That depend on the person moderating for sure.
Just like the sites current environment depends on the persons moderating now.
Personally I like a good challenge.
But some of what you get is just noise, nothing to do with the topic at all.
In fact at times intentional efforts to distract from the topic rather then let people be challenged by it and perhaps benefit from it.
It may also open up the site to more traffic, because fellowships and group leaders could set up something for their group and other can see it and perhaps join. While private group members may look into other threads on the site and become more involved.
With Covid pastor who-it need to host his bible study without concern for trolls, what better place?
Anyway, just a suggestion.
The old version of the site had actual separate private rooms moderated by the one that started them. And they were barren. Hundreds or thousands of these rooms existed and were barely used beyond a few days or a week at most, from the time it was started.
So turning the whole site into that isn't going to be an improvement. And that was without posts needing approval.
Also drastically changing the site and limiting conversation in the hope it will attract larger groups is a big risk and if it doesn't pay off could damage the site in the long run.
Bigger churches already have their own sites and are streaming their sermons. Smaller churches are more likely to still be gathering. Along with podcasts and YouTube I don't see a big demand for using a private forum hosted by an outside source.
People will segregate and only join other groups that are of the same belief because they will be denied to post elsewhere. Or create their own so they can moderate what goes on. Thereby creating more threads with less traffic.
It's a public, open forum. It's operating how it's intended.
Look at the chat rooms. It takes three users to agree to ban another user, and that's in the open rooms, not private rooms. Yet there are always complaints about people being kicked out of the chats unfairly because a small group runs the forums and boots anyone they don't like.
And having a site full of threads that need every post approved will be such a Huge slowdown. And make the threads more convoluted. If the thread creator doesn't sign on a few days they now have a list of posts they have to go through one by one. Then there's suddenly a flood of new posts. All centered around what was said two days ago. Now two days of threads hit at once and people picking through various the various ones. The buildup and sudden multiple responses create a flood of new posts needing approval.
Seems like a lot of work.
This sites been around over 20 years and seems to be the most active one I've found. Risking that by locking everything down under the control of the users isn't going to maintain that and will only increase division.
1
