Tech Forum

I have noticed a trend here that has repeated itself numerous times.

Here is a typical scenario:

<Forum Member 1> I have developed something really cool and I want to share it with everyone. Here are the details....

<Forum Member 2> I think that is against church policy because....

<Forum Member 3> I don't think it is because....

<Forum Member 2> Yes it is because....

<Forum Members 4, 5, and 6> Let me give you my input on whether his project is legal

<Forum Member 1> Uh, can we get back to discussing the project that I was originally excited about?

If the church has a problem with a person's project, let us leave it up to the church to deal with it. Theorizing about why someone's project may or may not be against the rules in the thread they have created to show their excitement is extremely disrespectful and rude.

If something really needs to be done, let us leave it up to the proper authorities. It is really getting tiring seeing this same paradigm repeating itself over and over again when all it does is discourage people who are trying to do something great for the church. It is like telling the person that their project is not important, but finding fault with it is.

It is one thing if this happens only once or twice, but it happens over and over again.

TB

Isn't that the point of these forums to get feedback? And wouldn't you expect that if a project someone was working on was in violation of church policy, they would prefer to find out about it here than through a phone call from the area presidency? Having experienced both, I can tell you which I prefer. If you want somebody to help you feel good, call your Mother. Nobody is forcing you to post here. But if you do post here, understand that everyone else who posts here is free just like you to post whatever they like in reply. If you're project comes that close to violating policy that it starts a huge online debate, then maybe you should think twice about why you're doing it and whether it is important enough to justify the risk. Personally, I go on these forums to hear about church policies and what the best way is to achieve technical objectives while still conforming to these policies. While there is occassionally feedback to my posts that could be phrased more diplomatically, I still welcome the feedback. If you are aware that you are in violation of policy (and this doesn't bother you) or that it is a grey area that you don't want to debate again, simply state this in your original post and most people will leave it alone. If they don't, they must feel pretty strongly about it, so maybe you should listen, as that is part of what this forum is all about. And for what it's worth, I don't know many church leaders that scour these forums looking for policy violations so they can action them. So unless you popped an email off to your area presidency filling them in on the details of your project before you started, how exactly do you expect to get this feedback from the "proper authorities" if they haven't been informed. It sound like you've buried your head in the sand a little and gotten annoyed when a few concerned passers by tried to dig you out.

jltware wrote:It sound like you've buried your head in the sand a little and gotten annoyed when a few concerned passers by tried to dig you out.

Let's be real careful not to pass judgment on anyone. My personal opinion is that TechnoBabel noticed something similar happen on a few different threads started by other forum users from himself.

But that assumption is beside the point...

TechnoBabel makes some good suggestions in my opinion. None of us regular community members should establish ourselves as policy experts in anyway. In fact, we should even try to avoid personal interpretation of current policy. Also, I think it is true that we should not try and completely sideline a discussion thread for a project that may or may not have a minor policy issue. And we definitely need to be respectful of other users, their opinions, and their project ideas/implementations.

Having said all of that, I do think that these forums should be open to discussion and input. That's why most come here. I do indeed think those coming with project ideas/implementations are coming for feedback and suggestions. Hopefully they should be ready to receive both positive feedback and constructive criticism.

If however a project may run into some potential issues with policy, I think it is a good thing for the community to try and let that user know. Maybe that very thread isn't the right place (and maybe even it's better had through private PMs at times), or maybe it is right to put it in that thread if it is not way off topic. It's hard to say. We all just need to be extra thoughtful, respectful, helpful, and polite in this regard.

One last thing I will say is in regard to Church Employee representation on the forums...and that is that there are no guarantees. Employee representation is not the entire purpose of these forums. And although we are seeing more and more employees represented and some becoming quite active, there have been times in the past where finding official representation or getting a definitive answer has proven very difficult.

The point of these forums is to get feedback, but I don't think the point of these forums is to go over the same old conversation countless times when it does nothing but disrespect someone's great idea that they have worked on.

I thought I made it perfectly clear that this is simply an observation I have made. I haven't even done any great projects like some of these people have. I'm just really getting tired of seeing this same old topic come up over and over again when no one has a single solitary bit of new information to add to it than they did the last time it was brought up. Everyone just wants to get their opinion in and I think it is unconscionable to do that to someone who has just invested their time working on a great project. Do we really want to make people regret that they went the extra mile for the church and stop the great work they are doing?

Like I said, if the church has a problem with it, the church can take whatever action deemed necessary. I don't think it is up to us to be throwing out accusations when all we have to offer on the subject are opinions and a letter from 2004 that is interpreted differently by just about everyone who reads it.

If people want to start some thread talking about general church policies, I don't see any problem with that. I do see a problem with turning someone else's thread into yet another church policy debate.

TB

Amen to everything mkmurray said, and I think a fair point by TechnoBabel. I have no problem with discussing policies and often find it useful to hear other's (referenced) interpretations of grey areas, but I do admit it becomes tiresome when people debate policies they know have no clear cut solution just for the sake of having a debate. Perhaps it would be better sometimes to politely ask them to start their own thread referring back to the question and debate it there, and leave the original thread for replies to the original question. I believe administrators have the ability to delete or move threads that stray too far off topic. However, for everyday members like ourselves, asking people to move their debate of the thread and onto another (and post a url to link it if they feel the need so those interested in the debate can find it and wont feel the need to carry on with the original). I think most people will respect such a request.

The problem is it takes two to tango, and debates involve several different people. No one person's comments are considered a debate on their own, and sometimes it needs to be pointed out to people that the topic as a whole is degenerating into an off topic debate that should be moved.

No disrespect intended towards you personally in my original post TechnoBabel. I haven't read through your posts and have no idea about and certainly nothing against any ideas you may or may not have had.

TechnoBabel wrote:<Forum Member 1> Uh, can we get back to discussing the project that I was originally excited about?

Now that's one part of the pattern that I don't recall seeing.

Keep in mind that it's entirely possible that there simply isn't a whole lot of interest beyond a few "Nice job" comments. I think there have been a few things that simply didn't go very far in terms of number of replies.

TechnoBabel wrote: ...
If people want to start some thread talking about general church policies, I don't see any problem with that. I do see a problem with turning someone else's thread into yet another church policy debate.

TB

Isn't the discussion of policy, against the Terms and
Conditions of the board ?

I tend to remember numerous reminders by moderators
that this is a technical forum.

As such, I agree wholeheartedly with TB that discussions
about projects should pertain about the projects themselves,
and not church policies. Let those who want to discuss
policies go to boringlegalforum.lds.org.

- Atticus

The repeated personal attacks against anyone stating that their nFS experiences have been less than perfect have pretty much killed those discussions. The fact that software does not function properly is *not* an attack on the church, but is reality. This is a tech forum. An entire section is devoted to nFS, yet users who point out their problems with the software are vilified on this forum. Ergo, little to no discussion. An no perceptible corrections in the program. (Reporting to nFS has resulted in only 2 resolutions: 1) I can now view my colonial American ancestors, and 2) their combining info now shows . . . eventually.)

RussellHltn wrote:Now that's one part of the pattern that I don't recall seeing.

I admit, the final part of the pattern is what I sense the person is thinking rather than what they actually posted.

Isn't the discussion of policy, against the Terms and
Conditions of the board ?

If that is the case, I'd be fine with eliminating all policy discussion. It is a waste of time and counterproductive.

TB

atticusewig wrote:Isn't the discussion of policy, against the Terms and
Conditions of the board ?

I tend to remember numerous reminders by moderators
that this is a technical forum.

The part about this being solely a "technical" forum has relaxed a bit over the last year as the scope of the site has enlarged. This site really is a clerk's support site as much as it is a technical forum.

As for policy discussions, it is tough. Policies need to be mentioned, but I don't think we should be debating or overly interpreting them. I believe that is what is mentioned in the Code of Conduct for the message boards.