Some discussions just don't fit into a well defined box. Use this forum to discuss general topics and issues revolving around the Church and the technology offerings we use and share.
JohnShaw wrote:I know i'm being a bit particular here, but this is clearly referencing my sentence out of context, I was referring to the policy as it came out, when it came out originally - when wards and stakes were told to pull down their websites.
Not long after the wards and stakes were told to pull down their websites, this letter was published in December 2004, which contains wording about privacy that is not all that different from what we have now. So concern for privacy is hardly anything new.
Questions that can benefit the larger community should be asked in a public forum, not a private message.
JohnShaw wrote:I was referring to the policy as it came out, when it came out originally - when wards and stakes were told to pull down their websites. Prior to there ever being a Ward and Stake website.
I remember privacy being mentioned. But it wasn't the bulk of the message. I should be able to find an older copy tonight.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.
So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
The sentence "it is imperative that the rights of third parties be protected and respected though strict compliance with applicable laws" could apply to both copyrights and privacy.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.
So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
First. In many countries around the world, the Church has sent out a Church Data Privacy Statement specific to the country that must be posted in every meetinghouse. Most often, this is because countries have adopted privacy laws that require it.
Second. In considering the use of social networking and other public web sites, it is always wise to follow Church guidelines, of course. And it is particularly wise to remember that there is a big difference between a group of Relief Society sisters or Young Single Adults who are, in fact, legal adults, and a group of Young Men or Young Women who are not of legal age and are entitled to greater protection in the cyberspace world.
Often times, this additional protection is required by law. Many times, there are safety issues involved.
So - tying these last threads together with the original poster: This is where, I think, the other service providers and tools come in. A member can opt in to their service and accept the privacy policy of the provider of behalf of themselves without the church being on the hook at all. This is the benefit of using a 3rd party service (whether it be email, or facebook, or whatever).
The church doesn't need to (and shouldn't in my opinion) wade into the social networking scene with its own tool as was suggested previously.
a) the other providers can do it so much better because of the time, talent, and money it takes to develop a great social network.
b) the church would struggle to create a compelling platform that would ever reach critical mass of usage to be relevant
c) the church protects the church from data privacy issues (as already stated)
d) the church wouldn't have to worry about filtering/editorializing members or looking like a 'sponsor' of something someone says or does on its social network.
Members are far better of coalescing around whatever communication platform is right for their time and location. In our country, we've been through an exciting evolution of snail mail, telephone, email, mobile/txt, and social networking in the last 100 years, but that is only the evolution we went through in the US. Remember that in many countries they are skipping right to mobile without ever experiencing a landline. Different people in different places use technology differently, and we have to be open to that possibility and not pigeon-hole them into a least common denominator, US-based approach.
The guidance in the new handbook feels more timeless than the other various letters/instructions to go/no-go on a certain technology. The new handbook essentially says what not to do with church data, and then leaves it up to the members to figure out what other tools are useful in their callings and responsibilities (with some general guidance of what not to do).
I took note that, in yesterday's training, Elder Uchtdorf mentioned that we should use technology to do organizational stuff so we can then maximize our council time in real council. He said "There are many ways to enhance our precious council time, like always coming well prepared. We could handle scheduling or other organizational matters by memo, phone, e-mail, or text. When we allow organizational matters to dominate our efforts and time in our councils, we run the risk of missing the mark of why the Lord has called us to minister in His Church." (emphasis added)
I believe that the Church is still trying to balance the good and bad of social media. But it is getting closer. These two links provide more guidance: (Sorry, I don't know how to use the cool linky things you all do.)
