The use and abuse of 'private mail'.

This recent comment provokes me to raise something which has increasingly troubled me in recent weeks.Now please, no lengthy theories, use ten words or less for each answer. Please respond via PM. I wonder if the writer realises that this strikes at the whole heart and purpose of the 'forums'. To take a conversation 'off-line' in the way suggested is to deprive the whole community of the opportunity of listening to the discussion. It is the equivalent of entering a common lounge and inviting someone to leave the conversation so that you can continue it in private. In normal space I would consider that a breach of social etiquette. I think it is somewhat similar in cyber-space. At the least, I would suggest that as this is basically 'Greg's Lounge' it would be a courtesy to ask him if it were appropriate to take someone outside to talk to them. I know it happens and I know that some folks spend a fair amount of time in personal pm-ing. My own view is that this deprives people of the some of the safety valves of a public forum. It opens up the way for private and sectarian spirited people to drive secret wedges between the saints and to profer private counsels which would be challenged in the open forums. In my view, this is an abuse of the facility.What do you think?

Personally, I don't think it is worth worrying about.Michael

What i was saying, sometimes personal messages are necessary, so to call them bad all over is a bad thing, if people are using only PM and to attack others or to gossip etc, then that most certainly is bad.The 'demands' could be considered rude, especially the way the person who wrote that message.Michael

Can I flex my computer geekiness (if that's a word)? PM stands for Private Message. :-P If it does stand for Private Mail, I've never heard it called that. ;-)I agree Ron. There is no reason to post a thread that says something to the effect of "don't respond to this post but just PM me." That takes away from what the forum is used for.I use PMs, but only when I have a quick question/comment about something that really doesn't relate to the thread or if I don't want anyone else to respond (not very often do I do this). I think if you are going to use PMs back and forth frequently, just use Yahoo messenger or MSN.

is this not a control issue ?who's in control ... the owner of this site? the creator of a thread ? or the Holy Spirit ?I'm utterly with sister Dorcas, in that to expect PM's to be dis-allowed would be tantamount to in an assembly setting - disallowing any single relationships/friendships to form ... and everything be said "before the Church" utterlyhow very unrealisticif anyone's been around christian discussion boards online, one has easily seen the dynamics of what dorcas said- It enables little misunderstandings to be clarified, apologies which are basically private between brethren who don't know each other very well, and questons of all kinds to be answered, without disturbing the flow of threads, some of which would be completely ruined if the entire forum had to keep stopping while this or that was publicly addressed. It seems the part I've underlined in dorcas' words is basically something Bro Ron is drawing attention to. This is quite an unhealthy picture, and I've seen it too many times to count on other discussion boards, and sadly, on this one.Let us be accountable to Christ, and let His Spirit rule us as we seek to communicate something that is more appropriate 'in private' ... or as we seek to share it with the general audience overall.This would be one big cult with a control center, I think, if we were to dis-allow such private context, would it not ?Bro Ron, I PM'd you last week, as you're well aware ... with words that I'd not have liked to bring to the board as a whole, so as to shield you from having to defend yourself in a public setting. Would you rather I'd had done that ?Wisdom separates what is appropriate for private vs general audience.Sadly 'factions' occur, online ... as in a face-to-face assembly. Let the Spirit deal with the hearts of those that align toward 'faction'.Let the Freedom of the Spirit have reign on this board, and let us all be grown up enough to take accountability for ourselves before His gaze.True fellowship is a River we can't control.baruch

Bro Ron, I PM'd you last week, as you're well aware ... with words that I'd not have liked to bring to the board as a whole, so as to shield you from having to defend yourself in a public setting. Would you rather I'd had done that ?That will be the one where you called me an 'empty gourd' I expect? You wouldn't be the first. When you have been on this site a little longer you will know that I never defend myself, only my ideas.

who's in control ... the owner of this site? the creator of a thread ? or the Holy Spirit ?That's easy, Greg and his fellow moderators, under the guidance and counsel of the Spirit. If I were not willing to submit to the guidance and counsel of the moderators I would not post on this site in the same way that if I could not submit to the guidance and counsel of elders in a local church I would not be part of that church. Refusal to recognise true spiritual authority always results in spiritual anarchy.

Ron is making a very good point. I am with him on this. I am not a big fan of pm's- unless they are to say a quick 'hi' or to relay a needed message.If we settle our 'differences' behind the scenes (via pm's) it can turn into gossip, backbiting and unneccessary talk that could hurt. I like the idea of being accountable for the words we speak. If we can't say something to someone on the forum to someone, maybe it shouldn't be said at all.I think that people can get in the habit of being two faced : "O, i agree with your post, I do not agree with his. Why would so and so say that?" It reminds me of gossip.This forum is different than other forums most people have been on. It doesn't have to follow the same 'routine' as other forums- and thank the Lord it iS different. I would hope that members here would be wiling to put others before themselves and to show self-control (something I need as well).I am not saying that there should not be pm's, just that we need to watch it because it can be a stumbling block, a source of gossip and contention and even manipulation. I definitely don't think we should ever talk about someone else or their post behind the scenes. I have learned this the hard way.But I say to you that for every idle word men may speak, they will give account of it in the day of judgment.Mat 12:36In His love, Chanin

As a second thought, I think that Greg's decision a while back not to allow posts to be deleted (unless absolutely necessary) keeps people accountable for their words. It causes us to think twice about what we're going to say and that they will be lasting- no erasing. I think this was a wise decision. I think we can think of pm's in the same light. Pm's are too easily done very quickly and without alot of thought to the consequences.Just my thoughts... :-) -Chanin

Satan is the author of confusion here. With the Lord's grace, I will attempt to expose something that should have been kept under wraps ... which will show why there is wisdom in dealing with things that require truth - in PM's.I will set out to show what my words to Brother Ron were about, which he has sought to portray ( by just taking a 'sound bite' from the entirety of many imploring words to him that he was doing a sister a dis-service )in a maliciously negative light.Ron your behavior in this regard, should not be, from one your age .. and your age in Christ.I gave you a straight out rebuke, for your trampling with your Theological Scalpel ... the poem of a sister's heart in here on a thread.If I would have gone to that thread to post my rebuke, that only would have added controversy to this site.Wisdom did not require that I take that course.Greg, may you take this as an object lesson, in the value of PM-usage. Would you prefer, as site administrator, a brother outright rebuking another controversially in a thread ... thereby de-railing it & its theme --- or would you rather it be handled in PM ... if the rebuke was necessary ? If you don't see the wisdom in this, then you may have a raucous board, which there has been plenty of raucousness in past threads in the preceding months.Brother Ron's pride and flesh could not handle being rebuked for being a theological "scribe" over the heart poem of a precious sister on here. Thus he has had to bring this out into the open. And bring this out into the open we will, if that's what you want. ( Greg and Ron )I reiterate, that I've seen these strategems in past instances on discussion boards, which made me shudder to get involved here. I could see such malarkey coming. But yet, a saint here encouraged me to get involved.If you can't handle a simple rebuke in a private PM ( done privately so as not to EMBARRASS you before an entire board, Ron ) .... and your tactic, rather than going before the Lord and asking Him - did I do the sister in question wrong, by trampling on her poem with my scalpel - needlessly ?rather than taking this holy approach, that a disciple would ... you have endeavored to make me look bad.Well done !I saw it coming.I can smell such potential in Christians miles away.Oh the childishness on Christian Discussion Boards ..... what petty kingdoms we build on here .... with our words ... and the fear we have, when it seems that some come in love to us, to offer the 'wounds of a friend' .... and we take that as a mortal threat, and thereby need to bring into the open to smear the 'wounder' ... what ought have remained in private.Greg, may you gain wisdom in this whole affair ... regardless of your estimation of myself ( whom you don't know too well ) or Ron. May you gain wisdom in how to run this board, in future years and months, by this bad example of peevish childishness.I could easily offer evidence to the board of how insensitive was Brother Ron's scalpeling of someone's poem, but I won't -- because again, wisdom requires that I not bring it out into the open, for I suspect that the particular writer of the poem cares not to be in the center of a 'controversy'.Are you going to drag that saint into the 'controversy', Brother Ron .... out of your desire to deflect the spotlight on yourself ? I hope not.If you are a leader in your congregation, Ron .... boy, the Lord has so much to teach you about discretion.How sad that this had to happen ... but how not unexpected.I will be very happy to depart from this petty kingdom, and let Ron declare "victory" to himself and pat himself on the shoulder.I don't need it.Nor does the Lord need me here. But I suspect some need this message board more than the Lord needs them here.Talk about 'faction' and 'heresy' Ron ... look at what you've just done. Seeking to create a 'faction' against lil ole me ..... baruch_48 the big dog that needs to be tarnished as a "name caller"For the record - to Brother Greg .... the full context of my words to Brother Ron were that "when you correct and prooftext someone's precious poem from their heart ... you are being a mere empty gourd"The Lord sees through pedantry, which looks to the correctness of theology, rather than looking at the person's heart.I even told Ron that I agreed with him, theologically on that matter, but it was terrible of him to 'prooftext' the person's precious poem. ( their heart )If the lot of you cannot see my heart innocence in this matter, then jolly ! This is the last I will stoop to defend my conscience, heart, and innocence before the saints.You owe me a big apology Ron .......but it'll take humility before our Lord.Enough said.May this be a learning episode for the Kingdom minded.

And let me add, Brother Ron ... if you and I were to meet face-to-face .. I would stare a hole through you, and you would melt in your guiltiness over this.The Lord have mercy on a brother your age acting this way

Baruch,There is a difference between a rebuke--which is done in love and kindness--and flaming another person. You not only have crossed that line but you've blown it away. Please do not post any further in this thread.Moderator,Jeremy Hulsey

brethrenthis has been a pretty interesting discussion and at this time i feel led of the Lord to say a few things. I feel that whatever is said in a p.m. is said in confidence and is better kept between the parties involved. If one were to betray that, then the other side of the story should be told so that it’s not one-sided. That being said Bro Ron it was not necessary to bring out any of what baruch said to make your acknowledge to everyone that you got a p.m. from him. you could have simply said yes or no concerning the p.m. and stated whether you would rather have had that message put on the forum for all to read or mailed to you privately to answer the question. Whether you meant it or not your response looks like you were trying to paint baruch to be the villain. Baruch is certainly not the first you’ve treated with such contempt but I guess he’s the first to call you out on it. He seems to have exposed in his response a fleshly pride in you bro Ron that many of us here and beyond have been shown and yet have done you a disservice and said nothing about it to you. There is indeed a pride in you that between the Lord and yourself must be dealt with. Brethren let us not be shy of calling out things which are not of God in each other. it’s better to be offended for a time and have the Lord deal with us and correct us than to have to answer to the Lord on the last day for that thing.

I've read all the posts and this is how I use the pm system personally. I think I've pm'ed less than 2 dozen times since coming here. I do feel that much of what is said here should be spoken in the open since the internet , generally speaking, opens itself up to all manner of persons. Keeping things public will keep the temptation for private sins and or the occassion of the flesh , better accountability.Generally speaking if I rebuke I do so publically , directly and in as few words as possible. If I pm someone it's usually to inquire, encourage and pray for someone. I do believe caution should be exercised at all times since we really don't know each other and over time I've observed that most people who post give no details to who they are in the bio- page, but they tend to use these forums as a platform to air thier ideologies. That I believe is wrong, ethically speaking.Commonsense is a good measuring stick to use. God bless Bro. Daryl