• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

How to fix the forum environment

FollowingHim

FollowingHim

Administrator
Staff member
Real Person
Male
It has become increasingly clear to me that the environment of this forum is turning away people who could, in many cases, benefit greatly from this ministry. This is a marriage ministry, and it exists first and foremost to help people in their marriages. It cannot serve this purpose if people find it too adversarial and are unwilling to share for fear of criticism and argument.

Secondarily, it is a place for deep theological discussion in areas relating to marriage. This is very important. However, it is a secondary aim, that exists to support the primary aim but not replace it. It must not become the primary focus of every discussion, because that will turn people away and prevent them from getting help here.

So then let us pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding. Romans 14:19

Here is a suggestion that I would like to hear your thoughts on. It has not yet been discussed with the other staff, this is me thinking aloud and getting your thoughts so I can formulate a clear plan to discuss with the other staff. I wouldn't make any such changes by myself, anything like this would only be done as a joint approach with general agreement of all staff. I'm just getting information.

1) New forum layout

Sections as follows. Note that as the existing "Marriage Issues" etc sections are a mixed bag of practical advice and theological debate, so I'd put them entirely into the "Deeper discussion" section, make new blank forums for people to ask for marriage advice in, and then just shift back individual threads into these as requested.
  • Fellowship
    • Seeking information
    • Marriage issues (new section)
    • Singles & dating issues (new section)
    • Introductions
    • Testimonies
    • Prayer requests
    • Book reviews
    • Health, food and more
    • Retreats, meetups, local connections
    • Online outreach
    • Links of interest
    • Off topic
    • Website & forum
    • Gentlemen only
    • Ladies only
    • 25 and under
  • Deeper discussion (theology & more)
    • Marriage (current "Marriage Issues" section)
    • Family (current "Family Issues" section)
    • Pre-marriage (current "Singles Issues" section)
    • Problems and solutions
    • Biblical issues other than marriage and family
    • Messianic Jews / Hebrew Roots Gentiles
    • Anything else I've forgotten...
  • FAQs
    • As at present
  • Real people's stories
    • As at present
  • From BF Staff
    • As at present
2) New rules

The "Fellowship" section is for fellowship, marriage advice, general banter, and light theological discussion. Deep debate about theology is not permitted, but is encouraged elsewhere on the forum. So if a thread turns into a deep theological debate, the relevant posts can be split off as a new thread over in the "Deeper discussion" section, or the entire thread can be moved there, depending on the preference of the original poster. Moderators would focus on this section to ensure it remained friendly and welcoming.

If a discussion in the "Fellowship" section raises issues that warrant deeper discussion (e.g. a poster is expressing views that are questionable theologically), the correct approach is to start a new thread in the "Deeper discussion" section, and post a link to it in the original thread. Commenters there can then choose to follow the link or not.

The "Deeper discussion" section would be moderated more lightly as at present - mainly to prevent personal attacks. Concerns about individuals are to be taken to moderators in private, not aired in public.

How it should work:

Anybody (men and women) should feel comfortable discussing anything in the "Fellowship" section. Anybody having trouble in their marriage should find it a friendly, loving, family environment, where they are comfortable sharing their deep questions and not worrying about being criticised because they've got some little theological detail wrong. The women should be happy to post anywhere here, not just in Ladies Only.

Anybody who wishes to study any issue in more detail can delve into the "Deeper discussion" section, which will contain most of the current archive of discussions. Posting in that section may at times require a thicker skin, as the men who are sticklers for theological correctness will hang out there and delve into things with a careful eye for detail - and that's a good thing. So discussions here won't be for everyone, but everyone will find it a valuable reference even if they don't all choose to post there.

In this way, it would cater for both general groups of people here, both those seeking fellowship and those seeking deep theological discussion / debate.

Does this sound like it would help? Any thoughts would be great.

Bear in mind that my desire is not to tweak things to make the forum slightly less adversarial. My desire is to completely and radically change the entire atmosphere of the forum. If this isn't radical enough to achieve that, please tell me.
 
Last edited:
I think part of the problem is that new people don’t realize where the thread is located. I have been active on here for quite some time and I almost exclusively view the “new post” list and respond accordingly without paying attention to the location of the thread.

So while I think the overall idea is good perhaps something can be done to make it more obvious which section the thread is in otherwise the moderators will end up with a huge work load simply because people don’t realize they are in the “fellowship” section and they get into overly deep disagreements...
 
Pacman said:
I think part of the problem is that new people don’t realize where the thread is located. I have been active on here for quite some time and I almost exclusively view the “new post” list and respond accordingly without paying attention to the location of the thread.

So while I think the overall idea is good perhaps something can be done to make it more obvious which section the thread is in otherwise the moderators will end up with a huge work load simply because people don’t realize they are in the “fellowship” section and they get into overly deep disagreements...
Click to expand...

Is there a way to color-code or otherwise give a visual cue as to which “side” of the forum a conversation is happening?
 
Pacman said:
I think part of the problem is that new people don’t realize where the thread is located. I have been active on here for quite some time and I almost exclusively view the “new post” list and respond accordingly without paying attention to the location of the thread.

So while I think the overall idea is good perhaps something can be done to make it more obvious which section the thread is in otherwise the moderators will end up with a huge work load simply because people don’t realize they are in the “fellowship” section and they get into overly deep disagreements...
Click to expand...

It’s also worth pointing out that I have never been on this forum from a computer... I exclusively use mobile devices and I imagine some others are the same. So whatever changes should be obvious within all browsers not just on the computer...
 
KatyBeth said:
Is there a way to color-code or otherwise give a visual cue as to which “side” of the forum a conversation is happening?
Click to expand...
Yes, that can be done. BUT for practical reasons it would require us to set one forum "style" that everyone must use. At present people can change the style using a small link to the bottom left of the screen. I can change this so that people cannot manually choose the style, rather the style is set depending on what section you are looking at. This would no doubt annoy a few people who have found a style they like, but that's probably a small price to pay.

The other thing I can do is add floating popup messages, as you'll see on the bottom right when browsing gentlemen's only if you're a woman, or ladies only if you're a man.

Edit: Both work for mobile browsers too.
 
Here's my problem with splitting threads as they get heated, often the original offending post will be left behind and may then leave error unanswered. In some cases this might not be a big deal and in others it may be catastrophic.
There's no easy answer and nothing will be perfect.
I still think the majority of this "problem", to the extent it is a problem, has its root in people who are very close to and personally invested in the forum. I probably account for some significant portion of this myself. I am sure if we looked at the history of this issue on the forum you would find either people who are no longer here and then a bunch of recurring names, probably fewer than ten. I think trying to manage the many to control that few is a lot of work. It would probably be easier to focus moderating on those individuals, a sort of a "broken windows" moderating approach.
The problem with having two different forums, a "lite" option and a full throttle option is that the "lite" will end up being ignored and everyone will be piled up in the hardcore section grtting their feelings hurt again. No one wants to sit at the kiddy table. Or watch the WNBA.
 
I have to agree with @ZecAustin but with an added thought that it is possible that the ones that are 'no longer here' may have left because there wasn't some kind of control. The other thing to consider is the weight of any group thought, left or right, conservative or liberal, nice or adversarial. When one makes things off balance, there will always be a counterbalance, or at least there should be. So, if the controls were in place the 'no longer here' ones would stay and create the counterbalance to keep things in order.
 
@ZecAustin, I agree that it's a set of individuals, and I'm glad you recognise you're one of them - but you're certainly not the only one. And these individuals are not "bad" either - I'd actually highly value every one of them for their input.

I think there are generally (talking historically as well as at present) around 2-3 "argumentative" people, around a dozen "talkative" people, and a lot of "quiet" people. Both the "talkative" and the "quiet" are very happy to have "lite" discussions as you've called them. However, the moment one of the "argumentative" or "talkative" people makes a deep and controversial point, the "talkative" people jump right in and keep going into a major debate, and the "quiet" get pushed aside.

Without naming names other than you and I, I'd put myself in the "talkative" bracket. I too have been responsible for such debates, not usually starting them but often perpetuating them. I'd also put you there usually, apart from the odd evening where you get into an argumentative mood! Most of the men who post often would be in this category.

But all of these men are quite happy to also have "lite" discussions, if only they have a reminder of some form not to take it too deep. We don't intend to debate everything - it just happens and before we know it things have ended up somewhere they never were intended to go.
 
Cap said:
I have to agree with @ZecAustin but with an added thought that it is possible that the ones that are 'no longer here' may have left because there wasn't some kind of control. The other thing to consider is the weight of any group thought, left or right, conservative or liberal, nice or adversarial. When one makes things off balance, there will always be a counterbalance, or at least there should be. So, if the controls were in place the 'no longer here' ones would stay and create the counterbalance to keep things in order.
Click to expand...
"No longer here" includes two categories: Those who got so severely out of line that they were kicked out by the moderators, and those who quietly left because they perceived a lack of control. There are people in both groups. And always there will simultaneously be people who think the moderators do too little, and others who think they're too heavy-handed. And whenever there's a serious dispute and two people are being equally moderated, each thinks they're being picked on and the other is being let off lightly, even if both are treated the same... It's a tough job trying to keep control of this place! :)

Though I'd agree with you that recently we've tended towards the low control end of the spectrum. This probably does mean that over the recent couple of years those that have quietly left will outnumber those who were booted, and we will have an unbalanced group to some extent because a portion of the quieter people have simply walked away.
 
FollowingHim said:
Without naming names other than you and I, I'd put myself in the "talkative" bracket. I too have been responsible for such debates, not usually starting them but often perpetuating them. I'd also put you there usually, apart from the odd evening where you get into an argumentative mood! Most of the men who post often would be in this category. .
Click to expand...

Wave-Your-Hand.png
 
I think it should be toned way down and nobody should be allowed to offend anyone else... BUT we will need one place in the forum that will be called “the Parking Lot” where it’s no holds barred, enter at your own risk, so we can say “OK, you wanna take it outside?!”
 
It seems odd that I can attack ,slur, defame, malign the characters of other members and no need to be concerned or even apologise
I visit a few other threads forums etc and the best one that jumps to mind has firm rules of conduct
If you break the rules you get suspended and your post removed. No ifs or buts... then the offender has to wait it out or put a case to the staff.

But Here, if I’m feeling generous I can call you all manner of things with no real consequences.
Or label you harshly having never meet you or talked to you
there’s no need for apologies, retraction or removal of comments
It’s plainly acceptable on some level
I have no problem with heavy discussion or debate
The problem for me is
I want to associate with the great men and woman of God, the fearless ones.( there is some greatness here)
But some of the silliness is not consistent for men of high caliber
When I come away from fellowship with others it’s good to feel lifted up ,not beaten down.
I really appreciate what moderators do here
However The moderators don’t set the tone here.
We do with every post. it’s a collective effort.
 
People are complaining about a lack of moderation here - but almost nobody reports any posts as needing moderation. The moderators often do not have time to read everything and rely on people to actually report things. If it hasn't been reported to the moderators then please don't expect anything to be done about it. There is a "report" button on every post.
 
FollowingHim said:
People are complaining about a lack of moderation here - but almost nobody reports any posts as needing moderation. The moderators often do not have time to read everything and rely on people to actually report things. If it hasn't been reported to the moderators then please don't expect anything to be done about it. There is a "report" button on every post.
Click to expand...

Didn't actual know how that worked.
 
ZecAustin said:
Here's my problem with splitting threads as they get heated, often the original offending post will be left behind and may then leave error unanswered. In some cases this might not be a big deal and in others it may be catastrophic.
Click to expand...

But therein lies part of the problem. I'm much closer to the conservative/fundamentalist side of theology, but I don't see it as my job to correct everyone and bring them into my camp. It may sound soft and weak, but sometimes a spoon full of sugar helps the medicine go down. Shout at someone who you believe is in error and hes likely to walk. Befriend him and share your personal experience and belief...you may win a convert. Even if you don't, you still have a friend.
 
Glad to see you liked that one @Joleneakamama. You are a prime example of what I am speaking about. We got into a few tussles back a ways, but we found common ground on more than we disagreed. Then, when we met at a retreat, we were able to cement respect. Much of all of this might get resolved if we were all able to meet in person.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top