As I mentioned in my first post here, for five years I moderated a very busy online discussion group associated with faithmaps.org using a free service called Yahoo Groups. These kinds of groups are very helpful for discussion between folks where everyone can read what is being said. Churches typically start these kinds of groups for outreach, for theological discussion, for groups planning events, just for socializing, or for other reasons. There are a number of platforms that can be used, some of which require very little technical facility, such as Yahoo Groups or Google Groups. Some churches might prefer keeping online discussion within their own website and so might use an open source solution such as phpBB. You can find a number of other free and commercial options discussed on David Woolley's Forum Software for the Web site and I also encourage my fellow contributors here and our readers to leave comments recommending preferred solutions not mentioned here.
But finding the best technological solution might be the easiest part of creating a successful online discussion group. What's also critical is the quality of moderation. This is especially important in an online venue where standard social norms of face-to-face disagreement are not followed as rigorously.
The moderator executes two important functions that maintain the quality and effectiveness of the group's discussion: 1) keeping the group discussion on task and 2) maintaining mutual civility.
This requires tactful and timely intervention, but when it comes to moderation, as the old saw goes, the best defense is a good offense.
For the faithmaps discussion group, I tried to get ahead of topic drift and disrespectful argument both by sending out an automatic note with our policies to every new member and by sending out a reminder note to the whole group once a month. Here's a portion of the text in one or both notes.
Welcome to faithmaps!
**our list**
This list was created in May of 2001 to facilitate discussion on topics flowing from faithmaps.org which was created to provide
"tools for navigating theology, leadership, discipleship and church life in postmodernity."
**the faithmappers**
...we have a pretty wide spectrum on this list from those who do not believe in God at all but like to talk to us folks that do to a number of us who not only passionately believe in the existence of the Judeo-Christian God but also believe that He has spoken and that reliably in Scripture. We are a public list and anyone is welcome to join as long as they understand what we're about and the parameters of our discussion. We seek to advance God's kingdom thru such interactions!
**parameters of discussion**
So I'll typically put my moderator hat on only when I think we are about to stray significantly off discussion of
"tools for navigating theology, leadership, discipleship and church
life in postmodernity. "**conflict and respect**
Our discussions here are sometimes quite spirited, but collegial. We occasionally disagree or explore a topic from various viewpoints but generally do so with mutual respect. We believe much learning occurs through such interchanges.
But I'll step in if - and this is very important - I perceive that anyone is dealing with someone else disrespectfully. We have a great community here and it would be sad to see it disintegrate into potshot land or a place of mere rhetorical positioning and grandstanding.
In the past on very rare occasions, I have stepped in when it seemed to me that discussion on any one topic on which there was disagreement debilitated to what I call "little motorcycle circles in the sand." Most of the time this is not an issue because most folks realize that a point can come where further discussion is counterproductive. But the desire to have the last word, or perhaps a passionate commitment to one's point of view, or other motives can subject all the 'mappers to endless reams of fruitless discussion, so I may choose to interdict or redirect such a thread.
Failure to respond to moderator notes dealing with these matters subjects violators to having their posts moderated (posts coming directly to me for approval) or even to being banned from the group. Further, in an effort to stop serial violators, any faithmaps participant who has been addressed with moderator's notes in the past are subject to *immediate* moderation (all their emails will come to me for approval) or even being banned.
I will always strive to act in fairness to both supposed violators and the group in my best judgment.
When differences of opinion come up, our discussions should drive to either
agreement - humble people of integrity are
susceptible to being enlightened by others!,synthesis - in my experience, successful resolution often ends here,
or a *civil* agreement to disagree.
Thanks and, again, welcome to faithmaps! Please don't hesitate to contact me if I can do anything to make your participation in our community more enjoyable.
By such initial and regular communications we were able to forestall some problems. (And I say "we" because eventually the volume of traffic in the group required me to invite some participants to join with me in a moderators' team.)
But these measures by no means made ongoing moderation unnecessary. There were times when we still needed to step in and warn one or more group participants that they had strayed beyond the bounds of acceptable discourse. When that need arose, it was critical for the moderators to remind the offender(s) that while disagreement was totally fine, disrespect was completely off-limits. ad hominems were both fallacious and disallowed. It was also important that our moderation occur as soon as possible after the offending remarks were posted. Since the offense occurred in group and was thereby a public event, I would typically also respond in front of everyone though at times I might send a private note to someone straying off path. I also found it helpful sometimes to launch myself into discussions that I feared were going south without formally donning my moderator's hat. This enabled me to moderate by example by assuming an irenic tone.
Strong moderation - when needed - provides a place of safety for all participants in these kinds of groups. They know that they are free to discuss and even disagree without subjecting themselves to debilitating flame wars. Skillful moderation provides a place of safety where folks can work through issues and come to a better place of mutual understanding.
Technology provides churches with exciting new venues for spiritual community, but it does not in the least vitiate the need for mature hands-on leadership.
---------------
One further note related to the post last week Toward a New Model of Leadership Development:
Gordon-Conwell is now offering a free theological program online called Dimensions of the Faith.
ht: Mary Hess via Fernando Gros via Steve Knight
Comments