Some changes afoot

[Nicholas Amsdorf]

Oh, by the way, I think prunes are a wonderful idea, for it does seem that often these topics get quite clogged up, bogged down, and otherwise woefully restricted, if not all stopped up by irrelevant comments.

So, I'm with Austin: prunes are the way to go.

 

Seriously: the way to improve this forum is actually to moderate it and if that means taking on more moderators to help, go for it.

[George Erdner]

If there is to be a movement on the part of the moderators to discourage off-topic posts, shouldn't that extend to gratuitous corrections of  typographical errors, even if done in a light-hearted manner? And shouldn't it also be extended to "welcome back" or other personal greeting posts?

On one forum that I participated in, there was a specific rule against congratulatory posts that were merely expressions of praise for something being well-said, or nothing more than a "Me, too." expression of agreement. Is that the kind of off-topic post that would be discouraged for the sake of saving space?

[kls]

If there is to be a movement on the part of the moderators to discourage off-topic posts, shouldn't that extend to gratuitous corrections of  typographical errors, even if done in a light-hearted manner? And shouldn't it also be extended to "welcome back" or other personal greeting posts?

On one forum that I participated in, there was a specific rule against congratulatory posts that were merely expressions of praise for something being well-said, or nothing more than a "Me, too." expression of agreement. Is that the kind of off-topic post that would be discouraged for the sake of saving space?

Is this NOT a Christian forum?  If I've somehow come to this mistaken understanding, please let me know now.  Thanks.

[George Erdner]

If there is to be a movement on the part of the moderators to discourage off-topic posts, shouldn't that extend to gratuitous corrections of  typographical errors, even if done in a light-hearted manner? And shouldn't it also be extended to "welcome back" or other personal greeting posts?

On one forum that I participated in, there was a specific rule against congratulatory posts that were merely expressions of praise for something being well-said, or nothing more than a "Me, too." expression of agreement. Is that the kind of off-topic post that would be discouraged for the sake of saving space?

Is this NOT a Christian forum?  If I've somehow come to this mistaken understanding, please let me know now.  Thanks.

You've totally confused and befuddled me. What does what I posted have to do with Christianity?

[kls]

And shouldn't it also be extended to "welcome back" or other personal greeting posts?

On one forum that I participated in, there was a specific rule against congratulatory posts that were merely expressions of praise for something being well-said, or nothing more than a "Me, too." expression of agreement. Is that the kind of off-topic post that would be discouraged for the sake of saving space?

You've totally confused and befuddled me if you did not just say we shouldn't welcome someone to the forum and thank them/praise them for a contribution we particularly appreciated.

[Nicholas Amsdorf]

Congratulations on a great comment, Kim. And, I did not notice any typos in your comment, but I'll let those more adept at finding typos find them.

 

[George Erdner]

And shouldn't it also be extended to "welcome back" or other personal greeting posts?

On one forum that I participated in, there was a specific rule against congratulatory posts that were merely expressions of praise for something being well-said, or nothing more than a "Me, too." expression of agreement. Is that the kind of off-topic post that would be discouraged for the sake of saving space?

You've totally confused and befuddled me if you did not just say we shouldn't welcome someone to the forum and thank them/praise them for a contribution we particularly appreciated.

I didn't "say" anything, I asked. The Moderators raised the issue of there being an excess of off-topic posts. I simply asked if the posts I described were included in "off-topic" posts. There is something of a shortage of detail in the communications regarding what it being asked of us. So, I asked for some clarification. Is there something wrong in asking for clarification in the thread "Some changes afoot"? For the record, had the Moderators not raised the issue of cracking down on off-topic posts, I never would have asked or even raised the subject.

In any case, I never said no one should welcome or praise anyone. I mentioned that in some forums, such welcomes and praise posts should be done via Private Message. Those are two of the reasons why it's there.

But that's not what confused and befuddled me about your question, "Is this NOT a Christian forum?" What does the Christian religion have to do with extraneous, off-topic posts? Do Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Mormons, Atheist, Agnostics, Druids, and adherents to other religions not extend greetings to each other? Do Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Mormons, Atheist, Agnostics, Druids, and adherents to other religions not sometimes post replies in internet forums that boil down to "Me, too"? What does being a forum for Lutheran Christians have to do with those things?

When it comes to how and when to post personal messages in discussion threads instead of in Private Messages, I consider this, "For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven: a time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up what is planted; a time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; a time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance; a time to throw away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing; 6a time to seek, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to throw away; a time to tear, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak; a time to love, and a time to hate; a time for war, and a time for peace."

To that list, I would add, "A time to greet in public, and a time to greet in private." I was simply asking the Moderators when they wanted those times to be.

[kls]

Thank you so much for clarifying what you meant.  I do appreciate the extensive explanation and think it was wonderful of you to quote scripture to make your point.  See now, doesn't that feel good to be praised?  Maybe it's just my female wiring, but a little politeness and encouragement is a good thing for Christians to offer each other even on a forum like this.  I can make my away around technology as much as the next person, but I wasn't expecting this forum to be run like a machine the way more technical forums might be.  That's all I meant.  Have a lovely evening, George.  God bless you!

[George Erdner]

Thank you so much for clarifying what you meant.  I do appreciate the extensive explanation and think it was wonderful of you to quote scripture to make your point.  See now, doesn't that feel good to be praised?  Maybe it's just my female wiring, but a little politeness and encouragement is a good thing for Christians to offer each other even on a forum like this.  I can make my away around technology as much as the next person, but I wasn't expecting this forum to be run like a machine the way more technical forums might be.  That's all I meant.  Have a lovely evening, George.  God bless you!

Actually, I suspect the praise was sarcastic. It makes me feel uncomfortable.

As for politeness and encouragement, I agree. The issue isn't whether or not it is right, it is whether or not it belongs as an extra post in a public thread or as a private message. Also, a little politeness and encouragement is a good thing for Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Mormons, Atheist, Agnostics, Druids, and adherents to other religions to offer each other. Wouldn't you agree? Or are you saying that a little politeness and encouragement is strictly for Christians, and not for anyone else?

[kls]

Actually, I suspect the praise was sarcastic. It makes me feel uncomfortable.

As for politeness and encouragement, I agree. The issue isn't whether or not it is right, it is whether or not it belongs as an extra post in a public thread or as a private message. Also, a little politeness and encouragement is a good thing for Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Mormons, Atheist, Agnostics, Druids, and adherents to other religions to offer each other. Wouldn't you agree? Or are you saying that a little politeness and encouragement is strictly for Christians, and not for anyone else?

No sarcasm.  I was admittedly trying to be funny, but I meant it with the utmost of sincerity.  I hope God indeed blesses your night.  And yes, I agree a little politeness and encouragement is good for all those categories you listed.  I would even add that it's good for cats and dogs, too.  

[Nicholas Amsdorf]

When my dog praises me and encourages me to keep petting him, it makes me feel all warm and special.

So, your point is proven Kim.

 

After all, don't we all know that happiness is a warm puppy, as the great philosopher Charles Schultz put it so well years ago.

[George Erdner]

As long as this thread hasn't been shut down, I assume it's still a place to make suggestions.

I suggest creating a special thread for "Recommended Links". Instead of launching a whole new thread to simply share a link to something interesting that isn't really a discussion topic, start a permanent thread where anytime anyone wants to simply share a link to something they can do so as a post in the thread. That way, there won't be a bunch of itty bitty non-discussion threads cluttering things up, and all such links will be in an easy-to-find location on the main page, with no need for the moderators to push the threads to page 1.

[George Erdner]

This is another general suggestion to help keep threads on topic and to better facilitate discussion.

Though we are responding to each other in the public discussions, all public posts are intended for all participants to read and respond to. That is the fundamental nature of internet fora such as this one. It makes it difficult to follow the train of a thread when people write reponses addressed only to the first name of whoever one is responding to, especially when the post one is responding two might be on a previous page, and even moreso when the first name isn't part of the main screen name, but is only a footnote in a tagline.

Overquoting is not a good thing. Hitting the quote button to copy a long series of nested quotes just to post a one or two sentence reply leads to using up a lot of server space. But using the quote button and trimming what you are responding to down to the point you are replying to makes it easier for everyone to know what you are replying to. I was taught that the best way to think of your responses in a forum such as this is that everyone needs to know what you are replying to (ie. the words in a prior post), but it shouldn't matter much who you are replying to.

[Mike Gehlhausen]

Yeah, well, I'm just hoping that the decision to start deleting old threads has been reconsidered.

It is helpful for me to refer to old threads to see what insights are available when subjects have been discussed before.

Mike

[Scott6]

Yeah, well, I'm just hoping that the decision to start deleting old threads has been reconsidered.

It is helpful for me to refer to old threads to see what insights are available when subjects have been discussed before.

Mike

Mike*,

Me, too.  I would hate to not be able to refer to my work on 1 Tim 2 from 2006, for example.  This is the only place I have it.

[[Hmmm... Note to self: Go copy the posts and keep them on your computer.  Good job, self!]]


* That one's for you, George!