Toward a Forum Philosophy for SI, Part 5

Read Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4.
Building the ideal Christian forum is a bit like bowling—or at least like my bowling. You’re aiming for a narrow middle, but it has two seemingly magnetic gutters on either side. In the case of SharperIron, the ideal narrow middle is not easy to sum up in a sentence or two, but the two gutters are easy to identify. One gutter—let’s say the one on the right—is the too-much-control gutter. The other, on the left, is the free-for-all gutter.

To some it may not be evident that both of these are gutters, but they truly are. When forums have too many rules and overly aggressive or overly censorious enforcement, people become reluctant to discuss at all, and what conversation does occur becomes boring. Energy wanes and interest along with it. Eventually you have no forum at all. On the other hand, if we bowl into the left gutter, energy and interest (and traffic) may be high, but it’s the energy of contention, strife, insults, and bickering. Much of the traffic consists of gawkers who disapprove of what’s happening but are drawn to the spectacle by morbid curiosity. Who will body slam whom the hardest, and how much blood will be spilled (metaphorically speaking)?

Which Would Be Better?

Given how easy it is to slip into one gutter or the other, what sort of rules and methods is best? To answer that question, let’s suppose for a moment that no matter what we do, we’ll eventually end up in one gutter or the other. I don’t believe that’s the case, but if it were, which gutter would we be better off rolling into? In bowling, it doesn’t matter. You fail to score regardless of which gutter claims your ball. But should we look at forums (or, if you prefer, online communities) that way?

The question is important because which outcome we see as the worst-case scenario biases us toward the opposite gutter and influences the rules we make and the procedures we develop for enforcing them. So if we have to roll a gutter ball, which is better, left or right?

Forum as Literature

One important factor in answering that question is the literary nature of our forums. At SharperIron, everyone who participates in discussion is a writer, and every thread is a publication. No doubt we’re not looking at it that way most of the time, but the fact remains. We write, and our writing is widely disseminated and preserved for relatively long periods of time. Though I used to think so, forum discussion isn’t the same as chatting in the church lobby.

The responsibilities of those who operate the site are also not the same those of, say, a cafe owner. The cafe owner has a community of regular patrons who sit and sip and talk about things. The proprietor’s concern is to make his patrons as happy and comfortable as possible and “the customer is always right.” When it comes to their conversations, he minds his own business. He gets involved as little as possible.

But imagine a really weird cafe. It has a large press out back and a microphone at every table. Every conversation is intentionally recorded, then transcribed, printed, and shipped to bookstores all over the world in seconds. But the conversations don’t disappear from those shelves in hours or even days. They remain available in unlimited supply for years for as long as the cafe exists—and longer. And all the books are stamped with the name of the cafe.

If you’re running that cafe, you’re not a disinterested observer of the conversations. You have a responsibility to actively shape them, to the degree you can, into something worthy of the bookshelves. You are a publisher of books who happens to employ cafe conversations as a means of getting them written.

Some may object that the patrons of this cafe are a community and that publishing isn’t what they’re interested in at all. They love coffee and conversation and each other. But if that’s the case, why do they converse in a publishing house full of microphones? As long as they make that choice, they also choose a writer-publisher relationship with the cafe operators. And like all writers, they should expect to be edited.

If the SharperIron forums are to remain mostly public, the literary nature of the discussions commends erring more on the side of control than on the side of liberty.

What Does Fundamentalism Need?

But another factor should shape which side we’d prefer to err on: the needs of the fundamentalist movement. SharperIron has little reason to exist if it merely duplicates what is already available in other fundamentalist venues online or offline. It has even less reason to exist if it only produces more of something Fundamentalism already has in excess.

What does it already have to excess? Let’s face it, the movement has not suffered from a shortage of heated arguments and diatribes. And it’s had an adequate quantity of personal attacks in infighting. But even if we suppose it needs yet more of that sort of thing, other sites are making sure it’s available online. SI is better off aiming for the other end of the spectrum, erring—if we must—on the side of overly forced civility.

But the need of Fundamentalism doesn’t call for “more control” of just any kind, because the movement has another need. It could benefit greatly from more open discussion of a wider range of ideas and opinions. We’ve had our own brand of political correctness. Tighter controls over subject matter and allowed viewpoints would make SharperIron redundant in the world of Fundamentalism.

So the need calls for erring on the side of tighter controls, not over content per se, but over tone. We could do worse than become the first fundamentalist forum to be “so polite they’re boring.”

Warnings Against Strife and Contention

The most compelling reason we should prefer the right gutter to the left is the abundance of biblical warnings against strife and contention. Here’s a sampling.

Proverbs 17:14 The beginning of strife is like releasing water; Therefore stop contention before a quarrel starts. (NKJV)

Proverbs 18:6 A fool’s lips enter into contention, And his mouth calls for blows.

Proverbs 22:10 Cast out the scoffer, and contention will leave; Yes, strife and reproach will cease.

We know that some contentious speech should not be avoided (Neh. 5:7; Gal. 2:11; Jude 3), but these Proverbs show we should prefer—and actively pursue—peace. And the New Testament ups the intensity of that obligation several notches. Consider the following examples.

1 Corinthians 3:3 For you are still carnal. For where there are envy, strife, and divisions among you, are you not carnal and behaving like mere men?

Galatians 5:19-20 Now the works of the flesh are evident … adultery, fornication, uncleanness … contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions

Hebrews 12:14 Pursue peace with all people, and holiness, without which no one will see the Lord:

James 3:17 But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, willing to yield.

Romans 12:18 If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men.

These are clear and commanding. But perhaps the most striking passage on this topic is in Philippians 2.

Philippians 2:14-15 Do all things without complaining and disputing, that you may become blameless and harmless, children of God without fault in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom you shine as lights in the world

Apparently our effectiveness as lights in the world correlates closely with the peaceableness of our interaction with one another. Consider the implications of this passage for a forum where believers’ conversations are exposed to the entire information superhighway!

From a biblical standpoint, we’re way better off “ruining the forum” in the direction of the gutter on the right than ruining it in the other direction.

The Good News

The good news is that the lane, though narrow, is attainable, and SI’s leadership is not hoping for a gutter ball. We can converse with the civility Scripture demands and still allow plenty of respectful friction and diversity of opinion. We can have interesting discussions and debates without allowing cat fights. And we can shape the discussions editorially without making everyone sound the same and without making people feel “slapped down.” More control over tone and topic doesn’t have to mean more censoriousness. We can also explore ways to enhance the community aspect of the forums without compromising the quality of what we’re publishing.

Some ideas on how that quality might be achieved will be the focus of Part 6.

Aaron Blumer, a native of lower Michigan, is a graduate of Bob Jones University (Greenville, SC) and Central Baptist Theological Seminary (Plymouth, MN). He, his wife, and their two children live in a small town in western Wisconsin, where he has pastored Grace Baptist Church (Boyceville, WI) since 2000. Prior to serving as a pastor, Aaron taught school in Stone Mountain, Georgia, and served in customer service and technical support for Unisys Corporation (Eagan, MN). He enjoys science fiction, music, and dabbling in software engineering.