<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: mormon.org Beta</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ldscio.org/2007/04/29/mormonorg-beta/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ldscio.org/2007/04/29/mormonorg-beta/</link>
	<description>Chief Information Officer for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 01:33:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Edward Lalone</title>
		<link>http://www.ldscio.org/2007/04/29/mormonorg-beta/comment-page-1/#comment-1189</link>
		<dc:creator>Edward Lalone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jul 2007 21:11:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ldscio.org/2007/04/29/mormonorg-beta/#comment-1189</guid>
		<description>The purpose of Mormon.org is to proclaim the gospel and it isn&#039;t intended to answer questions regarding beliefs we no longer hold and practice. The site is not intended to answer the questions of anti-Mormons or those who have been affected by anti-Mormons. It isn&#039;t even intended to answer sincere questions other then the basic beliefs of the Church. If those who visit the site are sincere and want their questions answered they can contact the missionaries and have an online chat or request a visit from the missionaries.

More resources are becoming available where members can publish information regarding such questions. To learn more visit http://www.mormonwiki.com, and the More Good Foundation at http://www.moregoodfoundation.org/. As for polygamy you can visit http://www.mormon-polygamy.org yet there is no reason to send people who are interested in the Church to these websites when the Church website will suffice to get them in contact with the missionaries. That is the entire purpose of the missionary program. For the majority Mormon.org will suffice. We want to expose them to the gospel and to get them in contact with the missionaries and not further expose them to topics focused on by anti-Mormons. They are quite effective at that and don&#039;t need our help.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The purpose of Mormon.org is to proclaim the gospel and it isn&#8217;t intended to answer questions regarding beliefs we no longer hold and practice. The site is not intended to answer the questions of anti-Mormons or those who have been affected by anti-Mormons. It isn&#8217;t even intended to answer sincere questions other then the basic beliefs of the Church. If those who visit the site are sincere and want their questions answered they can contact the missionaries and have an online chat or request a visit from the missionaries.</p>
<p>More resources are becoming available where members can publish information regarding such questions. To learn more visit <a href="http://www.mormonwiki.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.mormonwiki.com</a>, and the More Good Foundation at <a href="http://www.moregoodfoundation.org/" rel="nofollow">http://www.moregoodfoundation.org/</a>. As for polygamy you can visit <a href="http://www.mormon-polygamy.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.mormon-polygamy.org</a> yet there is no reason to send people who are interested in the Church to these websites when the Church website will suffice to get them in contact with the missionaries. That is the entire purpose of the missionary program. For the majority Mormon.org will suffice. We want to expose them to the gospel and to get them in contact with the missionaries and not further expose them to topics focused on by anti-Mormons. They are quite effective at that and don&#8217;t need our help.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alison Moore Smith</title>
		<link>http://www.ldscio.org/2007/04/29/mormonorg-beta/comment-page-1/#comment-1119</link>
		<dc:creator>Alison Moore Smith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jun 2007 23:08:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ldscio.org/2007/04/29/mormonorg-beta/#comment-1119</guid>
		<description>I agree with Michelle about addressing polygamy and other difficult subjects. There is so much anti-Mormon sentiment on the web. We really need an open, honest, faithful place to point.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with Michelle about addressing polygamy and other difficult subjects. There is so much anti-Mormon sentiment on the web. We really need an open, honest, faithful place to point.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: charlie</title>
		<link>http://www.ldscio.org/2007/04/29/mormonorg-beta/comment-page-1/#comment-1024</link>
		<dc:creator>charlie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 May 2007 12:21:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ldscio.org/2007/04/29/mormonorg-beta/#comment-1024</guid>
		<description>Congradualtions; you guys have done a great job there. It probably shouldn&#039;t be beta anymore.

&lt;em&gt;[Joel: It&#039;s released now. Thank you!]&lt;/em&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Congradualtions; you guys have done a great job there. It probably shouldn&#8217;t be beta anymore.</p>
<p><em>[Joel: It's released now. Thank you!]</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michelle</title>
		<link>http://www.ldscio.org/2007/04/29/mormonorg-beta/comment-page-1/#comment-1022</link>
		<dc:creator>Michelle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 May 2007 08:19:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ldscio.org/2007/04/29/mormonorg-beta/#comment-1022</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;In addition, I also think that we might need a little more info on some of the harder questions, like polygamy and other things that are getting attention.&lt;/i&gt;

I just wanted to add that this is a new thought for me. I am usually one who doesn&#039;t want to distract from our core message, and especially from the Savior and our focus on Him. I want the world to know HE is the reason the Church exists and HE is the focus of everything we believe in. I&#039;m just lately thinking that perhaps there are people who would be more willing to listen if they had some of the &quot;classic misunderstandings&quot; addressed...removing some questions and concerns. But then again, perhaps I have it all backwards and we should just keep pressing forward with our core messages. As such, I think that Mario had some good ideas earlier in the comments section about being sure we really, really communicate that Christ is the center, and everything else that we believe in is there to point us and bring us to Him.

Thank you for being willing to listen. I hope that in giving feedback I don&#039;t come across as overly critical. Like people have said, there are some neat features like the video that add such a wonderful personal touch (and maybe I have that backwards too....personal touch first then more info?) I dunno. This is why you are the expert working on all of this and we&#039;re just out here throwing out ideas. :)

&lt;em&gt;[Joel: Always willing to listen. We appreciate your feedback.]&lt;/em&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>In addition, I also think that we might need a little more info on some of the harder questions, like polygamy and other things that are getting attention.</i></p>
<p>I just wanted to add that this is a new thought for me. I am usually one who doesn&#8217;t want to distract from our core message, and especially from the Savior and our focus on Him. I want the world to know HE is the reason the Church exists and HE is the focus of everything we believe in. I&#8217;m just lately thinking that perhaps there are people who would be more willing to listen if they had some of the &#8220;classic misunderstandings&#8221; addressed&#8230;removing some questions and concerns. But then again, perhaps I have it all backwards and we should just keep pressing forward with our core messages. As such, I think that Mario had some good ideas earlier in the comments section about being sure we really, really communicate that Christ is the center, and everything else that we believe in is there to point us and bring us to Him.</p>
<p>Thank you for being willing to listen. I hope that in giving feedback I don&#8217;t come across as overly critical. Like people have said, there are some neat features like the video that add such a wonderful personal touch (and maybe I have that backwards too&#8230;.personal touch first then more info?) I dunno. This is why you are the expert working on all of this and we&#8217;re just out here throwing out ideas. <img src='http://www.ldscio.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p><em>[Joel: Always willing to listen. We appreciate your feedback.]</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://www.ldscio.org/2007/04/29/mormonorg-beta/comment-page-1/#comment-1019</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2007 16:40:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ldscio.org/2007/04/29/mormonorg-beta/#comment-1019</guid>
		<description>Correction: In our last user connectivity audit in Continuing Education we actually had 20% of our unique customers still using a dialup connection.  Sorry about that, I incorrectly referenced that number.

Kevin</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Correction: In our last user connectivity audit in Continuing Education we actually had 20% of our unique customers still using a dialup connection.  Sorry about that, I incorrectly referenced that number.</p>
<p>Kevin</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://www.ldscio.org/2007/04/29/mormonorg-beta/comment-page-1/#comment-1018</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2007 16:22:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ldscio.org/2007/04/29/mormonorg-beta/#comment-1018</guid>
		<description>I was running our dial-up benchmarks on our BYU websites this morning and I ran the same test on beta.mormon.org and lds.org.  I was using AOL, Windows 2000, and I had a true 50.6 kbps connection.  

I am always a little disappointed with the performance of our pages; I am especially disappointed that we are making it difficult for our dial-up friends to access our sites and learn more about the Gospel.  Are these sites designed only for those blessed with high speed Internet?

My numbers on lds.org showed that it was 26 seconds until I started to see elements loading in the window and it was a total of 85 seconds until the page finished loading.  Beta.mormon.org didn’t show elements until 53 seconds had passed and the page didn’t completely load until 80 seconds had passed.

In our last user connectivity audit in Continuing Education we had 60% of our customers still using a dialup connection.  I believe we reflect more the rule than the exception.  I am curious to see why we are building pages that require more and more bandwidth?  Is our customer base shifting to indicate that trend?  

Honestly, the site is beautiful, reverent, and the flash is incredible.  But in building such large site did we alienate our less fortunate users and make it impossible for them to access this information?

My two cents

Kevin</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was running our dial-up benchmarks on our BYU websites this morning and I ran the same test on beta.mormon.org and lds.org.  I was using AOL, Windows 2000, and I had a true 50.6 kbps connection.  </p>
<p>I am always a little disappointed with the performance of our pages; I am especially disappointed that we are making it difficult for our dial-up friends to access our sites and learn more about the Gospel.  Are these sites designed only for those blessed with high speed Internet?</p>
<p>My numbers on lds.org showed that it was 26 seconds until I started to see elements loading in the window and it was a total of 85 seconds until the page finished loading.  Beta.mormon.org didn’t show elements until 53 seconds had passed and the page didn’t completely load until 80 seconds had passed.</p>
<p>In our last user connectivity audit in Continuing Education we had 60% of our customers still using a dialup connection.  I believe we reflect more the rule than the exception.  I am curious to see why we are building pages that require more and more bandwidth?  Is our customer base shifting to indicate that trend?  </p>
<p>Honestly, the site is beautiful, reverent, and the flash is incredible.  But in building such large site did we alienate our less fortunate users and make it impossible for them to access this information?</p>
<p>My two cents</p>
<p>Kevin</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michelle</title>
		<link>http://www.ldscio.org/2007/04/29/mormonorg-beta/comment-page-1/#comment-1016</link>
		<dc:creator>Michelle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2007 23:47:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ldscio.org/2007/04/29/mormonorg-beta/#comment-1016</guid>
		<description>OK, I have one more piece of feedback. The home page feels a little dramatic/emotion-focused to me, with the questions fading in and out and the like. Rather than having the videos as the focus (which are good, but limited in the scope of what they can communicate, and also limited, I think, in audience they will appeal to), I would personally rather see more informational content immediately (an outline, maybe, like what shows up if you click on &quot;Basic Beliefs&quot;?), with the &lt;em&gt;option &lt;/em&gt;to click on video answers to questions (because they are good ones). Here&#039;s my concern: I think especially given the media attention we are getting at an increasing rate, we might want to appeal to a larger audience -- not just assuming that people are &quot;searching&quot; for something doctrinally or spiritually (about restored truth or the purpose of life, etc.) but may be simply looking for more straightforward information about the Church. (Especially on the internet, I think you will get a lot of people wanting information for their brains first, and then they might want more for their hearts.)
I wonder if and even worry that someone might be turned off by what could feel like a play on emotions when instead they are looking for simple and direct information.

In addition, I also think that we might need a little more info on some of the harder questions, like polygamy and other things that are getting attention. I&#039;d love to see a search feature that leads investigators to find more good and correct information about things that are often distorted by the press and enemies of the Church, or even about people who are simply misinformed. 

If such an approach were taken, we also would have the burden of finding a balance between giving enough information to answer their questions while still steering people toward the doctrine and seeking spiritual truth (not just intellectual information). (All the information in the world about our history won&#039;t help someone find the truth. But if we help remove barriers of misunderstanding, we might help them be more willing to listen to the core message of the gospel.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OK, I have one more piece of feedback. The home page feels a little dramatic/emotion-focused to me, with the questions fading in and out and the like. Rather than having the videos as the focus (which are good, but limited in the scope of what they can communicate, and also limited, I think, in audience they will appeal to), I would personally rather see more informational content immediately (an outline, maybe, like what shows up if you click on &#8220;Basic Beliefs&#8221;?), with the <em>option </em>to click on video answers to questions (because they are good ones). Here&#8217;s my concern: I think especially given the media attention we are getting at an increasing rate, we might want to appeal to a larger audience &#8212; not just assuming that people are &#8220;searching&#8221; for something doctrinally or spiritually (about restored truth or the purpose of life, etc.) but may be simply looking for more straightforward information about the Church. (Especially on the internet, I think you will get a lot of people wanting information for their brains first, and then they might want more for their hearts.)<br />
I wonder if and even worry that someone might be turned off by what could feel like a play on emotions when instead they are looking for simple and direct information.</p>
<p>In addition, I also think that we might need a little more info on some of the harder questions, like polygamy and other things that are getting attention. I&#8217;d love to see a search feature that leads investigators to find more good and correct information about things that are often distorted by the press and enemies of the Church, or even about people who are simply misinformed. </p>
<p>If such an approach were taken, we also would have the burden of finding a balance between giving enough information to answer their questions while still steering people toward the doctrine and seeking spiritual truth (not just intellectual information). (All the information in the world about our history won&#8217;t help someone find the truth. But if we help remove barriers of misunderstanding, we might help them be more willing to listen to the core message of the gospel.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tatiana</title>
		<link>http://www.ldscio.org/2007/04/29/mormonorg-beta/comment-page-1/#comment-1008</link>
		<dc:creator>Tatiana</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2007 13:53:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ldscio.org/2007/04/29/mormonorg-beta/#comment-1008</guid>
		<description>For that matter, companions could be a feature in text chat, as well.  It could put you into a chatroom with a missionary companionship, whether of full-time or at-home missionaries.  I think there is a large segment of especially younger people, though, who would feel very comfortable text-chatting one-on-one with a single member or missionary, who would feel less comfortable with voice chat or with a companionship in a two-on-one situation.  Young people are very comfortable with instant messaging, and there is a feeling of security with the distance and anonymity that will coax people into taking the next step.  A phone call is much more of a commitment to make than just an online text chat.  

I don&#039;t think the fear of chat transcripts should be anything to keep us from spreading the gospel in whatever way is most effective to each investigator.  After all, almost all missionary discussions are actually edifying and uplifting and by the spirit.  The more those get out, the better! =)

There&#039;s an online tutoring company called tutor.com who handle this sort of situation really well.  Tutors connect one-on-one with students over the internet.  Each tutor has a mentor, who reviews the tutor&#039;s chat logs week by week for a few weeks, then monthly thereafter.  (They pick random chat logs to review from the month.)  The mentors give their tutors feedback on how tough situations can best be handled, and specific areas they need to work on.  I think online missionaries could be handled the same way, with training, guidelines, and then a mentoring system.  It would be an awesome calling!  I so want to be the one who sets up this program and gets it started.  =)  Maybe I&#039;ll do that when I retire and serve a full time mission.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For that matter, companions could be a feature in text chat, as well.  It could put you into a chatroom with a missionary companionship, whether of full-time or at-home missionaries.  I think there is a large segment of especially younger people, though, who would feel very comfortable text-chatting one-on-one with a single member or missionary, who would feel less comfortable with voice chat or with a companionship in a two-on-one situation.  Young people are very comfortable with instant messaging, and there is a feeling of security with the distance and anonymity that will coax people into taking the next step.  A phone call is much more of a commitment to make than just an online text chat.  </p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think the fear of chat transcripts should be anything to keep us from spreading the gospel in whatever way is most effective to each investigator.  After all, almost all missionary discussions are actually edifying and uplifting and by the spirit.  The more those get out, the better! =)</p>
<p>There&#8217;s an online tutoring company called tutor.com who handle this sort of situation really well.  Tutors connect one-on-one with students over the internet.  Each tutor has a mentor, who reviews the tutor&#8217;s chat logs week by week for a few weeks, then monthly thereafter.  (They pick random chat logs to review from the month.)  The mentors give their tutors feedback on how tough situations can best be handled, and specific areas they need to work on.  I think online missionaries could be handled the same way, with training, guidelines, and then a mentoring system.  It would be an awesome calling!  I so want to be the one who sets up this program and gets it started.  =)  Maybe I&#8217;ll do that when I retire and serve a full time mission.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michelle</title>
		<link>http://www.ldscio.org/2007/04/29/mormonorg-beta/comment-page-1/#comment-1007</link>
		<dc:creator>Michelle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2007 20:00:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ldscio.org/2007/04/29/mormonorg-beta/#comment-1007</guid>
		<description>Another benefit of voice chat could be that companions could approach a discussion together. I think there is power in two witnesses and two people working together, keeping that &quot;two by two&quot; principle that is so important in missionary work.

Sorry for the many comments...just have been mulling over some of these things for a while....

&lt;em&gt;[Joel: Don&#039;t apologize! I appreciate the feedback, Michelle!]&lt;/em&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another benefit of voice chat could be that companions could approach a discussion together. I think there is power in two witnesses and two people working together, keeping that &#8220;two by two&#8221; principle that is so important in missionary work.</p>
<p>Sorry for the many comments&#8230;just have been mulling over some of these things for a while&#8230;.</p>
<p><em>[Joel: Don't apologize! I appreciate the feedback, Michelle!]</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michelle</title>
		<link>http://www.ldscio.org/2007/04/29/mormonorg-beta/comment-page-1/#comment-1006</link>
		<dc:creator>Michelle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2007 08:18:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ldscio.org/2007/04/29/mormonorg-beta/#comment-1006</guid>
		<description>Hm. Looking more closely, that still seems like more a feedback-for-the-site kind of link rather than a you-can-ask-a-question-about-the-Church kind of link. Wouldn&#039;t it be good to separate those out, so you have a technical feedback link and a doctrinal/investigative link. That would be easier to manage, no?

&lt;em&gt;[Joel: Yes, slightly easier to manage. But more complicated for the user. We tried to be very simple with this web site.]&lt;/em&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hm. Looking more closely, that still seems like more a feedback-for-the-site kind of link rather than a you-can-ask-a-question-about-the-Church kind of link. Wouldn&#8217;t it be good to separate those out, so you have a technical feedback link and a doctrinal/investigative link. That would be easier to manage, no?</p>
<p><em>[Joel: Yes, slightly easier to manage. But more complicated for the user. We tried to be very simple with this web site.]</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
