Ernie wrote: ↑Wed Jun 29, 2022 8:33 pm
I would like a forum in which:
1. the main participants value modesty, non-resistance, not swearing oaths, head covering, church authority, permanence of marriage and taking Jesus's teaching at face value.
2. participants could rate other participants on their peacemaking abilities and the content they post. If someone dropped below a particular score, they would not be able to post as a main participant until the moderators decided to give the person another try.
3. all threads would defualt to only those participants who value the things in number one. If a thread author wanted input from a wide variety of perspectives, the author could uncheck a box and then anyone could post.
4. the author of a thread could move posts elsewhere that don't fit the sort of discussion he/she was wanting to have in that thread.
I can agree with 1
I think 2 is a very subjective thing and would never go well.
3 would be as simple as a separate forum for those who agree with 1
4 isn't possible with forum software. Either you have control over all the posts in a specific forum, or you have control over all posts on all the forums. The software to my knowledge doesn't allow control over individual threads without anything else. The only way to do that is very impractical by giving each poster their own forum and making them moderators of that specific forum. I think generally the mods have been fairly helpful with moving posts per original requester if its off topic.
Ernie wrote: ↑Wed Jun 29, 2022 8:33 pm
I would like a forum in which:
1. the main participants value modesty, non-resistance, not swearing oaths, head covering, church authority, permanence of marriage and taking Jesus's teaching at face value.
2. participants could rate other participants on their peacemaking abilities and the content they post. If someone dropped below a particular score, they would not be able to post as a main participant until the moderators decided to give the person another try.
3. all threads would defualt to only those participants who value the things in number one. If a thread author wanted input from a wide variety of perspectives, the author could uncheck a box and then anyone could post.
4. the author of a thread could move posts elsewhere that don't fit the sort of discussion he/she was wanting to have in that thread.
You could do most, if not all, this with MyBB software. We use phpbb here. You can do some, but not all easily. I like MyBB better than phpbb, but most all were used to phpbb when we started MN so I just continued to use it. MyBB has some features that might work well for your Plain News sight because you can do a calendar with it and several other useful things. I stated before I would be happy to help you set up your own site if you choose to do so.
0 x
Try hard not to offend. Try harder not to be offended.
I think I am funnier than I really am.
Ernie wrote: ↑Wed Jun 29, 2022 8:33 pm
I would like a forum in which:
1. the main participants value modesty, non-resistance, not swearing oaths, head covering, church authority, permanence of marriage and taking Jesus's teaching at face value.
2. participants could rate other participants on their peacemaking abilities and the content they post. If someone dropped below a particular score, they would not be able to post as a main participant until the moderators decided to give the person another try.
3. all threads would defualt to only those participants who value the things in number one. If a thread author wanted input from a wide variety of perspectives, the author could uncheck a box and then anyone could post.
4. the author of a thread could move posts elsewhere that don't fit the sort of discussion he/she was wanting to have in that thread.
Ernie- as much as I value your input on this forum, this is a horrible idea. "Scoring" people? Might as well put an EPMC bishop in charge of MN
Ernie wrote: ↑Wed Jun 29, 2022 8:33 pm
I would like a forum in which:
1. the main participants value modesty, non-resistance, not swearing oaths, head covering, church authority, permanence of marriage and taking Jesus's teaching at face value.
2. participants could rate other participants on their peacemaking abilities and the content they post. If someone dropped below a particular score, they would not be able to post as a main participant until the moderators decided to give the person another try.
3. all threads would defualt to only those participants who value the things in number one. If a thread author wanted input from a wide variety of perspectives, the author could uncheck a box and then anyone could post.
4. the author of a thread could move posts elsewhere that don't fit the sort of discussion he/she was wanting to have in that thread.
Ernie- as much as I value your input on this forum, this is a horrible idea. "Scoring" people? Might as well put an EPMC bishop in charge of MN
LOL. That might be a good perspective to have in the mix here.
Ernie wrote: ↑Wed Jun 29, 2022 8:33 pm
I would like a forum in which:
1. the main participants value modesty, non-resistance, not swearing oaths, head covering, church authority, permanence of marriage and taking Jesus's teaching at face value.
2. participants could rate other participants on their peacemaking abilities and the content they post. If someone dropped below a particular score, they would not be able to post as a main participant until the moderators decided to give the person another try.
3. all threads would defualt to only those participants who value the things in number one. If a thread author wanted input from a wide variety of perspectives, the author could uncheck a box and then anyone could post.
4. the author of a thread could move posts elsewhere that don't fit the sort of discussion he/she was wanting to have in that thread.
Ernie- as much as I value your input on this forum, this is a horrible idea. "Scoring" people? Might as well put an EPMC bishop in charge of MN
LOL. That might be a good perspective to have in the mix here.
well looks to me like this is controversial but I don't know why. I've heard the input from those who didn't vote but nothing from those who voted no. At the same time, I would say that there is enough interest that it would be used.
Without reading through all the posts I apologize if this is repetitive thinking. But when the Bible talks about being like-minded there is a great deal of comfort in bouncing things off other like-minded people without the frustration of defending your own doctrinal or denominational differences so I could see the value in it and only time would tell if that turns out to be true
