Tech Forum

I hope I am asking this in the right forum. I am very excited about the recent adjustments to the Sunday schedule and renewed emphasis on the home. As part of that, Elder Cook stated

To help members prepare for the Sabbath, some wards already send an informative email, text, or social media message midweek. In view of this adjustment, we strongly recommend this type of communication. These invitations will remind the members of the Sunday meeting schedule for that week, including the upcoming class lesson topic.

and

For example, announcements can for the most part be accomplished in the midweek invitation or on a printed program.

This got us thinking about the importance of the ward newsletter that we send out each week and providing a location to display that important information. We are creating a blog to keep important announcement and news in one place. We are being very careful to follow the policies outlined in the Use of Online Resources in Church Callings page.

So, here is my question: making sure to comply with that page and Handbook 2 21.1.22, Do you all think that we would be safe creating a URL something like http://www.firstward.com? The title would obviously not be called First Ward, it would be First Ward News or Friends of First Ward. We would also include a disclaimer such as “This is not an official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints” and comply with all other guidelines. Thank you for taking the time to read this very long post!

TL;DR: is firstward.com an acceptable URL if we make it perfectly clear that it is not an official church site?

jordanrjones wrote:Do you all think that we would be safe creating a URL something like http://www.firstward.com? The title would obviously not be called First Ward, it would be First Ward News or Friends of First Ward.

Doing a search of "1st ward" results in over 1,900 units. I think it needs to be more specific.

As for if the guidance applies to the URL, I'd say that's a gray area. I, personally, would be more comfortable if URL wasn't just the unit name. If nothing else, it makes it more likely that some future page may violate the guidance.

I'd be tempted to register both URLs and make the first re-direct to the second. But I'd only publicize the second.

One caution I'd have is to work out how the registration for any URL is kept up to date. If the URL isn't renewed, it may be snapped up and re-directed to something ugly. Callings change and members move away. So, it may be challenging to put a procedure in place that's guaranteed to work. As such, it may be worth considering using a Facebook page or some other blog page rather than creating your own URL.

Thanks for the reply and the words of caution. We definitely want to be careful as we proceed. “First Ward” was just and example, sorry about the confusion

Just keep in mind that's my own personal interpretation, forum title not withstanding. The keys to interpretation rests with the local leaders. If they have questions, they need to ask their presiding authority.

Excellent reminder; thanks again