Conference lgp30::christian-perspective

Q. What external source guides moderator activity in CHRISTIAN-PERSPECTIVE?

A. Digital Policies and Procedures.


Q. Must one be a Christian to be a moderator of CHRISTIAN-PERSPECTIVE?

A. It is not a requirement.


Q. Are moderators more responsible for the noting conduct and content that
   takes place in CHRISTIAN-PERSPECTIVE than other participants?

A. No. Moderators are just as responsible, but not more responsible for
   noting conduct and content in CHRISTIAN-PERSPECTIVE.


These should be enough to start things off.

Peace,
Richard

Are the moderators responsible for making sure that CP is PC?

re Note 500.3 by COVERT::COVERT:

> Are the moderators responsible for making sure that CP is PC?

        They had better not -- that is not their responsibility in
        the least.

        Bob

    Interesting to note that SOAPBOX, arguably the most contentious
    conference on the network, has 5 moderators. DIGITAL, also a very
    contentious conference with a high degree of visibility to senior
    management and potential for "trouble", also has 6 moderators. I
    happen to know that one of those 6 is a moderator in name only. He's
    a senior manager who hasn't followed the conference regularly in some 
    years. So effectively it has 5 moderators. WOMANNOTES, which ranks
    second (IMO) in contentiousness behind SOAPBOX, has 7 moderators.

    Yet the lower volume, less contentious, CHRISTIAN_PERSPECTIVES
    conference has *8* moderators. Is there a problem the rest of us don't
    know about?
    
    			Alfred

re Note 500.5 by CVG::THOMPSON:

>     Yet the lower volume, less contentious, CHRISTIAN_PERSPECTIVES
>     conference has *8* moderators. Is there a problem the rest of us don't
>     know about?
  
        We just like company!

        Bob

Alfred .5,

I must say it made me go 'hmmm' too and do a show moderator to double 
check.

Ro

    Just for the heck of it ... what difference does it (the number of
    moderators) make?
    
    Bubba

    RE: Alfred & Ro,
    
    			We decided on 8 so we could have as wide a spectrum
    as possible.  Personal beliefs on religion is as volitile a subject as
    any you might see and worse than most.  One of the reasons this file
    hasn't "exploded" with discontent is that we *DO* have all of these
    different belief systems inputing on a regular basis.
    
    
    Dave
    C-P co-mod

    Bob is right.  It is basically for our own ease that we have spread
    the moderatorship so broadly.  It has nothing to do with the potential
    contentiousness of the file.
    
    When Bonnie Reinke left Digital, we decided we wanted to replace her
    with a conservative woman.  We did approach someone who fit our criteria,
    but she declined.  So, as I see it, we sort of split up the criteria
    and ended up with a conservative *and* a woman, God bless 'em.
    
    Richard

Obviously, the reasoning was of interest to Alfred and me.  I wouldn't 
have asked if I wasn't interested as to why such a large number was 
necessary.  It would seem to me, it makes it harder to come to a 
consensus.  

Ro

>We decided on 8 so we could have as wide a spectrum as possible.

A wide spectrum?  Which of the moderators represents the following views:

1. The Bible is inerrant.
2. Immoral sexual behaviour described by St. Paul is to be absolutely avoided.
3. Only God has the right to take the life of an unborn child.
4. Salvation is only through faith in Christ Jesus.
5. The whole world must be evangelized and brought to believe everything
   that was taught by Jesus.

/john

    Me. 
    

All of them, or just one?

/john

Note 500.11

>It would seem to me, it makes it harder to come to a 
>consensus.  

Ro,

	It would seem that way to me, too.

	I guess we've been fortunate.  It really hasn't been a problem.

Peace,
Richard

   As Co-mod:

   Simple arithmetic, there are 168 hours in a week and the files is
   available during every one of them.  Splitting the chores is good
   sense and also insures someone has access from somewhere to monitor 
   the file.

   There is also the issue of having someone to insure everyone has a
   voice within the file including dissenting or minority opinions.
   Collectively the moderators of this files are trying to meet and
   possibly exceed the criteria put forth by corperate policy and
   Christian teachings.  

   Peace,
   Allison

    RE: .12 Mr. Covert,
    
    			I would answer yes to all but #2...and that one I
    would vote yes on except that I suspect you have other agenda's on your
    plate.  Now a question for you.  Why do you feel it necessary to act as
    the moral judge of this file?  
    
    			One thing that irks me a bit is that I need answer
    to God alone according to the Bible and to have to answer to the people
    of this file does not bode well for the remainder of this discussion.  
    
    
    Dave

    .12
    
    I can't speak for them, but I suspect Dave Dawson, Bob Fleischer,
    and Jim Kirk all come very close to filling your shopping list, also.
    Heck, if I didn't have a pretty good idea of what your underlying
    assumptions are, I'd say I, too, pretty much fit the bill.
    
    Richard
    

re: Note 500.12 by "John R. Covert" 

>A wide spectrum?  Which of the moderators represents the following views:

There is a vast difference between representing a view, and insisting that 
everyone else maintain the same view, through verbal coersion or, in the case 
of moderators, through hiding or deleting notes.

Arriving at consensus is harder than a simple majority.  But I think it's
worth it.  I personally have seen a concerted effort to include as wide a
range of viewpoints as possible, however that is not all there is to the
picture. Members of such a group must be open to ideas contrary to their own,
must be strong enough in their opinions to be able to hear other ideas and let
them stand or fall on their merits.  Ultimately a consensus means that all
members have been heard and arrive at a decision all can accept, even though
they may not get exactly what they individually want.  (I recommend M. Scott 
Peck's book _Community Making and Peace_ for more information about consensus)

Peace,

Jim

    That the moderators represent a wide spectrum of beliefs can not be
    denied. (At least not by me.) However, the spectrum of beliefs included
    as "Christian Perspectives" in this conference are far wider than the
    spectrum included in the moderator list. In fact the spectrum of
    moderators stops somewhere to the left of center by my reckoning.
    By any reckoning I doubt one could say it moves as far right as it
    does left. (Religiously not politically Bubba. :-))

    Is this a problem? Only if one worries about an appearance of balance.

    		Alfred

    Alfred, Dave Dawson is a conservative Christian.
    
    -- Mike

>    Alfred, Dave Dawson is a conservative Christian.

    And I'm a liberal Christian. I suspect our definitions are different.

    		Alfred

    Huh?  Are you claiming to be a liberal, or are you being sarcastic?
    
    And if you deny that Dave Dawson is a conservative Christian, on what
    basis do you deny that?
    
    -- Mike

re: last few...

Interesting question, Alfred, but if we can't even agree on a definition of 
liberal/conservative, left/right, how is it possible then to determine whether 
the moderation leans too far one way or another?

Peace,

Jim

>    Huh?  Are you claiming to be a liberal

	Yes. Clearly I am a liberal. And so I've been told for most of my life.

			Alfred

    RE: Alfred & Mike,
    
    			Uh....I am not sure I like being "labeled" in any
    way. :-)  Some would call me liberal and others would call me
    conservative.  I think of myself as a Christian......and of course
    always right!  ;-)  
    
    Dave

I think it would be fair to say that all of the moderators of CHRISTIAN-
PERSPECTIVE have at least one attribute in common: acceptance ("celebration"
might be a better word) of diversity.  This is regardless of their
personal views (liberal/conservative) about religious or political issues.

				-- Bob

Does Christ accept the diversity of those who serve their selves instead of God?

    RE: .28
    
    No, and the point?
    
    Marc H.

>      -< Those who deny the work of the Holy Spirit in Paul's writings? >-

>Does Christ accept the diversity of those who serve their selves instead of God?
    
    To insinuate that an honest difference opinion on the role of the Holy
    Spirit in Paul's writings is due to others merely serving themselves
    instead of God is unbelievably insulting and offensive.
    
    -- Mike

    I was thinking about why it is that some might not consider Dave to be
    a theological conservative.  He is a nice guy, and he is not obnoxious
    about his faith, and since many self-proclaimed conservatives, or at
    least the shrill ones, don't don't have those traits, it is easy for
    many of us who might not know better to mistake personality
    characteristics for personal theology.  But the two don't necessarily
    correlate, and in fact it is a false impression that theological
    conservatism means that one must be a jerk.  Dave is actually one of
    the best proselytizers for conservative Christianity that you'll find,
    and he does it quietly, by showing that you can be a good person and
    still be a conservative Christian.  :-)

    Actually, I knew that already, since my parents are basically
    conservative Christians, but they also are good people who don't at all
    fit the obnoxious stereotype.

    -- Mike

    .31,
    
    The Holy Spirit working through Dave has blessed me with many gifts. 
    One of the most important, was to illuminate some of the stereotypes 
    I've held (and still tend to) of conservative Christians.  
    
    If the truth be told, I was secretly very ambivalent about Dave's 
    nomination as co-moderator.  I didn't know him from a hole-in-the-wall, 
    as he hadn't noted here much at the time he was nominated.  All I knew 
    was that he was a self-professed fundamentalist, and Southern Baptist.  
    I had doubts his presence would promote a healthy dialogue and consensus 
    would be possible among the moderators.  
    
    Because this file and its premise was and is so important to me, I caught 
    myself thinking as he accepted the nomination, "He and I better get along 
    or he's dead meat."  Then I caught myself in an invisible mirror God
    slipped me.  "Gee, how loving, huh?  How Christ-like you are, Karen. 
    Put your money where your mouth is."  
    
    Anyway, I was wrong, and admittedly, ignorant and intolerant.  Thanks 
    for showing me my shortcomings Holy Spirit, and Dave.  What a shocking, 
    eye-opening and wonderful surprise it has been.
    
    :-)
    
    Karen

    RE:  .31 & .32   Mike & Karen,
    
    			I thank you for the kind words but now I have to
    burst that bubble.  Dave Dawson is not a very nice person.  I am as
    full of anger and frustration as anyone here.  BUT....and this is a big
    one, that which lives within me is beautiful and loving and kind.  That
    person is Jesus Christ.  So any and all accolades should be directed at
    him and of course any desire to emulate me should be first directed at 
    God.
    
    
    Dave 

    Well, Dave, I believe that there is that of God in everyone, but I also
    believe that some of us have a larger measure of the Inner Light of
    Christ than others.
    
    One need only see the behavior of some of the "Christians" who
    participate here to know that faith in Jesus Christ is no guarantee
    against expressing obnoxious and offensive behavior as the modus
    operandi of one's faith.
    
    -- Mike

    Um...Dave...who said anything about *emulating* you? ;-)
    Credit was given where credit was due. :-)
    
    Karen

    It has become increasingly apparent to me that God delights in
    diversity.  Not even twins are exactly alike.  We were never
    intended to be homogeneous carbon copies of each other.
    
    Only restrictive human thinking demands precision uniformity.
    
    Peace,
    Richard
    

    God loves us, but how do we should we love God?
    
    God doesn't "delight in diversity".

         Not everyone who says to me "Lord, Lord" will enter the kingdom of
         heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in
         heaven.

         Many will say to me on that day "Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy
         in your name, and in your name drive out demons, and perform many
         miracles?  Then I will tell them plainly "I never knew you.  Away
         from me you evildoers".  Mt 7:22 NIV

    We love God by being obedient to Him and not be denying Him or defying
    Him.  What is the beginning of wisdom?
    
    I pray that not my will but thy will be done.

    RE: love.....
    
    		Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does
    not boast, it is not proud.  It is not rude, it is not self-seeking,
    it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.  Love does not
    delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.  It always protects,
    always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.  Love never fails.
    
    
    Dave

    
    		Thank you Mr. Sweeney....I guess I shoulda put that fact
    in.  :-}
    
    Dave

    It's even bigger than God loving diversity.  
    
    God is diversity.
    
    Kb

re Note 500.37 by SDSVAX::SWEENEY:

>     God doesn't "delight in diversity".

        For another perspective on God's attitude towards diversity,
        read Genesis 1.

        Bob

    "Diversity" stops at Genesis 2:16 where God makes his will known.

    I assume by "diversity" is meant the materialistic foundation argument
    that

    (1) God doesn't have a will
    (2) but if He does, He doesn't completely reveal it to people
    (3) but if He does, He allows us to be "diverse" because He loves us
    and will never punish us
    (4) but if He does, He will most likely punish the people who in life
    taught "Prepare the way of the Lord, make straight his paths".
    
    The Chrisitian Perspective:
    
    One Lord
    One Faith
    One Baptism
    One God and Father of all
    who is over all, and works through all, and is in all
    
    That's my "diversity":  Unity in God.

    I wouldn't know what the "materialistic foundation argument" is, since
    I am not a materialist.
    
    -- Mike

    P.S. On the other hand, I am a Great Evil, so everything I write here
    is only as a mouthpiece of Satan.  :-)
    
    -- Mike

    Patrick,
    
    I agree with you.  Unity in God  is a principle that I hold dear too. 
    A unity that embraces all of humanity.
    
                               love and peace
    
    
                               Patricia

    Patrick - 
    
    
    <The Christian Perspective is:
    
    Once again I am moved to point out that there is not just one Christian
    Perspective.  There are probably just as many Christian Perspectives
    here as there are participants.  If what you're looking for is our
    agreement that you alone hold a corner on the ultimate truth you're not 
    going to find it.  If you haven't figured that out by now I don't know
    how to impress it on you.  I and others have said it in as many ways as
    our little human brains can come up with and you still find it
    necessary to declare the truth for us all.  Sigh!
    
    Nanci  

    Nanci, If someone said to you that a valid pro-choice perspective
    was that all abortion should be against the law would you agree?
    Would you suggest that a person holding that view has a right to
    be a leader in the pro-choice movement? If not, why not? Is it because 
    the idea that abortion should be illegal is contrary to the definition 
    of pro-choice? 

    What don't you understand about Pat's and my idea of a Christian
    perspective? To me it seems as dishonest to deny "one faith, one Lord,
    etc" as Pat said and call oneself a Christian as to demand all abortion
    be illegal and call oneself pro-choice on abortion.

    		Alfred

    Alfred -
    
    What I object to is Pat's assertion that there is only ONE Christian
    Perspective...HIS.  I respect his perspective and am asking for the
    same respect in return.
    
    Nanci

    It is my perspective based on the words (and perspective) of Saint John
    the Baptist and Saint Paul.  It is a Christian Perspective.

re Note 500.49 by CVG::THOMPSON:

>     Nanci, If someone said to you that a valid pro-choice perspective
>     was that all abortion should be against the law would you agree?
  
        Alfred,

        You do realize that your straw-horse scenario is far simpler
        than the question "Who is a Christian?"

        In your hypothetical, all that is required to show absurdity
        is agreement on the common secular definition of a couple of
        words and two or three logical steps.

        It is not that simple with "Who is a Christian?"

        A "Christian" is obviously "a follower of Christ", but what
        is the definition of "Christ"?  (Even "a follower" is a
        deceptively complex term:  how much agreement must a follower
        have with the one who is followed?)

        To define "Christ" we would have to appeal to a variety of
        sources, scriptural and other, but we have no universal
        agreement on the nature of those sources (inspired? inerrant?
        human mixed with the divine? human observations of the
        divine?)

        No, to define "Who is a Christian?" is not as simple as "if
        someone said that a valid pro-choice perspective was that all
        abortion should be against the law."

        Bob

>        No, to define "Who is a Christian?" is not as simple as "if
>        someone said that a valid pro-choice perspective was that all
>        abortion should be against the law."

	I disagree. I believe that there are simple complete things that
	define who is or is not a Christian. I understand that that is
	not the concensious in this conference but that's not my fault.

			Alfred

    RE: .53  Alfred,
    
    			Well here is where I have to disagree with you.  I
    have made several studies of the different denominations.  The process
    of salvation is more varied than you think which in turn changes the 
    concept of Christian within each of these denominations.  To say that
    the term Christian means "Christ centered" is an oversimplifacation
    of the issue.  Many here follow Christ in a way they think is correct
    and even though I might think that their theology incorrect, I cannot
    say that they are "non-Christian".   
    
    			One of the "knocks" of the Southern Baptists is
    that they/we believe that we will be the only ones going to Heaven. 
    Nothing could be farther from the truth but there are those who believe
    that we do.  
    
    Dave

    Jill 546.47,
    
    re:  the moving of notes....
    
    Actually Jill, I made an error.  It should have been moved to topic
    #300 "The way, the truth, and the life."  I apologize for the
    inconvenience.
    
    But to answer your other question, as moderators, we try to honor the
    base noter and not kill discussions in the meantime.  We're not always
    successful.  Does bias play a role in our decisions?  Of course it
    does, to some extent.  But we try to be objective and fair.  For 
    example, if you'll notice, I usually step out of a topic and 
    address such side issues as this in another, what I feel, more
    appropriate note.  I do this so that I will disrupt, as little as
    possible, the discussion at hand.  You'll see I'm pretty consistent 
    in this regard.  Others do this too, fairly regularly, but again, not
    always.
    
    Anyway, topic 300 has many replies you may find interesting to peruse. 
    I'll move your and Dave's note there, and again, I apologize for the
    inconvenience of moving them twice.
    
    Karen 
    Co-Moderator, C-P

                  I N T E R O F F I C E   M E M O R A N D U M
 
                                        Date:     25-May-1994 03:41pm EDT
                                        From:     JOSE RAMIREZ_ER
                                                  RAMIREZ.JOSE
                                        Dept:     CORPORATE EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
                                        Tel No:   223-9584
 
TO: See Below
 
Subject: Solicitation                                                           
 
Recent messages have come to our attention that Notes users are violating 
Personnel Policy 6.54 Proper Use of Computers, Systems and Networks as it 
relates to solicitation.
 
I wish to take this opportunity to remind you that "conferences created to 
communicate matters of opinion and common interest may not be used for 
solicitations of any kind, and must be open to all employees."
 
As in the past, conference moderators are responsible to remove any material 
that violates this policy and report such violations to the relevant systems or 
cost center managers.
 
Please feel free to communicate this message as you deem appropriate.
 
Regards,
Jose Ramirez
 
 
Distribution:
 
[deleted]

    "When I use a word it means exactly what I mean it to mean."
    
    	- Mad Hatter from the Alice in Wonderland books

re JOSE RAMIREZ Subject: Solicitation:
                                                           
> I wish to take this opportunity to remind you that "conferences created to 
> communicate matters of opinion and common interest may not be used for 
> solicitations of any kind, and must be open to all employees."
  
        What does this mean?

        Bob

As an example of what the corporation considers "solicitation", three
candidates for the DCU board of directors were fired recently for mailing
out campaign literature.

From this we can infer that in management's eyes "solicitation" doesn't
just mean advertising a service that you are making a profit on.  It's
hard to say just how far their definition of solicitation extends.  I
suppose any time someone asks other people to do something that's not work
related (like go to church, buy Girl Scout cookies, write to a
congressman) it could be considered "solicitation".

It puts moderators in the interesting position of having to interpret a
vague policy and not only delete material that violates the policy
(whatever it is) but report the offenders to their management.

				-- Bob

	Are there special rules for the classified notesfile?


Glen

    I sell, for my daughters, girl scout cookies each year.
    
    This year, I had a large sign outside of my office, telling people that
    the cookies are for sale.
    
    A manager came by and said something about "company
    policy...solicitation, etc......"
    
    I told him to get a life!
    
    I mean, really.....
    
    Marc H.

I have placed an number of announcements of upcoming events here.  I have
not made 1 cent from any of them.

May I say also that I've yet to see any noters from this file at any one
of the events I've publicized.  So, I don't see this conference as a prime
vehicle for effective advertising anyway.  Maybe it's different elsewhere.

Shalom,
Richard

    I have lots of ideas about this but I'd rather not put them in
    print. In conferences I've moderated I've been very inconsistant
    on this item. 
    
    		Alfred

	Re: .62 Richard.

	>May I say also that I've yet to see any noters from this file at
	>any one of the events I've publicized.

	Sorry, Richard, but you always seem to catch me at the wrong
	moment or in the wrong place.  Often both!    ;-)

	Greetings, Derek.

>I have placed an number of announcements of upcoming events here.  I have
>not made 1 cent from any of them.

Garrod, Gransiewicz, and Gillett would not have made one cent from their
election to the DCU Board.

    RE: .65 I suspect that the company's idea of personal gain includes
    more then cash income.
    
    			Alfred

I don't see anything about "personal gain" in "no solicitations of any type".

The policy is either totally vague or all-inclusive.  If it's all-inclusive
you can't invite people to an after-work party; you can't solicit an opinion;
you can't announce the arrival of the tall ships in Boston Harbor; you can't
announce a community theatre performance; you can't announce a town festival;
...

/john

    The emphasis on the word personal is not unstrikingly familiar.  In a
    world where interpersonal relationships suffer, it naturally spills
    over the spiritual.

    RE: .69
    
    A slur???? Surely you jest.......unless you are into PC talk.
    
    Marc H.

 Perhaps my sensitivity alarm needs to be adjusted..the spelling of the
 word "puhsenal" seemed to me to be aimed at a particular segment of
 the population that might hail from the southern reaches of this great
 land of ours.




Jim

    RE: .72
    
    Sure enough there jim.........
    
    The ability to laugh at ourselves needed to be maintained around here.
    It really, really does.
    
    I have many, many relatives from the deep south, and I for one like
    a southern drawl.....
    
    Marc H.

    I have deleted the offending note (.68).  It's not that big a deal.
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

 You're right, Richard...I was going to delete my reply anyway.





 My apologies.




 Jim who also loves a southern drawl.

 I deleted .69





 Jim