Christopher, Dan and Terrell: Thanks for weighing in. It all enriches the discussion. Dan and Terrell, even if you are saying similar things to what others say, hearing another voice with similar concepts more than doubles the effect, in my opinion. Christopher - I tend to agree on the scriptures part. I know there is an effort on the part of many in Christian Worldview to make the case more "ad hominem" - within the context of secular readers - but not sure we have many in this audience and if we did, we are not opening up the floor enough. I know from experience arguing on other forums, like the Wash. Post, that open discussions with rabidly secular readers take a totally different tack. I like them, but they are not for the faint of heart. Even in those discussions, however, I find scripture very apropos if used wisely.

Is a great one.

One thing I notice (and maybe I'm just overlooking or forgetting things) is that I don't actually see that much scripture quoted, or even cited.

If you want to raise up Biblical leaders, I think you need more of the Bible.

Maybe you could seed discussion by tying specific scriptures to the blog topic, to encourage discussion. Sometimes you might even get what seem to be competing scriptures, and that might spark some very lively discussions.

And if that doesn't work, have you guys considered blogging about tattoos?

It's hard to come up with much. I come here because I like it.

If I were to see one change, it might be to get more bloggers. Most of those here seem to be "high church." This is most apparent when the subject of music comes up. Perhaps it would be good to have a few more bloggers who are from churches with less emphasis on liturgy and high church forms.

As far as commenting, many times I don't comment because someone else has said what I would say.

I confess, I am one of the occassional readers and an enfreguent commenter. I depend on the links on the side bar of the Daily BP transcript to keep me up with what's up on the Point.

So, if we have 1000 semi-regular readers and a 10-20 regular commenters ( I am sure that I don't qualify for that ) then I feel compelled to ask, what is the readership of the Point broadcast? How many are there and do we need to make the Blog more prominent on that?

As to how to improve it, I do not mind the login. I read some of the rancorous commentary on some of the news and other sites and I definitely enjoy the collegial environment here. Even when someone gets into it with Ben W the dialog is reasoned and civil and the ad hominem is limited to carrying someones' assertions to the end of the path, the true rhetorical ad hominem.

My Subject, a reference from a post last week, alludes to sort of how I feel trying to comment. It seems passe for me to add anything. Is there a problem with the panel discussion? Maybe an occassionel moderator comment like "who else has something to say?" might spur the conversation to widen. Again it sometimes feels like commenting on the conversations of the Inklings although I know that none of the regulars would consider themselves an inkling but that's how it feels on this row.

Because I depend on the links from the BP transcript I usually and pretty late the party, so I might suggest we get the really current ones added to the transcript.

Apologies for droning as I drive by.

Steve: Thanks for your input. The comments so far are really helping this issue to focus - very good. I think you are right on the mark with the 2 distinctions you make. It is the classical (as in 1700's-1800's) discussion of the popular forum vs. the aristocratic, or elite, forums; the courtier parlors of Paris vs. the streets and taverns. Where do the important discussions take place? Whose voices rise and who is given the floor?

Beyond the philosophical thinking about public discourse, though, the practical matter at hand is this: How do we raise up Christian worldview leaders? How do we equip and mobilize ordinary people to get out into our culture and speak out? The fact that we already have leaders who do speak out is refreshing. But we have far too few.

Let me talk about The Point Blog. I am only semi-regular here, but have been here enough to see that we basically have about 20 commenters who speak regularly. 10 of them are very vocal. (All the comments so far on this very post come from that group of 10 by the way - interesting). Stack that against probably 1000 readers averaging visits every other day or so and it does not seem much to me like a public discussion. It is more like a "panel discussion." The blogger (usually on staff) is the particular emcee and then those from the 10-20 regulars who show up make up the "panel." Everyone else reads as part of the mostly silent audience. That is a valid format, and I do not want to make anyone feel bad about it. It can be stimulating and a lot of good information gets passed around.

BUT - a good part of the strategy of BreakPoint is to raise up and equip new leaders. This is our main blog. We WANT people not used to speaking out to speak out. To your point, a great part of discipleship training is also leadership training. Jesus let the 12 watch Him talk for a while, and then he sent THEM out to teach two-by-two. He also sent out 70 two-by-two. He was after the grass-roots, average-follower effect.

That is what I am looking for as well. By the way, these are my personal views and do not necessarily represent those of the staff or of Chuck Colson. But we all agree we want to see a re-invigoration of The Point Blog.

How to do it? We don't have the answers yet. But you can help us find them. That is why we are having this discussion. Anyone else chime in?

Steve -- I generally throw away only spam or comments that break the rules (directly insulting or rude to a blogger or fellow commenter, profane, etc.). That isn't a very high percentage of our comments.

Hmmm. Since I've spent 5 minutes trying to come up with something reasonable to say, I can only conclude this is a real dilemma.

I see The Point as quite unique. I *think* this is because it has one of the lowest rates of "drive-by comments" (DBC) I've encountered. DBCs tend to do only raise ire and degrade quality of the conversation.

So, to increase comments, we have to deal with the tensions:
1) Ease of making vs policing comments
2) Social Club/Sandbox vs Rotating/Open Door gatherings (or to use a Christian analogy, Discipleship vs Conversion).

Probably every variation imaginable has been tried on the internet to deal with these.
I think constant encouragement from bloggers and regular commenters to others to comment would help bring some out of the woodwork (Hmmm. Not sure non-commenters would like being compared to creepy-crawlies).
As well, non-anonymous comments that aren't initially moderated would, in my opinion, be best - though of course there are risks.

Can I ask a couple questions? (Well, I'm going to)
1) Gina, to what degree are comments moderated? (i.e. how many have you 'thrown away')?
2) Alan, I have an idea, but why do "we really need more of you to come in and participate"?

Thanks

Jason: I agree in a way, but there is always that balance between the civility in a somewhat restricted audience and the more rough-and-tumble civility of the open marketplace of ideas. Audiences can be very self-restricting as well, even if it is not from external pressure. If people feel reluctant to speak out, it may seem civil, but is it real discourse on the part of all? I fear at times that may be the case here.

I'd kind of like posts to be processed faster, but on the other hand, I do like the civility we have here.

Interesting link, Lee! As a student of Journalism and the New Media - and as one who worked as Internet Director of a paper for a while, I can testify to the general disdain of those in the Media for proletarian online commenters. The "Fifth Estate" is not much appreciated by the Fourth, which in turn is often not much appreciated by the first three. It looks like Krugmen has actually granted regular folks grudging admission to the club however. Trimming copy at 3 inches is an honor usually only afforded journalists! It is a rite of passage.

All of that to emphasize my point - I think the conversation is much improved by regular people of the normal caste speaking up. Yes, most may not be the greatest writers, but neither was the kid who yelled "The emperor hath no clothes!" It may make laborious reading but there is wisdom in the masses. "Wisdom of the Crowds" style, we NEED to hear from all parts of the bell curve. Especially the solid basic Christian parts. So everyone, please chime in! You don't have to be an intellectual! Plain words do fine!

It seems to me that Dr. K. and his detractors agree, kinda sorta, with your approach, Alan: http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NDMwZjZmMzUxM2M0MjJiNDg1ZjU3YWRhZWIzMWQwMmY=

But I wonder what others think?

(More seriously, Point commenters seem biased toward deeper discussions than "Excellent article, (insert blogger name)!" Besides, with *these* bloggers that would be belaboring the obvious.

...at least, in the opinion of 1/500th of your readership.)