Moderator?
Jose Baiocchi
I agree that Lory helped a lot today and showed us how to do a great job as a moderator. Thanks Lory.
However, I believe that we should not have a permanent moderator, but rather anyone can assume the task when necessary. I say this because being a moderator requires to be impartial/indifferent to the result of a particular discussion, which means that either the moderator will have to restrain him/herself from sharing his/her opinion or may end up doing a biased job. Given the nature of our discussions this scenario is not unlikely and I don't think this will benefit neither the group nor the moderator.
So my vote is against having a permanent moderator, but in favor of nominating/volunteering someone to act in that capacity for our debates if the group feels this is necessary. Whoever if chosen/volunteers should not be a part of the discussion but rather guide it and make sure everybody has time to express his/her views.
I'd like to suggest (and this includes self-criticism) that we should all respect each other's time and make an effort to express our points in a direct and concise way so everyone else can understand them and provide feedback. Also, be aware that there are topics that by their very nature are unlikely to generate an agreement so they should be the subject of exposition only.
I think we should start proposing topics for the following weeks, too.
God bless you all,
Jose
Shenoda Guirguis
I am sorry Jose, I disagree with you J
Without details, we have been meeting for a year without a permanent moderator, and it wasn't that successful. So, let us give it a try with a permanent moderator. May be it becomes better, especially we saw a success from Lory, and also enthusiasm and new good ideas (like meeting for lunch)….Who do you know? She might do the job unbiased, and yet tell her own opinion (I personally believe in her, she will do it!)
I still vote that we give it a try and see how it goes.
Regarding exploding discussions, I re-suggest the ring-style conversation, instead of the free-style one. In which everyone has a turn and time limit to express him/her-self.
+Sh
Peter Djalaliev
This is silly...come on. If Lory is there, she will be the moderator, if not - somebody else. If Lory doesn't want to be the moderator (e.g. if she doesn't feel comfortable moderating the current topic), somebody else can be. What's the big deal about the PERMANENT moderator? As long as we have one, it's fine. Most of the time it can be Lory...
Peace,
Pesho
Shenoda Guirguis
I think what you said is my idea of a permanent moderator :)) calling it whatever, I agree to what Peter just said.
Jose Baiocchi
I would like to ask: why do you attribute the "lack of success" of the group meetings to not having a (permanent) moderator? Please explain this to me because I don't see the relation. Also, how do you measure "success" for this kind of group?
If there has to be a permanent moderator (I still don't see the need for one), I say Lory is a great choice, but leave it up to her to accept or decline doing it.
Thanks,
Jose
Shenoda Guirguis
In fact I believe we failed both from organizational point of view (and
that what I meant in my original message) that we didn't meet regularly,
we didn't have a line/discipline of study & no committment.
"But all things should be done decently and in order." (1 Cor 14:40)
I also believe we need to review our spiritual goals.
"What then, brothers? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a
lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be
done for building up." (1 Cor 14:26)
With Love in Christ!
+Sh
Jose Baiocchi
I now understand better Shenoda's concern. Still, I respectfully disagree that the solution for what has been a collective failure is nominating someone to be in charge (i thought the role of moderator is different than that of promoter).
I suggest to make the review of our goals as a group the topic of our next meeting. Also discuss if and why have we been failed in the sense Shenoda points out and what should be done in the future to improve.
Something I was talking about yesterday with Michel and PJ is that as interesting as our discussions about certain topics could be, we are not being faithful to the name of the group. As a "Bible Study" group we should be studying the Bible and trying to find the answers for our questions there. I propose to post the topic for a meeting here in the list a week in advance, so we all have time to do our homework and come to the study with the passages that we think relate to the topic. Also, if some questions appear over the discussion that we are not able to answer (I am personally far from being a Bible "expert"), we should take note and do a recap at the beginning of the next meeting.
Let me know what you think about all of this, thanks.
God bless you all,
- Jose
Brian Staskowski
From: PC...@googlegroups.com [mailto:PC...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Shenoda Guirguis
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 6:46 PM
Shenoda Guirguis
Brian, we thank you for joining us last meeting, it was a blessing (at least to me). And be sure that you did not cause any problems at all.
+Sh
From:
PC...@googlegroups.com [mailto:PC...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Brian Staskowski
Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2007 3:26 PM
To: PC...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [PCBS] Re: Moderator?
Hi everyone,
Thank you for having me last time. I hope I didn't cause too many problems last week, I had forgotten the long emails discussions on old vs. new testament in this group (and that there were some feelings still lingering about them). But my question about punishment was in earnest, not questioning the existence of god or faith, but that one of the major differences between the old and new testaments is the idea of punishment. I am still not sure what the answer is, but thank you for providing your thoughts and opinions. I enjoyed the discussion and the fresh air.
-Brian
From:
PC...@googlegroups.com [mailto:PC...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Shenoda Guirguis
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 6:46 PM
To: PC...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [PCBS] Re: Moderator?
I think what you said is my idea of a permanent moderator :)) calling it whatever, I agree to what Peter just said.
From:
PC...@googlegroups.com [mailto:PC...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Peter Djalaliev
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 6:35
PM
To: PC...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [PCBS] Re: Moderator?
Guys...
This is silly...come on. If Lory is there, she will be the moderator, if
not - somebody else. If Lory doesn't want to be the moderator (e.g. if
she doesn't feel comfortable moderating the current topic), somebody else can
be. What's the big deal about the PERMANENT moderator? As long as
we have one, it's fine. Most of the time it can be Lory...
Peace,
Pesho
<BR