. Yeah.. It appears that we have to be stifled, shrouded in darkness, practice discrimination, and shun just a few posters, in order to return this forum to its Christian principles! Righteousness does not come without a price!

Yea Jesus!!!

RealDealNeverstop

10th November 2007, 11:33 PM

RealDealNeverstop

10th November 2007, 11:39 PM

If red cards with yellow streamers can be issued for guideline violations then the word needs to be changed to 'rule.' The term guideline is misleading. After looking at that mess again i think we should start a pool to see how long before a nuke goes off site wide like it did before. What does Lee think will be so different from before?

Lindon Tinuviel

10th November 2007, 11:59 PM

Lee, it would seem, is a victim of his own misguided notions. He probably doesn't know about the Star Chamber years. He obviously doesn't know the history or the culture of this community. And that's his own fault. Whatever may or may not work at his other boards is just gonna get him skewered here. And I'm OK with that.

RealDealNeverstop

11th November 2007, 12:10 AM

Iam sure he did his homework on the history and iam sure there is a plan to prevent yesteryear's dark clouds but so far, it seems to be a mystery. What is unavoidable is the contradiction between private staff threads and accountability. There is no Jesus Justification to blind the community from disciplinary actions and the processes. Many of us saw the outright abuse by staff while the threads were visible. Guess we will have to learn the hard way. Again.

Lindon Tinuviel

11th November 2007, 12:13 AM

Who's this "we" you speak of? As long as money rolls in, there's no reason whatsoever to learn anything.

RealDealNeverstop

11th November 2007, 01:07 AM

I dont assume the worst about people i know nothing about so i wont agree with that. It almost seems like the current structure is in response to the wiki hurricane aftermath but so far it seems like over compensation.

MrJim

11th November 2007, 01:11 AM

It is a good system to set up if ya wanna get rid of some people permanently and discreetly...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2e/AlCapone.jpg/270px-AlCapone.jpg

mnphysicist

11th November 2007, 09:01 AM

Good jolly pumpkin radiation batman! If the calendar didnt say 2007 i would think it's 2004. There is SOOOOOOOOOO much *grey* area that we have just regressed at an unbelievable rate. It's almost like Erwin 2004 just changed his name to Lee and absolutely nothing was learned through all trials and upsets.
The current setup is very much like CF 2004. Lee was briefed as to the history, and the resulting problems of that time period.

If red cards with yellow streamers can be issued for guideline violations then the word needs to be changed to 'rule.' The term guideline is misleading. After looking at that mess again i think we should start a pool to see how long before a nuke goes off site wide like it did before. What does Lee think will be so different from before?

Guidelines, if violated repeatedly would likely result in a warning or infraction. A few instances here or there will result in the threads being moved... Once a member knows and understands the guidelines for a forum, and if they persist in breaking them, it is likely a warning or infraction would be given.

A couple big differences from before, first, the RT, and secondly the hard line Lee takes on errant staff.

RealDealNeverstop

11th November 2007, 10:10 AM

People are going to use the guidelines as a form of silencing others. It is already happening and even after i respond to the notification pm of a deleted post asking for clarification or explanation it just gets blown off. No response at all. Just yesterday a staff member used a backdoor method of accusing me of not being a real conservative and this person has stated straight out he doesnt think iam. I can also show other examples so forgive me if iam overreacting here.

CoachR64

11th November 2007, 09:07 PM

If Lee really wants to make this site for the users, he needs to give the users a voice. When you close the reports to keep out the public, the public has no voice or security. The mods are tempted with absolute power, and that corrupts absolutely.

We are dealing with humans here. Humans will always allow emotions and personal feelings to play a role in their decisions. If we do not have a stead fast set of rules and open reports, mods will be able to go unchecked. We should be given the opportunity to defend ourselves and face our accusers.

This card set up is silly. I do understand there needs to be a vast overhaul of the system, but this aint it.

When it takes 24-72 hours for the mods to finally act on a report, it is a problem.

Coach

Lindon Tinuviel

11th November 2007, 09:15 PM

If Lee really wants to make this site for the users, he needs to give the users a voice.

I don't remember him ever saying that anything here would be for the Members.

Letalis

11th November 2007, 09:48 PM

The cards are the standard vBulletin warning/infraction system, I believe.

Angeldove97

11th November 2007, 10:10 PM

Well, I'll start.

I think it is ridiculous that bans go from 1-month to permanent with no steps in between. It will be exceedingly easy for a mod with a grudge to get someone perma-banned with a system like this, especially with everything so closed and secret in reports and appeals.

Please have patience with me as I take the time to clarify the questions and comments made in this thread. :wave:

To go from one month to perma-ban, we actually placed alot of steps to help prevent this. I'm going to take this straight out of the training lesson that Staff are being given to shine some light on this issue:

After 4 points have accumulated the member is banned for one month, once the ban is served, the points remain, and continue to accumulate. Should a member acquire 8 points, they are perma-banned.

Thus, if someone earns 4 points in a month, they get banned, if they come back, and get 4 more, within a total of 6 months, they are perma-banned.

If a member is banned for having 4 points, and then the first point expires, the next point earned will net them a ban again. It is possible to get in a loop for a bit, where every violation equates to a ban. That is intentional by design. It prevents the member from being perma-banned being they earned points over a period of many months, rather than two or three months.

Example: Angeldove (who is very evil and bad--- don’t let the name fool you) earns 4 points with a span of 6 months, she will serve a ONE MONTH ban (this is automatically done once the number of points is earned). After that month, if one of her infractions expires, she’ll only have 3 points (3 Infractions).

If her none of her Infractions expires and then she earns another one, she’ll have 4 points again (4 Infractions) and she will be banned for another ONE MONTH period. This can continue over and over again--- member won’t be perma-banned (which is honestly a good thing) but will have to watch themselves until their Infraction points expire.

As you can see-- we placed a "loophole" to allow for members to be banned only for a short time unless they rack up 8 points really fast. A member would serve a one month ban numerous times before getting perma-banned. (FYI--I used the member name Angeldove because that is my sock account, so I'm not offending anybody)

Then there's the fact that reports and appeals are closed and secret, which is just begging for the perception problems that plagued this site pre-777 to rear their ugly heads again.

One part that I'm stressing during training is that staff be as lenient as possible and as open as possible when it comes to communicating with members via pms/warnings/infractions. We're doing a detailed training session where the staff member MUST openly communicate with the member and provide a drawn out explanation as to why something was in violation.

While this may not solve all issues that arise, I hope that staff understands that if a member serves an amount of time banned, the issue might still be on their account but staff should not use it against them. Every member should also clearly understand why a post was in violation--- if not the staff member MUST take the time to fully explain it and work with the member. If a staffer can't be dedicated in this way when it comes to moderating, they really shouldn't be moderating at all.

Finally, I am increasingly peeved at Lee's complete and total lack of responsiveness to the members' opinions. He's saying absolutely nothing, he's not listening to what the membership says they want, and my trust in him has plummeted as a result.

I think this may be because alot of members are saying alot of different things--- you can go either way. Lee has alot to learn about the site and he already knowns that he won't and can not please everybody. He has staff members in place to help him make calls on important decisions and at this time this is what he feels should be in place.

Even though you might not agree with his methods or opinions, I hope that you can still enjoy the site. The people here will never change just because of new policies. Alot of changes have been hard for me to swallow as well, but I always keep coming back because there are people here that I love and who love me back. So it's worth it.

Angeldove97

11th November 2007, 10:11 PM

If that's the case, the announcement does not make that clear at all. I'll wait for further explanation though. Thanks.

That graphic which I designed just has the very few basics on how the Infraction and Warning System will work. There's only so much you can put into an image like that without making it too confusing. But we do have other details written up and staff are being trained to make sure they know them. :)

Angeldove97

11th November 2007, 10:17 PM

May we assume that no one will be banned by means of the new system until after we recieve full and accurate information?

Correct--- no Staff member will be able to use the new system UNTIL they have passed training. We want to go over everything with staff first to see if there will be any issues before posting the content for members. Have patience :pray:

Yeah, it's a graphic. Somebody thinks they're playing a soccer game.

Absolute idiocy, in my opinion, especially these two:

and

Not to mention that the whole "card" thing is childish and absurd.

I did design the image but I didn't design the red and yellow card design. The icon of the red and yellow cards is what staff sees on each post in a thread in order to give a warning or infraction--- we click on that and it gives us a new panel to put in the necessary information. It's just the way it was designed--- nothing staff can do about that.

Lindon Tinuviel

11th November 2007, 10:33 PM

I did design the image but I didn't design the red and yellow card design. The icon of the red and yellow cards is what staff sees on each post in a thread in order to give a warning or infraction--- we click on that and it gives us a new panel to put in the necessary information. It's just the way it was designed--- nothing staff can do about that.

Yeah, they're vBulletin standard, but this is the first site I've seen that actually uses them as such.

Lindon Tinuviel

11th November 2007, 10:37 PM

That graphic which I designed just has the very few basics on how the Infraction and Warning System will work. There's only so much you can put into an image like that without making it too confusing. But we do have other details written up and staff are being trained to make sure they know them. :)

I'm glad to hear that Staff has a detailed inventory of the rules and the infraction system. Be kinda nice if the Members knew what they were, too. We're not stupid; we don't need things dumbed down to our level. But hey, thanks.

I still hold to the simple truth that if things are being done in the dark, there's a reason why.

CoachR64

11th November 2007, 10:39 PM

So you can get another 30 day ban for only getting ONE card based on an expiring card?

You can not continue to penalize a person for the same crime. That is totally out of line.

Coach

snoochface

11th November 2007, 10:53 PM

Angeldove97

11th November 2007, 10:53 PM

The reason why is that we want to be able to have those who understand this policy teach those who do not about it. I've gotten alot of Staff saying they don't need training because they think they already know what is up, when they honestly don't. If I just put out the information out there right away, I'd get alot more hassles. So for the time being I'm just asking members to sit tight, give us another week or two and the information will be shared with all :)

And as long as a member doesn't violate any more rules until their Infractions expire, they really won't have to worry about it. Plenty of members discuss things here and NEVER get a pm or a warning or an infraction from a staff team. Those who are more prone to getting them will just have to watch their words for awhile.

Angeldove97

11th November 2007, 10:55 PM

Thanks for all of those explanations, Angeldove.

The quote from the training manual says that a one-month ban will be automatic when 4 points have been accumulated. Is that literally automatic, from a technology standpoint? Doesn't that circumvent the appeal process for the member if they get banned on that 4th point and have no chance to plead their case?

Members can still put in an appeal or pm a staff member if they need to discuss something--- they just won't be able to post in the forums. And yes I believe it is an automatic ban done via technology--- though staff would be aware of it before they put in the 4th Infraction (we can see how many points a member has).

CoachR64

12th November 2007, 12:10 AM

This new system is a total joke. Refusing to give people a chance to face their accusers and defend themselves in an open report is nonsense.

Coach

arborvita

12th November 2007, 02:54 AM

This new system is a total joke. Refusing to give people a chance to face their accusers and defend themselves in an open report is nonsense.

Coach
If there are actions that a member feels are not correct and should be looked into the Reconciliation Team can look into the matters and see if all actions were on the up and up. Appeals can still happen also and PMs are available to talk to all staff.

Lindon Tinuviel

12th November 2007, 08:17 AM

Ah yes, the Ministry of Accountability.

A New Dawn

12th November 2007, 03:06 PM

So one infraction is worth 4 points? :confused: Why bother giving it that artificial number and saying it takes 8 points for a permanent ban, when, in reality, it only takes two infractions?

Lindon Tinuviel

12th November 2007, 03:12 PM

I'm pretty sure that an infraction is only worth one point.

arborvita

12th November 2007, 03:17 PM

Yes one infraction is one point and could be as much as two but only if two rules were broken badly enough to warrent that.

A New Dawn

12th November 2007, 03:18 PM

Lindon Tinuviel

12th November 2007, 03:29 PM

Oh, OK, I misread that one post by Angeldove.

But still, as someone pointed out, one is having to pay for the same error multiple times under the new system. That was never part of CF's setup before.

Indeed.

Not only that, Arbor seems to be saying that we can get nailed multiple times for a single comment.

I'll get the torches... who wants to get the pitchforks?

arborvita

12th November 2007, 07:19 PM

Indeed.

Not only that, Arbor seems to be saying that we can get nailed multiple times for a single comment.

I'll get the torches... who wants to get the pitchforks?
No I didnt say that LT. Allow me to clarify if a member has multiple rule violations in one area the team could designate up to 2 infraction points but only if it is multiple rule violations. I would think it would have to be very very serious for it to be like that. TBH I have never seen a whole lot of infractions ever handed out to members even under the old system.

Lindon Tinuviel

12th November 2007, 07:26 PM

No I didnt say that LT. Allow me to clarify if a member has multiple rule violations in one area the team could designate up to 2 infraction points but only if it is multiple rule violations. I would think it would have to be very very serious for it to be like that. TBH I have never seen a whole lot of infractions ever handed out to members even under the old system.

That's pretty much what I said you said. You said you didn't say it, then you said it again. ;)

So if I called you a dirty name now, I might get infractions for both flaming and for bypassing the swear filter?

snoochface

12th November 2007, 07:29 PM

So if I called you a dirty name now, I might get infractions for both flaming and for bypassing the swear filter?

That's been my understanding as well. If it's not that way, I'd like to hear it explicitly stated.

arborvita

12th November 2007, 07:30 PM

That's pretty much what I said you said. You said you didn't say it, then you said it again. ;)

So if I called you a dirty name now, I might get infractions for both flaming and for bypassing the swear filter?
:) Nope. Youre kosher.

Seriously thought I wouldnt get all caught up in the infraction part. The violation would have to be extreme or have been a consistent pattern of misbehavior. An infraction in my opinion a chance for a person to change behavior. I mean we all have to live by rules IRL and with this site we have to play with in the rules.

Lindon Tinuviel

12th November 2007, 07:37 PM

:) Nope. Youre kosher.

Seriously thought I wouldnt get all caught up in the infraction part. The violation would have to be extreme or have been a consistent pattern of misbehavior. An infraction in my opinion a chance for a person to change behavior. I mean we all have to live by rules IRL and with this site we have to play with in the rules.

Hard to do that when we don't know what the rules are. And it's hard to know what the rules are when they are--per Lee--at the whim of Staff.

Seriously, I don't see how good people could support such a system.

RealDealNeverstop

12th November 2007, 07:38 PM

So what happens when people actively conspire to break the rules within the rules? Current example: some people will quote others' posts and only post an image. This image has been deemed a method of calling people trolls. So, even though the words 'You are a troll' are not typed, the image makes the same statement. Will staff be bounded in the abdication of common sense or will they be allowed to rule it for what it is?

arborvita

12th November 2007, 08:23 PM

Hard to do that when we don't know what the rules are. And it's hard to know what the rules are when they are--per Lee--at the whim of Staff.

Seriously, I don't see how good people could support such a system.
Well the staff cannot get to far out of whack. The Reconciliation Team is here to balance staff misbehaving and to take appropriate actions. This is still all new to us all. I would ask for a chance under the new system before it gets condemend. As always your input while I might not always see eye to eye with you do appreciate your points you make. Thank you for bringing your concerns to the table.

arborvita

12th November 2007, 08:31 PM

Lindon Tinuviel

12th November 2007, 08:34 PM

:)

Hey, did somebody steal this thread's title--or are thread titles secret too, now?

arborvita

12th November 2007, 08:39 PM

I just noticed that too.... Whare did it go?

arborvita

12th November 2007, 08:42 PM

wow thats crazy its back now.

Thanks Letalis!

Lindon Tinuviel

12th November 2007, 08:43 PM

I don't know about you, but I'm going to blame snoochface.

snoochface

12th November 2007, 08:52 PM

I don't know about you, but I'm going to blame snoochface.
How many points do I get for that? :mad:

RealDealNeverstop

12th November 2007, 09:35 PM

#70--i wouldnt have posited the scenario unless the purpose of the image was airtight. Iow, there is no question the specific purpose of the image is to call others a troll. So i guess the question gets repeated :-)

Bombila

13th November 2007, 03:58 PM

Speaking of images... are those Warning and Infraction 'cards' going to appear in our control panels as enormous graphics, as they do in the original Announcement about them? Because if that's so, some of us dialup users, who can barely load the CP as it is are going to have serious difficulties.

Lindon Tinuviel

13th November 2007, 04:26 PM

If you use Firefox, add these to your AdBlock filter and your speed will increase dramatically:

Kill the ads:
http://*.*.valueclick.*/*
https://*.google-analytics.*/*
http://*.google-analytics.*/*
http://*.googlesyndication.*/*
http://*.azjmp.*/*
http://*.big-boards.*/*

Remove gradients and just have flat color bars (speeds things up noticeably):
http://*/*/gradients/*

Block any of these that you don't want to see:
http://*/*/arcade/*
http://*/*/misc/*
http://*/*/bars/*
http://*/*/cfpets/*
http://*/*/items/*
http://*/*/jobs/*
http://*/*/mood/*
http://*/*/reputation/*
http://*/*/staffteam/*
http://*/*/userinfo/*

Kill the Chatbox:
http://christianforums.com/chat.php

Kill the flashing red NEW PM message:
http://*/*/pmbg.gif

Kill the FavIcon that appears in the address bar:
http://*/*/favicon.gif

Kill the artwork around the quotes:
http://*/*/quotes/*

Kill the scripts:
http://*/clientscript/*
http://*/nuwiki/*.js
http://*/vbspell.js

Note that adding these to your block list will probably remove the items from EVERY board you visit. Some functionality may be reduced--mix and match filters to optimize your visit.

The first asterisk can often be replaced with "christianforums.com" (no quotes) if you want to make the block specific to this board.

arborvita

13th November 2007, 05:06 PM

You could also use the PDA version of this site to help cut down on the graphics and wouldnt have to block all the stuff out.

To answer the question no the cards will not be big and they will only be seen on your profile page and only by you.

Bombila

13th November 2007, 11:06 PM

Thanks for the speed tips, guys, and thanks for the answer, arborvita.

The graphic in the Announcement was a monster.

Lindon Tinuviel

19th November 2007, 03:41 AM

Good luck :)

pdudgeon

19th November 2007, 12:08 PM

mnphysicist

20th November 2007, 04:59 PM

ok, got a question here...or maybe three.:)

case scenario: A member racks up several (let's say 6) reports over two day's time for flaming. the Admin pumps for going straight to infraction with 2 points. the team is split on that decision.

now the questions:
1. can the Admin override the team?
Yes
2. if so, when and how or should we get the reconciliation team involved?The member can ask their involvement at any time. Staff could too.

3. if the next day after receiving the infraction the member is reported for one flame (which may have been posted before receiving the infraction), would the Admin be justified in asking for another 2 point infraction and thus an auto ban?That would seem to be pretty harsh, yet, staff do have the discretion to make the call. Multipoint infractions should only occur if multiple rules were broken in an egregious fashion, thus it would likely be overturned.

The only criteria as to timing, is an infraction can only be issued once per 24 hours. It does not matter when the event or report occurred, or was processed. It would be best if staff considered the timing of events, and showed mercy, if an action occurred prior to the issuance of the first infraction, but protocol does not provide for it. The RT would likely look at such, and likely overturn it.

i'm asking because it looks like according to the system this is a possibility, and there might not be anything available to prevent it's happening.Technically no, nothing can prevent this. However, if such occurred, the RT would likely step in, and it is likely such actions would be overturned. If it happened more than once, it is very likely future actions would be looked at very closely, and could end up with a recommendation for removal.

Glass*Soul

20th November 2007, 09:32 PM

Lindon Tinuviel

20th November 2007, 09:46 PM

Block the ads, cancel your subscription, continue to use as many resources as possible, and try to have a good time.

Bombila

20th November 2007, 11:43 PM

I find myself - and it is likely a good thing - spending more time on my music forum, where we can have a good roaring ranting religious debate, and then amicably swap tunes with the same people. No rules, no reports, no secrecy, just people sharing a passion and occasionally sidetracking into the 'spirit world'.

I think there is a failure on the part of many members, staff included, to understand fully that this site is now a commercial property being 'streamlined' to look good to advertising, and that LeeD is not likely to participate in the community at all, except as staff puppeteer.

I wonder when some of the many thinking, honest unpaid staff are going to start wondering why they are giving their free time and energy to further these commercial aims, while helping to stifle what has been, overall, a stimulating and involved community.

I already notice some of the best of us, the sincerest intelligent Christians, the most educated intelligent unbelievers, posting less often or just fading away as the site becomes less friendly to freethinking and honest debate, and more suited to those who just want more smilies and dollies and 'blessings'.

Amoranemix

21st November 2007, 07:05 PM

These are comments I moved from foru.ms/t6377759-announcement-new-infractions-warning-system.html.

Yes, staff discretion plays a huge role in this. There is great latitude in interpretation. What may be a violation by one team, will not be by another. That is ok, as different forums have different needs. Ie, the dividing line for mocking God in teens is much much higher then it is in GA for example. There should be consistency across forums, but it will not exist across the site for the above reason.I disagree. Most rules should be the same and interpreted the same everywhere. It is for the exceptions that we should have had forum specific rules.

I don't like all this "discretion of the mods" and lack of uniformity. This is what got the forums into trouble in the first place. No one knows what the rules are, because what is given leeway in one forum would get you an infraction in another. How is that fair?What makes you think it is supposed to be fair ?

Also, there is no "secret" staff group. I think people are still being recruited, but I am not "in the loop" on that process.Do you mean it is so secret that even you don’t know about it ?

Will do and you're welcome. I will also reassure you that we are still looking into making any future warnings or infractions NOT hit you square between the eyes on your profile page. I completely understand how this could be demoralizing. :)I find the excessive secrecy demoralizing too. Can you do something about that ?

You're very welcome. I'm glad that we were able to do this.That is an example of manipulating opinion. If you inconvenience someone and then take the inconvenience away, then they tend to think more highly of you than if you hadn’t inconvenienced them in the first place.

It is extremely hard for me to read through all of these opinions, and negative remarks in order to assist members who wish to understand the new system. Please respect that this thread is for respectful questions ONLY.I think it would be even more constructive to take away the reason for these negative remarks. It would also have been less destructive not to create those reasons in the first place.

Beastt: If you will notice the posts have been MOVED and NOT deleted. There is a time and a place for everything.I disagree.

I would hope that everyone would show some respect for the fact that I am attempting to communicate with members who have valid, respectful questions in relation to the changes. To be accused of participating in censorship and book-burning type activities is disrespectful to me as a person and I request that you stop making these types of assumptions.The respect for attempts at communication, do we owe that to you or to the system ?
I agree that you are participating in censorship.

Amoranemix

21st November 2007, 07:09 PM

I am in favour of a warning system. After the 7/7/07 changes I even advocated a more sophisticated bahaviour record. People who opposed seemed to object mostly because they thought it was prone to abuse. That problem that to me seemed to be only a minor one has been severely compounded by the new context. However, IMO the problem does not lie with the principle of using a warning system. I can’t really express myself on the current proposal as I haven’t seen the wiki yet and can’t seem to find it.

Catlover 9 : Quotes from now on are from this thread.
Snoochface 10 : No they can't. That doesn't matter. I can see it.
The problem I see is that you can’t show them off then. A member showing his/her infractions would be like a warrior showing his scars, reaping admiration and envy among the spectators.

The thing is... history and human nature prove that when an elite few are placed in authority with the attitude that the "mob" (aka the majority) need to be "kept in hand"... the elite will abuse their authority.I didn’t understand the part where you explained how that is LeeD’s problem.

Oh well, I should have known that the emulation of an open and free society wasn't going to last long where Christians are in charge.
Hopefully, this will help to demonstrate to those sitting on the fence why they need to avoid being absorbed into this rampant form of mind-control.I was hoping, I was participating, I was constructing. Everything has been shattered by Christians.

How many of use wanted these changes? Apparently irrelevant to the new dictatorial regime.There was a majority for nuking the wiki process, but I doubt that has been LeeD’s main motivation.

I do like the card idea though but please consider - a person has the right to be warned or told of any ban, permenant or temporary, this is also why report threads should be open/or allowed access to by those who are being reported.Informing members about impeding bans was foreseen in the ban protocol wiki (http://foru.ms/t5728478-wiki-ban-protocol.html), but the powers that be never thought it worth snapshotting.

There are steps in-between the 1-month ban to a permanent ban. I will attempt to explain this after I myself have been fully trained in the new system (this weekend). This way I will avoid making mistakes in any explanation I attempt. Thanks for understanding.If staff had implemented a warning system when members asked for it then we could have incorporated it into the banning protocol and members could have had a working warning system with escalating bans over a month ago.

Guidelines, if violated repeatedly would likely result in a warning or infraction. A few instances here or there will result in the threads being moved... Once a member knows and understands the guidelines for a forum, and if they persist in breaking them, it is likely a warning or infraction would be given.Rules should be called rules and not guidelines.

To go from one month to perma-ban, we actually placed alot of steps to help prevent this. I'm going to take this straight out of the training lesson that Staff are being given to shine some light on this issue:Can you provide a working link to the rules and their discussion ? Can you provide a working link to the training lesson ?

After 4 points have accumulated the member is banned for one month, once the ban is served, the points remain, and continue to accumulate. Should a member acquire 8 points, they are perma-banned.How long is a permanent ban ?

Example: Angeldove (who is very evil and bad--- don’t let the name fool you) earns 4 points with a span of 6 months, she will serve a ONE MONTH ban (this is automatically done once the number of points is earned). After that month, if one of her infractions expires, she’ll only have 3 points (3 Infractions).What if an infraction expires during the ban ?

While this may not solve all issues that arise, I hope that staff understands that if a member serves an amount of time banned, the issue might still be on their account but staff should not use it against them. Every member should also clearly understand why a post was in violation--- if not the staff member MUST take the time to fully explain it and work with the member
. If a staffer can't be dedicated in this way when it comes to moderating, they really shouldn't be moderating at all.
That wasn’t done before the 7/7/07 changes. Was it supposed to be done ?

snoochface : Finally, I am increasingly peeved at Lee's complete and total lack of responsiveness to the members' opinions. He's saying absolutely nothing, he's not listening to what the membership says they want, and my trust in him has plummeted as a result.
Angeldove97 : I think this may be because alot of members are saying alot of different things--- you can go either way. Lee has alot to learn about the site and he already knowns that he won't and can not please everybody. He has staff members in place to help him make calls on important decisions and at this time this is what he feels should be in place.
Is Leed listening to staff or being unable to please everyone somehow a reason to have so much to hide and not listen to the members ?

Even though you might not agree with his methods or opinions, I hope that you can still enjoy the site. The people here will never change just because of new policies. Alot of changes have been hard for me to swallow as well
, but I always keep coming back because there are people here that I love and who love me back. So it's worth it.Yet you keep supporting the local dictator.

Glass*soul : May we assume that no one will be banned by means of the new system until after we recieve full and accurate information?
Angeldove97 48 :Correct--- no Staff member will be able to use the new system UNTIL they have passed training. We want to go over everything with staff first to see if there will be any issues before posting the content for members. Have patience :pray:
I think the question was whether lowly members can fall victim to the new system before they have been fully trained. I gather they can. It looks like staff eager to draw cards doesn’t require to demonstrate patience.

I did design the image but I didn't design the red and yellow card design. The icon of the red and yellow cards is what staff sees on each post in a thread in order to give a warning or infraction--- we click on that and it gives us a new panel to put in the necessary information. It's just the way it was designed--- nothing staff can do about that.Does every lowly member’s post have two card icons that staff can use to give them a warning or infraction ?

The reason why is that we want to be able to have those who understand this policy teach those who do not about it. I've gotten alot of Staff saying they don't need training because they think they already know what is up, when they honestly don't. If I just put out the information out there right away, I'd get alot more hassles. So for the time being I'm just asking members to sit tight, give us another week or two and the information will be shared with all :)Sorry, but I don’t understand your attempt at justifying keeping members in the dark. The sooner we get to see the rules the sooner we can understand them. I fail to see what staff falsely claiming to understand those rules has to do with that.

CoachR64 55 : This new system is a total joke. Refusing to give people a chance to face their accusers and defend themselves in an open report is nonsense.
arbovita 56 : If there are actions that a member feels are not correct and should be looked into the Reconciliation Team can look into the matters and see if all actions were on the up and up. Appeals can still happen also and PMs are available to talk to all staff.
I don’t think the Reconciliation Team would appreciate it if you file an appeal at every hunch that something fishy happened in a secret report. Besides, fishy things may happen without any hunch being generated as well.

But still, as someone pointed out, one is having to pay for the same error multiple times under the new system. That was never part of CF's setup before.We wikied something similar, but had to do without warnings. I still think it is a good idea, but I would need to ponder it more to be sure.

Well the staff cannot get to far out of whack. The Reconciliation Team is here to balance staff misbehaving and to take appropriate actions [1]. This is still all new to us all. I would ask for a chance under the new system before it gets condemned[2]. As always your input while I might not always see eye to eye with you [Lindon Tinuviel] do appreciate your points you make. Thank you for bringing your concerns to the table.[1] Can you prove that ? [2] This isn’t about you, but about the system. Why would it deserve a chance ?

Pdudgeon : 1. can the Admin override the team?
mnphysicist : Yes
I disagree with the admin being able to override the team.

It is what it is. If we stay, we must conform ourselves to its workings. Inside or out. Hidden or seen. There's little else left to say.You can try to join staff like me. If you are accepted as a lowly moderator you will be let in to some of the secrets that the lowly members don’t have access to and that, also thanks to the added powers, can make you feel you are better than them.

Glass*Soul

21st November 2007, 10:33 PM

Block the ads, cancel your subscription, continue to use as many resources as possible, and try to have a good time.

I can't. There's something in Christ's Gospel that's worked itself into me like a virus taking up residence in my DNA. Even when I lose hope, when I'm sure it can't work, never has worked and never will work, I can't seem to stop trying.

And that weird, stubborn part of me absolutely longs for this board to demonstrate the things that make Christ's Gospel different from business as usual. I want to see the sorts of things that happened in the stories that Jesus told, and the sorts of things that happened when he interacted with people, not just happening here incidentally, but woven into the very fabric of this place.

I want to see virtual word-banquets held with the door wide open and the most unlikely people possible invited in and treated like folks. I want to see the least of the least brought to the head of the table, fed and gravely consulted. I want to see a deep realization that dividing ourselves from a brother or a sister is as traumatic in its own way as losing one of our own arms or legs. I want a form of governance so rich with open communication and loving good will that it mirrors Jesus' startling claim that to love is tantamount to having Christ and Christ's Father living in communion in our very hearts. I want us to do things that are utterly foolish from a mundane perspective but absolutely typical of the startling upside-down quality of Christ's kingdom. I want to see the greatest of us being the servant of all. I want to see people offering up their coats and getting whole wardrobes back. I want to see people offering to walk and extra mile and getting carried. I want to see people turning the other cheek and getting kissed. I want people to know the difference between what belongs to Caesar and what belongs to God. I want fearlessness.

I want the Gospel...

This broke my heart (http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=40865344&postcount=120): Because Christian Forums should be about posting on a Christian Forum. It's just like any other institution - these are the rules and conditions of participation.

If (I'm sorry) christianforums.com is about posting on a Christian Forum, and that means it's just like any other institution, then what are we doing here? What have we been doing for the last 2000 years?

I hear the sound of gears turning.

Lindon Tinuviel

21st November 2007, 10:42 PM

I want fearlessness.

Now, that I can get behind!

Beastt

23rd November 2007, 06:14 AM

Who's this "we" you speak of? As long as money rolls in, there's no reason whatsoever to learn anything.
A truly excellent point and, in my opinion, dead-on. Lee obviously couldn't care less about what the members here want. I see no indication that he has any interest in Christianity. It appears to simply be a mass target for the purposes of easy advertising. If he actually cared about the members or Christianity, you might think he'd stop cowering and hiding behind his appointed Administrators and come in here and discuss this with the members -- the ones who keep this site alive. Instead, his only concern does seem to be the cash. And since that's the only way to get him to listen, that is what I would recommend.

Most of the advertisers here have EMail addresses or other ways to contact them. So do so. Lee isn't going to listen to us but I'm betting he'll listen to them. Drop them a note and let them know that the systems being adopted here are an afront to free-speech and just about every other concept important to American values and the values of every country which pursues freedom of the people. Let them know that as long as they support a site which promotes beliefs and behaviors parallel to fascism, and contrary to Christian values, your dollars will be spent elsewhere.

If he's only interested in the money (and that certainly seems to be the case), then he has set the target and that is where we must focus. If you don't believe in his dictatorial methods, stop paying him (through his advertisers), to promote them.

Beastt

23rd November 2007, 06:22 AM

After several weeks of ruminating over the changes here at Foru.ms I find myself approaching the site as if it were, more or less, a machine. I do not expect anything particular of it except that it will run as it runs. Whether or not I will eventually find myself caught in its gears remains to be seen.

The voices of the staff are becoming...distant. I wonder and worry what it might be like inside the running of this thing...this Thing designed to turn people into eyeballs looking at ads. Christiany ads.

It is what it is. If we stay, we must conform ourselves to its workings. Inside or out. Hidden or seen. There's little else left to say.

I'm sorry and sad....

I share your sadness but not your hopelessness. As long as money is his game, he's set the standards to which we must answer. I seriously doubt most of his advertisers would be pleased to learn about what he's doing here (promoting decidedly unChristian values), and they're the ones padding his pockets. Drop them an Email and let them know that you'll not be doing business with them and why. If they convince him to start listening to reason, then be true to your word and send a little business in the direction of the advertisers who convinced him to pay attention to them, and us through them.

brachah

24th December 2007, 02:10 AM

members shud be given opportunity to edit their post via a staff pm, then warning is issued. why this is not practised? this is worse than things happened here before 777.:mad: pure unfairness!

Lindon Tinuviel

24th December 2007, 03:04 AM

Is some moron going around reporting posts at random or something?

brachah

24th December 2007, 03:11 AM

Is some moron going around reporting posts at random or something?

exactly.

the only effective way to prevent random reports are making the reports open. or provide a solution that we can report the reporter. w/o a good report system, it's too early to discuss or practise warning... friendly or not, let's make cf at least a safe place.

Lindon Tinuviel

24th December 2007, 03:13 AM

Whoever's doing that crap needs to have their reporting ability removed until they grow up.

BZZZZZ... try again next year.

brachah

24th December 2007, 12:28 PM

consider this seriously: do we really have effective culture, guidelines n policies against "professional" reportholics n warningholics??

CaDan

24th December 2007, 06:42 PM

consider this seriously: do we really have effective culture, guidelines n policies against "professional" reportholics n warningholics??

No, not really.

Rep Daddy

24th December 2007, 06:45 PM

nevermind

CaDan

24th December 2007, 07:04 PM

nevermind

Pretty boring.

brachah

24th December 2007, 07:48 PM

Whoever's doing that crap needs to have their reporting ability removed until they grow up.

BZZZZZ... try again next year.
a healthy way of moderation is to ask the reporter to ignore the post or encourage communications as human beings, rather than "oh, my precious chance to warn a guy!!!". warningholics n reportholics are mothers n sons.:sick: i shud correct to cyber-warningholic n cyber-reportholics, bcz they can never do this to harm people in real life.

brachah

24th December 2007, 07:54 PM

There are posters who just love to report me for sport

:D :D :D good post!

CaDan

24th December 2007, 07:54 PM

a healthy way of moderation is to ask the reporter to ignore the post or encourage communications as human beings, rather than "oh, my precious chance to warn a guy!!!". warningholics n reportholics are mothers n sons.:sick:

Yeah, there's some of that.

One of the big problems is we (both members and staff) really don't know where "the line" is. I'm not sure whether that can even be formalized.

brachah

24th December 2007, 08:11 PM

Yeah, there's some of that.

One of the big problems is we (both members and staff) really don't know where "the line" is. I'm not sure whether that can even be formalized.

:( :sigh:
btw, anyway merry christmas to us all.

Baruch41

25th December 2007, 04:48 AM

To answer the question no the cards will not be big and they will only be seen on your profile page and only by you.

u put it on top of everything on the profile. when wl this kind of torture to the members stop on a christian forum? :sick:
i suggest u dont keep a record. if u r so delighted to keep a record, do it at the bottom of the profile. :sigh:

Baruch41

25th December 2007, 04:54 AM

now we can only discuss, not allowed to edit? this whole rule needs to be re-written, both content n format, especially the format, looking like not a rule but a good ad.

A New Dawn

25th December 2007, 12:27 PM

I agree with you except on one point. People seem to think a forum is a Christian Forum if it simply carries the name, hence your question about how long it will be before this kind of treatment of people will stop on a Christian Forum. But that's not really how it works. As long as this kind of behavior persists, it's not a Christian Forum no matter what it's called.

You can't turn a tricycle into a bus simply by calling it a bus and you can't turn a forum which subscribes to practices of intolerance, strict control, inequality, persecution and suppression of opinions into a Christian Forum simply by calling it "Christian Forums".

It's not a Christian Forum and it never will be until it returns to practicing those values Christians claim as their own and those the Bible claims were promoted by Jesus. Jesus protected the "sinners" from those who would punish them. Here those who call themselves "Christians", punish anyone with an opinion contrary to their own.

It's time for these people to face a few facts. A forum which adopts and promotes practices contrary to Christian values simply isn't a Christian Forum and those who choose to act in nonChristian manners, even if it's by the authority granted them here, aren't behaving as Christians.

There's a bit more to it than a name. Were the name to match the practices, "AntiChrist Forums" might be a bit harsh, but certainly "Nazi Forums" (in keeping with suppression of "wrong" ideas) or "Fascism Forums" would be more accurate than the now farcical "Christian Forums" mockery carried atop every page. As is, the site is a disgrace to its own name.

With so many people being completely blind to the nature of their own actions and how those actions contrast with what they proclaim as their beliefs, it's no wonder that Christianity lead to The Inquisition, The Crusades, the Salem Witch Hunts and a rather long and embarrassing list of other travesties carrying the "Christian" moniker. To the staff; you are what you do, not what you call yourself despite what you do.

It is Christian in the sense that it promotes Christian values and a safe place for young people. People can go to any secular site and act the way they want, be as rude as they want, etc., etc., but that is not the way Christ calls us to act. Christ didn't tolerate sin. He didn't tell people 'I'm OK, you're OK', He said, "Go and sin no more" and "In as much as you have done it unto the least of these, my brethren, you have done it unto me". What is wrong with asking people to act in the manner Christ wants them to act on a site bearing His name?

How would you respond to people who continually act in a manner that is not even civil, let alone Christian?

Glass*Soul

25th December 2007, 02:19 PM

It is Christian in the sense that it promotes Christian values and a safe place for young people. People can go to any secular site and act the way they want, be as rude as they want, etc., etc., but that is not the way Christ calls us to act. Christ didn't tolerate sin. He didn't tell people 'I'm OK, you're OK', He said, "Go and sin no more" and "In as much as you have done it unto the least of these, my brethren, you have done it unto me". What is wrong with asking people to act in the manner Christ wants them to act on a site bearing His name?

How would you respond to people who continually act in a manner that is not even civil, let alone Christian?

You act towards them with a startling generosity. On another board I frequent we had a member who was so objectionable in his posting at times that we all agreed he deserved to be banned. Instead, at the 12th hour, we put him on full moderation and continued working with him. He's now off full moderation and will soon be back to a clean slate. Admittedly, we were awkward to a fault in figuring out what to do, but there was a solution.

I've stepped away from the discussions of the rules for the most part these days, out of a sense of futility, but I do want to comment on the scripture fragments you've quoted.

The first fragment is from the story of the woman taken in adultery. It's in John 7:1-11. In this very familiar story, there is incontrovertible evidence against the woman who is brought to Jesus. She was caught in the very act. Yet, Jesus saves her from the punishment that the law would have allowed by appealing to her accusers' awareness of their own shortcomings. He then declines to condemn her. This is where it gets strange. He does not speak of forgiving her. He cuts off the process one step before forgiveness would be called for. He does not even condemn her. When he tells her to sin no more, we are already mysteriously deep into his new paradigm, so it would be a mistake to think he is giving her the same mundane advice we all give one another -- to stop messing up. He is challenging her to stop thinking of herself as someone who messes up. To stop thinking of herself as an adulteress, or whatever unsavory labels have been attached to her. She's walking away into a new life where one is not even condemned.

The second fragment you quoted is from one of my favorite scriptures. It's the parable of the sheep and the goats found in Matt. 25:31-46. In this story the Son of Man informs those who have caught on to his Gospel that in ministering on a very basic level to those they have seen in need -- with a cup of cold water, a little food, a friendly visit, shelter -- they have mysterious ministered to him. Mind you, they did not know this mystery was taking place when they were doing the things they were doing. They did them simply because they needed to be done. It is in this context that he says, "In as much as you have done it unto the least of these my brethren, you have done it unto me." There is no talk in this parable of misbehaving or not misbehaving. There is only talk of being generous or not being generous.

When we keep a count of wrongs, when we condemn, when we punish, when we take away privileges, when we silence those who have no power, when we literally put unsavory labels on people and force them to look at them, it would do us all good to contemplate these two stories.

I'll not lie to you. Making CF a Christian board would be a wrenching process. The Gospel is wrenching. It's dangerous. It's subversive. IT IS NOT SAFE. We're not used to it, and we hardly know how to proceed. I think we should do it anyway.

A New Dawn

25th December 2007, 02:35 PM

You act towards them with a startling generosity. On another board I frequent we had a member who was so objectionable in his posting at times that we all agreed he deserved to be banned. Instead, at the 12th hour, we put him on full moderation and continued working with him. He's now off full moderation and will soon be back to a clean slate. Admittedly, we were awkward to a fault in figuring out what to do, but there was a solution.

I've stepped away from the discussions of the rules for the most part these days, out of a sense of futility, but I do want to comment on the scripture fragments you've quoted.

The first fragment is from the story of the woman taken in adultery. It's in John 7:1-11. In this very familiar story, there is incontrovertible evidence against the woman who is brought to Jesus. She was caught in the very act. Yet, Jesus saves her from the punishment that the law would have allowed by appealing to her accusers' awareness of their own shortcomings. He then declines to condemn her. This is where it gets strange. He does not speak of forgiving her. He cuts off the process one step before forgiveness would be called for. He does not even condemn her. When he tells her to sin no more, we are already mysteriously deep into his new paradigm, so it would be a mistake to think he is giving her the same mundane advice we all give one another -- to stop messing up. He is challenging her to stop thinking of herself as someone who messes up. To stop thinking of herself as an adulteress, or whatever unsavory labels have been attached to her. She's walking away into a new life where one is not even condemned.

The second fragment you quoted is from one of my favorite scriptures. It's the parable of the sheep and the goats found in Matt. 25:31-46. In this story the Son of Man informs those who have caught on to his Gospel that in ministering on a very basic level to those they have seen in need -- with a cup of cold water, a little food, a friendly visit, shelter -- they have mysterious ministered to him. Mind you, they did not know this mystery was taking place when they were doing the things they were doing. They did them simply because they needed to be done. It is in this context that he says, "In as much as you have done it unto the least of these my brethren, you have done it unto me." There is no talk in this parable of misbehaving or not misbehaving. There is only talk of being generous or not being generous.

When we keep a count of wrongs, when we condemn, when we punish, when we take away privileges, when we silence those who have no power, when we literally put unsavory labels on people and force them to look at them, it would do us all good to contemplate these two stories.

I'll not lie to you. Making CF a Christian board would be a wrenching process. The Gospel is wrenching. It's dangerous. It's subversive. IT IS NOT SAFE. We're not used to it, and we hardly know how to proceed. I think we should do it anyway.

Most people do not have infractions credited to their name until they have been told "go and sin no more" repeatedly. It is never the first step, so to assume that they have not been treated with Christian compassion is overstepping your case.

I was a moderator on a board that used post moderating methods like you described, and it did little to nothing to alter the ways people posted. I'm glad it worked in the instance you are talking about, but that is probably the exception to the rule.

People will rebel to whichever type of moderating techniques you try (and we have run the gamut here in methods used) because the flesh is sinful. Point blank. People want to do what they want to do, but Christ calls us to be better. If this was not a board that strives to be PG in nature, then I'd say that maybe we could be less structured, but when we need to think of minds in their formative stages, it is better to err on the side of caution. (What is that common poem .......... Children learn what they live (if you get my drift.))

Back to the scriptural examples, Christ did not condemn the woman at the well, but He did tell her to stop sinning. He wanted her to live His law. It fits perfectly in this situation. And in the parable of the sheep and the goats, telling us that what we do/say to each other we are doing/saying to Him is advice to us to treat each other with respect. They are both scriptures that are meant to inspire us to be better people. ChristianForums does not even pretend to be Christ, or have the power of salvation, but it can place directives on us that have Biblical backing in their expectations.

Beastt

25th December 2007, 02:48 PM

It is Christian in the sense that it promotes Christian values and a safe place for young people.
Then I tremble for your idea of "Christian Values". The values promoted here are inequality, elitism, persecution and most of all, suppression of opinions. Are those what you consider to be Christian Values? Is that what you think Jesus was teaching?

People can go to any secular site and act the way they want, be as rude as they want, etc., etc., but that is not the way Christ calls us to act.
Jesus didn't demand people to act in any particular manner. He didn't threaten people with systems of punishment for doing nothing more than presenting an opinion in an open and civil manner. Do you not remember the post Erwin presented when he decided to invoke true Christian Values here? He pointed out that if God could forgive, there should be no reason that the governing system of the board couldn't also be forgiving. He pointed out that if God could see all people as worthy, so could the board. And despite objections from those more prone to the application of fascism, he invoked those values. Did we see people acting in any manner they chose? The answer is, "yes". But we didn't see people acting in an inappropriate manner significantly more than we had before. People were given the choice, just as Jesus gave them a choice, and they chose to act appropriately rather than being forced to act in anyone's particular idea of what is appropriate.

I've said this many times here and it has always held true; if you force people into the roles of children, they'll act like children. If you allow them to act as adults, the majority of them will do just exactly that. Jesus didn't apply the application of force for what he taught. He offered his teachings. He didn't erect walls of secrecy between himself and the masses, behind which to invoke systems of punishment against all who might decline to follow him. Those who chose to accept them were free to do so and those who chose not to accept them were equally welcome to decline. That's what Erwin instated here. That's also what Lee Dodd has taken away from the members of this board. It's now a system of enforcement and in that, it is a serious diversion from the methods proclaimed to have been those of Jesus. Who here should have the authority to suggest how another should act. Can you really do that and not be serving as judge over others? Are you the example by which all others should be measured? Is Lee? Is anyone? Is it fair to promote a system wherein those who position themselves as judges are themselves immune from the standards they enforce for others?

That's what the secrecy is all about, you know. When you first recognize that you can't act in full view of the people, it is your first indication that you are acting inappropriately. When curtains of secrecy are drawn, corruption is being purposefully plotted against the members.

Christ didn't tolerate sin. He didn't tell people 'I'm OK, you're OK', He said, "Go and sin no more" and "In as much as you have done it unto the least of these, my brethren, you have done it unto me".
Where in that do you see Jesus using force over the people to relieve them of the freedom to choose either to accept his recommendations or decline them? Sure, he said "God and sin no more". But he never said, "the next time you sin I'll eject you from this society". He never told them that if they continued to "sin", he would use any form of force against them. Jesus chose to lead by example. The board rules by force. Hitler ruled by force. Hitler promoted censorship, suppression of ideas and the eradication of any ideas contrary to his own.

It's your choice; Jesus or Hitler. Which do you choose?

What is wrong with asking people to act in the manner Christ wants them to act on a site bearing His name?
Ahhh, do you see? Do you see what you've said here? You've heard the words as they apply to Jesus but you've not digested the importance of those words. There is nothing wrong with "asking" people to act in an appropriate manner. And as Erwin demonstrated, when asked, most people will comply. When forced, most people will rebel. But when you step over that line; when you decide to enforce rather than request, you have violated the teachings of Jesus with the feigned motive of promoting his values. One cannot truly promote the values of Jesus by violating those values. That's what Christians were doing during the Inquisition. It's what they were doing during the Crusades. And unfortunately, most have learned nothing from those examples and choose to follow these bad examples rather than following Jesus.

Why is it so hard for most Christians to see that this is exactly what Gandhi was talking about when he said, "I like your Christ but I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."?

How would you respond to people who continually act in a manner that is not even civil, let alone Christian?
Do you believe it would be appropriate to "force" people to act as Muslims in order for them to discuss with Muslims? Would it be appropriate to "force" people to behave as Hindus in order to discuss with Hindus? Certainly you can ask. But when you invoke force you not only go too far, but you violate the teachings of "Christ" on a site that bears his name.

The truly sad part is that you suggest that a system of force, censorship and the suppression of ideas is a "safe" place for children. Why is that which mimics Nazi Germany your idea of a "safe" place for children? Would you prefer to have your children ruled over by an iron fist or lead by example as Jesus did? What does your child learn when he sees those who claim to be Christians ruling with a sword rather than setting an example and asking for compliance?

Lindon Tinuviel

25th December 2007, 02:59 PM

It is Christian in the sense that it promotes Christian values

Such as? Which Christian values, exactly, are promoted here in practice?

a safe place for young people.

What has that got to do with Christian values?

People can go to any secular site and act the way they want, be as rude as they want

Most secular sites I visit have Memberships who act, on their own, somewhat less rudely. While promoting those "Christian values", common courtesy seems to have been lost here.

Beastt

25th December 2007, 03:43 PM

Most people do not have infractions credited to their name until they have been told "go and sin no more" repeatedly.
By people who themselves are no less prone to "sinning". In fact, as was shown before Erwin's last changes, those placed in positions of power and ultimate authority behind walls of secrecy are often the worst of the bunch. We saw people banned inappropriately, posts and entire threads deleted without sufficient cause and threats issued merely for asking that one be provided with the details of a violation. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The staff her are flesh and blood and no less prone to corruption than anyone else. That's why their actions must not be sheltered behind impenetrable walls of secrecy and should instead be in full view of the membership. And that's why the membership should have full veto power over the staff.

It is never the first step, so to assume that they have not been treated with Christian compassion is overstepping your case.
It has been the first step in the past. And of course it didn't start that way. But tiny infractions justified by those in staff who make them lead to larger and still larger infractions. Before long, the corruption is fully seated within the power they use against the membership. And that's exactly what has happened here and indeed, in every country where government ceases to be answerable to the masses. When government begins to pull curtains of secrecy, the misapplication of force against the people is being plotted. And that's exactly what is going on here.

I'm somewhat offended that you take it upon yourself to speak for every member of the staff. You don't know every detail of what others are or aren't doing. When you do, you make speak for all. Until then, you're speaking out of place, out of turn and against the members of this board.

I was a moderator on a board that used post moderating methods like you described, and it did little to nothing to alter the ways people posted. I'm glad it worked in the instance you are talking about, but that is probably the exception to the rule.
It has worked here. Never in my 3-4 years here has there been more harmony than during the 4-months following Erwin's changes of July 7th. And since those principles have been removed the anger, the rebellion and the corruption have returned. Learn by example. Begin to understand that the iron-fisted application of rules has never been effective. Show me one law which has ever been successful in eradicating the action it prohibits.

People never learn. I've spent 26-years of my life working law enforcement and taking people's complaints. No matter what you do, someone will be unhappy and they'll seek a new law in the pursuit of that happiness. When the new laws pass, they find themselves subjected to those laws and become even less satisfied. Every law passed is a freedom lost. We need a very few simple laws which regulate carefully and with compassion. Instead we see here what we see in big government; the proliferation of laws to prevent the circumstances under which existing laws/rules are violated. Each time we step back and erect another law. In short order it becomes a violation even to act with zero harmful intent. Loosen up. Take a deep breath. Live your life and allow others to do the same. You're not God. You needn't act as though you are. You're not here to act as my judge or judge to anyone else.

If you believe in the Bible, take a good look. Take a long read. Look to the way Jesus taught and understand that teaching is not enforcing. It is an act of offering.

People will rebel to whichever type of moderating techniques you try (and we have run the gamut here in methods used) because the flesh is sinful.
And yet there is nothing but the flesh, the physical. You can wax philosophical all day long but never can you demonstrate that anything beyond the physical exists. So deal with the physical. Recognize that never will everyone act as you would choose for them to act. But most of all, understand that how others act is not, and should never be, your choice. If I shouldn't choose how you should act, then you shouldn't be trying to choose how I should act. Regulate yourself, not others.

Point blank. People want to do what they want to do, but Christ calls us to be better.
Jesus taught by example. Either follow his example or perhaps you should desist with utilizing his name in the promotion of a system that is decidedly contrary to his.

If this was not a board that strives to be PG in nature, then I'd say that maybe we could be less structured, but when we need to think of minds in their formative stages, it is better to err on the side of caution.
What do you mean when you refer to the "board"? Is the board an entity unto itself, or does it not exist without the members? I think it inappropriate and particularly unChrist-like if you're choosing to refer to the board as a reflection of your own personal desires and standards.

(What is that common poem .......... Children learn what they live (if you get my drift.))
And when they live in strict regulation and enforcement they learn strict regulation and enforcement. They forget about things like tolerance, understanding and turning the other cheek. Instead they take up the sword and hesitate not to shed the blood of another simply for acting as an individual. Is that what you wish to promote in your children? Isn't there enough blood-shed in the world without setting an enforcement standard in a community bearing the name of the Christ?

Back to the scriptural examples, Christ did not condemn the woman at the well, but He did tell her to stop sinning.
But he didn't threaten her and he didn't enforce his request. And that's really what it was. He requested that she stop sinning and he did so knowing full well that she would be free to choose. And it is that choice which he felt should be provided to anyone which you choose to take from everyone.

He wanted her to live His law.
But you're missing the substance of his law. Did he want her to comply because she feared non-compliance? Was that his goal? Or did he want her to comply because she desired to comply? There is a vast difference between offering a standard and allowing others to choose to follow that standard and hitting someone in the face with a standard they never accepted, didn't want and feel is inappropriate. It's amazing to me how often history is repeated and how little most people learn from the atrocity of that repetition. What you're suggesting not only doesn't work, it misses the entire point. If people are not complying out of voluntary will to comply, then you have accomplished nothing but the nurturing and cultivation of animosity.

It fits perfectly in this situation. And in the parable of the sheep and the goats, telling us that what we do/say to each other we are doing/saying to Him is advice to us to treat each other with respect.
There it is again. You see the words but you ignore their meaning -- "Advice". Today is Christmas. Perhaps take a few quiet moments alone. Think about what advice is and what the word suggests. Think about what it isn't. Think about how mutilated and twisted the concepts of Jesus become when you choose to demand and enforce rather than advise and allow choice.

They are both scriptures that are meant to inspire us to be better people.
Yes; to inspire. Not to force.

ChristianForums does not even pretend to be Christ, or have the power of salvation, but it can place directives on us that have Biblical backing in their expectations.
But in the Bible, they're not directives. They are what you have stated above; "advice". When you begin to enforce the Bible, you demonstrate the beginning of the Crusades and prove that you know nothing of what Jesus was attempting to do. When you step back; when you accept other people as different but equal; when you learn to present an example and know that not all will adopt it as their own, then you have begun to understand what Jesus was talking about and have begun a journey away from the hatred Christians now bring upon themselves. You were never told to enforce your values. You were told to practice them. When you begin to enforce them, you cease to practice them.

A New Dawn

25th December 2007, 03:45 PM

Such as? Which Christian values, exactly, are promoted here in practice?

Respect. Love. Respect.

What has that got to do with Christian values?

People who want their children to know and love and understand God also want their children to understand what is good. That there is a difference between the correct way to act and the wrong way to act, and that there is a penalty for acting wrong. (I do believe that Christ said "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's. He never said that we should not live in a society that is void of rules and penalties.)

Most secular sites I visit have Memberships who act, on their own, somewhat less rudely. While promoting those "Christian values", common courtesy seems to have been lost here.

I don't think it has anything to do with the goals and rules of this site. It has to do with human nature. It has to do with the size of this site and the fact that most people can go from forum to forum and be pretty much anonymous. If they get slapped on the wrist in one forum, they can move on to another where they are not known and continue their bad behavior. New forum, new mods, same bad behavior.

What I find interesting is the continued insistance that the problem is with staff and the rules instead of with the people who create the problems. If people posted responsibly, there would be no problems.

Usual disclaimer: Yes, I know that there are some staff that are less than stellar, but all of the problems of this site do not rest on those few shoulders.

Beastt

25th December 2007, 04:00 PM

Respect. Love. Respect.
When you place your standard above those of others and suggest that your standards be enforced, you're not just showing disrespect to people, but to the teachings of Jesus.

Jesus was not about enforcement. He was about offering teachings and a choice.

When you enforce his teachings as law, you violate his teachings and render them spoiled and corrupted.

Lindon Tinuviel

25th December 2007, 04:15 PM

Respect. Love. Respect.

I see neither, as a general rule.

I don't think it has anything to do with the goals and rules of this site. It has to do with human nature. It has to do with the size of this site and the fact that most people can go from forum to forum and be pretty much anonymous.

I can definitely agree with that.

If they get slapped on the wrist in one forum, they can move on to another where they are not known and continue their bad behavior. New forum, new mods, same bad behavior.

"Bad" behavior is in the eye of the beholder.

What I find interesting is the continued insistance that the problem is with staff and the rules instead of with the people who create the problems. If people posted responsibly, there would be no problems.

What I find interesting is your continued insistance that the rules are the right rules. That they're even good rules. Posting responsibly does not equate to following the rules.

Usual disclaimer: Yes, I know that there are some staff that are less than stellar, but all of the problems of this site do not rest on those few shoulders.

I don't know of anyone who says that. The problems of this site are many and varied.

Beastt

25th December 2007, 04:28 PM

Respect. Love. Respect.

People who want their children to know and love and understand God also want their children to understand what is good. That there is a difference between the correct way to act and the wrong way to act, and that there is a penalty for acting wrong. (I do believe that Christ said "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's. He never said that we should not live in a society that is void of rules and penalties.)

I don't think it has anything to do with the goals and rules of this site. It has to do with human nature. It has to do with the size of this site and the fact that most people can go from forum to forum and be pretty much anonymous. If they get slapped on the wrist in one forum, they can move on to another where they are not known and continue their bad behavior. New forum, new mods, same bad behavior.

What I find interesting is the continued insistance that the problem is with staff and the rules instead of with the people who create the problems. If people posted responsibly, there would be no problems.

Usual disclaimer: Yes, I know that there are some staff that are less than stellar, but all of the problems of this site do not rest on those few shoulders.
Erwin's last reform brought greater harmony to this site than at any other time over the past 3 to 4 years. True, there were many militant fascist-type Christians who rebelled because they want iron-fisted rule; so long as they're the ones granted the iron fist and not the recipients of that fist. But those people were the bad seeds, not the rest of the membership. Once they weeded themselves out, the board settled into true discussion instead of Spite-Reports and infractions contests.

Lee steps up, makes his changes, and within a week we were plunged back into the seething hatred promoted through force, secrecy and prejudice.

You can claim whatever you like. But you can't re-write the board's history. Perhaps you don't get the same ego-rush when you're not granted the power to slap others about and scold them as if you were their mother, but the board's health is much better when you stay in your place and allow others a place of their own as well. Equality breeds harmony. Inequality breeds hatred. You're promoting the inequality which leads to hatred, rebellion and the rejection of the values you claim to promote. When Christians practice tolerance they receive tolerance. When they practice force, they receive force. It's really not such a hard concept. As long as you practice force, what you call yourself is just a word.