Important Questionnaire #18: Proselytizing Sub-forum

[Sunstone]

This questionnaire is important to me: I am gathering member feedback to help me make better policy decisions. Please help out by responding to it.

Please Note: As you might know, proselytizing is currently prohibited everywhere on the Forum. Members are prohibited from attempting to convert other members to their faiths by means of asserting that their faiths are unquestionably true.

However, a proposal has been advanced to set up a special sub-forum for members to use when they wish to proselytize other members. Proselytizing would only be allowed in that one sub-forum. Everywhere else on the Forum it would continue to be prohibited.

The details of the proposal have yet to be fully worked out, and hence, are currently unavailable. The following question concerns only whether or not you would be in favor of such a sub-forum in principle. That is, provisionally, depending on the final shape or form it might take.​

With all of that in mind, how strongly do you agree or disagree with this statement: "I am (in principle at least) in favor of a special sub-forum for proselytizing."

Please pick which one of these five options is closest to your views. If you do not see an option that suits you, please accept this poll was not designed for you, and move on.

OPTION ONE: I strongly agree with the statement.

OPTION TWO: I somewhat agree with the statement.

OPTION THREE: I neither agree nor disagree with the statement.

OPTION FOUR: I somewhat disagree with the statement.

OPTION FIVE: I strongly disagree with the statement.

 

[dybmh]

I voted "somewhat agree".

I think it's probably a good idea to let people preach somewhere just to get it out of their system and have it out in the open. Although, OTOH, I think there is something nice about having an online community where preaching is 100% verboten. And that specific restriction on a religious forum is rather unique and perhaps should be protected? ( rhetorical question )

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I have no issue with it, but I am not sure it will end well.
I don't see it as problematic though, more just that it seems unlikely to me that people will voluntarily wander in there to get preached at.

So I voted 'somewhat agree'.

 

[osgart]

Fire and Brimstone even? Fear tactics? Insinuations of dishonesty in non belief?

How far will they go?

Kirk out!

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I voted I don't care. I don't like proselyting, but so long as I know where it is, I can avoid it, and therefore would prefer not to shut other people up.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I voted I don't care. I don't like proselyting, but so long as I know where it is, I can avoid it, and therefore would prefer not to shut other people up.

Amen!

 

[sun rise]

Let me tell you about the wonders of dog petting. If you don't pet a dog every day your brain will start shriveling up, your eyes start squinting and all the animals around you will start planning an intervention before it's too late.

So for the good of your soul or at least your brain, pet a dog today.

Or at least an, ugh, cat.
---

(in case you wondered, I voted go for it)

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Let me tell you about the wonders of dog petting. If you don't pet a dog every day your brain will start shriveling up, your eyes start squinting and all the animals around you will start planning an intervention before it's too late.

So for the good of your soul or at least your brain, pet a dog today.

Or at least an, ugh, cat.
---

(in case you wondered, I voted go for it)

Hi @sun rise
Just a quick note. I've decided to let it slide this time, but if you persist in suggesting a 'cat' is a potential substitute for the love and companionship of a dog, I'll probably spew up.

Err...not sure if that translates from Australian but...yeah...

 

[Revoltingest]

Would it be limited to proselytizing?
This would be a 3rd type of post, the others being debate & discussion.
Allowing debate would make for exciting arguments.
Whatever it is, it strikes me as a forum to avoid.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

This questionnaire is important to me: I am gathering member feedback to help me make better policy decisions. Please help out by responding to it.

Please Note: As you might know, proselytizing is currently prohibited everywhere on the Forum. Members are prohibited from attempting to convert other members to their faiths by means of asserting that their faiths are unquestionably true.

However, a proposal has been advanced to set up a special sub-forum for members to use when they wish to proselytize other members. Proselytizing would only be allowed in that one sub-forum. Everywhere else on the Forum it would continue to be prohibited.

The details of the proposal have yet to be fully worked out, and hence, are currently unavailable. The following question concerns only whether or not you would be in favor of such a sub-forum in principle. That is, provisionally, depending on the final shape or form it might take.​

With all of that in mind, how strongly do you agree or disagree with this statement: "I am (in principle at least) in favor of a special sub-forum for proselytizing."

Please pick which one of these five options is closest to your views. If you do not see an option that suits you, please accept this poll was not designed for you, and move on.

OPTION ONE: I strongly agree with the statement.

OPTION TWO: I somewhat agree with the statement.

OPTION THREE: I neither agree nor disagree with the statement.

OPTION FOUR: I somewhat disagree with the statement.

OPTION FIVE: I strongly disagree with the statement.

I put I don't agree. (To me) that's like putting a group of people away so they can turn lion and eat each other. Instead, if one hasn't already, list examples of pry- in the rules so people know the difference between discussion (god exists), evangelization (let me tell you how god exists), testimony (this is what gods existences means to me), or pryz (I will tell you how and why god exists so you can believe with me too).

I see more evangelizing than pryz here. But life long members shouldn't get a pass when we know they are prys and will say so in many ways than one.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

While I consider this a very different idea, I see the merits of it and think it should be given a try.

 

[Deeje]

Not sure...is this a subforum to others subforums, or attached to DIR's?

Are they allowed to debate in these forums, which are prohibited in DIR's?
Who would be permitted entry?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

No p-tizing is probably a reason for RFs still being around. Preaching can be rude, can easily turn into patronizing, and often can be used to prey upon the vulnerable and emotionally distraught. I feel the seekers form does a better job at allowing people to seek and ask questions without inviting the baggage of proselytizing.
Amd, keep in mind, allowing it can open the door for cult recruitment and would require additional rules and oversight to decide the fine line between normal religious stuff and cult recruitment.

 

[John53]

Doesn't bother me, if I'm offended I just won't read that forum.

 

[Valjean]

Makes no difference to me, but I wouldn't expect to spend a lot of time there.

 

[bobhikes]

There are methods where they can invite people to their cause and chat them up all they want.

If you do make such a forum I request that threads in it can only be seen by people entering the forum setup for it. It does not show up in any other viewing category.

 

[Sunstone]

Not sure...is this a subforum to others subforums, or attached to DIR's?

Are they allowed to debate in these forums, which are prohibited in DIR's?
Who would be permitted entry?

The details have yet to be worked out. The questionnaire is about whether you would favor such a forum in principle.

 

[Thief]

This questionnaire is important to me: I am gathering member feedback to help me make better policy decisions. Please help out by responding to it.

Please Note: As you might know, proselytizing is currently prohibited everywhere on the Forum. Members are prohibited from attempting to convert other members to their faiths by means of asserting that their faiths are unquestionably true.

However, a proposal has been advanced to set up a special sub-forum for members to use when they wish to proselytize other members. Proselytizing would only be allowed in that one sub-forum. Everywhere else on the Forum it would continue to be prohibited.

The details of the proposal have yet to be fully worked out, and hence, are currently unavailable. The following question concerns only whether or not you would be in favor of such a sub-forum in principle. That is, provisionally, depending on the final shape or form it might take.​

With all of that in mind, how strongly do you agree or disagree with this statement: "I am (in principle at least) in favor of a special sub-forum for proselytizing."

Please pick which one of these five options is closest to your views. If you do not see an option that suits you, please accept this poll was not designed for you, and move on.

OPTION ONE: I strongly agree with the statement.

OPTION TWO: I somewhat agree with the statement.

OPTION THREE: I neither agree nor disagree with the statement.

OPTION FOUR: I somewhat disagree with the statement.

OPTION FIVE: I strongly disagree with the statement.

it's called......debate

note my signature

 

[crossfire]

If only to have an outlet available for the compulsive proselytizers and to serve as examples for what is not allowed in the rest of the forum.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

An atheist board I was on had a special forum for proselytizers: instead of banning them outright, they were restricted to that one forum where they could complain to their heart's content how they were being mistreated and other members were allowed to mock them.

That sort of forum for proselytizers has a certain appeal, but probably wouldn't be a good fit with the tone of RF.