Whether Sacred Sciences Subforum Be Open to All Posters

[Insanis]

If the posts off topic in this thread aren't cleaned up or restricted, then this subforum is exactly the same as any other and serves no purpose.

[Insanis]

Remember, for moderation of a forum, quality control is not censorship.

Quality control is good.

[Jayne]

Ultimately, the idea in my head (restrict the subforum to pre-approved posters) would serve to make my moderation life easier (inb4 <any comment at all>).

I could be more heavy-handed in my thread moderation, but to my mind, the pre-approval would just remind people for what this was intended.

If it makes moderation easier for you, of course you ought to do it.  This forum was founded with a team of moderators and really seems to be too much for one person to run alone, especially someone with many other responsibilities.  I don't see any down side to pre-approval and certainly no good reason for you to do things a harder way than necessary.

It sounds like a great idea.  In the unlikely event that it did not work out well, it would be easy enough to go back to the current way of doing things.  It is definitely worth trying.

[Miriam_M]

I guess I should make this subforum "permission only", where approved commentators could post, while everyone else could watch.

That's a bad idea.

No-one in SD has any particular authority to pontificate on theology. Allowing only a select few members to post here will just reinforce certain cliques.

Although I think that some have a better theological foundation than others (and by the admission of those others), I agree that it is a bad idea because the judgment of who would be "qualified" would be subjective and perhaps without sufficient knowledge of the small or great scope of the pertinent expertise.

[Jayne]

I agree that it is a bad idea because the judgment of who would be "qualified" would be subjective and perhaps without sufficient knowledge of the small or great scope of the pertinent expertise.

The person judging who should post here would be KK.  Since a very large proportion of his moderation decisions are subjective to some degree, I cannot see what would make his judgment on pre-approving posters any less trustworthy.

I wonder if those who are expressing misgivings about this are correctly understanding KK's intent.  I do not have the impression that KK is proposing restricting the sub-forum to "theology experts". I don't think that he wants only posters with a theology degree or is considering making people write a test on the subject.  As I understand his idea, he merely wants to pre-approve people who understand the purpose and expectations for posting here.  I did not think it had anything to do with judging the theological or philosophical expertise of posters.

Kaesekopf, could you please clarify what sort of pre-approval criteria you have in mind?

[Aulef]

As laymen, we shoud limit ourselves to quote, cite and/or paraphrase real authorities when it comes to Sacred Sciences.

In other words, let the Fathers and Doctors of the Church speak through us, for they truly represent the orthodoxy of the Catholic Church in these sacred matters.

[Kaesekopf]

I agree that it is a bad idea because the judgment of who would be "qualified" would be subjective and perhaps without sufficient knowledge of the small or great scope of the pertinent expertise.

The person judging who should post here would be KK.  Since a very large proportion of his moderation decisions are subjective to some degree, I cannot see what would make his judgment on pre-approving posters any less trustworthy.

I wonder if those who are expressing misgivings about this are correctly understanding KK's intent.  I do not have the impression that KK is proposing restricting the sub-forum to "theology experts". I don't think that he wants only posters with a theology degree or is considering making people write a test on the subject.  As I understand his idea, he merely wants to pre-approve people who understand the purpose and expectations for posting here.  I did not think it had anything to do with judging the theological or philosophical expertise of posters.

Kaesekopf, could you please clarify what sort of pre-approval criteria you have in mind?

Your understanding is the proper one


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[clau clau]

I agree that it is a bad idea because the judgment of who would be "qualified" would be subjective and perhaps without sufficient knowledge of the small or great scope of the pertinent expertise.

The person judging who should post here would be KK.  Since a very large proportion of his moderation decisions are subjective to some degree, I cannot see what would make his judgment on pre-approving posters any less trustworthy.

I wonder if those who are expressing misgivings about this are correctly understanding KK's intent.  I do not have the impression that KK is proposing restricting the sub-forum to "theology experts". I don't think that he wants only posters with a theology degree or is considering making people write a test on the subject.  As I understand his idea, he merely wants to pre-approve people who understand the purpose and expectations for posting here.  I did not think it had anything to do with judging the theological or philosophical expertise of posters.

Kaesekopf, could you please clarify what sort of pre-approval criteria you have in mind?

Your understanding is the proper one


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Amen.   

[Insanis]

The forum needs quality control of some kind, either in restricting who can post or responding to inappropriate uses of the subforum.