Posted on 02/02/2004 6:43:03 AM PST by Religion Moderator
I have some announcements and observations pertinent to everyone who frequents the Religion Forum.
First, I have registered the screen name "Religion Mod" in order to make it easier to contact me via FReepmail. This should satisfy some your concerns regarding just who, exactly, is reading and responding to your messages directed to me.
Like all good clouds, however, this one has more than a silver lining. As you know, I simply cannot be here 24/7; therefore, if you send me a FReepmail during a time I'm not present on the forum, it will take time for me to read and respond. Consequently, if you have a concern that needs immediate response, please send it, as before, to either the Admin Moderator or the Sidebar Moderator. If it's a concern that is not pressing, send it to the Religion Mod, and I will respond eventually.
A word about Abuse Reports in general. They are the fastest route to a moderator, period. Abuse Reports are always read before FReepmail, and during periods of heavy traffic on the forum it can be hours before anyone has the time to check their mailbox.
My second announcement has to do with a daily thread I will begin posting later today. I have decided to do this in response to a general situation I perceive to be on-going (about which, more later). This daily thread will be titled "Daily Reflections with Oswald Chambers", one of those "dead white males" with whose work some of you are surely familiar.
How long I post this daily thread will depend entirely on how it's received: forever, if it receives wide acclaim; not very long at all, if it turns out to be a dud. The important thing to note about this daily thread is that it will be there for self-examination and reflection about one's relationship with God - it will not be about any one faith tradition, even though it comes from an author who was very much associated with a particular faith tradition. I am hopeful that this thread can be utilized and enjoyed without the strife between denominations, sects and dogma which seems to be rampant throughout the Religion Forum. It is my intent to post this thread only; I do not anticipate taking part in any ensuing discussion.
Now, an observation about current Abuse Reports. Quite frankly, many of them are difficult or impossible to understand, especially considering the particular post they are complaining about. I believe the reason for this difficulty is because some of you have been in a particular running battle with a specific poster(s) for so long that you can't submit an Abuse Report without coloring it with past abuses or transgressions, either real or perceived. Naturally, such Abuse Reports are almost impossible to honor, and consequently, they get ignored based on the rule "if you don't know the right thing to do, better to do nothing than do the wrong thing and make things worse".
When submitting Abuse Reports please make them specific to the post in question, remembering the rules of the forum, "no profanity, no personal attacks, etc, etc."
A second observation about Abuse Reports can only be described by suggesting that some of you simply don't think before typing or hitting the "send" button. If your request is included in the same sentence in which you insult or flame the moderator, about the best you can expect is to be ignored. Come on, folks. To put it in the context of the Religion Forum, would you go to God in prayer and ask for a blessing while cussing Him out for something else? Mods ain't gods, and we react to insults, flames and name-calling about the same way all the rest of you do - in a negative way, sometimes in a very negative way.
The last observation I want to raise today may very well be under the category of "Is it just me?". We are receiving numerous Abuse Reports concerning "slurs and slanders" against the complainant's faith tradition. Remember, please, the rule is "no personal attacks".
As a member of a particular faith tradition myself I've listened to many such slurs and slanders; as a general rule of mine they are usually like water off a duck's back. IOW, I seldom take them personally. If the "scandalous" comment has an element of truth to it - and if it refers to a particular person in my faith tradition and can't be denied because, after all, it did happen, I try to point out that every human institution has its "bad apples", and go on about my business. If it's a broad brush comment meant to include everyone in my faith tradition, I try to point out how it doesn't apply to me and many others I know, and again, go on about my business. It has been my experience that most, if not all, such slurs and slanders can either be refuted or, on occasion, admitted as historical fact. Beyond that they have no real effect on my life.
In short, unless a "slurs and slanders" Abuse Report can be seen to refer to a truly egregiously nasty comment that offends almost anyone who reads it, not much will be done about it. If, however, a comment is judged by me to be posted for the purpose of initiating a flame war, I will remove it. Such judgment is solely mine in each case.
As a final comment, it appears to me that if everyone would try to live according to Paul's instructions about dealing with "the weaker brother", things would be a whole lot more cordial around here.
May God bless you all as you live out this day.
You raise a good point. I think, when faced with a statement such as "all Catholics are blah blah blah" or "all Protestants are such and such" many people perceive that as meaning that they, personally, are "blah blah blah" or "such and such." Religion is such an intensely personal thing, that a lot of people have problems differentiating.
Sorry to step on your toes, RM, but as you know moderators do most of their work from their regular own accounts, and it is not uncommon for those accounts' mail to go unchecked for hours, if not days.
Anything requiring fast action must be handled through the Abuse Reporting System.
For good reason usually, insofar as the deduction on offer is tolerably obvious to all. "All left-handed people are pedophiles. You are left-handed. Therefore...", where omitting the "therefore" part injects a bit of plausible deniability, despite the fact that the conclusion the reader is supposed to draw is plain as day.
I've been lurking and following this discussion off and on for some time now, and while I don't envy the job the moderators have allotted themselves, I don't know if a workable solution is allowing group slurs in place of personal slurs, and then having the posters of such slurs essentially invite the reader to draw the obvious conclusion about particular members of that group. Not that I have a better answer, mind you - I think it's not going to be much fun regardless of the rules adopted...
I think I've already addressed this, but it never hurts to repeat policy. First of all, much "disruption", intended or otherwise, depends very much on the response it gets. A "disrupting" remark which is ignored by everyone as if it were never made, will most likely be ignored by me as well. Also, as I said once before, oftentimes it's almost impossible to find a pair of "clean hands" in an on-going flame war. Initially, and for the forseeable future, when off-topic posts are brought to my attention, I will post a "stay on thread topic" warning to the poster. Action after that will depend on response(s) to the warning.
What do you consider to be "trollish behavior."
If I believe a comment was posted solely to initiate a flame war, it will be pulled. However, that judgment has to remain mine alone.
I reserve the right to change, modify or delete any rule that isn't working. Of course, if a rule isn't working for just one poster or group of posters, while working just fine for everyone else, then I reserve the right to employ a different set of rules.
I'm hopefull.
And by the way, I'm always willing to listen to new ideas, or new ways of doing something. I may not implement a new way, but I'm always willing to hear about it. I used to believe I knew all the best ways of things, but then I grew up. :)
"There is nothing easier than getting saved, because it is solely God’s sovereign work—"Look to Me, and be saved . . ." ( Isaiah 45:22 ). Our Lord never requires the same conditions for discipleship that he requires for salvation. We are condemned to salvation through the Cross of Christ. But discipleship has an option with it-"If anyone . . ." ( Luke 14:26 )."Jboot runs for the bunker, mortar fire at his heels...
Actually, we do have a method which eventually places a "frivolous" reporter of abuses on "ignore". Almost no one takes the hint, however.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.