The Conservative Apostolic Forum

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

This is very true, but some issues need to be hashed out. This particular issue is all over CAF and now Wordshare with only one side of the story represented. It would have been great to see AFF be the one place where "real" DISCUSSION could have occured.

I understand why that could not be.

It might have been the one place for that...the problem is it started to look like a rallying point for the "tear down the old regime" mentality than for constructive and introspective discussion.

Perhaps we can have a forum where only two members or 4 members that are actually members of the same group in question discuss it without outside interference?

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

It might have been the one place for that...the problem is it started to look like a rallying point for the "tear down the old regime" mentality than for constructive and introspective discussion.

Perhaps we can have a forum where only two members or 4 members that are actually members of the same group in question discuss it without outside interference?

Now that's an idea.

[Praxeas]

Or maybe have what we wanted to have at NFCF....a debate forum with a limited time or amount of posts to make a point and counter point.

The reason for limit is then each person has to weigh their words carefully and not waste them with insults etc etc

[Tina]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Or maybe have what we wanted to have at NFCF....a debate forum with a limited time or amount of posts to make a point and counter point.

The reason for limit is then each person has to weigh their words carefully and not waste them with insults etc etc

I like that idea...

[Nahum]

I think all of these ideas are great ones.

A debate with true moderators.

Maybe lock the thread until after the first two position posts have been made.
You could have each debator pm his rebuttal to admin to post.

Then allow a limited amount of posters from each end coment for a few minutes.

[Felicity]

Originally Posted by Tina

The problems I've seen with posters jumping in to "defend" other posters is that the people entirely lose focus of the ISSUE at hand and it degenerates into nothing more than a US -VS- THEM thread... which ends up locked because we don't have time to do cleanup required from everyone "taking sides" and attacking each other.

I agree and was thinking about making this point myself. Really dislike the" Us vs Them" thing.
Some people just seem to want to polarize and pull people into that kind of dynamic.

I know that cliques form and you tend to gravitate toward some people and not with others. This is just the way it is -- this is the way it is in real life but in virtual life as well ........ and this is understandable, but I don't like it when people intentionally group into "sides" and "blocs". It makes things seem very uncomfortable. That's my opinion anyhow.

Maybe it's unpreventable. Don't know.

[Praxeas]

which is one reason why a thread where only 2 or 4 members can add comments is valuable. You always get these people who just want to stoke the flames rather than have a meaningful dialogue

[Monkeyman]

Originally Posted by Thad

The District Supt of kansas Owns it
not sure if we can say his name ?

it's not only for UPC preachers. there are independants on there too


I have heard that if you disagree on anything there you will be immediatley devoured. It's not really a debate forum say between libs and cons. everyone there is suppose to be a con.

You lost me at "Kansas"...he he

[Tina]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

which is one reason why a thread where only 2 or 4 members can add comments is valuable. You always get these people who just want to stoke the flames rather than have a meaningful dialogue

On those types of debate threads, it's always a possibility to let outside members send questions they'd like to see answered to the moderator/admin who is moderating the debate by PM. The moderator could approve or not approve the questions --depending if it would add substance to or take away from the debate at hand. The moderator could add the comment or question to the thread.. and let the original people involved in the debate respond to it.

Just my rambling thoughts....

Originally Posted by rgcraig

Would you care to explain the metamorphosis that you have observed?

Until a day or so ago, I've never posted on this forum. I have posted some on GNC that has some rigid restrictions. I was told that this forum was a place of open discussion that good men/women with fair minds and charitable dispositions might post freely those thoughts and concerns that interest them without such tight restrictions not seen on GNC. It seemed that was true when I first started lurking here from time to time shortly after the forum was launched. Since then, I've seen the ever increasing intolerance of what can be discussed, two or three recent notable examples noted. This is disappointing to me.

Any topic, discussion or forum that can't stand the light of day smacks of deceit if not outright dishonesty, regardless of how clothed in piety that it might appear. This is my firm, charitable and honest opinion formed by much experience. Civility, respect and honesty should be the rule, born of love and longsuffering. There is not a topic or discussion that I would restrict myself from, or engage, so long as those priciples are observed. Anyway, its your ball park and I am sure that you all will decide who can and will play here. I had hoped to enjoy fair exchange with like minded men and women.

Just my opinion. Did I break a rule by saying this? Hope not.