14 Apr 2004

Shocked and Saddened by Ridge Point Church

New Web Site and Forums to Be Launched Soon!  The internet is always changing and Ridge Point is changing its website to include everything the old one had and more!

I had planned to announce soon that I had ended my involvement in the Ridge Point web site, and had transitioned ownership over to the church staff.  There are a few reasons for this - personally we’ve been feeling called to do something different in our church and spiritual life, and there had also been a small number of disagreements over the use of technology at Ridge Point.  I had turned all the source files and all related documents over to the church staff, with the expectation that they would continue with the current site, and possibly look for another pMachine developer to help with any incremental changes needed.

Needless to say, learning that the intent is to now completely change the site was a shock - one that greatly saddens me, and not just because I’ve logged more than 370 hours over the last two years researching, designing, building, and training user and content contributors on the current site. 

And I’m not just sad because I still believe the current site is the right site for Ridge Point - based on the things we learned during the research, based on the internet community feedback we got after the launch, and based on some of the comments from the church itself.

No, I’m mostly sad because I truly feel like the current site is the one God wanted for Ridge Point - based on the prayers sent up while building it, and based on the fact that it turned out the way it did - way above what I feel like I’m capable of alone.

So - just for the record - my involvement in all aspects of the current Ridge Point site is officially terminated.  I have no knowledge of or participation in any technology decisions made from this point forward, and I would covet your prayers for myself personally - that I can “let go and let God”, and for the staff members at Ridge Point who are now making technology decisions for the church - that they keep the site users first and foremost in mind, seek good counsel, and commit the site to prayer.

Learn ExpressionEngine® Fast

Visit Train-ee.com for the latest in ExpressionEngine training designed with one goal in mind - to get you up to speed on ExpressionEngine® as quickly as possible.

The latest Train-ee Products:

The latest from the Train-ee blog:

Comments

1

April 15, 2004

Wow!  Most churches have crappy websites and the leadership doesn’t care that they are that way.

Perhaps you’ve been able to raise awareness to a level that they actually care should be enough of a reward.

Like Jonah, after you’ve come and preached the good-word to the people of Ninevah and they accepted it, you have to go sit in the desert for a while.  I pray that God will grow a shade tree to comfort you.

2

April 15, 2004

Mike,

I’m heartbroken for you. In part because I’ve seen this before. A new pastor comes in with an agenda, and past buddies. It happened at Montrose Baptist. Eventually, the ‘style of leadership’ grew a 3000 person SBC in Maryland (which is a real feat) to about 800 ...

... most if not all of the ‘resume’ members taking their talents elsewhere.

For example, Redland Baptist now enjoys three very capable Sunday school teachers, a webmaster, and some other talents via Montrose’s decision to have the congregants serve the agenda, as opposed to the agenda serving the congregants.

Not that all agendas are bad, but pastors are just that, called to be shepherds of the sheep ... this means they meet the sheep where it is at ...

... Not that all change in churches is bad, but change just for the sake of change, or change just because that’s the way the pastor did it with old friends, buddies and systemd doesn’t necessarily make it right if it doesn’t fit into the purpose and personality of the church.

My advice? Talk to them. If that fails, broaden the scope with you you talk. If that fails, take your talents to a church that will appreciate having the best website on the block.

Personally, from what you’ve described, it sounds like the staff has lost sight of what the website should be ... a useful tool of the church ... and the church useful mechanism for organizing the the Body.

After all, it was the Body that Jesus’ focus ... 

3

April 15, 2004

Mike,

It makes me sad just to read this. The Ridge Point website is one of the best church websites I’ve ever seen.

You’ll definitely be in our prayers.

4

April 15, 2004

Interesting, I had posted technical commentary over at RidgePoint, only to have them deleted. Nothing bad, just asking if a complete needs analysis had been performed before the decision to change. Mostly because I’m still trying to figure out what data would compel them to expand forums that with the exception of the prayer requests, are rarely used.

That said, someone else left a comment, the pastor replied, with the following quote included:
Please also know that Mike Boynk is not the sole designer of this site. There was a team involved. What is inspiring about the site is that people are at the core - it has little to do with the technology. It’s community!

I’m sure there were others involved, but to my subjective eye, the above comment makes it sound like the others could have managed the MySQL, PHP and other programattic elements of the effort.

Again, IMHO, it’s starting to sound like a Montrose/Otis Ray Hope scenario.

5

April 15, 2004

Dean and Mike,
I find it a disturbing that comments were removed.  Dean’s comments were insightful and meaningful.  However the impression I get is that “they weren’t what we wanted to hear so we’ll remove them”.  Running a Portal myself (with Mike’s help from time to time) situations arise people question why you do what you do.  I think it’s healthy to have people question you.  For me I’m glad my users feel that they can speak their mind on the page.  If it doesn’t serve them it doesn’t do any good.

Where I’m going with this is all too many times on other forums I see a flame war arise or comments are made that aren’t within the confines of what’s appreciated by the forum administration and they’re simply removed as if they didn’t happen.  That’s poor management IMO, if you can’t back up why you’re doing something this drastic then you shouldn’t be doing it perhaps?

6
(Author)
April 16, 2004

Current RP website features, in no particular order:

- Database driven backend
- Completely web-based—no special software or knowledge of HTML required to add or edit content
- Collaborative, permissions-based publishing
- No operating system or browser restrictions to publish content
- RSS feed
- “Static” content
- Group blogs
- Integrated discussion forums - not a seperate application or website.
- Context-sensitive “Contact Us” form - different recipient depending on where you access it from in the site
- Generic addresses used for all “Contact Us” forms, to prevent site updates being required due to frequent staff changes.
- Automatically-generated breadcrumb trail navigation
- Validated HTML template and CSS
- Verified cross-browser operation - even in Netscape 4, site is readable/usable.
- Printable versions via CSS
- Integrated user management (one login for all functions including forums, blogs, etc).
- User editable membership profiles.
- Self-serve mailinglist subscriptions
- Context-sensitive photo headers that change with page refresh
- Integrated search engine
- Auto-archiving of old content
- Full Terms of Use agreement and Privacy Policy
- Fully customizeable look and feel, not tied to any set of templates
- Site admins are able to upload images
- Low cost of ownership - hosting $10/mo, pMachine license $45 (paid for till next major release).
- An already-trained staff and user base.
- Tell a Friend feature for Messages
- Auto Notifications - admins of new site postings, members of responses to their posts or comments
- Curse word censoring
- “Future Dating” - content can be pre-entered and appear on the right date.
- Auto-expriration - content can be pre-programmed to come off the site on the right date.
- IP Banning for preventing unwanted people from posting.
- A style sheet that allows fonts to be resized larger - even in IE.
- Fully scalable - no additional costs incurred by adding more content or more users.
- Search engine friendly and “Bookmarkable” page titles and meta tags
- Design that displays well down the 800 x 600 resolution
- No personal email addresses posted directly on the site - to prevent against user email addresses from being harvested by spam-bots.

Besides chat, I’m lost as to what “the next step” for RP on the web could possibly be.

7

April 16, 2004

Mike, thanks for enumerating what’s there currently. Hopefully it’ll help RidgePoint “hold on to what is good.”

That said, perhaps you could help answer this question ... what is the compelling reason for chat? To me, in a day an age where most everyone who wants to chat has some form of IM, why suffer the bandwidth and security issues?

In other words, what user profiles could have arisen or changed that would inspire them to re-invent the wheel?

I mean if its really an issue where they don’t like the blog-centric front-end, no problemo. The pMachine templating system is flexible enough to feed events into the front page as a form of dynamic content.

I just don’t get it.

8
(Author)
April 16, 2004

IMHO, The chat will fail - there isn’t enough traffic to the forums to indicate that enough people will be online at the same time to support it.  It might work for the students - but that would require a youth pastor with the vision to use technology as a tool, which RP doesn’t currently have.

I also question whether the current forum users, who are mostly new to online conversation tools of any sort, realize that what they are currently doing - talking with other RP people via the website - isn’t chat.

No, what I firmly believe we’re seeing is evidence of a struggle to justify the change, trying to sell it as the “next step”, and “bigger and better” when in fact it will be at best a lateral move and more realistically a step backwards technology-wise.  It can’t be about features—we’ve actually pulled features like the event calendar from the site because no one on staff had the bandwidth to maintain them, even though they were useful to users of the site.

I think the real reason they’re abandoning the current site is that no one on staff knows how to tweak pMachine, so rather than contract with another pMachine developer for the mostly incremental changes required for the near future they’re going to contract with some sort of hosted “just fill in the blanks and create your new site!” kind of service.

Since this hosted service has a couple of features not present on the site like chat and photo galleries, those are being used as the justification for the move.

9

April 16, 2004

So the issue then becomes, how much will it cost them to hire someone to solve the problems, vs. someone an out-of-the-can solution.

If that’s the case, then why not be up-front about it? Sheesh ... same thing at Montrose. They’d lose someone talented ... often because of the pastor’s “style of management” and then paint the replacement/alternative as the next best thing since sliced bread.

Grew a 3,000 member church to 800 (eight hundred) in only a couple of years.

10
(Author)
April 19, 2004

Please also know that Mike Boynk (sic) is not the sole designer of this site. There was a team involved. .

The accuracy of this statement depends on how you define “designer”.

At the beginning of the project there was a small team - myself and 3 others, reporting to the Director of Development. This team did the stakeholder interviews, benchmarking of other sites, and brainstorming for the new site. 

By the time we had moved to the point of putting together a site architecture (which I did) into content-gathering, the team was down to myself and two others.  Another staff member was enlisted as copy writer/editor, to put a consistent voice on all the “corporate” content.

Part way through the content development, at the point of deciding / developing a look and feel for the site, the “team” had become myself working with the Director of Development.  In order to help speed this step along, I enlisted the help of an outside design firm, who worked on my direction to develop the basic HTML template used on the site.

I sure don’t remember a “team” sitting in my office during Spring Break 2003, when the bulk of the site was implemented.

Since that time until Ridge Point’s annoucement, the only person making structural or “design” changes to the site at the pMachine template or HTML/CSS level was myself, based on input from various members of the church staff.

Sole designer or team?  You decide.

11

April 19, 2004

Michael, it sounds like the problem has nothing to do with technology but pastors/leaders who are scared of technology and can not give up control.

There I said it. Technology is just a front. It is really about control.

My take on it is that your website allows for too much congregational input, too much stuff does not need to go through channel, boards, etc. (I say too much) It just makes leadership types nervous. I thought I remember some problem with enabling comments back when you first launched--it was a sign.

I know some pastors that would sit for hours surfing a site like yours trying to find something troubling. As the almost instant deletion of Dean’s comments attests.

They jumpted at the first chance they got to move to an inferior (I can’t imagine a superior site), less accessible, less transparent, less congregational, less original.

I’m so sorry that you are going through this. It really, really disappoints. It must break your heart. I would just try and let it go. Find a way to forgive. Then give it some time, find some new faces who embrace your vision of technology and continue to dedicate your talents to HIS service.

12
Dan Broekhuizen
April 22, 2004

Mike, I have known you for a few years, and have appreciated your involvement at Ridge Point.  I too am a volunteer, and have felt both appreciated and, at times unappreciated.  The time that I spend with the the music team, and with other teams at RP is time spent for the Kingdom.  I consider it building up treasures in Heaven.  Your dedication to helping the lost find Life, through your efforts with the web site, have made Jesus smile.  I think he sees how you have been able to take a technology and make it work for Him.  Some choose to use it for pornography, some for building bombs, and some for stealing identities; you have chosen to use it for the purpose of providing an opportunity for Eternity.  You have given back to the One who gave all. 

Mike, please continue to work for the Kingdom, whether that is at RPCC, or elsewhere, if you are so called.  You will not know the number of people who have been introduced to new Life by your efforts, but Jesus does; He knows them, and you, by your name. 

“For I know the plans I have for you, Mike, plans to prosper you and not harm you, plans to give you HOPE and a future” - JER 29:11

Mike, your work with the RPCC web-site for the past few years has made this passage personal to many people.  Take our your name and substitite theirs.  There are others who will try to get you to focus on the wrong that has been done.  Whether intentionally or unintentionally, that is a job for the One that we wronged, and no one else.  Mike, seek first the kingdom of God, and His righteousness, and all of theses other “things” (substitute your needs) will be added to you.

Thanks, brother.

danno

13

April 23, 2004

These posts deeply grieve me. The judgmental tone and critical attitude of so many who know so little about the real issues is so harmful to the cause of Christ. Please be careful what you conclude when you have so little information and one side of an issue.

Please know the Leadership of Ridge Point deeply appreciates Mike and his family and we hope they continue to be part of our faith community.

Mike, I’ll call you and speak personally and privately - between brothers in the spirit of Matthew 18.

If any of you have questions or concerns, please contact me at

14

April 23, 2004

Jim,

Let me get this straight, you’ve just publically stated that you’re going to straighten Mike out with your Matthew 23 interpretation of Matthew 18:15-20?

By the way, speaking of asking you questions privately and directly, when are you going to answer my reply to your private email of last week where I asked if you had compelling metrics (e.g. needs analysis) to make such drastic changes to your church’s website?

It’s starting to sound to me like a job for Jeff VanVonderen.

15
(Author)
April 23, 2004

OK - now that all interested parties have had comment, I’m going to do a little housekeeping then close comments on this post.

On Ridge Point’s web site:
The new site has been announced in the current RidgePoint.org forums, so I think it’s fair game to announce it here:

http://www.ridgepointcenter.org

The site speaks for itself, and I will offer no further commentary about that site here on boyink.com.

On my involvement with Ridge Point:
I already have a signed and notarized Hold Harmless agreement between Boyink Interactive and Ridge Point Community Church that insulates my business from their use of internet technologies, and have also publically announced my termination of involvement in the Ridge Point web site in the post that contains these comments.

On a personal level - we’ve already requested that our names be removed from any and all mailings that Ridge Point sends out, and we will no longer be attending RP. This decision was made before RP’s decision to redevelop their web site.

Finally - I will not answer any further emails or phone calls from Ridge Point staff, elders, or board members concerning this issue.  I’m done folks - I’ve got paid work waiting, and we’re excited about what God’s got in store for us next.

And with that, comments on this post are now closed.

  Commenting is no longer allowed on this entry.

Related Posts

GetBoyinked

Subscribe to Boyink.com