We have 4300+ members. Only 30+ participate. Why?

[Soloist]

My guess is a lack of what I consider Anabaptist specific spiritual topics even amongst the 30+ participants. That has caused me to leave before and may again. Sometimes a troll drops in and stirs up some theology discussion but it seems those who have shown more spiritual interests in the past don't participate much anymore. Some that do like to discuss God topics are not even Anabaptists. Well that is my experience, YMMV.

Might it be that we have different idea's of what is spiritual? also perhaps trying to have spiritual discussions between liberals and conservatives don't bare fruit worth attracting anyone?
Generally speaking if you say position A, we tend to see someone else argue position B and then out of the blue someone starts arguing for random things like certain Hebrew characters... Its not very productive. I would argue there is never going to be high quality spiritual fruit from a group of people that could never church together.

You know what has attracted web traffic? The vaccine discussions. You call getting the vaccine common sense now and not something to pray about. I for one say discussing using unborn babies for medicine is a very applicable topic admittedly dark in nature... Very necessary to discuss and spread truth about these evil practices.

[justme]

I would argue there is never going to be high quality spiritual fruit from a group of people that could never church together.

interesting. i need to consider that a bit more.

[Ernie]

*Link removed because it was from cnn.com. Please use other credible sources.

I was not aware that CNN links were not allowed on MN.

cnn.com and msnbc.com are currently blacklisted because of their intentional distortion and misleading information.

Is New York Post a credible source?

The other sources are fine. Thanks for taking the time to post them.

I think a rather lengthy list of reasons could be given for why only about 30 people participate on MN. Scenarios like the above are one of the reasons.
I agree that CNN and MSNBC intentionally distort and mislead, but I don't see them doing more of this than Fox and New York Post.

MN may be down to 29 before long. This is not a threat. MN is what it is. But it perhaps provides a bit of explanation...

[Pelerin]

I just checked my post count and was surprised to see I’ve reached 200, so maybe I’m not a nonparticipant.

Up above someone said maybe we’re too old fashioned and have been overtaken the wave of the future, Facebook. If so, may we never progress. Facebook is notoriously a bad place for conversation (driven largely by Facebook’s poor design). The best topics here feature intelligent, original thoughts and experiences—we have a lot of smart, interesting people here! The worst are—well, the opposite of that. The ones where the argument follows the script; it doesn’t matter who’s does the writing. It’s memes that someone let become their thoughts, an infection from Facebook or darker places.

I admit, some days I log in, look at the list of active topics, sigh, and just hit “mark all read”. I’m sure I’ve never opened the Elections Investigations thread or most of the vaccine ones.

On the other hand, sometimes, I’ll look at a topic I wouldn’t normally read because of who made the last post, and sometimes I’m surprised at the direction the conversation has taken and will go back and read the earlier pages too.

In particular, I’m always up for a Bawamba story from Neto. I appreciate Mike’s experience with prison ministry and the insights that adds to his posts. Wayne’s Year of Living thread is the best thing on here now, and seeing that he’s participating in a thread makes it a sure read for me. Ernie, I see you posted while I was writing this threatening to leave. I appreciated the insights you gave us into CAM during the debacle there. I’m not sure what thread your quoting from, I’ve always founds your posts to be levelheaded and thoughtful. And there are a lot more thoughtful posters as well that I could cite.

More of the good, less of the bad!

[Haystack]

I think this has been mentioned before, but I wonder if the online forum platform isn't dated. Everything is on social media. There's a page for about any special interest one could imagine on Facebook. Hence maybe while the average age on MN is around the 40/50-ish range.

I wouldn't say forums are dated considering I still see a large presence on various automotive forums I frequent for car maintenance, diagnostics, etc. As far as Mennonet, I think a lot of it has to do with the way enthic Anabaptists are raised as far as their use of the internet in general. I would say we have a fairly regular bunch who aren't Anabaptists or they're seekers who are more aware of forums and want to engage in them as that might be their only source to interact with Anabaptist.

[Soloist]

I wouldn't say forums are dated considering I still see a large presence on various automotive forums I frequent for car maintenance, diagnostics, etc. As far as Mennonet, I think a lot of it has to do with the way enthic Anabaptists are raised as far as their use of the internet in general. I would say we have a fairly regular bunch who aren't Anabaptists or they're seekers who are more aware of forums and want to engage in them as that might be their only source to interact with Anabaptist.

I would tend to agree with that. My church only recently allowed home internet, none of them are on here or really have any notable presence online at all. Occasionally one of them might stop in and read up on what I'm doing but I never hear about it other then some idea's regurgitated later.

[steve-in-kville]

Simple. They don't want to get killed in the crossfire.

Unfortunately, I know what you mean.

Look people, I'm an ex-transplant. I spent nearly 25 years in a conservative setting. That said, I do not consider myself anti-conservative. Nor am I pro-progressive. We have the word "Menno" in our forum title and have taken the liberty to mean that would encompass all of anabaptism, as I am sure many more do as well. I am well aware we lost a few MN members in the past months because they felt we getting too "liberal."

There... I used the "L" word.

I have nothing against conservative standards. I am against double standards.

I have nothing against conservative authority. I am against corrupt authority.

All that said, I enjoy discussing standards and applications. I also enjoy discussing scripture and spiritual things. I may occasionally join in on a political thread.

This is all.

[PetrChelcicky]

My guess is a lack of what I consider Anabaptist specific spiritual topics even amongst the 30+ participants. That has caused me to leave before and may again.

I just considered to create a special topic for immigrees like me - in order not to intrude into insider topics ("Anabaptist specific spiritual topics").

On the other hand, my concern is mostly ethics (including political ethics), confronting the prevailing "woke" ethics as covered by the "Anabaptist World". And I feel that that "woke" ethics has not much to do with "Anabaptist specific spiritual topics" either. (At least I miss an attempt to really develop woke ethics from the works of Sattler or Menno Simons or whoever.)
Thus, where would be the right place to confront "woke" ethics or "Anabaptist World" ethics, if not here?

[Sudsy]

My guess is a lack of what I consider Anabaptist specific spiritual topics even amongst the 30+ participants. That has caused me to leave before and may again.

I just considered to create a special topic for immigrees like me - in order not to intrude into insider topics ("Anabaptist specific spiritual topics").

On the other hand, my concern is mostly ethics (including political ethics), confronting the prevailing "woke" ethics as covered by the "Anabaptist World". And I feel that that "woke" ethics has not much to do with "Anabaptist specific spiritual topics" either. (At least I miss an attempt to really develop woke ethics from the works of Sattler or Menno Simons or whoever.)
Thus, where would be the right place to confront "woke" ethics or "Anabaptist World" ethics, if not here?

I guess I will have to get an understanding of "woke" as it is a first for me to hear that term. Is this a good explanation of "woke" - https://www.ethicssage.com/2021/05/are-you-woke.html

[Falco Underhill]

My guess is a lack of what I consider Anabaptist specific spiritual topics even amongst the 30+ participants. That has caused me to leave before and may again.

I just considered to create a special topic for immigrees like me - in order not to intrude into insider topics ("Anabaptist specific spiritual topics").

On the other hand, my concern is mostly ethics (including political ethics), confronting the prevailing "woke" ethics as covered by the "Anabaptist World". And I feel that that "woke" ethics has not much to do with "Anabaptist specific spiritual topics" either. (At least I miss an attempt to really develop woke ethics from the works of Sattler or Menno Simons or whoever.)
Thus, where would be the right place to confront "woke" ethics or "Anabaptist World" ethics, if not here?

I guess I will have to get an understanding of "woke" as it is a first for me to hear that term. Is this a good explanation of "woke" - https://www.ethicssage.com/2021/05/are-you-woke.html

The Bible describes those who are walking in the flesh as "sleepers"

Wake up, sleeper,
rise from the dead,
and Christ will shine on you.

— Ephesians 5:17

while those who are walking in the Spirit are "awake."

There are those who consider themselves "woke" if they understand the Marxist/neo-Marxist critique of society and live by its ethics. This is what I think is meant by "wokeness" nowadays. By Biblical standards they're still in the flesh and so still asleep though.