LOL!
Posted on 05/14/2008 9:06:42 AM PDT by Religion Moderator
In late April, markomalley and gamecock made a trial run at a “respectful dialog” category for threads on the Religion Forum. The trial failed due to the inability of the posters to agree on what is or is not “respectful.” Then in early May, several other posters appealed for the elimination of posts which seek to tear down other poster’s beliefs (iconoclasm.)
Meanwhile, the situation on the Religion Forum has been exacerbated by posters on the News/Activism forum inadvertently being exposed to religious debate as a result of choosing the “everything” option on browse instead of the “News/Activism” option.
In response to the pleas for a “respectful dialog” and/or the elimination of “iconoclasm” (attacks on other people’s beliefs) – I’m opening the floor for trial postings of a new type of semi-open thread which we shall call “ecumenic.”
Unlike the caucus threads, any poster could reply to an ecumenic thread. And the article on which an ecumenic thread is based could include contrasts and challenges of other beliefs. However, on the ecumenic thread, the poster must not argue against any other beliefs. He can only argue for what he believes – or ask questions.
While we test this new type of thread, be sure to tag every article so that posters will know when to avoid a thread. The tags during this trial run are “prayer” “devotional” “caucus” “ecumenic” or “open.”
Devotional threads are closed to debate of any kind.
Caucus threads are closed to any poster who is not a member of the caucus. If it says “Catholic Caucus” and you are not Catholic, do not post to the thread. However, if the poster of the caucus welcomes you, I will not boot you from the thread.
Ecumenic threads in this trial run are closed to all “anti” arguments. Posters who try to tear down other’s beliefs – or use subterfuge to accomplish the same goal – are the disrupters on ecumenic threads and will be booted from the thread and/or suspended.
Open threads are a town square – posters may argue for or against beliefs of any kind. They may tear down other's beliefs. They may ridicule, similar to the Smoky Backroom with the exception that a poster must never “make it personal.” Reading minds and attributing motives are forms of “making it personal.” Thin-skinned posters will be booted from “open” threads because in the town square, they are the disrupters.
When you see a post which is inappropriate for an ecumenic thread, ping me. Do not bother the Admin Moderators with an abuse report unless the situation requires immediate attention.
The explanation would have had little import, impact or usefulness without the satire it referred to.
And, the grammar etc. communicates quite effectively enough to those for whom it’s most targeted. I’m happy enough with that.
I’m not trying to cater to obsessive compulsive grammarians.
nor really any other obcoms being a recovering obcom myself.
So this is an open thread, and not an ecumenic thread?
Yes. That was stated quite explicitly by the RM. I forget what post #.
The satire was a distraction from your point, which was more clearly expressed in your second post.
I don’t know what it is about the satire . . . but it tends to be my densest, content rich writing with the most impact.
And those are the main reasons I use it and feel so compelled to use it.
It really isn’t to upset anyone. It’s to communicate meaning,import, substance. And, by all acounts, including the wailing and whining . . . it does that quite well.
By His Grace, of course.
I guess this is another area where we’ll just have to differ.
I do appreciate your input and will continue to prayerfully ponder it as I do all inputs.
Blessings,
Wasteing effort on the former give tacit acceptance to the latter.
That's sad. However, I do enjoy satire when it is used cleverly.
There is a lot of that going on.
I suppose satire is OK, if one knows how to use it properly. Otherwise.........
And there aren't very many that use it effectively.
LOLOL!
RE: your post #334,
‘If you wish to post an “open” Religion Forum thread, put the phrase “[Open]” in the title.’
= = =
If a thread is started and there isn’t a designator in the title, what kind of thread will it be considered to be?
Thanks for all of your diligent work!
Joya
"If a thread is started and there isn’t a designator in the title, what kind of thread will it be considered to be?" [excerpt]
The default designation is “open.”
LOL!
NET: Well, that’s just fine. And good on ya! Now here on FR you are more than welcome to start up your own threads to do that.
Just not hop on ours!
I see. No preaching of the Gospel by grace through faith permitted on "your" threads.
Got it.
Sheesh take the fun out of everything.
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.