Showing posts with label Top tips. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Top tips. Show all posts

Thursday, 9 July 2015

Church Growth strategies: 'Be IT Savvy: get a website - part one!'

As always we start with a reminder of Hauerwas' comment: 

Church growth strategies are the death rattle of a church that has lost its way.  

Whilst social media is one of the quick and easy ways of getting your church, projects and/or special events noticed where you are (and even further afield), the pinnacle of being 'IT savvy' has to be found in websites. There are a number of ways of getting a 'web presence' (good to learn the language innit?) - but we'll look at three:

A 'traditional' website

Using Wordpress to create a website

A 'content management' website

The traditional model has pages that live on a computer somewhere and can be accessed by anyone who wishes to view them. Generally the site is managed by a 'web master' (who says us techies don't crave power?) and access to change things is very limited.

The Wordpress website is a cost effective and simple way of creating a website, it can have as many pages as you like and authority can be distributed so that people can edit and add information like news and images without having access to the whole (so limiting the ability to burn the thing down when they make a mistake).

A content management site looks like a normal site to those who visit but once the format is done then sections can be owned and edited by others. Some like to keep the main sections controlled by the web master whilst allowing church groups, wardens and  others to change their content as and when the need arises. This is an extremely powerful way of doing stuff when there are many who have sections that need keeping up to date as it pushes the work to those who have the local knowledge. One of the best products for this is Joomla.

So, all you need to do is find the URL (uniform resource locator - the www.name.whatever) you want to use, and you're sorted (the web hosting company will usually be more than happy to sort one for you once you know what you want).


GETTING YOURSELF A ''TRADITIONAL' WEBSITE


There are a number of ways of doing this and regardless of which you choose, here are some things you need to consider:

MANAGED PACKAGES - The easiest option because you find a layout that you like and have it tailored for so it becomes yours and then the same company 'host' it (this means that they keep all the techie bits on one of their computers (we call them servers) for you. This means that they do the backup (very important) and will forward mail to you (equally important because websites have to have ears to listen as well as mouths to proclaim). All you need to do is keep the content up to date.

This is the most expensive route but it is quick and simple and avoids some of the pitfalls that doing it yourself or finding an enthusiast in the church can sometimes present (more about that later).


WEB HOSTING - Here you have someone who designs the web site and then you upload it (put it onto the host company's server) so that it can be published on the internet. 

This is a simple method of getting in to the web business but because it splits design and hosting into two separate element, you will need to get involved with:


WEB DESIGN - A wonderful world of joy and fun when it works and a trip into the darkest places of existence when it all starts to unravel (makes sheol look like a holiday destination in fact). There are three options when it comes to web design:

i. Bring in an expert - someone who might cost you some money but will take the brief and produce something with a 'look and feel' that does what you want and makes you feel you have something to be proud of.

ii. Find an enthusiast in the church and get them to do the design with you. Now I have to say that this works well when it works well BUT there is often the problem with using someone 'in house' that they might take the brief but will often try to impose their own views or preferences and the like and so what if often found is an agreed design rather than a desired design. The second problem is that some of the sites I have had to go and rescue have been left locked when the member leaves or them and the dog collar, council or someone else in the church fall out with them! 

TOP TIP 1: Always get the username, password and any other relevant information that let's you access and control the site and store it behind a 'break glass in case of fire' panel. 

iii. Do it yourself - This is, for me, the most enjoyable bit of the whole thing but that's because I'm a techie type and enjoy 'hacking'* code but there's great pleasure to be found in getting a template and modifying it yourself using one of the proprietary software products out there and then uploading the finished item to your host. The problem here is that if you're the person who issues the brief, fulfils the brief and manages the site it can be something beautiful in your eyes and an abomination to those who come across it!

TOP TIP 2: Always get the opinion of others when it comes to the look and feel of a site, the content and the pages - you only need a few opinions (go for people you can trust) but you do need them!



So there you are, you have a web presence! But what are you going to put on it?

Deciding what you want to have will have an impact on the sort of hosting you require.

Sermons, audio files and other downloads
If you would like people to be able to access and listen too sermons then you will need to ensure that you have sufficient space on the server. If you have other download (like videos, docent and other stuff) this will take up space too. When contracting for a web hosting service it's always a great idea to go a little bigger than you need rather than to go for the smallest and find that you end up crashing because you've run out of space.

Bandwidth
If you think of the connection from the server to the people who want it as being like a road, the larger the road the more traffic can flow along it. If you're going to be a small site then a single track will accommodate those who travel along it, but as you get more visitors and the cars turn into lorries taking sermons and videos away with them, then you'll need more lanes until you need a motorway to allow people to travel at a decent speed/

TOP TIP 3: One of the surveys I read recently told me that people wait no more than three seconds before 'binning' a site. If your site runs on a dirt track then much of the traffic will look elsewhere for an A road or, better still, a motorway! Bandwidth is important.

Images
If you have poor quality images then people will soon tire of your site and you'll find yourself reaching no one and paying (in time and money) for the privilege of not doing so! Try to use your own images wherever possible and where you can't then make sure you use images that are really 'royalty free' because otherwise you can find yourself with a big bill for breaching someone's copyright!

Being current
I went to a diocesan website this morning and found the article I'd been pointed to spoke of an event in 2011. So I snorted and closed the page (probably never to return). If you have a website and you want to put calendars and events on it - make sure someone keeps them current. It's a killer for those who come and a pain for those who maintain the site. Be warned!

There's much more I could write about here, but there is enough to get you thinking about church sites here and so I'll draw stumps and let you think a bit.


_______________________

I'm happy to answer questions and point you in the right direction with this because it's important that we are out there and more important that we are out there with good sites (and in a cost and time efficient manner).

Pax
____________________

* Hacking used to mean writing software using machine code - the term was later hijacked to mean illegally accessing sites and systems - being a 'hacker' meant something very different in the early days of computing (we were people who could hold a conversation, grunted as a form of communication and slept under our desks!).

Tuesday, 29 July 2014

Lost with translations?

Sunday's Old Testament reading caused some interesting discussions regarding Leah (Laban's daughter) and her eyes (Genesis 29.17) because the NRSV - which is used by many churches as the standard volume of the Bible told those gathered that her eyes were 'lovely' BUT those who use other versions were left with the impression that she was in possession of dodgy eyesight!

As requested - I have compiled a list of thirty-eight Bible versions - six of which go with 'lovely, nice or attractive' whilst the rest all point to something else and point to the challenge of different translations and their take on things.

Many of the translations look back to the King James Version as their starting point - seeking to move forward from this start point and put the Bible into contemporary language and, using 'modern' linguistic tools,  change words translated incorrectly.

There are (as I recall) three main types of translation available to us: At one end of the spectrum we have the free translations (like the most excellent Message) whilst at the other we have the literal translations (English Standard Version, New American Standard Version to name but two) with the dynamic version (one of which is the New International Version) acting as the fulcrum.


  1. Literal translation. Seeks to maintain exact words and phrases of original using modern style and grammar (including the King James - which fits the bill for time it was written!).
    Not always the easiest but most accurate of the translations.
  2. Dynamic equivalent translation. Seeks to keep timelines and facts with modern writing style and grammar. Trade off between accuracy and readability.
  3. Free translation or Paraphrase). Keeps the stories but modifies way they're told to give gist rather than 'word for word' or 'close enough' realities of the other two.
    Eminently readable, but rather loose - but you get the idea of what story/history/stuff is about.
Each translation has its strengths and weaknesses - Reading level is a good consideration, so here's some of the translations grouped by type and reading levels to help you compare (and perhaps select for yourself):


FREE TRANSLATIONS
The Message (MSG): Leah had nice eyes
The Living Bible (TLB): Leah had lovely eyes

DYNAMIC EQUIVALENT TRANSLATIONS
Contemporary English Bible (CEB)Leah had delicate eyes
Good News Bible (GNB): And Leah was tender eyed
New Living Translation (NLT): There was no sparkle in Leah’s eyes
New Jerusalem Bible (NJB): Leah had lovely eyes
Revised English Bible (REB):Leah's eyes were weak
New International Version (NIV): Leah had weak eyes
Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB): Leah had ordinary eyes
New Revised Standard Version (NRSV): Leah’s eyes were lovely

LITERAL TRANSLATIONS
New American Bible (NAB): Leah had lovely eyes
English Standard Version (ESV): Leah's eyes were weak
Revised Standard Version (RSV):  Leah’s eyes were weak
New King James Version (NKJV): Leah’s eyes were delicate
Amplified Bible (AMP): Leah’s eyes were weak and dull looking
New American Standard Bible (NASB): And Leah’s eyes were weak
King James Version (KJV): Leah was tender eyed


So it's simple: Don't rely on just one translation of the Bible!

I try to take one of the free and one or two from the other types of translation when I consider the passage before me to ensure that I have a good grasp of what's on offer and the accuracy and tenor of the words before me.

I hope this is of some help

Pax



And if you're having fun - here's some more to consider:
ASV:And Leah's eyes were tender.
CJB: Le’ah’s eyes were weak
CEV: Leah was older than Rachel, but her eyes didn’t sparkle
DARBY: And the eyes of Leah were tender
DRA: But Lia was blear eyed
ERV: Leah’s eyes were gentle
ESVUK: Leah's eyes were weak
EXB: Leah had ·weak eyes [frail/tender eyes;  likely means unattractive]
GW: Leah had attractive eyes
GNT: Leah had lovely eyes
HCSB: Leah had ordinary eyes
JUB: Leah was tender eyed
KJ21:Leah was tender eyed
AKJV: Leah was tender eyed
LEB: Now the eyes of Leah were dull
NOG: Leah had attractive eyes
NABRE: Leah had dull eyes
NCV: Leah had weak eyes,
NET: Leah’s eyes were tender
NIRV: Leah had weak eyes
NLV: Leah’s eyes were weak
OJB: Leah had weak eyes
VOICE: There was no brightness to Leah’s eyes
WEB: Leah’s eyes were weak
WYC: but Leah was bleary-eyed,