Originally Posted by Guy (Post 51581)

I have been a part of FCF and its various permutations.
One of the great strengths of FCF were the articles that were presented monthly. Much of the discussion flowed from the articles.
It is also worthy of note that many of the "simpleton" threads that pop up here would never have been tolerated. That being said there were some epic battles waged on FCF, but waged within bounds.
FCF depended on the personality of its founder for much of its success. With his passing some of what made FCF successful went AWOL.
Finally, the big question is how sustainable a forum is hashing over the same old thing again and again. This even became an issue on FCF.
Finally, hate it or love it, Doubtful Thomas was a must read each month. Kind of like a car wreck, you just couldn't help looking.

Originally Posted by Guy (Post 51581)

I have been a part of FCF and its various permutations.
One of the great strengths of FCF were the articles that were presented monthly. Much of the discussion flowed from the articles.
It is also worthy of note that many of the "simpleton" threads that pop up here would never have been tolerated. That being said there were some epic battles waged on FCF, but waged within bounds.
FCF depended on the personality of its founder for much of its success. With his passing some of what made FCF successful went AWOL.
Finally, the big question is how sustainable a forum is hashing over the same old thing again and again. This even became an issue on FCF.
Finally, hate it or love it, Doubtful Thomas was a must read each month. Kind of like a car wreck, you just couldn't help looking.

Originally Posted by Newman (Post 51597)

I am wondering (not sure) were there even threads that were unrelated to the articles initially? And if they were; were they wiped out each month so that only the article threads and those threads over a certain number of posts were archived? Or am I totally mixed up? :nah

Originally Posted by freeatlast (Post 51604)

Newman: I was just re reading some of your 5 articles refuting Ruth Reider that were in the archives on FCF. Great stuff!

Originally Posted by Newman (Post 51597)

I am wondering (not sure) were there even threads that were unrelated to the articles initially? And if they were; were they wiped out each month so that only the article threads and those threads over a certain number of posts were archived? Or am I totally mixed up? :nah

Originally Posted by Guy (Post 51599)

I had some huge battles with WWOD and the Bishop from Kentucky. Those were the days!
I'd even take Thad ahead of these mindless "I hate the UPC - aren't I cute?" threads.

Originally Posted by tv1a (Post 51630)

I say all that to say this. The best way to honor JY's vision is not to carry on his vision, but to build upon his vision. We would honor his memory not by trying to make a copycat of his forum but building on the great foundation he established for "apostolic" discussion.

Originally Posted by Just a Shepherd (Post 51516)

I haven't read this whole thread but I will attempt an answer from my perspective. I was the 83rd member to sign up on Faithchild Forum, so I was around almost from the beginning. I primarily came there to defend the uncut hair doctrine that was being written against by Newman.

One difference that I see is there were articles written that people were discussing and it made it easier to stick with the topic at hand. Many times I quoted directly from the articles and challenged the author to defend her position with scripture. It was a very mind sharpening exercise.

The second difference is that -like it or not- Jim and Mike Flemming ran a tight ship with regard to anyone who was seen as attacking another poster for any reason. I know, I was banned 3 times - the first by JHY himself. I wish I still had the e-mail he sent me. He clearly stated that the forum was for the discussion of ideas not personalities. When I compare the things I said to get banned with what posters get away with here and at the nFCF the difference is dramatic.

Jim wanted a place for good discussion of doctrine and ideas, but not a place for people who just wanted to take cheap shots at people they would otherwise have no access to. That's what many of these other forums have in common. They provide an opportunity for the walking wounded to be heard, and often it takes the form of immature insults and outright mockery - something that was not allowed on Jim's watch. I know, I learned the hard way.