Your posts

[Genesis1315]

I have received 5,6,102 reported post threads in the past week. Here is the bottom line. Get in line now! The RD forums will be closed until Saturday night, 11/26/05. Take this time to re-read the ToS, Bible etc and remember how you are to act and behave on these forums.

Genesis1315

 

[Macattak1]

I have received 5,6,102 reported post threads in the past week. Here is the bottom line. Get in line now! The RD forums will be closed until Saturday night, 11/26/05. Take this time to re-read the ToS, Bible etc and remember how you are to act and behave on these forums.

Genesis1315

What do people report?
Why are people reporting so much?
Why are people judging so much?
What are people affraid of?
Do people report or do they try to correct first?
Do people have to be the most super best Christian to remain posters here?
What happened to serious discussion where people have to leave their pride and ego at the door and not take offense just because it is offered?
If there is only milk to eat here and only milk eaters then I can somewhat understand.
But if Bread and Meat are served here some people will have to teach and others learn. Some will be proven wrong though their ego refuses it. Some will find that they believe in what they Think while others will show them what God says.

True thourough discussion breaks some eggs and brusis some egos.

Peace.

 

[Genesis1315]

While I can answer the first question, out of respect for privacy I won't. No one need to be a super anything. We do need to remember that we all need to treat others with respect.

If I had answers to the other questions, RD would not be fully moderated right now.

As much as I have thought about this over the past month, I really do think it boils down to respect. Respect for others, respect for self and respect for leadership.

Gen

 

[Dark Virtue]

I'm going to back up Mac here and ask that you give us some idea of what the reports are.

Without telling us who sent the report, I don't see why that would breach anyone's privacy.

As I have said from the start, without knowing what the problems were, how are we to mold our future actions?

Also, would you mind editing this number: 5,6,102

Is that 56,000 reported threads in one week?!?

 

[Wayman]

i'm not exactly sure what point macattack was trying to make, but what i take from it is...


1. people are getting their feelings hurt over a post they don't like
2. only spiritual milk is encouraged here, because whenever any spiritual meat is offered it gets treated like arrogance. even though the person offering up spiritual meat and bread, the person/people ('authority figure'?) get their egos bruised because it's not what they believe or think
3. people need to get over themselves

 

[Genesis1315]

Here it is....pretty much straight and to the point since I have been posting this and IM'ing this since I locked RD and no one has paid attention

1. Name Calling
2. Personal attacks
3. Complete Disrespect for me and my position here
4. Personal attacks on me
5. Repeated going off topic
6. Shouting in posts, adding emphasis when it is NOT NEEDED
7. Being completely, totally and in all ways disrepectful to members of the forums
8. Violating the ToS
9. Failing to take instruction or correction when it is repeatedly given
10. (for Christians) Acting in a manner that is unbecoming of the faith
11. Being rude
12. Failing to discuss topics in a civilized manner
13. Not walking away from a topic when it gets heated, but rather fanning the flames
14. Posting attacks (ie non constructive criticism) in other forums where I may or may not have access


This is all I can think of at this time. I do not mind discussing these things here, but I am not going to go through a case-by-case example on all of these. In addition, I am not here to debate the validity of the reason. I would like to see solutions to the problem.

To Clarify - I also do not lock threads because I disagree with them. I lock them because of repeated rule violations or the inappropriate nature of the threads. Please note - DV's thread about giving him $1000 is still open, regardless of my feelings on it.

Gen

 

[Wayman]

it just appears to me that this forum sorta goes like this.....

mod - "this personally offends me so i'm going to take it way too seriously and lock the thread"

being a good moderator means being a moderator.

-------mod·er·a·tor
n.

1. One that moderates, as:
1. One that arbitrates or mediates.
2. One who presides over a meeting, forum, or debate.
-------
mediate
v. tr.

1. To resolve or settle (differences) by working with all the conflicting parties: mediate a labor-management dispute.
2. To bring about (a settlement, for example) by working with all the conflicting parties.
3. To effect or convey as an intermediate agent or mechanism.
-------

i don't see anything here about personal feelings of a moderator. i think you're suppose to be neutral; relatively removed from the topic and subject... mediate even originates from a word meaning middle, neutral, central.

if you can't remain neutral while moderating, perhaps a new area of helping should be found for you?

 

[Wayman]

also...

why is it so wrong for people to get into heated and spirited debate and discussion?

if something doesn't burn down (ego,pride?), then good things cannot grow in its place.

 

[Genesis1315]

it just appears to me that this forum sorta goes like this.....

mod - "this personally offends me so i'm going to take it way too seriously and lock the thread"

If this were the case.....ummm how do I say this.... RD would have been closed a long time ago. Personally, I am offended by a lot of the repsonses here. Not they are attacks against me directly but against the One whom I love dearly. But, the threads do remain open.

It really amazes me that people think I am being petty. Wow. I enforce the rules and ToS and I am petty. hmmm, going to have to think on that one....

Now, the list I provided is not the Gospel according to Gen. Most of the offenses really could be lumped together as ToS violations, but in the interest of clarity, I thought listing them out would be best. While I was a part of making the rules for CGA, I was not the only one and ultimately Tek approved them.

why is it so wrong for people to get into heated and spirited debate and discussion?

if something doesn't burn down (ego,pride?), then good things cannot grow in its place.

again, let me reiterate, the reason that spirited debate is not freely occuring here is because it could not be completed in a way that did not violate the ToS (more times than not)

if you can't remain neutral while moderating, perhaps a new area of helping should be found for you?

Wayman - you are pretty new here. Please do not make presumptions like this at this time. This is also to others here that would think the same things. If I must be honest, I actually give more leniency to non-Christians than I do to fellow believers. The bar is much higher for those who have accepted Christ (regarding behaviour)

Right now though, everyone needs to follow the rules.

To those who are going to respond to my posts, please read through everything thoroughly. I have repeated myself many many times over the past week and would like for this productive conversation to move forward.

Gen

 

[Wayman]

"give preference to the brethren..." ---genesis, that last comment you made about being more lenient to non-Christians sort of frightened me.


in my humble opinion...you're already doing to me what has appeared to happen to others here...i don't agree with everything that's going on here, and i'm expressing that...but i'm being told not to be presumptuous...also, i'm not new here. i'm new posting here, yes, but i've trolled these forums for quite some time.

also, the Terms of Service here seem to be held too highly... it's not the Word of God...maybe the focus should be more on what the Bible says about actions as opposed to some rules listed by a group of humans?

sure, they might have been written with good intentions, but that's irrelevent if they're not effective... thus i reitterate...refocus on the Word, let it lead discernment.



please don't ban me from these forums right after i started posting... i've refrained for the reason that banning here seems to be prevalent against those with differing opinions....

can't we just share our thoughts freely?

 

[Dark Virtue]

Here it is....pretty much straight and to the point since I have been posting this and IM'ing this since I locked RD and no one has paid attention

1. Name Calling
2. Personal attacks
3. Complete Disrespect for me and my position here
4. Personal attacks on me
5. Repeated going off topic
6. Shouting in posts, adding emphasis when it is NOT NEEDED
7. Being completely, totally and in all ways disrepectful to members of the forums
8. Violating the ToS
9. Failing to take instruction or correction when it is repeatedly given
10. (for Christians) Acting in a manner that is unbecoming of the faith
11. Being rude
12. Failing to discuss topics in a civilized manner
13. Not walking away from a topic when it gets heated, but rather fanning the flames
14. Posting attacks (ie non constructive criticism) in other forums where I may or may not have access


This is all I can think of at this time. I do not mind discussing these things here, but I am not going to go through a case-by-case example on all of these. In addition, I am not here to debate the validity of the reason. I would like to see solutions to the problem.

To Clarify - I also do not lock threads because I disagree with them. I lock them because of repeated rule violations or the inappropriate nature of the threads. Please note - DV's thread about giving him $1000 is still open, regardless of my feelings on it.

Gen

Thanks Gen, I appreciate the info.

I only have a comment on your first item, since I was banned for it (although I don't know who it was that banned me-this would also be a nice bit of info to know). I see name calling as referring to someone in a petty manner, verbal abuse, something insulting. I referred to someone as a bigot. Considering the person, his actions and the thread, I don't see how this could be construed as name calling. Bigot was a very accurate description. Back to my point, without knowing who banned me, it was impossible to plead my case.

And again, thanks for the information and for leaving this thread open to discuss the problems at hand.

 

[Genesis1315]

"give preference to the brethren..." ---genesis, that last comment you made about being more lenient to non-Christians sort of frightened me.

It would not be fair to non-Christians to hold them to Christian standards.

i'm new posting here, yes, but i've trolled these forums for quite some time.

Your post count is 4 and your join date is Dec 2005. The facts are... you are new to the forums.

The ToS is as the ToS is. It really is not that strict, but if one person breaks the rules, then there are consequences.

I will not ban you, it is your behaviour and choices that will lead to that action if needed, as has always been the case

 

[Didasko]

I've gotta stand up for Gen here guys. I for one appreciate the time Gen volunteers to moderate this forum. We do get off topic way too often and can sometimes go overboard in the way we treat eachother.

I really don't see how Gen could be much clearer on the public forums about what the problem is.

A quick PM would be nice when we do something wrong and I would guess that does happen, but that also adds to Gens already busy work load.

 

[Wayman]

i think you misunderstood me........

we're supposed to give preference to Christians. in other words, they are to be treated with "preference" above non-christians...

hence, i think it's wrong to, for example, automatically ban a christian for an undesired response but only give a non-christian a warning.

we're supposed to love our brothers and sisters, not abuse them

 

[Didasko]

please don't ban me from these forums right after i started posting... i've refrained for the reason that banning here seems to be prevalent against those with differing opinions....

Not sure where your coming from here Wayman. This hardly ever happens. And it has never been due to 'differing opinions'. Are you here for serious discussion or to stir the pot?

 

[Wayman]

if a mod puts a thread back on track because it has scampered off onto some unrelated subject, fine, but if a topic is progressing fine still relating to the original topic, why should one of them be stopped for having an opposing opinion?

 

[Genesis1315]

In the interest of my post count, I am going to respond to everyone here...

DV

Bigot was a very accurate description. Back to my point, without knowing who banned me, it was impossible to plead my case.

Name calling is name calling. I am not sure who banned you. It may have been me, it may not have been me. I do send a PM when I ban someone so if you did not receive anything from me...

To clarify, when I ban someone, I take away posting priviledges. If PM's aren't available, then I will send an email stating what is going on. So you are aware, I have about 45 minutes of documentation to complete when I ban or remove posting priviledges. It is quite a bit, so please keep in mind, I use this as a last resort.

Didasko

We do get off topic way too often and can sometimes go overboard in the way we treat eachother.

If more people would realize this, the forums would not be fully moderated right now. Thank you for stepping up on this

Wayman

If you want to debate this out, please take it to PM

Gen

 

[Genesis1315]

if a mod puts a thread back on track because it has scampered off onto some unrelated subject, fine, but if a topic is progressing fine still relating to the original topic, why should one of them be stopped for having an opposing opinion?

Please use caution on this. Wayman, you are new here. As I have said before, this is not the truth.

Gen

 

[Dark Virtue]

Name calling is name calling. I am not sure who banned you. It may have been me, it may not have been me. I do send a PM when I ban someone so if you did not receive anything from me...

Understood, and I totally agree. I disagree, however, with the term "bigot" being considered namecalling. If you could tell me why you think it is, I would appreciate it.

Would I call someone else a bigot on this forum? No, because I now know it is unacceptable. Had I known that before, I would not have done it.

To clarify, when I ban someone, I take away posting priviledges. If PM's aren't available, then I will send an email stating what is going on. So you are aware, I have about 45 minutes of documentation to complete when I ban or remove posting priviledges. It is quite a bit, so please keep in mind, I use this as a last resort.

Again, understood. I'm not sure how this all works, but it would be nice to have a PM sitting in my box to let me know I was banned and who did so without having to wonder why. I'm not exactly in the habit of getting banned so it was a bit confusing and disconcerting.

I'm going to also agree with Wayman, but for very different reasons.

As a NonChristian, please do NOT hold me to a different standard. I am here, on a Christian board, as a guest. The rules shouldn't change for me. Exactly what Christian standards are you afraid I can't meet? Besides, I don't ever remember getting any preferential treatment

 

[Eon]

Can I add my 2c in support of Gen here? I personally believe that the ToS is ridiculously strict on this board and that this limits the expression of ideas and stifles debate - I'd rather see it relaxed so that people feel they can express themselves, and a warning provided to those who get personally offended that this might not be the forum for them.

BUT

Gen really has only 2 choices - enforce the rules or neglect enforcing them. I think she does a pretty good line balance in general. While she might exercise leniency from time to time, everyone knows that the law is observed in here.

DV - I have a rule in debate I call "Play the ball, not the man." - how I would have handled your Bigotry situation would have been to tell the guy that his behaviour was biggoted, but not call he himself a bigot. By suggesting someone's behaviour is at fault, you set up a discussion wherein that behaviour can be modified without criticising the person himself unduly. If you call him a bigot you're saying that he is essentially at fault in himself as a person - there's not many places to go from there!