Currently the rules under which I moderate sections of Club Adventist are being publicly discussed. That is fine with me. At one time, I thought that I had posted a set of rules. They do not seem to be around now, so I will develop a set of rules, and post them.

All of us associated with Club Adventist are volunteers. We have many other demands upon our time. Due to that, probably none of us are able to spend the tine in CA that it deserves.

As Moderators, there are two basic modes of moderation, active and passive, as I shall call them.

In Active Moderation, you write a post, it is sent to the Moderator for review, and for permission to post. In this style, the post is not made public until that moderator has reviewed it, and given permission for it to be posted. Prior to posting, the moderator may edit it in any way.

In Passive Moderation, your post immediately becomes public. It is available for reading, and for people to comment upon. That moderator may at any later time edit, delete it, or otherwise chagne it.

Some have asked that we do Active Moderation here, at least in some sections. So far, CA has not done so. But we could chose to do so.

As volunteers, we may be away from our computers for 24 hours at a time. Sometimes less, and sometimes more. We feel that it is a serious impedement to communication, and discussion for someone to make a post, have to wait say 10 hours for it to become public, and then perhaps another six hours for someone to respond.

We rather feel that our people posting here are generally fair, and can be trusted to post in a system of passive moderation. So, that is how this system has been set up.

Those of you who have been with us for a number of years know that some have come here who have gone beyond what we have allowed. We have had to act with firmness in some cases, and those people have generally left us.

In the past I have been involved with several of these so-called SDA chat forums. In some cases I have held some kind of a role, such as I do here as a Moderator. In other cases I have only been a member. I am still involved with several of these forums.

Those who are aware of these other forums know that they operate under different standards. They have different goals, objectives, and more. Some seemingly offer greater freedom to post, and others offer less. Some have tight boundries in some areas, and are loose in others.

There is a common thread, as I see it, that none of these operate in a totally netural sense. None operate in the sense that some seem to ask that we operate here. In all cases, the Moderators, and Administrators, seem to me to step in on the side of the goals and objectives of that forum.

Well, enough of an Introduction. I will next post some of my operating rules.

The following may be called my rules to moderation, or my philosophy, or approach. It does not matter to me. But, it will let you know how I approach moderation.

1) I come from a background where I have seen fair-minded people engage in vigorous, and frank discussions. In these, a spade has been called a spade, so to speak. From this standpoint, I am willing to allow for frank discussion of issues.

2) I am unwilling to allow people to go outside of the issues and to make personal attacks. One hobby-horse that I often ride is when someone calls someone else a liar. In my book, doing such is stating that the person intentionally attempted to decieve. This is simply unacceptable to me.

All of us are different. One poster states that an idea is irrelevant. Some see that as a personal attack. Others see it only as a fair attack on an idea. Another person comes along and calls someone a snake, used by Saten. Is that an attack on a person, or on an idea.

I make a personal judgement. That judgement may include the context, and the person making the post. Am I always correct? No. But, someone has to make the decision, and than take action, if required. That, in CA, is generally the Moderator.

3) As a point of Theology: I do not see God judging all of us by a rigid set of standards. I see God taking into consideration the individual, and everything that involves that person.

I attempt to do the same here. This means that I may deal more strictly with someone who claims to have formally studied Theology, and been a SDA for 20 years than a person who is new to the faith (Christian, SDA) and is just learning.

I have been very clear in stating to certain people here that I will deal more strictly with them than I will with other named people, who the complained to me about, for the reasons listed above.

We who run Club Adventist consider it to be a ministry. We see it as hopefully a place whre wounded, hurting people can come. Many of us are privately relating to people who come to us with questions. We may know spiritual issues that they struggle with, that are not open to the public reading their posts. The result of that is that I may be justly charged with bias, and partiality toward certain people.

It is in this context that I openly say that I may have a bias, and I may be partial. It is in this context that I may say that I will not allow one person to post someting that I will allow another to post.

4) I take several factors into consideration when I consider editing or deleting a post. When I find that something has been posted for several hours, and that several people have responded to it, I typically will decide to leave it alone. To many people have read it to effectively do anyting about it.

I do not have the time to give to CA that I should. I have other things to do in my life. Stuff does get by. When I read it, it is to late.

5) I also consider the reaction that the post is generating. I pay attention when people start sending me e-mails telling to to pay attention to a discussion, and to consider editing or deleting.

But, when I see that basicly a small group (may even be two people) are engaging in the conversation. Both are speaking openly, and frankly. Neither seems to take offense at the other, I may very well leave it alone. If no offense is being taken, why should I mess with it?

I also apply this to threads. I will come on to CA. I have a few minutes. I go immediately to the sections that I think may be generating the most heat. I may not read every thread and post in my sections at that time. I simply do not have the time to do so. I may leave alone, for a while, threads that I think are going well, and not generating heat. Sometimes stuff get by me becaue I am wrong, and I then catch it later.

6) It has been suggested that I never edit or delete a post until I have contacted the author privately, and given that person a chance to "repent."

That sounds nice, and even Christian. But, it is not practical. Let us say, as has happened, Samantha posts a statement that Saul is a snake in the grass, and is being used by the Evil One. O.K. I sent Samantha an e-mail, and I ask her to revise her post. Samantha does not read my e-mail for six hours. During that time, it remains posted and an additional 30 people read that statemt. Samantha now reads it. But she knows that if she waits anothr six hours to respond to me, the post will remain up, and it will be read by more people. So, she waits another six hours. But, I am off the computer, and I do not read her response for three hours. All in all, 15 hours has passed. The post remains public, and people are reading it.

I frankly do not have the time for all of that.

When a post is publicly made, I make a public response, and immediately. I feel that is action is required, it is required immediately.

NOTE: There have been occasions when I have changed my mind after people have contacted me and given me constructive comment. By the way, constructive comment is not, in my opinion, private messages telling me that I am on my way to H_ _ L, or some other such. Yes, I have recieved some frank messages telling me in detail of my sins in editing a message. Sarcasm, and other such really does not help you to change my mind.

7) Just for your information: When a post is deleted, there are basicly two options that exist.

Under the first option, the note is gone, and it is not generally recoverable except by special effort, by software engineers, and possible Administratiors.

Under the second option it is simply not available to be read by the membership. But, it remains available to Administrators, and Moderators.

Most of the time I use the first option. Occasionally I use the second option. In this case, the post can be easily made available to be read by the public.

8) It has been said here that the job of a Moderator is that, among other things, of intervenign between two people with differing opinons, etc. I am well aquainted with that model. But, that is not the only model that exists. I do not see my job in that role.

I see my job as being the person who interacts between the member, and Club Adventist, and to some degree, the SDA Chruch.

This may mean that when a member violates the rules, I am in once sence here to obtain compliance, or to enforce them. In another aspect, I act as a voice (not the only one) of Club Adventist.

This is a different role from what some people think of when they see the word "moderator" after my name.