Yes, I think we agree more than we disagree too. Somehow, I’m being too quick to interpret what you say.

Also, I’m not necessarily opposed to dates, times and places up front if that’s not the only thing (although I guess I could say that in the past, I’ve been more narrow-minded about dates, times, places).

If the dates, times, places are the only thing on the front page, then I think we’ve limited our audience only to those people who are already seeking out a church. I want to have a broader audience and try to convince people who aren’t seeking out a church that there is a place for them among us.

So how about dates, times, places for those who are already seeking out a church and just need quick access to the information and prominent links to profiles of believers within our congregation for unbelievers who aren’t seeking out a church?

Let’s see. According to Google Maps, the western border of Maryland is a whopping 2,874 miles from my house (they estimate it will take me 1 day and 18 hours to drive there). The western border of North Carolina, on the other hand, is a paltry 2,763 miles from my house (1 day and 17 hours away). At least this is heading in the right direction and there’s hope of a lunch together!

… I never, EVER said one should post a mission statement on their frontpage.

In fact, I’ve said more than once that is a deadly sin of church web design.

We seriously need to get together for lunch (here in N.C. now) to get over this disconnect.

Why? I see we agree more than we disagree, which is why I think we find ourselves in “violent agreement” with one another.

Still, dates, times & places – needs to be up front for foragers. They convey the message of an active, furtive congregation.

I agree that we should put the pertinent text up front. I guess I just don’t think dates, times, mission statements, etc. are as pertinent as some do. Textual profiles of believers in the congregation are more pertinent and useful, in my humble opinion.

Frank

Instead, what do all the hot commodities have in common: text.

From mobile phones, to blogs, to aggregators to search engines – text.

Church websites too – text was the tool utilized by the early Church, from Paul to on forward.

In a like manner, those making a life decision, from conversion to Christianity to determining which church to attend on Sunday are going to do so based upon the results of information foraging.

This means putting the pertinent text up front without overwhelming an individual with the entirety of the church on the front page – but rather clear navigation into those areas that help them make decisions.

Most adopters of the web understand that they may have to hit a front page to get to a sermon and/or information about children’s services – and aren’t going to be put off if there is a clear way to navigate to such.

The web is what it is – I say work with it within the boundaries to achieve our conversion goals first.

Then worry about how to bend it in ways it wasn’t designed.

Seriously Dean, I appreciate the response as well as the kind recommendation of SDO. After reading this post, I think we’re pretty much on the same page.

Regarding your paraphrase of Romans 10:14-15, I agree completely. Minimal use of Flash, if at all. Lots of text.

The search engine indexes represent some of the “highways” of today – “the master said to the slave, ‘Go out into the highways and along the hedges, and compel them to come in, ….’” Without content-heavy sites (textual content), we’re not feeding the search engines and we’re, in effect, not going out into the highways (at least not in the fullest measure that we can).

We both made assumptions that, I think, turned out to be wrong. You’re right – I assumed “personalities” meant staff (largely because I rarely see a church website where anyone but staff is profiled). I also agree with you that the web doesn’t create ambiance. Primarily, a website conveys information.

My question is whether the information which is included on most church websites is compelling enough to make unbelievers interested in the dates and times of our gatherings. I would say the answer to that is almost always “No.” That’s why I think profiles of personalities in the congregation are so valuable.

We can provide the dates and times of our gatherings as much as we want, but if people don’t want to join us in our gatherings, they won’t be interested in the dates and times. As I’ve said lots of times before, no one cares about your service schedule because they don’t plan on attending. That’s a bit of hyperbole for the sake of making the point. Obviously, there are people who do care – believers visiting from out of town, believers who have just moved to an area, and people who are on the verge of becoming believers.

But I would submit that the majority of unbelievers today simply aren’t interested. That’s where the compelling content comes in. I want to see church websites whose content is so compelling (and profiles of believers in the congregation, I think, represent the most compelling content available to us) that they will seek out the dates and times of services just so they can meet us.

If the first impression that an unbeliever visiting our website gets is that this “organization” is all about services (dates, times, and places), leadership (even though I know now that’s not what you were saying), and purpose (mission statement), how is the church any different than the local service club? I would suggest that the difference is the life of the community of believers. And that’s what I want the unbeliever exposed to, even immersed in – the life of the Christian community (through eventual face-to-face relationship).

So I often ask myself, “How can our websites compel the unbeliever to come in?” How can our websites interest the unbeliever so much that their original feeling (of not caring when and where our gatherings happen) be transformed so that they want to join us in our gatherings?

I’m convinced that an approach where we include profiles of believers (with textual content primarily) on our websites deserves much more consideration than it typically gets. Well-thought-out textual profiles (and part of being well-thought-out is making sure they are well-indexed in the search engines with an emphasis on theme and geography) will enable us to “broadcast” compelling content into the “highways” of the search engines.

Thanks again, Dean, for the good conversation!