The Religious Standard

Wokamuka

Wokamuka

New Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
1,878
Reaction score
0
(It is within the spirit of maintaining a comfortable and respected discussion forum that I post this. I intend no offense nor do I intend any disrespect to AllDeaf's powers that be.)

I must say that the whole "religious" standard is getting, rather, confusing. A thread that discussed a wide range of related factors within a topic would, within 14 posts, be focused on the topic.

The thread (http://www.alldeaf.com/general-chat/55589-new-neo-nazis-alive-well-germany-2.html#post1062614), after 14 non-religious posts, was shut down due to religious postings? I'd never perceived any postings to be bashing anyone personally, which contradicts the spirit of the Religious Standard.

A former moderator witnessed that many had misconceptions. He'd explained that there were some religious postings that were welcome and there were others that were not. With the said thread shut down without any clear understanding as to why, I cannot be confused as to why AllDeaf members would be confused. (I'm most inclined to believe that it not the case of opportunistic atheists who spread that confusion - as was implied by one.)

There are a wide range of factors that relate to a topic. To discount a few to encourage attention on other factors does not welcome a wholesome debate nor clear understanding. It's a confusing censorship, denying the full spectrum of the human experience while employing fear as a tactic. How, then, can you expect an honest discourse?

I request, most humbly, that this "religious standard" set forth by AllDeaf be made clear and, without retribution, agreeable.
 
Yeah, no offense to the mods, I have been noticing that the mods tend to simply close the thread instead of warning some of the members or ban some of the members. I think it's not really right, but oh well.
 
PuyoPiyo said:
Yeah, no offense to the mods, I have been noticing that the mods tend to simply close the thread instead of warning some of the members or ban some of the members. I think it's not really right, but oh well.
Click to expand...

Perhaps the mods can step in to advise that flame-throwing and trolling are unnecessary or unacceptable in the forum so the members can enjoy discussing and debating.
 
Royale said:
Perhaps the mods can step in to advise that flame-throwing and trolling are unnecessary or unacceptable in the forum so the members can enjoy discussing and debating.
Click to expand...

Yupp exactly.. There's a lot of good member still around that would debate with a lot of interesting things to learn. Banning the religion subforum doesn't solve that.
 
I've sent a message to all listed moderators except SG. For some reason, I cannot send a message to her. Within that spirit, I hope s/he accepts my apologies.
 
I guess, in my opinion I think it would give the moderators an easier job not to have to deal with ADers when the arguments, flaming wars, and all that involved in any thread. It will tire them.

I agree to some of you that the " religion " does benefits to some ADers as part of education to understand the walks of life. This AD SHOULD discuss ANYTHING - I mean anything that this world talks about. IMO, we can not omit or delete something that we may not understand what is goin' on OUT THERE ... outside of this AD. We need some feedbacks, inputs, opinions, point of views, and what YOU know out there will help some ADers to understand all 5 w's: Why, When, What, Where, and Who.

I know as for myself, I think it is silly to shut down the religion forum just because, of flaming wars, arguments, belittle others, and all that -- well, the question is : how come we have the moderators here ? That's like if, there's a house burning with fire and someone will call Fire Dept to get some help and they will put the fire down with their water hose, right ? Okay -- the Fire Dept don't give up when they are doing their job everyday. They would save some houses and yet let the families or people to live in with some damages or have their insurance replace some new houses for them.... or whatever that you know. :)

And of course, I do not want people or us, the ADers to forget who our God/Jesus Christ is.
 
Maria said:
I guess, in my opinion I think it would give the moderators an easier job not to have to deal with ADers when the arguments, flaming wars, and all that involved in any thread. It will tire them.

I agree to some of you that the " religion " does benefits to some ADers as part of education to understand the walks of life. This AD SHOULD discuss ANYTHING - I mean anything that this world talks about. IMO, we can not omit or delete something that we may not understand what is goin' on OUT THERE ... outside of this AD. We need some feedbacks, inputs, opinions, point of views, and what YOU know out there will help some ADers to understand all 5 w's: Why, When, What, Where, and Who.

I know as for myself, I think it is silly to shut down the religion forum just because, of flaming wars, arguments, belittle others, and all that -- well, the question is : how come we have the moderators here ? That's like if, there's a house burning with fire and someone will call Fire Dept to get some help and they will put the fire down with their water hose, right ? Okay -- the Fire Dept don't give up when they are doing their job everyday. They would save some houses and yet let the families or people to live in with some damages or have their insurance replace some new houses for them.... or whatever that you know. :)

And of course, I do not want people or us, the ADers to forget who our God/Jesus Christ is.
Click to expand...

:gpost:
 
Good post, Maria.

As long as each person have a different belief, so no one have a right to bash theirs, especially ours. :)
 
Wokamuka said:
(It is within the spirit of maintaining a comfortable and respected discussion forum that I post this. I intend no offense nor do I intend any disrespect to AllDeaf's powers that be.)

I must say that the whole "religious" standard is getting, rather, confusing. A thread that discussed a wide range of related factors within a topic would, within 14 posts, be focused on the topic.

The thread (http://www.alldeaf.com/general-chat/55589-new-neo-nazis-alive-well-germany-2.html#post1062614), after 14 non-religious posts, was shut down due to religious postings? I'd never perceived any postings to be bashing anyone personally, which contradicts the spirit of the Religious Standard.

A former moderator witnessed that many had misconceptions. He'd explained that there were some religious postings that were welcome and there were others that were not. With the said thread shut down without any clear understanding as to why, I cannot be confused as to why AllDeaf members would be confused. (I'm most inclined to believe that it not the case of opportunistic atheists who spread that confusion - as was implied by one.)

There are a wide range of factors that relate to a topic. To discount a few to encourage attention on other factors does not welcome a wholesome debate nor clear understanding. It's a confusing censorship, denying the full spectrum of the human experience while employing fear as a tactic. How, then, can you expect an honest discourse?

I request, most humbly, that this "religious standard" set forth by AllDeaf be made clear and, without retribution, agreeable.
Click to expand...
I can't say this for sure but you might want to consider that some of the offending posts were removed therefore you would not see them in the thread. I know that sometimes the mods do that but they also usually say that they have done so. :dunno:

Edit: I went to the thread in question and the last note was that it's closed due to the originators request. The previous mod entry said the thread is re-opened but I didn't see a mod note previous to that which usually indicates the thread is locked and why. I usually see something like "Thread is locked for review and some offending posts may be removed." I didn't see that in the thread you referenced but I am guessing that is what happened. I would defer to SG or the other mods for clearification.
 
It has been one week. I am concerned that, publicly, no moderator nor administrator has responded.

Should this issue be said to be an issue of intentional confusion/fear?
 
Until we get another mod or two, religion discussions of any kind are not allowed on AD. Bible verses in a member's signature area or profile are OK. I think we all know why it has to be this way for now.

Thanks.
 
And I was asking why I am not allowed to post in that section. If its a general rule for now, we will respect but why dont you make it a sticky in the religions sub section telling what you told us here Alex? Otherwise people who doesnt know forum rules and whats going on at the moment like me will get confused, specially after seeing there are threads started today. Just a suggestion..

Hermes
 
Maybe its better to regulate our forum by notification.

I subcribe to many threads. Also to one forum. If any new thread posting, I will know about it.

I would like to have notification selections under "new post". If people dont want to hear religion, they can unscribe to religion. Allowing others to really debate in healthy way.

Similar to Deafread, you can unscribe to specific bloggers that you dont want to hear from. You control what you see.

Its a suggestion.

BTW... how do one become a MOD? Can someone explain that?
 
To become a MOD is to be a member of AD for years.

To have knowledge of PHP, HTML, and CSS.

To be able to reject posts due to Adminstration's rules without emotion attached.

Basically, you bug Alex about it. Probably everyday, show him that you are serious and find a thread that purpose a threat to the forum.

If you feel like you can do it. Do it without the MOD ability.

I wouldn't know cause I'm not a MOD, but it's common sense.
 
Deaf Mortgage said:
BTW... how do one become a MOD? Can someone explain that?
Click to expand...

Here is the outline:

Now, I'm going to be straightforward and list some of the things that will NOT make you a moderator:

- If you're just looking for "power" by being a moderator, forget about it not here.

- If you were mentioned in our watch list in the Mod's Corner and were banned in the past, then most likely we don't want you in our mod team. Those that have continuously attacked a moderator in the past are automatically not considered.

- If you're not willing to stay neutral at all times, or at least TRY your best to be, then you're better off staying as a regular member.

- If you have made members uncomfortable being around you since you joined AllDeaf because of your negative attitude, then that's usually not a good sign.

- If you're not an active member and have made little contribution to AllDeaf, then sorry but the moderator position is not for you.

- If you know you're too busy and probably won't have time to moderate for a minimum of 30 minutes a day, then that's understandable but the moderator position may be a little too much for you.
Click to expand...

http://www.alldeaf.com/general-chat/19659-new-moderators.html#post367564
 
Open the regilion thread.

I'm dying to tell you something.

Kelly Slater taught me something.
 
Can we at least have notification as choice to listen to specific discussion than some noises from another departments?
 
Hey Alex and Moderators. How about create of Religion Group to invite people who is same my belief and would be less the problem and flame war? I think group will be good idea instead of threads. What do you think??
 
~♥~Pinky~♥~ said:
Hey Alex and Moderators. How about create of Religion Group to invite people who is same my belief and would be less the problem and flame war? I think group will be good idea instead of threads. What do you think??
Click to expand...

Do you mean social groups? If so, I think it'll probably be great idea. I got my club for pro-lifers so since they feel pretty much comfortable without get a "slap" by a different belief. But my best suggestion, do not point a finger at any club/group whenever they read some posts at any club/group. Because it's not helpful.

Just thought on this.
 
Back
Top