Question for mods: What's the criteria for admission?

[ActivShootr]

What is with the new Law & Civil Rights forum? Why can only select members post there? (A bit prejudiced perhaps?) Now I have to take my legal questions somewhere else. /

[pax]

Patience, please.

What we're trying to do is to allow as wide a latitude in discussing civil rights as possible, without ending up with the old mud-slinging pigpen that got the old L&P closed. TFL can be and is better than that.

But because so many folks had gotten used to slinging invective with impugnity, the moderators in that area decided to gradually open access -- so that the new culture would have time to build and become strong on its own, reinforcing itself from the participants themselves rather than from continuous moderator intervention.

If you'd like to be a part of building the culture in there rather than simply watching from outside as it takes shape, feel free to drop a PM to any of the moderators listed on the Law & Civil Rights forum. They're actively looking for members who can set a good example for others about how a vigorous, informed, intelligent conversation can be conducted ... without stooping to personal attacks or impugning the motives of those who disagree.

pax

[Al Norris]

Thanks Kathy.

The most often question I've had to field (via many, many PM's) is what is the selection criteria. So, here goes:

You've read the new rules and understand the vision and what's expected?

That's the criteria. Adherence to the vision. The ability to have an open mind and the ability to discuss things in an adult manner, without bickering or mudslinging. Disagreeing without being disagreable.

i.e.: The standard fare for having an adult conversation.

This does mean that we will be looking at your posting history. Do you post a lot of "+1's"? Have you been warned for something in the past? Has it been repeated? Can you disagree with someone without hurling invectives or name-calling? Can you articulate your thoughts, in writing, well enough that we don't need a translater?

If you've been here long enough to have witnessed the demise of the old Legal & Political Forum, then you know why it was shutdown. If not, then there was a discussion, here, about why we closed L&P. There was also a discussion about how we could make it better, if we re-opened it, or something similar. That discussion is here.

Dave (TheBluesMan) and I took from that last link, the best suggestions and designed the L&CR forum. When we brought up the Law & Civil Rights forum, an this announcement was placed at the top of every forum index page.

There is also this sticky (at the top of the L&CR forum index), that explains the vision and rules of the forum.

The whole concept is an experiment. If it works as well as Dave and I designed it, it will be opened to the general membership at some point in the near future. If not, it will remain open only to members who understand the vision and have agreed to the new rules, as expressed in the sticky.

This is an adult forum, hopefully devoid of all the rancor and personal attacks that made the demise of the old L&P necessary. Elitist? Perhaps. But it was either start this experimental forum in this manner or completely shut off all such discussion on TFL.

If you think you can qualify; If you think you'ld like to help build a solid community; If, after reading and understanding the vision and rules of this new forum, you wish to be included in the discussions (and to take up Rich's challenge), please PM TheBluesMan or 44 AMP or myself and we will include your names to be vetted. You will be notified when you are invited.