I didn't see the ad crazyheart. Haven't had time to look at the Observer at all this month. It is certainly a little disingenuous to suggest that the discussion associated with Wonder Cafe continues on Facebook. I find the United Church Facebook page dreadfully dull and I rarely go there. It seems dominated by a handful of posters, and there's not much diversity of opinion that I can see.

I think WC was a very successful attempt at building an online community and it's vaguely depressing to realize that the United Church thinks that the discussion could continue on Facebook or Twitter. It's that association of WC with the Facebook group that bugs me. Unfortunately the fact that we start something that turns out to be successful but then decide we don't have the resources to sustain it doesn't bode well for the future. Or I suppose you could say that this is exactly what should happen. Ministries get started and then taken over by the people. Maybe the emergence of WC2 is, in a strange sort of way, a compliment to the United Church for having nurtured a community that's now ready to spread its wings and fly on its own. Maybe the United Church is like the mother bear driving the cub away because it's time for the cub to go out on its own. Who knows. Perhaps someone will write an Observer article about the emergence of WC2 from its United Church roots.

*proffers crazyheart a wondertini*

RSD:  i like the image of the mother bear and the cub -- you do have a way with words :3

aboot FB:  even the HuffingtonPost, a place I like viewing because of the sheer variety of news stories, is changing over into becoming closer affiliated with FB...which seems strange to me, because HP seemed to be aboot engaging people and FB is all aboot monetizing one's friends...I stay there to keep an eye on the media landscape -- I've noticed, ferinstance, an increase in little 'stories' that are just a blurb written aboot someone's picture or even a tweet...this Brave New World that has and is coming into being is very strange...

I think it is a good thing that wc2 comes  from Wondercafe.

However I do wish there would hve been consultation ahead of the announcement, and that the GCO had better managed the change or hand over of the community.  I often find that is the case in the ONDP, I have no problem with the ONDP trying to do things differenently, I just wish there had been more strategy and more wide spread consultation in how it was done. ANd than when it is done i wish both groups at the minimum looked liked they knew what they were doing.

That said I think WC2 will be a big success, and I hope the ONDP is as successful in the election. If either succeeds a lot of the credit will be due to the grassroots, and the respective central office.

 And the CXhurch is us, not the GCO, just as the NDP belongs to the memebrs and nort paid staff .

Good point.  It would not surprise me, in the years to come, to also see local United churches spread their wings and fly on their own.

Just guessing, but I suspect that the Methodists, Presbyterians and Congregationialists who "united" to form UCCan may have held the same sentimemt: I am Mad at the Church.  Well, madness abounds.  It is the nature of the institution.

Hi crazyheart,

Eventually.  First, it goes to an updated blog entry which does mention WC2.

I can see why they wouldn't go immediately to the thread here.  It is not very complimentary of UCCAN decision making.

What I note, somewhat  morosely, is that the communication around this closing has not gotten any better.

Still the brave smiling faces cheerfully lifting up the wonderful alternatives which, while being "newer" and more "hip" places to hang out represent colossal steps backward in the art of conversation.

While United Future has had some modification it still is essentially the same discussion nightmare it was when I first signed up.  If United Future was to be depicted in real space it would be two or three people in separate halls of a convention centre asking if anybody was there while their voices echoed off walls or was swallowed in acoustic deadening material.

United Future is the illusion of conversation.

WonderCafe has a group on facebook.  For the most part conversation there, since it started up has revolved around one theme.  "Can anybody else get into WonderCafe.ca this morning, evening or whaterver?"  It is where we go when we can't be here.

Recently there have been more exciting posts which are actually links taking folk away from Facebook to conversations begun here.  If Facebook is such great conversational space why are we wanting to leave it to have one?

Grace and peace to you.

John

The United Future site is really set up as a blog with comments - that's what that architecture is designed to do. What the UCCan have done, is set it up such that anyone can create a blog entry, then people below can comment on that blog entry. As with most commenting features at blogs and media sites, there is no formatting, no embedment of pictures or video, and the comments are in reverse chronological order. That is, if there are comments, which usually there aren't. Even finding a blog entry you once commented on is difficult.

Aaron keeps trying to plant seeds of discussion there. It's pretty entertaining to watch. In between the rant posts and the rambling ones that get zero response because no one can figure out if they just read a proposal or a question, he'll try to post something short and thought provoking. Really, they are very good attempts to solicit a response, but he's doing so on a God-awful site. So the popular response to his posts, like those of everyone else, is the sound of crickets.

Looking at the last week of discussions (blog entries), there are 10 entries. In terms of responses, they have, in reverse chronological order (because that's how United Future would want it), 0, 0, 6, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 and 0 responses. About the future of the largest church in Canada.

I could post about navel lint at Wondercafe and get a dozen responses by lunch.

The only part of United Future that gets attention are the live events. Turn it into a live event hosting site, then. Trying to host discussion on what is meant to be a blog is completely futile.

If what you are doing is posting articles, ideas or questions and eliciting responses, that's what Facebook is for. Facebook is a perfect replacement for United Future. Facebook is a completely useless replacement for Wondercafe. It's like replacing your pickup with a Civic.

I really wish the UCCan had come to us two or three years ago. We could have pointed out how continuing with the Drupal architecture was silly and how the fat could be trimmed from Wondercafe while maintaining the forums which account for 99% of the traffic and the attachment, at a fraction of the cost. We could have advised how the post archive could have been moved over to any number of less expensive managed forum solutions, admittedly for a sizeable initial cost, but hosted for a few hundred dollars a year. This could have gone on, under the UCCan banner, almost in perpetuity for the money they seem to have spent in the last couple of years alone.

Instead, they wait until the money is gone, announce the closure, insist on repeatedly making a completely idiotic comment about how Facebook has replaced Wondercafe anyways, and drop the site.

I've always said that the Internet is where religions go to die, but that will happen even where religion can create decent websites. In this case, the Internet is where the UCCan goes to publicly commit suicide. I don't think it was in the UCCan's best interests to host open online discussion, as others may note that no other denomination has made that mistake. I will say this - it was ballsy. Not smart, but ballsy.

That said, despite the clunky architecture and dubious result for the denomination, a good discussion forum arose from this effort. Wondercafe has worked for many people over 7+ years. I don't think it has helped to grow the UCCan, or even stemmed the tide of losses. If anything, open conversation highlights the reasons to doubt the authenticity of the bible and the idea that it is good, necessary, or even beneficial. Open online discussion forums are the realm of skeptic and atheist groups, which are awful to read because it's often people ganging up on Christians and congratulating one another on coming to reasonable conclusions. I hate those forums. If I think I've got the better arguments (and the better one liners), the only way it's fun for me is to be in the minority. Otherwise, it's not sporting.

The good that has come of all this, is www.wondercafe2.ca. WC2 is out from under the control of the UCCan, who have yet to figure out how to host or moderate online discussion. With little support from the UCCan, mostly just links from sites few visit in the first place, we're pretty much on our own.

If you're mad at the UCCan, I suggest you turn that into action. Let's get that www.wondercafe2.ca link out there. Yes, even on Facebook. I've been trying to think of where I can post the link. My last resort is atheist sites, because I really don't want those bastards to show up in numbers. I'd rather have a busload of fundies than a busload of atheists - you probably believe me, and you should.

Look, we may fall flat. It may not work. WC2 may be all but dead inside of a year. I had to be a part of it because this place has meant something to me. I don't agree with almost anyone here on the topic of God and Jesus, but I think most of you are good people, and you were there for me. Helping to install and configure WC2 is the least I can do to return the favour and help to carry on a tradition and a meeting place that has meant so much to so many.

Even if the posts slow to a trickle, know that WC2 could go on for a decade or more for just over $100/year. That was important to me, to make sure that whatever software we chose was good, secure, reasonably inexpensive, and could be run on a cheap web hosting account for peanuts if it came down to it. If WC2 closes, it won't be because we couldn't raise a couple thousand dollars over the course of a year. It will be because we couldn't break $100. If there are software upgrades to do, I will always be available at the same email address, and I will always be back to do them, no matter if I'm active or not.

Folks, sorry some of you didn't like Observer announcement...to put it in context, I had to write the text for it 3+ months ago. I'm not even sure the name WonderCafe2 was agreed upon at that point and there were still too many things in the air to name the new initiative directly. That, and there are also other United Church-related web things happening that would equally deserve a mention...so, because the space was very limited, it's a very broad stroke.

And I get that some of you don't like Facebook, but there are many United Church groups on there (not just the main one folks have mentioned) that are just as active as WonderCafe. Yes, it's different, but some prefer it, some don't. I guess I don't understand why some folks think it's a problem to suggest that it could be one alternative to WonderCafe. 

Here's the Observer announcement, in case folks haven't seen it.

Aaron could you give us a link to the really active United church facebook discussions?

Because it isn't conducive to discussion. It's conducive to posting pictures to shame your drunk friends.

lol

...not to mention time-limited Facebook Bible studies Turn Around Take Off and Rock the Bible, which were much more active than WonderCafe has been in the last couple of years.

Facebook and WonderCafe and Twitter, etc. are just different vehicles. People connect with them according to their own taste. But there's no need to put down one or the other, in my opinion. To each their own. But, honestly, many of the people who were once very active on WonderCafe and we no longer see here are actively posting pictures of their drunk friends over on Facebook. I see it every day.

"...several of our forums on WonderCafe." May I guess which ones? Would they be - say - Health - and Global? Are any of the facebook groups as busy as - say - Social - and Religion? Facebook is a good-enough place for group announcements - but a poor one for discussions. It reduces people down into sound-bites. Hardly the kind of well-thought-out dialogue that has often taken place at WC.

Dcn. Jae, this group is just as active as Social and Religion here on WonderCafe:

That is the only active Facebook group you have. The nature of Facebook is that discussions are fleeting. Items get pushed down the page and forgotten. Nothing gets discussed for long, and posts are short. Scroll down. The vast majority of posts on that page elicit fewer than 10 responses. Usually 3 or fewer. And that's your most active group by far.

Facebook, without my typical jokes, is for updating people. In the context of the United Church, it will work to update people on issues, news, events, etc. If you bring up something heavy, it will be glossed over and the issue forgotten and conversation dried up inside of a week, though usually a day or two. At WC, many threads live for weeks. A few have been active for years.

They are completely different animals, which appeal to different people, and are used for different purposes. Wondercafe could not replace Facebook. Facebook can not replace Wondercafe. Some will prefer Facebook. I think of those people as having pimply faces or longing to have pimples again.

With a much improved interface compared to Wondercafe.ca and especially Unitedfuture.ca, it will be interesting to see how much UCCan-related discussion traffic we can drive to www.wondercafe2.ca. We certainly have the capability to host as much discussion as the UCCan can throw at it. It works, it's easy to navigate, and, most importantly, unlike Facebook, it's set up to promote in-depth discussion. 

Yes, I will agree with you that FB isn't primarily for in-depth discussion. It's more about getting eyeballs and some shares (i.e. promotion). But, somehow, millions of people spend a ton of time on there each day, which the core group being 45-60 year old women. I have my own criticisms of FB and wouldn't argue for putting all your eggs in that one basket - but it's hard to argue that it's not popular or people don't like it and spend time on it.

But it's incredibly easy to argue that it's not a vehicle for in-depth discussion. And that's been the point all along - Facebook is not a replacement for Wondercafe. If you like Facebook, my all means, use Facebook. Play Farmville or Candy Crush and update me against my will on your progress there. Just don't call it a WC replacement, because that's an insult to those who actually want to discuss things and not just click "Like".

Good post.

If the UCCanada wanted to attract and lots of people to Facebook - and keep them hooked - they ought to have just created a church-themed match-3 game.

But that's what I'm arguing here.... for some (not all), it has become a replacement. And that's ok - not an insult!

Fine, then it's just hopelessly incorrect. They don't serve the same purpose.

Hi Aaron

I'm quite impressed with this United Church  FB group. There's a lot of interesting reading on it. 

Aaron is correct.

Rock the Bible and similair were quite active.

For me the challenge has been dealing with the inability to have decent faith based conversations with fellow united church of canada folks without having to argue or deal with the same old tired arguments from all sides.  I do hope that the Future United forum can provide that feature at some point, a rock the bible type venue with tighter moderation.

Chansen, the comments regarding bible authenticity get boring in relationship to the united church of canada.

You know how much variety there is in the church and how few would take the bible literally that are active in the denominiation.

the united church of canada actually did the right thing by providing a place for faith based folks of the united church of canada to disc uss their faith.  It is a widely diverse group and for folks who are in isolated locations with less access to ministers who resonated with them, it helped feed their faith.

So, sadly, some of the noise distracted from faith based dialogues, but it did not hurt faith....just hurt the ability to have good dialogue here.

Similair sounds like an airline. To where was it flying? Way beyond the blue?

Okay, so why has no other denomination done this? The technology has been available for over 15 years. Is the UCCan really that cutting edge, or have other denominations come to the conclusion that open discussion about religion is not in their best interests (like I think), or is it something else?

I think it has been beneficial for the growth of some people's faith. I think the net effect has likely been a reduction in belief, though I'll agree it's impossible to measure.

I think that united church is that cutting edge for the size.

Way ahead on multiple items over the years.

Some denominations prefer to encourage open discussion live and in-person.

I think the UCCanada launched the failed experiment that is Wondercafe because it is desperate - and dieing - and grasping at straws. Watch for more failed experiments in the future.

Jae, did I hear you say "Failed experiment?"Where were you on the Raging Cat thread?. It wasn't a failure for me.

Meanwhile, on  Baptistlife.com  they are still discussing abortion and segregation...

The decision to shut down WC was presented as a financial matter. 

The fact that WC was launched as recruitment tool, and that it failed in that way, is not talked about - but it is the elephant in the room.

There is another self evident fact: UCCan was innovative, and cutting edge with presenting WC to all; very inclusive, very thoughtful and very caring.

That said, it is clear that the decision to discontinue WC speaks volumes about UCCan currently, including the fact that UCCan does not appreciate WC members in any meaningful way.  Yes, no bums in seats, no coins in the collection plates, but still a virtual, mission based outreach driven, inclusive and caring site.    And so, shutting down WC is equivalent to turning away from a virtual congregation - a community pulled together through technology and now torn asunder.

:D

I wouldn't be surprised.

At various times over the years since I got access to the Internet I have been on several online forums run by denominations.  At least three Anglican based ones (have you checked out Ship of Fools?) 

Two were hosted by the US based Uniited Methodists, one of them hosted by a minister, I think.

Then there is Sea of Faith - atheists. agnostics and liberal Christans. This one migrated to FB.  

well, the Anglican church by definition could be considered nondenominational...

To be honest - I was introduced to it by an Anglican so thought it was started by Anglicans.  Sorry if this caused any confusion.

Which were run by the actual denominations, and would I not be banned at any of them?

Things are gonna be a lot simpler for you at WC2, chansen. There, as an admin, you'll be able to ban yourself, cutting out the need for a middle man (or woman), so to speak. Much more efficient!

If I did ban myself, I'd at least do it right.

"Dedicated discussion forums like Wondercafe are largely being replaced by social media discussions on sites such as Facebook and Twitter. Websites like WonderCafe just aren’t as popular as they once were."

This presents an interesting point of view. Are we to take it that following the crowd offers hope for the future? Are we to concede the field to corporate powers who develop social media to assimilate all perspectives under the watchful eye of advertising and security agenda?

George

I'm pretty sure that you wouldn't be banned by the Ship of Fools - just need to avoid being blatantly rude and throwing around rude names!

On WonderCafe I have felt like an individual with ideas worthy of debate and been encouraged.

On Facebook I seem to be encouraged to be part of the flock and behave as a lamb being encouraged to participate in the harvest (slaughter).

"To each his own as Paddy kissed the cow"

This post finds me finishing packing up here at WonderCafe and saying Goodbye and hoping to see you all again at WonderCafe2.

Naman, I always appreciate your input.  I am glad that you have joined wc2

Well said redhead.

As for the FB/Twitter/WC discussion, I believe each of these has its place. I have had some good, thoug short discussions on FB or Twitter. They are not the same as this format. If you don't stay in the discussion, it disappears. These discussions are there when you go back and continue later. I'm glad that WC2 has been created. It is also good that it has left the UCCan.

I think that's a pretty good summary of the difference. Almost from the start WC has been about diversity of opinions being welcomed, if at times passionately and heatedly disagreed with. The UCC Facebook group on the other hand - to me at least - seems to encourage falling into line, and those who don't fall into line don't feel especially welcome. At least I've heard many express that to me.

Exactly this. Each of those social media outlets have a place, and none of them replaces any of the others. Northwind summarized that really well.

As for the UCCan not caring, I don't see that. I would not say the UCCan is uncaring. Technically inept, dependent upon expensive and slightly clueless Internet consultants, and poor communicators at times, sure, but not uncaring. For UCCan members, there is a place for them in the UCCan - it's called their church.

And I still don't see this as a virtual congregation, but then, I'm not religious. As for this being a mission, I don't know how you give WC.ca funds that could be going to orphans, or the homeless, or any other good cause. We aren't the needy ones. We proved that by up and creating our own place. In Tea Party terms, we picked ourselves up by our own bootstraps. Because we could. We aren't truly needy. Other people are truly needy.

Revsteven, I agree with what you stated about FaceBook. The same people seem to post and all seem to be in agreement WonderCafe people seem like they are crashing the party. They also love vids. I love to read more. Videos all the time seem like we are spoon fed.

Chansen, We really aren't  needy except for conversation.

Naman, your ideas are important. Glad you are all moving over.

I agree, CH. It's just that, if the decision is between the UCCan cutting funding to something truly important to people who have no good recourse and funding the existing Wondercafe instead, or funding the charitable work and having us start Wondercafe2.ca, I'll take the latter.

Actually, I'd take the latter for both reasons. I prefer the charitable work be funded instead, and I prefer getting Wondercafe out from under the control of the UCCan, who really aren't good with social media or forums.

Chansen, I have found that a lot of Church People  that sit in ivory towers don't like to be told they could be wrong.