New Moon Witness Criteria
Originally Written: 2023-02-22
Related Study Notes: Detailed New Moon Day Scriptural Study Notes
Just for people’s educational awareness, this page was quickly put together as a sub-topic of the New Moon Sighting Witnesses summary on 2023-02-22 to document a series of text messages which I sent to people on my new moon alerts text list who help to sight the new moon from various locations. If you are able to become a new moon witness for new moon sightings, please contact me. Below is the information I sent via text message related to the subject of new moon witness criteria:
—-
I am sending this to everyone who gets new moon notices, so don’t take these texts as to ‘you’ specifically. There are two main criteria that questions are related to: 1) were binoculars used at all in the process of finding the new moon, or looked into at all ever, 2) I noticed with a few people who I collect sightings from that people remember to verify on their own without me asking that ‘pictures’ were not taken until after at least two witnesses have seen the new moon with their own eyes and no binoculars used to find it - however technically the second criteria what needs to be verified is more broad and related to ‘cameras’ - that ‘no cameras were looked into at all before at least two of the witnesses saw the new moon’, because technically somebody could look through a camera before the other witness sees it, but then wait to take the picture until after. But even looking through the camera before is what I’m saying invalidates it. Not just the taking of the picture.
So to be clear, maybe I will reword it just to ban binoculars completely, and try and help others see the details as specifically as what I’m thinking of - because the main reason I ask extra questions is to clarify those kinds of details when it’s not 100% clear by what’s written, alone. By asking questions I’m basically trying to eliminate the need for me to make any assumptions and rely solely upon what’s told to me.
In the case of saying things like 'with own eyes only' or 'with no aids' that could mean different things to different people. So for me, wording it that way would lead to me asking more questions because I don't want to have to make any assumptions about what someone means. I want to just use their words and only their words to know that all the details are covered without any assumptions on my part.
I'm not trying to give people a headache or be too nitpicky I'm basically just trying to be able to not have to make any assumptions on my part.
That way if I'm asked questions by others about any given sighting I can just say the witness told me "such and such".
I don't have to interpret the details - the details were given to me directly from the witness.
Sending these text to everyone, so this is not to you only so don't take this is being just to you - this is kind of a bigger issue with multiple sightings in general just so that people understand where I'm coming from.
If I have to do any interpreting of what you mean to somebody else who is questioning me about the details of your sighting, then your sighting didn’t contain enough information and I have to ask you more questions so that I can tell others what ‘you said’, not what ‘I think you meant by what you said’.
So that’s why I will not assume what you mean if you did not specifically say all of the details. It’s not about trusting you, it’s about being able to quote what you said to others, because you are responsible for the quality and details of your sighting, and since I am not a witness at your location, I cannot vouch for your sighting just because I know who you are. That is partiality. You must vouch for your sighting by providing all of the details.
Friends cannot vouch for the quality or details of another friend’s new moon sighting when they are not actually at that location to ensure that everybody is following the rules. So the person who is reporting has a duty to provide full details, because only they can vouch for that sighting, not me.
When ministries take new moon sightings, and they don’t vet the witnesses, they don’t have enough details to provide to others if they are questioned. Simply saying that you know somebody doesn’t really mean as much to somebody new to this walk or somebody new that you’ve never met before. If they don’t know me that well, then me simply saying ‘we know them’ is not enough information - and I know that because I’ve interviewed other witnesses the other ministries have taken sightings from and found the sightings to be insufficient. So if I don’t question people and all the details are not clear by their words, then I’m basically doing the same problem as what exist out there already.
These text were sent to others too so don't take as to you specifically.