Comments on: Understanding Attack Blogs http://www.churchmarketingsucks.com/2007/04/understanding-attack-blogs/ Frustrate. Educate. Motivate. Thu, 09 Feb 2012 19:53:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: blogger http://www.churchmarketingsucks.com/2007/04/understanding-attack-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-5176 blogger Thu, 14 Jun 2007 20:12:41 +0000 http://cms.bigbadcollab.com/?p=840#comment-5176 http://memorialparkchurch.blog.com http://memorialparkchurch.blog.com

]]> By: David Lindner http://www.churchmarketingsucks.com/2007/04/understanding-attack-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-5175 David Lindner Thu, 07 Jun 2007 10:22:06 +0000 http://cms.bigbadcollab.com/?p=840#comment-5175 I agree that regardless of Technical know how, church leaders must succomb to the new wave of communication and over communicate from the get-go with their congregations in whatever form possible. I see communication as a big part of leadership, and blogging is one way to do that. It's unfortunate that people are starting to use it to bash their churches, hopefully, we can use them to become better leaders. church-leaderhip.blogspot.com David Lindner I agree that regardless of Technical know how, church leaders must succomb to the new wave of communication and over communicate from the get-go with their congregations in whatever form possible. I see communication as a big part of leadership, and blogging is one way to do that. It’s unfortunate that people are starting to use it to bash their churches, hopefully, we can use them to become better leaders.
church-leaderhip.blogspot.com
David Lindner

]]> By: Jeff L http://www.churchmarketingsucks.com/2007/04/understanding-attack-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-5174 Jeff L Sun, 06 May 2007 02:45:24 +0000 http://cms.bigbadcollab.com/?p=840#comment-5174 People will be people no matter what method they use to split a church. Used to be word of mouth was enough to get the ball rolling, now we live in such a high tech state, that we want our messages, nice or attacking to get to the flock as fast as possible. Once Satan opens the door, he keeps a foot in front to keep it from closing. It is a tough battle back from an attack. Great article. People will be people no matter what method they use to split a church. Used to be word of mouth was enough to get the ball rolling, now we live in such a high tech state, that we want our messages, nice or attacking to get to the flock as fast as possible. Once Satan opens the door, he keeps a foot in front to keep it from closing. It is a tough battle back from an attack. Great article.

]]> By: brendon http://www.churchmarketingsucks.com/2007/04/understanding-attack-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-5173 brendon Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:27:03 +0000 http://cms.bigbadcollab.com/?p=840#comment-5173 attack blogs are never good.....but if you have a good tech guy on your church staff like we have....then you just ask him to hack it and take it down.....other options availble but that one worked for us :) attack blogs are never good…..but if you have a good tech guy on your church staff like we have….then you just ask him to hack it and take it down…..other options availble but that one worked for us :)

]]> By: bob smietana http://www.churchmarketingsucks.com/2007/04/understanding-attack-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-5172 bob smietana Tue, 10 Apr 2007 12:32:31 +0000 http://cms.bigbadcollab.com/?p=840#comment-5172 Looks like the attack bloggers are in the right here and the church is breaking the law? What else are they supposed to do Looks like the attack bloggers are in the right here and the church is breaking the law? What else are they supposed to do

]]> By: bob smietana http://www.churchmarketingsucks.com/2007/04/understanding-attack-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-5171 bob smietana Tue, 10 Apr 2007 12:31:24 +0000 http://cms.bigbadcollab.com/?p=840#comment-5171 It seems like this church breaking the law and the leadership, at least the leader in the transcript, is refusing to live up to his legal obligation. What else should members do? It seems like this church breaking the law and the leadership, at least the leader in the transcript, is refusing to live up to his legal obligation. What else should members do?

]]> By: Drew http://www.churchmarketingsucks.com/2007/04/understanding-attack-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-5170 Drew Tue, 03 Apr 2007 18:10:03 +0000 http://cms.bigbadcollab.com/?p=840#comment-5170 I get my gossip from the pews... Feels more hot off the press that way. I get my gossip from the pews… Feels more hot off the press that way.

]]> By: Mean Dean http://www.churchmarketingsucks.com/2007/04/understanding-attack-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-5169 Mean Dean Tue, 03 Apr 2007 11:40:04 +0000 http://cms.bigbadcollab.com/?p=840#comment-5169 Paul, I entirely disagree with your assessment where you write: <blockquote>If we'd all just do what Jesus said and follow Matthew 18, we'd all be better. That goes for both church leaders and those creating "attack blogs".</blockquote>Not that both sides shouldn't practice this tenet - but rather the reality is that many, especially those spiritually abusive situations, don't. What then, sit about with wishful thinking - after all - isn't the Matthew 18 model to publically excoriate the offending party if they won't deal with it in private? What better mechanism than the blog? Paul, I entirely disagree with your assessment where you write:
If we’d all just do what Jesus said and follow Matthew 18, we’d all be better. That goes for both church leaders and those creating “attack blogs”.

Not that both sides shouldn’t practice this tenet – but rather the reality is that many, especially those spiritually abusive situations, don’t.
What then, sit about with wishful thinking – after all – isn’t the Matthew 18 model to publically excoriate the offending party if they won’t deal with it in private?
What better mechanism than the blog?

]]> By: mike hosey http://www.churchmarketingsucks.com/2007/04/understanding-attack-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-5168 mike hosey Tue, 03 Apr 2007 10:03:46 +0000 http://cms.bigbadcollab.com/?p=840#comment-5168 Hey Paul - I agree with you that face to face contacts are usually preferable. However, if people are thoughtful and willing to control emotions, written communication allows restriction to topic, real thoughtful deliberation, and the ability to thoroughly avenues a variety of avenues when the original topic becomes exhausted or unproductive. The key, of course, is keeping one's emotions under control, and being willfuly deliberative instead of reactionary. mike Hey Paul -
I agree with you that face to face contacts are usually preferable. However, if people are thoughtful and willing to control emotions, written communication allows restriction to topic, real thoughtful deliberation, and the ability to thoroughly avenues a variety of avenues when the original topic becomes exhausted or unproductive. The key, of course, is keeping one’s emotions under control, and being willfuly deliberative instead of reactionary.
mike

]]> By: Pastor Paul http://www.churchmarketingsucks.com/2007/04/understanding-attack-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-5167 Pastor Paul Tue, 03 Apr 2007 09:20:05 +0000 http://cms.bigbadcollab.com/?p=840#comment-5167 I once read an article in YouthWorker Journal about arguing via e-mail. In general, it's one of the worst ways to argue because it is generally (read generally, not always) done without too much thought, but more emotion. However, what's worse is that it's not done face-to-face. People can't hear voice inflections or see body language that could communicate something totally different than the words do. Not only that, but face-to-face communication communicates that you care about that person enough to risk getting hurt (the risk is considerably lower when one is simply writing), and that you are willing to work with that person to correct whatever's wrong. With all of that said, I would say that the idea of an "attack blog" is an extremely sad way for people to deal with their issues in the body of Christ. Yet I also understand that, in rare instances, they may feel that's the only way open to them. Generally (again, that's generally, not always),though, my guess is that most people won't confront a pastor/leadership/person because they are afraid of getting wounded even more, or they aren't truly willing to see reconciliation. They simply want to attack somebody who has wronged them, like a wounded dog biting the vet's hand. Of course, even this comment is open to my own criticism, which shows the point that occasionally a loving blog of correction, or e-mail, is necessary. However, I wish it was less the norm than it is... much less. I once read an article in YouthWorker Journal about arguing via e-mail. In general, it’s one of the worst ways to argue because it is generally (read generally, not always) done without too much thought, but more emotion. However, what’s worse is that it’s not done face-to-face. People can’t hear voice inflections or see body language that could communicate something totally different than the words do. Not only that, but face-to-face communication communicates that you care about that person enough to risk getting hurt (the risk is considerably lower when one is simply writing), and that you are willing to work with that person to correct whatever’s wrong. With all of that said, I would say that the idea of an “attack blog” is an extremely sad way for people to deal with their issues in the body of Christ. Yet I also understand that, in rare instances, they may feel that’s the only way open to them. Generally (again, that’s generally, not always),though, my guess is that most people won’t confront a pastor/leadership/person because they are afraid of getting wounded even more, or they aren’t truly willing to see reconciliation. They simply want to attack somebody who has wronged them, like a wounded dog biting the vet’s hand. Of course, even this comment is open to my own criticism, which shows the point that occasionally a loving blog of correction, or e-mail, is necessary. However, I wish it was less the norm than it is… much less.

]]>