Do we need to encourage more activity here?

[MrVersatile48]

A mod just PM'd me that, from now, the site will impose a limit of 2 new posts per day & delete all others

Here's my reply:-

Sorry, but my gut instinct as ex-UK *1 salesman in several national & international companies is that your edict is the kiss of death to this site: new things happen at the most amazing pace - the Matt 24 'birthpains' are indeed accelerating & intensifying just as Jesus prophesied

We need to 'be ready to give reason for the hope within us'

We need to demonstrate, not only that Christians are bang up to date but that the Bible is even more up to date than tomorrow's newspaper - or next week's, next month's or next year's

As soon as I saw that I had PM waiting, my gut instinct told me to copy the link to the thread I was working on:-

"Pastor Provocateur"

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=29984&p=348624#p348624

Oh great: that just produces 'this thread does not exist' - euphemism for deleted - as in denial of free speech for no good reason whatever

While I may not agree with Driscoll, the most vital function of 'Net anonymity is to encourage Christians to think & pray @ new developments before they face the world - that's why many login here before going to work/college etc

We need to encourage folk to do as the Bible says: 'whatever your hand finds to do, do it with your might, as unto the Lord, not unto men'

We need more folk to spend more time in here: the average member seems to post way less than 1 a day, which makes it look like Christians have nothing worth saying

I have another 90 minutes here today &, as usual, will work thru the Christian news/devotional emails I get daily - as well as the main news sites

If I find deletions on Sunday, I'll have no choice but to leave this site & find a better 1

God bless!

Ian

 

[MrVersatile48]

God's timing is perfect:-

I Was a Stranger..

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=29987&p=348627#p348627

How many folk google 'Christian' & find http://www.ChristianForums.net the option that God uses to draw them?

Do we not want to do all we can to encourage them into saving faith in Christ?

Pass it round your churches & Christian Unions, etc, yes?

God bless!

Ian

 

[Guest]

Ian - mass postings does not always mean good 'activity'.

To be honest with you, this post is refreshing, because the reader gets to read YOUR thoughts, YOUR comments, YOUR heart. Most of the other posts that you provide are merely cut and pastes of other peoples thoughts and comments. I want to hear from Ian, not ChristianDaily, or Crosswalk - I can visit those sites on my own.

Often times the mass postings are just too much and it can drown out someone elses posts that get pushed to the bottom. So your mass postings actually silence activity on other people's posts.

 

[MrVersatile48]

Many folk today boycott news & hide their heads in the sand

Many more have never been exposed to Christian news media & don't realise the 'spirit of antichrist' is so active in secular media

Even those aware of Christian news/devotionals don't know all that's going on

But short samples, with links, give opportunities to everyone to read more & MAY HELP INCREASE HUNGER & THIRST FOR GOD'S wORD & WISDOM IN EVERY SITUATION THAT ARISES

Caps lock accidental there, but appropriate

See also..

OOPS: like @ 40 of my posts - many of which pasted God's Word - it seems to have been deleted by an enemy of the gospel posing as a mod in here

Must go

I don't believe in wasting what precious time I have left on Earth

& I don't let others waste it either

Ian

 

[Drew]

If it is indeed true that this site will "the site will impose a limit of 2 new posts per day & delete all others", I think it may be its death knell.

I certainly agree that it is generally put to express one's own thoughts and not to cut and paste. And I agree that it might not be ideal to start a flood of new threads.

But I think it would be a mistake to constrain the "back and forth" between people. Let's say Fred and Joe are debating something. If they can each only post 2 items per day, they may lose their train of thought or worse, start to write lengthy posts that no one will read.

I find we have very few active posters anyway. If something is done that will constrain their discussion of ideas, these people might go elsewhere.

 

[antitox]

Do I understand this correctly? Aren't we speaking of threads, not posts?

I thought it would be 2 new threads per day, but posting on threads unlimited, right?

 

[Drew]

Do I understand this correctly? Aren't we speaking of threads, not posts?

I thought it would be 2 new threads per day, but posting on threads unlimited, right?

The idea of limiting the number of new threads per day per person seems like a good one to me.

 

[gibby]

Wow, I have never heard of this rule on a forum before...interesting. I guess if you are getting slammed with useless topics, then it would be appropriate. I know many forums that would love to have more than 1 topic a day started. Activity breeds more activity.

 

[Guest]

As a mod here at 123 - I believe I can speak and say that there has been no discussion of a overall general rule to limit the amount of posts.

That is not to say that there could not be a special rule for a specific purpose, but a general rule - No.

There are rules against post flooding.

 

[tim-from-pa]

If everyone notices something here, there are some Initiators (of posts) and the rest are reactors.

I for one hardly ever start a post, but react to something already posted.

Then there are some nice folks like Ian (Mr Versatile) that starts them---- we don't agree, but debate like heck but that's the fun in it.

I would suggest to moderators to see how may people are the most active in starting a new thread and multiply that by two. That's the number of new topics per day, and I bet if we were to stick to a new rule like this it would be very small. The forum could die out if the initiators are discouraged and leave, and the rest have "nothing new to talk about".

 

[Vic C.]

As a mod here at 123 - I believe I can speak and say that there has been no discussion of a overall general rule to limit the amount of posts.

This is correct people.

That is not to say that there could not be a special rule for a specific purpose, but a general rule - No.

Also correct.

There are rules against post flooding.

Correct again. Included in this particular rule is the urge to avoid overly long copy and paste posts. A small excerpt with a link to the source can go a long way. 8-)

Thanks, Alone.

 

[MrVersatile48]

Whoever said that activity produces activity is right

& I applaud the one who said that many folk wait for folk like me to start the threads, then enjoy arguing like mad: the daily news is also news to me, so of course I just give a taster to whet folks' appetites to click & read the links

I have broad shoulders & the sort of wacky humor that enjoys the cut & thrust of robust debate - otherwise I'd hardly have gone on so many radio phone-ins (as shared @ my www - just click my name, then www)

& I always share them to encourage other Christians to do the same, as many of my posts have specifically urged, yes?

The media famously use the process of gradual info - I often have something I want to say, but hold back to give others the chance to react & say it: that's what public forums are about

Guys, we live in a world where many millions are turned into vegetables by being virtual prisoners in their own homes, living vicariously via TV, the 'Net & playstations, etc

How many sit for hours watching folk sleep in 'Big Brother' & other 'reality TV' shows?

Having lived in 3 seaside resorts on the trot, in the past few years, I've often noticed crowds gather like prone zombies around the most untalented street entertainers, & stay seemingly mesmirised even when nothing is actually happening, yes?

Yet when a team of street preachers hold out the Word of life, everyone seems to rush past, head down - so, to encourage more activity out there.. :wink:

To the Streets! :infinity:

viewtopic.php?f=27&t=22619



Street work in the UK :fadein:

viewtopic.php?f=27&t=25734


See this post that I'm now going to use to start a new thread, as I've just realised its theme is so very like that of this one:-

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070922/ap_ ... ls_regroup

viewtopic.php?f=23&t=29995&p=348702#p348702

It's deleted too

Final thought, that I've been meaning to say since the site format changed last month: is it possible to redo the links to latest posts & to unanswered posts?

Some are unanswered because no-one wants to reply: they don't get pushed to page 2 in just a day or 2, do they?

Btw, before I forget, some of my deleted posts were in the middle of long threads, strongly suggesting unfair exercise of theological bias in the deleter?

One thread that was disabled, so no-one can reply, is "Plans 4 the weekend? How @ next 1?"

viewtopic.php?f=43&t=29561

How does it benefit any member - or any of the many non-members who only come onsite to tead, & never to post, to disable a thread that features info links that folk can use for any weekend plans? (as my www also does!)

In addition, the post there for last weekend - which gave the links to 3 churches that could be useful to many folk seeking training etc - was deleted

All 3 are in my www too

Last time I checked, there were @ 6,600+ members in here, yet even though I only joined in June '05, I've done @ 2.11% of all the posts on site, yes?

Let that spur others on, as that's what it's meant to do, OK?

Happy Sunday, y'all! 8-)

Ian :-D

 

[Rick W]

I imposed the limit on Mr V. and Mr V only in an attempt to curtail his new topic proliferation which I made VERY clear in the PMs I sent him. Previous attempts from others have failed, he continues to flood the forums.
Moderation is the key word Mr V.