Actscelerate.com Forum Index Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
r/Actscelerate

2024 General Assembly agenda item on social media

 
   Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Acts-Celerate Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Message Author
Post 2024 General Assembly agenda item on social media Quiet Wyatt
The powers that be clearly want to clamp down much harder on social media interaction, judging by the GA Agenda item we just received. On first reading, it appears to give far greater subjective judgment to what would constitute irresponsible use of social media, by including quite subjectively defined concepts such as being “harsh” to its list of forbidden things on social media. No doubt the many CoG snowflakes amongst us will be the first to cry “harsh” and to accuse tellers of uncomfortable truths of being unloving.

No doubt about it, the powers that be are riled up about all the flak they’ve received about Lee in recent years, and are looking to stifle dissent.
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12813
6/3/24 11:07 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Nature Boy Florida
They don't want what comes with social media.

So, sadly, they won't reach the people that interact on social media.

COG always 50 years behind.
_________________
Whether you like it or not, learn to love it, because its the best thing going today!
Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 16641
6/4/24 8:18 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: 2024 General Assembly agenda item on social media FLRon
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
The powers that be clearly want to clamp down much harder on social media interaction, judging by the GA Agenda item we just received. On first reading, it appears to give far greater subjective judgment to what would constitute irresponsible use of social media, by including quite subjectively defined concepts such as being “harsh” to its list of forbidden things on social media. No doubt the many CoG snowflakes amongst us will be the first to cry “harsh” and to accuse tellers of uncomfortable truths of being unloving.

No doubt about it, the powers that be are riled up about all the flak they’ve received about Lee in recent years, and are looking to stifle dissent.


Would you mind posting the info for those of us not in the loop?
_________________
“Hell will be filled with people that didn’t cuss, didn’t drink, and may even have been baptized. Why? Because none of those things makes someone a Christian.”
Voddie Baucham
Acts-celerater
Posts: 782
6/7/24 3:43 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Quiet Wyatt
https://mcusercontent.com/98e1da87c6ba38bba6f45c48b/files/e523b2b2-8d2f-bab4-0795-9310431a7c1d/GA24_Agenda_rdx.pdf

The portion regarding Social Media use can be found on page B-59, or you can search for “Social Media” and find it within the PDF.

The primarily troubling portion is the use of the terms, “harsh” and “demeaning” which are defined as “personal attacks,” by this motion. So, anyone whose comments might be considered “harsh” or “demeaning” could be accused and perhaps even subjected to ecclesiastical discipline, censure, or even trial based on such subjectively defined terms.

(I tried copying and pasting the relevant portion of the Agenda, but for some reason I was not able to on my phone).
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12813
6/7/24 4:51 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Censorship 4thgeneration
I don't think it stands a chance. It sounds too much like censorship, and is too vague in its wording. As it is written, anyone could feel offended, deem posts a violation, and press charges against a minister.
Just my O!
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1607
6/8/24 8:07 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post georgiapath
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
https://mcusercontent.com/98e1da87c6ba38bba6f45c48b/files/e523b2b2-8d2f-bab4-0795-9310431a7c1d/GA24_Agenda_rdx.pdf

The portion regarding Social Media use can be found on page B-59, or you can search for “Social Media” and find it within the PDF.

The primarily troubling portion is the use of the terms, “harsh” and “demeaning” which are defined as “personal attacks,” by this motion. So, anyone whose comments might be considered “harsh” or “demeaning” could be accused and perhaps even subjected to ecclesiastical discipline, censure, or even trial based on such subjectively defined terms.

(I tried copying and pasting the relevant portion of the Agenda, but for some reason I was not able to on my phone).


I clicked on the above link and read it all.
Acts-dicted
Posts: 7601
6/8/24 10:37 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Censorship Quiet Wyatt
4thgeneration wrote:
I don't think it stands a chance. It sounds too much like censorship, and is too vague in its wording. As it is written, anyone could feel offended, deem posts a violation, and press charges against a minister.
Just my O!


I hope you are right. It is very concerning that the EC felt this motion should be on the agenda.
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12813
6/8/24 11:30 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post georgiapath
What is menclature? I've never seen that word before. It's in B-54 No 9. Acts-dicted
Posts: 7601
6/8/24 12:21 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post I did not find “menclature” or any word similar on that page Quiet Wyatt
I searched the entire Agenda for the word, “menclature,” and only found “nomenclature.” I also googled “menclature definition” and it took me to the definition of “nomenclature.” [Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12813
6/8/24 12:48 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: I did not find “menclature” or any word similar on that page georgiapath
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
I searched the entire Agenda for the word, “menclature,” and only found “nomenclature.” I also googled “menclature definition” and it took me to the definition of “nomenclature.”


Sorry. that's it. What does it mean?
Acts-dicted
Posts: 7601
6/8/24 5:58 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post FLRon
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
https://mcusercontent.com/98e1da87c6ba38bba6f45c48b/files/e523b2b2-8d2f-bab4-0795-9310431a7c1d/GA24_Agenda_rdx.pdf

The portion regarding Social Media use can be found on page B-59, or you can search for “Social Media” and find it within the PDF.

The primarily troubling portion is the use of the terms, “harsh” and “demeaning” which are defined as “personal attacks,” by this motion. So, anyone whose comments might be considered “harsh” or “demeaning” could be accused and perhaps even subjected to ecclesiastical discipline, censure, or even trial based on such subjectively defined terms.

(I tried copying and pasting the relevant portion of the Agenda, but for some reason I was not able to on my phone).


Thank you!
_________________
“Hell will be filled with people that didn’t cuss, didn’t drink, and may even have been baptized. Why? Because none of those things makes someone a Christian.”
Voddie Baucham
Acts-celerater
Posts: 782
6/8/24 8:58 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Censorship FLRon
4thgeneration wrote:
I don't think it stands a chance. It sounds too much like censorship, and is too vague in its wording. As it is written, anyone could feel offended, deem posts a violation, and press charges against a minister.
Just my O!


Once again, it would seem the CoG wants to go backwards instead of forwards. Heavy-handed, overreaching, strong arm attempts to “control” people never works. Furthermore, the entire proposed resolution could be summed up in “love your neighbor as yourself”.
_________________
“Hell will be filled with people that didn’t cuss, didn’t drink, and may even have been baptized. Why? Because none of those things makes someone a Christian.”
Voddie Baucham
Acts-celerater
Posts: 782
6/8/24 9:01 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: I did not find “menclature” or any word similar on that page Quiet Wyatt
georgiapath wrote:
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
I searched the entire Agenda for the word, “menclature,” and only found “nomenclature.” I also googled “menclature definition” and it took me to the definition of “nomenclature.”


Sorry. that's it. What does it mean?


From Oxford:

the devising or choosing of names for things, especially in a science or other discipline.
"the Linnean system of zoological nomenclature"
the body or system of names in a particular field.
plural noun: nomenclatures
"the nomenclature of chemical compounds"
FORMAL
the term or terms applied to someone or something.
"“customers” was preferred to the original nomenclature “passengers.”"
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12813
6/8/24 9:14 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: I did not find “menclature” or any word similar on that page georgiapath
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
georgiapath wrote:
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
I searched the entire Agenda for the word, “menclature,” and only found “nomenclature.” I also googled “menclature definition” and it took me to the definition of “nomenclature.”


Sorry. that's it. What does it mean?


From Oxford:

the devising or choosing of names for things, especially in a science or other discipline.
"the Linnean system of zoological nomenclature"
the body or system of names in a particular field.
plural noun: nomenclatures
"the nomenclature of chemical compounds"
FORMAL
the term or terms applied to someone or something.
"“customers” was preferred to the original nomenclature “passengers.”"



Thank you.
Acts-dicted
Posts: 7601
6/9/24 6:13 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Censorship 4thgeneration
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
4thgeneration wrote:
I don't think it stands a chance. It sounds too much like censorship, and is too vague in its wording. As it is written, anyone could feel offended, deem posts a violation, and press charges against a minister.
Just my O!


I hope you are right. It is very concerning that the EC felt this motion should be on the agenda.


I feel like it is a reaction to a few people stirring things concerning Lee University and the charges that were filed against TJ on a couple of FB sites.
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1607
6/9/24 8:36 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Nature Boy Florida
FLRon wrote:
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
https://mcusercontent.com/98e1da87c6ba38bba6f45c48b/files/e523b2b2-8d2f-bab4-0795-9310431a7c1d/GA24_Agenda_rdx.pdf

The portion regarding Social Media use can be found on page B-59, or you can search for “Social Media” and find it within the PDF.

The primarily troubling portion is the use of the terms, “harsh” and “demeaning” which are defined as “personal attacks,” by this motion. So, anyone whose comments might be considered “harsh” or “demeaning” could be accused and perhaps even subjected to ecclesiastical discipline, censure, or even trial based on such subjectively defined terms.

(I tried copying and pasting the relevant portion of the Agenda, but for some reason I was not able to on my phone).


Thank you!


So was it harsh to rip the whole Exec Committee for very poor management of finances when they let an employee take a minimum of 1,000,000 in tithe dollars right from under their nose?

Would I get brought up on charges for pointing that out today?

We already know you get charges for posting someone's picture approving of gay affirming communion.

COG should just close down now if this happens. You can never say "the Emperor has no clothes" with that kind of rule.

Find us an infallible Pope to run things.
Evil or Very Mad Evil or Very Mad Evil or Very Mad Evil or Very Mad
_________________
Whether you like it or not, learn to love it, because its the best thing going today!
Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 16641
6/9/24 2:23 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Carolyn Smith
Hereafter known as the TJ motion... Laughing Laughing Laughing
_________________
"More of Him...less of me."
http://twitter.com/camiracle77
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=691241499&ref=name
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5921
6/9/24 4:12 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Censorship georgiapath
4thgeneration wrote:
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
4thgeneration wrote:
I don't think it stands a chance. It sounds too much like censorship, and is too vague in its wording. As it is written, anyone could feel offended, deem posts a violation, and press charges against a minister.
Just my O!


I hope you are right. It is very concerning that the EC felt this motion should be on the agenda.


I feel like it is a reaction to a few people stirring things concerning Lee University and the charges that were filed against TJ on a couple of FB sites.


They want to make sure nobody does what TJ did, it's a warning I think.
Acts-dicted
Posts: 7601
6/9/24 7:18 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Nature Boy Florida
Carolyn Smith wrote:
Hereafter known as the TJ motion... Laughing Laughing Laughing


Agreed.
_________________
Whether you like it or not, learn to love it, because its the best thing going today!
Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 16641
6/10/24 9:02 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Acts-Celerate Post new topic   Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Acts-celerate Terms of Use | Acts-celerate Policy
Contact the Administrator.


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group :: Spelling by SpellingCow.