Value of an Internet-assisted Ministry

The typical reaction is: wouldn't such technology fool us into replacing our face-to-face human interaction? (Just look at the societal results of surfing, online chats, and online relationships.)

I agree that face-to-face interaction is the most meaningful of all. I am also aware that telephone have in the past decades reduced and perhaps replaced a large amount of otherwise direct human interaction. I agree that TV sermons have caused many Christians to skipped participating in a church all together.

But the point is: it is how you use the technology. While technology have the potential to be misused, it can also be used wisely for great benefits.

Simply looking at the value of the NHF forum:

1. The interaction and idea exchanges is comparable to thoughtful letter writing of a prior era. Such degree of honesty and transparency would be hard to obtain even among a small group study that has been meeting for years.
2. The forum tool organizes and archives these postings, to allow later-comers to catch up with the discussion, and participate easily.
3. We are mindful that these online communications supplement, rather than replace, our weekly meetings at church. If anything, it makes our face-to-face meetings even more meaningful.

What are your thoughts?

BTW, From Google's directory, I find an article on Web Collaboration that fits the topic of this discussion.

Below are several replies from humble friends,so I will hide their identity until they let me reveal them. Similarly for people mentioned in the discussion.

Reply by D

Where it seems to work:

I'm not quite sure. Maybe for archival purposes?

Where it doesn't work well or not at all:

1. As a tool to provide information to the masses (very few read the forums, except those who probably already have said information).
2. As an interactive tool to share competiting ideas or having a back-and-forth among two or more people. The time delay between posts can be infinite. I'm still waiting on J's replies to my comments on his forum, for instance.
3. As a way to encourage people (encouraging a specific person requires a personal effort that goes far beyond the vagaries of a forum post).
4. As a means of self-expression. This is probably the most interesting use of the forums, but it is also very likely to be self-defeating. If a person sits in the forest and has a wi-fi internet connection, does it matter? What is the value of expression as a means to itself anyway?

Reply from T

But consider:

- there are models of successful online communities (slashdot, craigslist, tech support forums) to name a few. These are primarily communities formed by common interest, tech-savvy, as opposed to an offline community branching off to encompass an online mode of communication as is the case with our church. Hence the learning curve is high. I usually receive at least one or two emails from new users about the forum regarding registration/interface/content clutter, etc.. which tells me the forum isn't as intuitive as I would like it to be for this church user demographic.

Are we locked into this usage pattern of a small user base with (apparently from what I read from both of you) unfulfilled potential? No. There are various steps which can be done, ranging from a more prominent positioning of the forum, encouraging participation of more internet-savvy but not-current-congregation Christians (various ways to do this), implementing various hacks, restructuring the forum, interactive multimedia tutorials about the forum, etc.

A basic principle in site design is that people don't respond to exclusive text content.. such as our forum. I've tried in the past to allow people to upload images to their discussion threads, unsuccessfully, but will revisit when I can.

- Remember, in terms of forum history, there was a long stretch when I was the exclusive participant, using it as an archive for church emails. Then, I believe it was either D. or C. who made a fairly provocative and anonymous post to the forum, and we saw a sharp increase in forum readership. That plateaued after a while, and then WJ jumped in with a lot more frequent posts and the blog model, which also triggered an increase in user response. I have previously emailed both of you a report of the website logs.. if you were to look at the unabridged report for february and compare it with a year ago, you can see that the level of forum exposure is in fact quite high (albeit with much more lurkers than contributors). Regardless, I would hazard that forum participation will again rise in response to a new need or a new pitch or a new user demographic.. and that if we ever achieve critical mass, the forum will at that point be self-sustaining.

- Archiving is not something to be taken dismissively, not that I am insinuating that anyone has been dismissive. I would hope that PE has benefitted by perusing the forums, and has a greater understanding of some the issues and debates than he would otherwise would have, as would any newcomer to the church. I happen to be responsible for archiving now, but this church has been without a secretary for most of it's history(when I began, I received no records at all), and there is no guarantee that it will continue to have someone in that capacity in the future. I would hope that having a forum would help alleviate that absence, if that occurs, so that decisions made, issues discussed, and priorities established can be referred to at future dates, so that we can move forward as a body as opposed to rehashing old discussions.

- the time delay between posts is not a delay triggered by the forum. Once you post a response, people can be immediately identified by email.. the delay is the time taken to formulate a response and/or check their email.

- I have not made any radical changes because:

1. a lot of these steps involve closer integration with the main website. Since we are eventually going to redo the website design, it is inefficient use of time to start the process with a site layout which is going to be phased out anyway.
2. I reviewed several forum packages, and chose this one primarily for it's range of extensive features, assuming that the high learning curve was a surmountable obstacle. I happen to be a member of the KCW single's discussion board, with a membership of around 30, and a much more vibrant discussion. They have a simpler layout, which increases the likelihood of posting. We can at some point review the options available, and transition to a much simpler forum software with a smaller learning curve. If necessary we can buy a forum package, as opposed to the current free open-source package, now that we know people will actually use it.

I usually think of an architectural case study I read a while back when thinking about information architecture, which I find helpful on a personal level. An architect designs and successfully completes a building complex, but with no sidewalks or roads between buildings.. he just put in grass. People complained, but eventually adapted, and later all the architect had to do was pour in cement along the natural pathways which had been created, which were efficient, as wide or as narrow as needed, with no unnecessary corners or stretches, since the pathways were dictated by the residents.

The architect is not the best source to anticipate what his(or her) users want. Asking the users is not the way to go about either.. if they had been asked what they want, their aggregate data would have been totally different from what their behavior patterns demonstrated. However, their footsteps didn't lie. They showed exactly what building were frequented the most, and what were the best ways to reach them. In a very real sense, we have not yet reached that second stage of pouring in the cement.. I am still watching your interests, and making note of your priorities (creepy ain't it :). When the time is right, we will step into the second stage, or third if necessary. So.. be patient, and continue to post with the dedication you have shown.

Thanks again, - T

Reply from D.

2. The fact is, most NHF people do not see the need to actively participate. There have been two events that triggered a significant uptick in usage: (1) the C./D. postings regarding praise songs (first anonymously, then the revelation), and (2) the NHF T-shirt design thing. The first was based on a curiousity factor, both in the anonymity and with the forum, and the second was based on evident efficiency of the forum in opining on designs and large interest in this topic. However, both upticks were singular and discrete events, and not examples of continuing usage. The most recent uptick, with WJ's blogs and J./D. subsequent participation, isn't as significant because the level of participation has not gone beyond our small circle. Currently, other than WJ, you and me, how many regular visitors are there, that are willing to read and post?

The thing is, anything that people can say to one another, there is (usually) a better way to do it than to post, since people see each other at least once or twice a week. Prayer requests, accountability issues, debating topics of varying interest, timely questions on current NHF events, and news regarding individual people - these things, a public forum likely would not be the first choice when such need arises. This is not a knock on the forum, its handler(s), its design or flexibility; the nature of a public forum just doesn't lend itself well to these areas.

3. With regard to archiving, I think that this is the only purpose that has proven its worth. I think you have done an excellent job with regard to this, and as time passes, the value of the forum in this regard can and will increase.

4. When I said infinite time delay in responses, I meant only that people can reply to a post, or not, at their whim. Thus a person who replies to a post, may in fact wait forever for a reply in kind. It is obvious why this is so - discussions of any import can and probably are better left to phone calls, instant messages, personal emails and face-to-face interaction, over that of a public forum. Discussions of non-import or tangents may not "deserve" a timely response, and thus a thread may die an early death.

Finally, I believe this forum is well-designed, nicely-cared for, and may be fully utilized by nearly everyone with a minimum of effort. As time passes, it may be that we will discover new uses for the forum or new events may trigger a permanent rise in use. I would certainly like to see it, but honestly, I don't think it will happen anytime soon.

My response to T. and D.

Personally, I find the archival aspect of the forum most valuable. In fact, when I decide whether to post at NHF forum, or simply using the phone, I think first about whether my ideas/thoughts could potentially benefit others in the congregation, (possibly future members). If so, I would post at NHF forum first, so that future readers will benefit.

Specifically, you see that I have gone out of my way to document a series of email discussions between Terry and me into one of the forum topics. I have also written to the forum first, and then send emails via cut/paste.

The maximum benefit for the church is, as T. said, newcomers can catch up and feel participatory with the rest of the group. In fact, several months before I jumped in with all the activities, I have already read the various postings regarding the praise songs, and was rather encouraged. I didn't jump in, since I haven't thought of relevant topics, but due to the archival nature, I feel as if I were part of that discussion, and immediately got a feel for who the players are.

The second most valuable aspect for a forum is self-expression, hence the blogs. It allows not only the extra channel to share our thoughts with others, but also to let ourselves be known, to become vulnerable (as you have, D., when you open your inner thoughts to us in your blogs), and hence to allow deeper friendship be created. Again, this is in a supplementary mode, much like letter-writing in the past, for face-to-face relationships.