Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Member Questions, Feedback & Suggestions' started by Santha, Jan 31, 2016.
Old Posting rules have been revived, please take a look here!
They will need to be revised and rewritten. Some, like #12, could be eliminated.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
Rule about image size have been removed!
I've got a lot more suggestions but it's late and I'm on my tablet. More ideas tomorrow.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
#12 was an artifact from the days of dial up.
#5, enforced, would be a big boon to participation IMHO!
This one enforcement, again IMHO, would eliminate at least 80% of two particular members posts.
The definition of "trolling" needs to be better defined. For example, "absurdities" is in the eye of the beholder. If given the job of moderator most of us would delete many of Poncho's posts, whereas Poncho would delete many of our posts.
Creating "large volumes of responses" is pretty much what a discussion board is supposed to do.
There needs to be a hard and fast rule, with penalties, for questioning someone's salvation, either directly or obliquely.
I don't know about obliquely. I have been accused of questioning someone's salvation when I had no intention of it. I think it would be easy to label someone's post as such just because someone does not like it its content as it disagrees with their view.
Here's examples of an oblique attack:
"Mr. So-and-so does not exhibit the fruits of the spirit. By their fruits you shall know them and I don't see any fruit."
"Just because you went forward at a revival meeting and prayed a prayer doesn't mean God elected you to salvation."
"If you don't believe in the total depravity of man, you can't understand the gospel at all."
No. 11 probably needs better enforcement.
Or am I the only one who finds it odd that a member with a 3 month old account complains of things "going on for far too long."
A suggestion since I had goofed on my first post when I came back here.
Please allow Christians of no denomenations to post in the Baptist board.
I was former Presbyterian, but had ended my membership there when they have been resorting to commitments and promises as if that is how we live the christian life in making ourselves good and to do good by. I rely totally on Jesus to do His good work in me and to enable me to do good even when serving Him in the ministry.. which is the truth in His words of the KJV.
People of denomenations should not be allowed to because they would bring their denomenational teaching into the "Baptist only" part of the forum, and may be subverted in their church ways to not really be open to discussing the truths in the KJV Bible.
However, since my initial goof when I had come back, I shall post in the christian only part of the forum, but you should know that not all topics in the Baptist only part of the forum is really about Baptist only.
It would be nice if Baptist's members would post all threads in christian only part of the forum when it is not exclusive to Baptists only.
Let me know when I am allowed to post in Baptist only part of the forum or if threads not exclusively Baptists are going to be moved to Christians only part of the forum or whatever.
Or open a new sub forum in Baptists only part of the forum where topics are not exclusively Baptist.
It's common sense that just because I open another thread on the same topic in the christian only part of the forum, that not all the Baptist members that are participating in that same topic in the Baptist only part of the forum will engage in the same topic in the christian only part of the forum. The loss of engagement can lead to christian losing interests in participating in this forum as a whole. IMO
Thanks for sending an e-mail to alert me to this changeover, but it looks like only the allowed size of avatars was the only change? Pardon me if I am forgetful as to how it was before to notice any other changes.
I'm tired of putting up with the blatant hypocrisy on this board anyway. So it wouldn't hurt my feelings to get banned.
If this really were Baptist Borg, we would.
Perhaps not eliminated, but better defined. For example, there are topics I like to post in both the Baptist Board as well as in the Other Denominations Forum. Other denominations cannot participate in the Baptist Board, and some Baptists do not frequent the OD board, so it makes sense for both groups to be able to participate in a thread that crosses the aisles.
The rule is a good one as a whole because posting the same thread in every board is unnecessary.
Now Poncho, sit down, take a breath, and don't let this shock you, but...I would agree in large part (though I am not specifically referring to any particular member).
For the Staff/Moderators, here is a suggestion that could help: on one forum there was a Moderator who would show up in just about every thread and post the same statement:
Address the post and not the Poster!
It is a simple rule that, if enforced, would cut down on the contention that arises in the discussions.
If the membership gets into the habit of doing this, much of the personal animosity would be lessened, and, we might see a growth in regards to Doctrinal Issues in the membership.
And for all of us, we need to keep in mind that we are dealing with the most volatile issue mankind has before him: religious belief. This is something that most of us who come here hold dear, and that is why we are here, because our views are important to us. And even for some, Political beliefs are dear, and this too is a sensitive area. So we should understand we need thick skin and a healthy dose of grace, lol, and expect that things are going to be said that we will find insulting. Sometimes it's intentional, but sometimes it's not, it's a matter of, first, our attitude toward our antagonist places everything they say in an adversarial context, and secondly we are all prone to fail at times in relationship with others.
If you go to a forum to discuss God, expect to run into someone who thinks you are wrong about something, and a few that think you are wrong about...everything. lol
Since this is personalized to me I feel I must respond to it.
Like his conspiracy theories I see that Poncho is still clinging to this fiction that I made personal attacks on him "from behind the cover of the Ignore List". You claimed I was sniping you. You said it was a cowardly act. (This idea that writing something on a public forum is sniping is hilarious, BTW, as is the idea that an Ignore List is some sort of cover.)
You never reposted several quotes showing me attacking you because I didn't do it. I have repeatedly IMPLORED you to please post this material but you never have. It doesn't exist.
The fact is, you don't know when you were on my Ignore List or when you weren't. For the umpteenth time, yes, you have frequently been on (and off) my Ignore List. I don't respond to people that are on the List so if I responded to you, you weren't on it at the time.
Let it go...