Lancaster Online: web usage among Amish & Mennonites

[Soloist]

Accountable2you on the phone is excellent for accountability and cheaper then covenant eyes. No filtering though.

[ken_sylvania]

I use Compass. I don't know about the "foundation" name being sneaky so much as a little odd maybe. I've heard the name of the founder but I long forgot it. I don't know whether he was an Eastern bishop, but most likely he was just a tech savvy Mennonite guy who had some money, expertise, and time, and people knew of his work and encouraged him to develop a solution for Internet filtering that would satisfy conservative Mennonites. There's a big demand in that community for what Compass is selling, so it's fine with me if they made a business of it.

I may know who started it. If he is the same guy that owns Rosewood, I would've gone to church with him for a brief time.

Pretty sure it's not. I think Compass got started in Vineland, NJ.

[Josh]

My speculation about why it is a business is that businesses are allowed more independence than nonprofits in ultra-conservative circles. If you have a nonprofit it is expected to be under firm church control. Businesses are granted much more leeway.

Very interesting... I guess running a nonprofit and then trying to get people from each constituency on the board would be difficult.

(Granted, I operate a nonprofit myself and our bylaws limit board members to just our own constituency because, well, it would just be too difficult to figure certain things out without shared values.)

[Josh]

I may know who started it. If he is the same guy that owns Rosewood, I would've gone to church with him for a brief time.

Pretty sure it's not. I think Compass got started in Vineland, NJ.

Interesting. A fellow from the Beachy church there (more like a mission) recently moved here and married a girl here, at my old church. He also just got ordained minister.

The guy that owns Rosewood isn't Eastern, is he? My wife used to work there.

[cooper]

Very interesting... I guess running a nonprofit and then trying to get people from each constituency on the board would be difficult.

(Granted, I operate a nonprofit myself and our bylaws limit board members to just our own constituency because, well, it would just be too difficult to figure certain things out without shared values.)

It wouldn't be difficult. FraudAware.us does this and has members from W/F, EPMC, NFC, Weaverland, Groffdale, OOAmish, etc. I think the participation of the ultra-conservatives in Fraud Aware is perhaps an exception because the players in the Phillip Rhiel scandal were ultra and it affected the broader Mennonite community.

Board members imply some denominational ownership and the board member is responsible for representing the denomination. As we've discussed on MennoNet previously, EPMC has a habit of pushing EPMC people off ecumenical boards. It's much harder to break up a business partnership without a sound rationale such as an unequal yoke.

[Josh]

In Holdeman circles, you aren’t supposed to be business partners with non church members. But serving in a nonprofit board that’s mixed would be more acceptable. (A common example is fire and rescue departments.)

[steve-in-kville]

I may know who started it. If he is the same guy that owns Rosewood, I would've gone to church with him for a brief time.

Pretty sure it's not. I think Compass got started in Vineland, NJ.

Interesting. A fellow from the Beachy church there (more like a mission) recently moved here and married a girl here, at my old church. He also just got ordained minister.

The guy that owns Rosewood isn't Eastern, is he? My wife used to work there.

I kinda think he came from those circles.

[Verity]

Very interesting... I guess running a nonprofit and then trying to get people from each constituency on the board would be difficult.

(Granted, I operate a nonprofit myself and our bylaws limit board members to just our own constituency because, well, it would just be too difficult to figure certain things out without shared values.)

It wouldn't be difficult. FraudAware.us does this and has members from W/F, EPMC, NFC, Weaverland, Groffdale, OOAmish, etc. I think the participation of the ultra-conservatives in Fraud Aware is perhaps an exception because the players in the Phillip Rhiel scandal were ultra and it affected the broader Mennonite community.

Board members imply some denominational ownership and the board member is responsible for representing the denomination. As we've discussed on MennoNet previously, EPMC has a habit of pushing EPMC people off ecumenical boards. It's much harder to break up a business partnership without a sound rationale such as an unequal yoke.

Maybe it is a habit, Cooper, but one I find difficult to understand. Not long ago I was told by an Eastern man that he had received his ultimatum letter- get off the board he had served on for several years or lose his membership. We had been discussing this board earlier and I asked "Wait, but everyone on that board Eastern would exchange pulpits with. What exactly is the issue? We can't call this an unequal yoke, that is ludicrous." He shook his head and said "Politics, and I can't afford right now to leave." Is that truly the kind of members Eastern wants? Here because I have to be? Maybe someone who grew up in it can explain the reasoning to me.

[Josh]

Very interesting... I guess running a nonprofit and then trying to get people from each constituency on the board would be difficult.

(Granted, I operate a nonprofit myself and our bylaws limit board members to just our own constituency because, well, it would just be too difficult to figure certain things out without shared values.)

It wouldn't be difficult.

I meant it would be difficult for Holdemans specifically since our values are not identical to any other plain groups.

For example, we stick to kapps, but solid black, and don’t do cape dresses at all but do stick to handmade dresses. We don’t do plain suits. But we also don’t believe you should charge interest (or earn interest at a bank), which would affect running a nonprofit. Likewise we don’t think photography should be taken outside of legitimate business use. A typical plain nonprofit takes lots and lots of photos.

Likewise in the event of trouble or disputes we would defer to church leaders to help sort it out (in the case of a religious nonprofit) but with a mixed board how would that work?

[eccentric_rambler]

Very interesting... I guess running a nonprofit and then trying to get people from each constituency on the board would be difficult.

(Granted, I operate a nonprofit myself and our bylaws limit board members to just our own constituency because, well, it would just be too difficult to figure certain things out without shared values.)

It wouldn't be difficult.

I meant it would be difficult for Holdemans specifically since our values are not identical to any other plain groups.

For example, we stick to kapps, but solid black, and don’t do cape dresses at all but do stick to handmade dresses. We don’t do plain suits. But we also don’t believe you should charge interest (or earn interest at a bank), which would affect running a nonprofit. Likewise we don’t think photography should be taken outside of legitimate business use. A typical plain nonprofit takes lots and lots of photos.

Likewise in the event of trouble or disputes we would defer to church leaders to help sort it out (in the case of a religious nonprofit) but with a mixed board how would that work?

It would be different for your church, Josh. In the case of Eastern, the other churches in question are usually similar enough it seems there should be enough mutual trust to sort out issues as they come up. If an organizations bylaws called for a much more liberal group to handle conflicts I think Eastern would be right to be uncomfortable. If the bylaws call for three ordained members from a group Eastern exchanges pulpits with to handle problems why the lack of trust?