This is for casual members who don't come here often. Is there anything that would make you more active on RF? If so, what would it be?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What Would Make You More Active on RF?
- Thread starter Debater Slayer
- Start date
Second, and I'll pass this along to the tech guy.
Last edited:
When @DebaterSlayer said 'This is for casual members', he wasn't talking about your lack of formal attire.
You three ( @Wirey @Nietzsche and @Quagmire ) are RF tragics, face it.
You three ( @Wirey @Nietzsche and @Quagmire ) are RF tragics, face it.
I DO WHAT I WANT.
Treks
Well-Known Member
"It's me, not you." I'm not so active in the forum these days because I'm in a liminal phase and don't have much to contribute. I check the threads in 'New Posts' regularly, but not many catch my interest at the moment.
So, really, the forum itself is fine. It has all the tools one needs to monitor their topics of interest. I guess casual members are pickier with what they talk about? I dunno.
So, really, the forum itself is fine. It has all the tools one needs to monitor their topics of interest. I guess casual members are pickier with what they talk about? I dunno.
A minor Thought: Could there be a symbol for each religion for users to chose from underneath the 'religion' tab. e.g. a cross (Christians), a moon and cresent (Islam), a wheel (Buddhists), maybe the 'A' symbol for atheists.
e.g.
Religion: Christian
(< about this size, so it's not obstrusive)
Religion: Islam
(smaller obviously)
Religion: Buddhism
Religion: Satanism
Religion: Scientology
etc. you can see where I'm going with this...
It plays on group psychology lets everyone know's "whose who". pictures and symbols communicate it more quickly and more easily than words as it's just one glance. In that sense, people may feel they 'belong' more- but it's subtle, non-invasive and may make people feel they can share more, be open and therefore 'active'. it would also make the rules on DIR easier to enforce if you wanted to do. it would also make it easier to know if any one group is dominant in terms of numbers or activity in the forum (I'd guess it be atheists atm). You would need a 'none of the above' or 'other' option so they don't feel they have to chose and that it's ok not to follow a major religion.
The downside is that it is a bit sectarian and favours conforming to the 'big religions' who a) have widely known symbols, b) won't recognise denomination and c) if it's controlled centrally- will depend on the admins giving recognition to a religion/belief system, d) is a bit superfical and may encourage 'evangalism' to get people to wear the right 'badge' and encourage herd conformity, e) may discourage people with less well-known or more controversial beliefs, f) ironically, it might create a problem that admins powers reflect their religious views. But I'm speculating. These could all be fairly minor things for 90% of the time, but will come up in that 10% of the time when people feel the need to 'chose' sides and do it on 'gut' instinct rather than thinking it through when dealing with something really controversial.
although from the admins point of view, it would make it easier for you to know who to purge to build your "perfect" forum of complete yes men.
Religion: Commie.
food for thought anyway.
e.g.
Religion: Christian
Religion: Islam
Religion: Buddhism
Religion: Satanism
Religion: Scientology
etc. you can see where I'm going with this...
It plays on group psychology lets everyone know's "whose who". pictures and symbols communicate it more quickly and more easily than words as it's just one glance. In that sense, people may feel they 'belong' more- but it's subtle, non-invasive and may make people feel they can share more, be open and therefore 'active'. it would also make the rules on DIR easier to enforce if you wanted to do. it would also make it easier to know if any one group is dominant in terms of numbers or activity in the forum (I'd guess it be atheists atm). You would need a 'none of the above' or 'other' option so they don't feel they have to chose and that it's ok not to follow a major religion.
The downside is that it is a bit sectarian and favours conforming to the 'big religions' who a) have widely known symbols, b) won't recognise denomination and c) if it's controlled centrally- will depend on the admins giving recognition to a religion/belief system, d) is a bit superfical and may encourage 'evangalism' to get people to wear the right 'badge' and encourage herd conformity, e) may discourage people with less well-known or more controversial beliefs, f) ironically, it might create a problem that admins powers reflect their religious views. But I'm speculating. These could all be fairly minor things for 90% of the time, but will come up in that 10% of the time when people feel the need to 'chose' sides and do it on 'gut' instinct rather than thinking it through when dealing with something really controversial.
although from the admins point of view, it would make it easier for you to know who to purge to build your "perfect" forum of complete yes men.
Religion: Commie.
food for thought anyway.
I like Religious Forums, although I'd probably fall more into the "casual member" category. I read a lot more threads than I actually post on. I was almost going to post something the other day, but then I realized it was in response to a thread in "Libertarian Only." Since I'm not a Libertarian, I had to refrain from posting. Religious topics are interesting, but it's also nice to branch out and discuss other topics as well.
It's good that there is the section entitled "Everything but the kitchen sink," but there doesn't seem to be as much activity or interest as there is in religious-oriented topics. So, if there are too few people with similar interests to have a discussion with, then one just has to accept it and move on.
I also find it a bit puzzling, the way it's organized. For example, if I wanted to start a discussion on politics, do I put it under "Political Debates" or "The Political World"? Or perhaps it might go under "Current Events," which is under "General Discussion." It seems that a lot of sub-sections are redundant and organized in a manner which seems counterintuitive. There's a section on "Historical Debates" under "General Debates," but no section where one can just discuss history in general without having a debate. I don't understand that. And if one wants to have a political debate, then I presume they should put it under "Political Debates" and not under "General Debates."
More Christians that believe and do the words of Jesus written in the Holy Bible. John 14: 12-14.
I do get the feeling that RF is dominated by the atheists, probably in numbers- but definetely in terms of activity. It would be good to have more devout believers on here. not sure how you'd do it though?
I don't think it's dominated by Atheists. However Christians that don't believe and do the words of Jesus in John 14: 12-14 have less respect then Atheists.
so what you mean is, it's not the number, but the qualitity- both morally and intellectually?
I've experienced Atheists being above Christian morals because they feel intrinsically. Christians follow words (beliefs) from people other then themselves.
dust1n
Zindīq
Just a tip, when making a thread in the general religious debates or general discussion, you can qualify your thread ath beginning with Theists Only: or Muslims Only: or Abrahamic Religions Only: "Name of Topic." While I don't think these are backed by rules at all, they are pretty much well respected.
There's also the Same Faith Debates section. There's also many many DIR forms where people of the same faith can discuss and debate, and there is also the private DIR "Theists Only!" which I understand is active.
It wouldn't hurt for mods to have an informal first step of advising posters when they're being abusive.
I speculate that requiring something less than 3 mods agreeing upon some warning could encourage stepping in more often.
Abusive posts seem rampant.
That's gotta scare away normal people.