DEBATE-ing on Higher-Fire

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

At 03:32 AM 10/26/98 -0600, Bro Jerry wrote:

>NEW QUESTION FOR ALL WHO SUPPORT WOMEN PREACHERS/PASTORS:
>
>BOTTOM LINE:  Do those of you who believe in women preachers believe that
>you would have been allowed to Preach/Pastor in a mixed congregational
>setting in one of the Churches Paul started during the time when Paul was
>there?

O.k..... this is the *kind* of thing that I don't like about some of these
really hot topics.... nothing ever gets answered.

To that end, Bro Kirk and I (Bro Tyler), have thought that we need to come
up with rules of operation of a real live e-mail debate.  Form teams,
elect captains, establish rules, etc.

Once a debate has been established, then we need to have the team members
submit the points to the captain whereby the captain will be the only 
allowed poster to the DEBATES.  

There'll be questions established, further points can't be made until
previous questions are answered.... hopefully, a real debate will ensue.
We can't just stick out spiritual tongues out at the others and say
your wrong there has to be more to make any charge stick.

We don't want to shut the list off from remarks so that nobody else can
get something in edgewise, so the list will still be open.... [not sure
how to do "side" comments].  If a non team member starts to take a side
with side comments, he/she might be asked to join a team and report to
the captain for any other input of the matter.

To me... the way we currently discuss hot topics... it's like the ending
discussion of "Charlie the Tuna" and the "Chicken of the Sea" folks in the
commercials I remember years ago.  They go back and forth and they don't
solve anything ... and waste my mental bandwidth...

            "Tastes great"  .................. "Great taste"
            "Tastes great"  .................. "Great taste"

... or in the more modern world of adult type beverages....

            "Tastes great"  .................. "Less filling"

... or with polarized apostolics ....

            "Can so"        .................. "Can not"

None of these type situations solve or even remotely address the
issues other than raising doubt as to the any validity at all.

Anybody have any experience in real debate?  What are the normal
rules of operation and how do they work together?  We need a little
input about such as to how to pull this off.  Any help would be appreciated.

Bro Tyler
--
Bro Tyler Nally 
<tnally@iquest.net> <tgnally@prairienet.org> <tn@higherfire.org>

Higher-Fire Oneness Apostolic Emailing List
Send e-mail to ...

        listproc@prairienet.org 

 a) ... To Subscribe               SUB HIGHER-FIRE Your Name
 b) ... To UnSubscribe             UNSUB HIGHER-FIRE
 c) ... To Postpone Mail           SET HIGHER-FIRE MAIL POSTPONE
 d) ... To Resume Mail             SET HIGHER-FIRE MAIL ACK
 e) ... To Change to H-F Digests   SET HIGHER-FIRE MAIL DIGEST
 f) ... To Check H-F Settings      SET HIGHER-FIRE 
 g) ... To Review H-F Subscription REVIEW HIGHER-FIRE

H-F Homepage     :  http://www.prairienet.org/upci/h-f.html
H-F WWW Archives :  http://www.higherfire.org
H-F Nettiquette  :  http://www.higherfire.org/netiq.html
H-F F.A.Q.       :  http://www.higherfire.org/FAQ.html
H-F KJV Bible    :  http://www.higherfire.org/kjv
H-F QuickTour    :  http://www.prairienet.org/~tgnally/HigherFireTour.html
H-F Questionaire :  http://www.prairienet.org/upci/questions.html