thief of fire

Probably not . I think it's worth trying.

Did something similar happen with Science and Pseudosceince a while back?

TedM

I have an idea which may sound awful at first, but hear me out:

Limit the number of postings per person/per day to something like 5, and the number of new threads per person/per week to something like 1 or 2. This would not apply to moderators, of course.

What will this accomplish?

It will increase the quality of postings:

*People will try to use their postings more wisely, and say more meaningful things.

*People with an agenda will be limited from repeating the same thing over and over again.

*It will reduce the dominance of the forum by a relatively few number of posters, and will increase the number of different posters using the forum: With a reduction in dominance will come a sense of 'being heard' in greater proportion by those who feel 'squeezed out' by dominant posters.

The thread may well 'slow down' in quantity of postings initially, but over time I believe this will increase the quality of postings, and as a consequence the number of new higher quality posters.

A reasonable response to this idea likely will be: People should just use the ignore button. The problem is that they rarely do and that simply won't change.

The numbers of course can be adjusted depending on the results. Of course this assumes the forum software can be set up to impose such limits, and in a way that is clear to the members.

spin

There was a reason why I talked of "heavy moderation." Frequent abusers can be blocked from write access to the subforum for some forfeit time, then there would be no question of refraining.

You need specific rules, which basically resolve to the rule of scholarship.

DCHindley

I think this would be a good thing. The fact is, the neo-Christian intelligentsia, such as Loren Rosson III (The Busybody), Stephen Carlson (Hyptyposeis), etc, do not come here to play anymore. Even agnostic historicist turned mythicist Rick Sumner (The Dilettante Exegete) hasn't posted here for over 6 months.

The reason, I think, is this:

Blogs and exclusive membership Facebook pages stroke folk's egos. I've noticed that very few blogs offer much in the way of detail about the authors' occupations, marital status, etc (perhaps they are ashamed to be patent lawyers or librarians), but still go out of their way to concentrate on promoting the author's agendas. Besides the (a)historical Jesus, they are usually also interested in video games and especially online versions of games, movies, pop music & popular culture, and their newly born children, as if generating children proves they are regular folks rather than over-intellectual wonks living in a bubble (move over Republican congressmen in the USA, and let then in).

IMHO, though, I think what keeps most academics away from this list is the sheer volume of noise: guffaws hurled at whoever thinks differently, bald assertions without proof (of course, "It is "obvious, so what need do we have for discussion of the facts at hand?), snide put downs, rude behavior.

We could also use more everyday folks who actually like to find new things out.

I've tried several times to urge Ben C Smith, (one of the most polite guys I have ever known, who works for a test grading service with an undergrad degree in The Classics) back into the fold, but he kept saying that he could not bear to read the scrambled posts by aa and MountainMan. I suggested the "ignore" option but he said he just couldn't stop himself from trying to bring order to their disordered reasoning. In other words, they gave him a headache and made him want to get off the bus (to be fair, he also had other personal issues that kind of broke his will to investigate religion anymore).

It doesn't just happen here. I used to know a guy named Steven Craig Miller (a house husband married to a physician, with an undergrad degree in the Classics) who used to moderate a BC&H Forum on www.Compuserve.com. On Compuserve, he was very very sharp and decisive. He could detect flaws in anyone's hypotheses, and makes use of question-answer dialogue like Socrates. We both left Compuserve forums after AOL took it over about 1997. Around 1998 I suggested that he join the Synoptic-l group where I was then posting. He got a lot of flack about his question style of exposing flaws in reasoning, or at least the academics took offense that he could seriously question them. He left just after 1/1/2001, evidently because he felt that the academics were talking down to him as an unlearned couth rather than answering his sensible questions. A very interesting exchange between him, Stephen Carlson and Leonard Maluf can be accessed here.

Stephan Hüller, in spite of his tendency to go off on obsessive tangents., is also a very smart fellow who has no difficulty going to sources and sorting out data. You'll notice even he is not posting as often as he used to. What I'd give for more discussions like the one we had over the Greek text and Latin translations of, or quotations by Tertullian, of Irenaeus' Against Heresies, or over the disputation between Adamantius and Marcionites, or of Ephraem Syrus' statements about Marcion.

Roger Pearse knows quite a lot about ancient source texts translated into English, and can be exceptionally helpful with details of these texts.

Toto is also a wonderful source of information about secondary and tertiary literature pertaining to biblical criticism, having moderated this list for a decade.

Spin, although a little snarky at times, appears to have an intimate knowledge of biblical criticism. If he states anything, he appears to me to have already worked out the issues beforehand. No shooting from the hip.

For this to work will require set rules of engagement and propriety. Any guffaws or put down posts would immediately get sent to Limbo. Require any claims made about the positions of this or that author be cited fully (include title of book and page numbers). Being too lazy to search for downloadable copies of older books, or using university libraries where accessible or at least inter-library loans, sends bald assertions to Limbo. Encourage the use of "In my humble opinion" when drawing a conclusion. Instead of acting like a pack of hyenas, tearing apart helpless prey for sport, maybe we should rather ask those questions: "How does this or that fact, which were not cited by you, affect your hypothesis?" Take the reasoning process step by step in considering an issue.

Just my 2ȼ. DCH

Tommy

I read the Biblical Criticism and History Forum more than any other sub-forum on FRDB. I would post here more but there is often an emphasis on certain scholars: Ehrman, Doherty, Pryce etc. I understand why that would be the case but I am still at the stage of browsing scripture itself which I think is necessary before considering secondary criticism. Also there is too much HJ v MJ polarity when I think most people would have sympathies somewhere in the middle of the spectrum.

In dealing with the religious they will always return to scripture and engage in discussion regarding it; one is likely to get far less traction with the latest Bart Ehrman book. Would it be possible to have a sub-sub-forum of BCH, or at least some threads, discussing what is recorded in scripture without the higher criticism?

outhouse

Im here to learn.

The only positive thing about these wild poster, is in refuting them, im actively researching new material and picking up on new aspects of a very wide and diverse field of study.


I wish I could see more of you and Spin posting in threads, as I not only pick up new ideas, but sometimes I get a glimpse outside the box so to speak.

I enjoy the differences in scholarships, and choose to follow many differents scholars as I havnt found one that I believe has nailed it.



I do undertsand this is about educated opinions, and what we see more often then not is uneducated opinions, myself being guilty as well. If we did try a new forum section that was moderated tighly, im afraid do to the diverse nature here, moderation bias, would raise its ugly head.

[and im not aiming at Toto whom I respect]

Adam

Toto, please clarify whether this is too be applied only for future posts, or if it does apply to past threads whether you want relevant footnotes and commentories placed in new posts on such threads (stating which post is being footnoted)--or is it conceivable that old posts could be opened for editing where necessary? Can I rest assured that no threads or posts will be deleted without notice to me? (No one ever told me that I should not respond to Shesh's demands that I provide a text instead of just lists of verses.) I was presenting texts in line with the source criticism of Higher Criticism, not for doctrine. The contrasting texts do not prove eyewitness accuracy (whatever that is), but are subject to whatever spin one wishes to place on the veracity or mentality of the sources. (I caught Hell from Shesh for what he regarded as impugning the character of Nicodemus for my interpretation that he did not write fairly what he heard. What is it lawyers do?)

Sheshbazzar

My 2¢ is what my daddy told me when the job got hot and heavy; If you can't take the heat then get to hell out of the kitchen.

This is thread about how to best coddle the whiners and complainers that participate here. How to keep everyone in one big happy family.
Well I'm going to tell you straight up. This isn't place isn't you mamas kitchen nor is it kindergarten.
It is a jungle kitchen, one well infested with cockroach's, rats, web-spinning poisonous spiders, and venomous snakes.

No one forces anyone to participate in any thread here. If you don't have the fortitude or the adult social skills to deal with others strongly expressing their opinions and views there is always the option of using that keyboard you pound on to move on to different thread, subject, or site.

Most of the posters on this Forum are adults (at least physically)
You want to deal with often difficult and divisive adult subjects, and the heated opinions they arouse, then it is damn well time you start to grow up and learn to quit the bitching. Or just get the hell out of the kitchen, go to your room and bawl your eyes out.

Some of you are carrying on like a bunch of spoiled 6 year olds that want momma to come running and wipe your runny sniveling noses for you and send all of these 'bad' boys away.
Tighten down the screws on moderation, have 'teacher' issue demerits and send naughty children out to the hallway.

I've said my piece. If the mods want to put a bunch of grade-school children's rules and restrictions into place that turn this Forum into a daycare center for pandering to the emotional needs of immature whiners and complainers, every adult will soon enough get fed up and move on. Or have to be evicted and banned for using one of them naughty naughty adult four letter words.

stephan huller

Thank you so much DCH. It was funny the other day I was doing a Google search for the Marcionite chapter in Epiphanius's Panarion and you had put it all up on Scribd. I too look to only a few people for a meaningful conversation at this forum - you being one of them.

My feeling as to why these conversations don't happen more often is as follows. I don't think it is about intelligence but attentiveness. Do the other posters care to spend the time to actually read the sources and if they don't what can they possibly add to the conversation? I've got to run but I wanted to say thanks. You can tell who cares about the truth and who doesn't. It's not about being right but eliminating what can't possibly work and working together to find the truth. Is that too idealistic?

Sheshbazzar

Don't misrepresent the course of our discussions Adam. I DID NOT ask you to post those huge wall's of texts.
And I objected when you did so.
I had initially objected that your method of just posting verse numbers omitted all of the connecting narrative that is necessary to make a cohesive and readable text.
You were proposing the existence of a text that did not contain any of that connecting narrative material, to which thing I objected. Your methodology and claims were nonsensical.

It took me dozens of posts to even extract from you what verse you were proposing as the opening verse of your imagined text, and even then you inexplicably thought that you could just begin in the middle of a text with no prologue at all.
No writer ever wrote a text like that, and even with your walls of cobbled together quote mining you still have not succeeded.