We know that people have to be more mindful of choosing a post title because the title of the most recent thread will show up on the main forums page. But is it okay to use abbreviations like CHR, PGN, etc. in the title, so people will have a better idea of whether it's something they want to read?

MDs

test test test.... I tried to reply to this post earlier, and I got an error because my computers have this urge to return to the old site...

Let's see if it works now...

(05-27-2012 12:52 PM)MakersDozn Wrote:  But is it okay to use abbreviations like CHR, PGN, etc. in the title, so people will have a better idea of whether it's something they want to read?

My personal preference would be that this forum not be affiliated with any particular set of spiritual beliefs. It is only my opinion, but I would prefer also that the tolerance type of thing which I am seeking would be much more than just a peaceful coexistence.

I am not particularly wedded to any set of spiritual beliefs, so maybe that is where I am coming from in wanting this place to be more open, generally, to the whole concept of spirituality.

So - I guess if we're taking a vote, and I had not heard that we were, but anyway -- lol -- I would vote for not marking posts as being a particular spiritual flavor. I would vote for all posts being able to be posted in a general framework of spirituality, and to be taken that way as well.

As always, YMMV

(05-28-2012 10:38 AM)Kathleen Wrote:  My personal preference would be that this forum not be affiliated with any particular set of spiritual beliefs. It is only my opinion, but I would prefer also that the tolerance type of thing which I am seeking would be much more than just a peaceful coexistence.[...]

So - I guess if we're taking a vote, and I had not heard that we were, but anyway -- lol -- I would vote for not marking posts as being a particular spiritual flavor. I would vote for all posts being able to be posted in a general framework of spirituality, and to be taken that way as well.

Noted. Thanks.

OTOH, we don't think that designating individual posts as discussing a specific set of beliefs constitutes affiliating the forum as a whole with a specific set of beliefs.

As for posts being made in a general framework of spirituality....In an ideal world, perhaps this would be the case. But many people take their particular beliefs very personally, and even if they post and reply respectfully, and keep an open mind, their beliefs may still remain very personal to them, often to the point of factoring strongly into their self-concept.

And some survivors, especially those who were abused in a religious context, may just not be at the point where they're able to deal with certain material. Yes, we want to encourage system responsibility, but we think that we also need to be mindful that people heal at different rates.

Thanks again. We appreciate your thoughts on this.

MDs

I see it both ways. Kathleen has an interesting take on it, and at the same time I agree with MD that marking in the post title (I could assign specific post prefixes for this) doesn't associate the forum with a particular brand of spirituality or religion. What it does it convey information about that particular post - like this post is about Christianity or this post is about Buddhism, etc.

So I guess I would be of the opinion that if people want to clarify their topics they can do that, but I don't think it should be required.

Lea....good points. Thanks. Your statement that such a tag would "convey information" was precisely what we meant when we posed the question. And when we asked, we were asking if including a tag would be okay (rather than asking if a tag should be required).

MDs

(05-28-2012 11:10 AM)MakersDozn Wrote:  OTOH, we don't think that designating individual posts as discussing a specific set of beliefs constitutes affiliating the forum as a whole with a specific set of beliefs.

I was prolly unclear. I did not think that marking posts as being of a particular belief set marked the forum as being of that same mind set. My thinking was that having to state ahead of time that XYZ spiritual belief system was going to be discussed was a bit like saying that we need to warn each other that we have strong beliefs.

I think we ought to all understand that in a forum such as this most of the folks DO have strongly held beliefs (is that redundant? they call it BELIEF for a reason, right?), but I think that we also ought to be wide open to the idea that probably none of our strongly held beliefs exactly matches anyone else's. What we tend to do, I think, is to sort of "team up" with people who share roughly the same beliefs.

If we were to start out with the idea that this is a mystery, and we may have very strong beliefs, but they are based on understanding and faith and mental imagery, etc... and that we DON'T have the same ideas about these things... I think it puts us in the frame of mind to really hear one another -- like "this is what I think, and the thought processes that brought me to this point", and "I think it is kind of like this...".

Maybe it is because I don't have any very strongly held beliefs, just wonderment and awe at lots of things, and some rough ideas about how the whole shebang might work, that I see that most of the people who "agree" with each other, in fact, don't (agree with each other).

I know what you were asking, though, and you and The Warren are right... it just conveys information. But I guess sometimes I think using shorthand loses something in the process.

(05-27-2012 12:52 PM)MakersDozn Wrote:  .. is it okay to use abbreviations like CHR, PGN, etc. in the title, so people will have a better idea of whether it's something they want to read?

OK, but not required would be my view.

nats....thanks for the reply. We ourselves are in agreement.

Kathleen....thanks for clarifying. It helps.

MDs

I'd say don't require it, but if someone wants to label a post, feel free.