Until a history is set in written form, it is going to be fluid and subject to individual memories. All of us who have been involved in the creation of Ecunet are going to have slightly different version of how it happened. This is my memory:

Camcon I in Los Angeles

My thoughts go back to the Camcon Conference in Los Angeles, March, 1986. We were all really getting to know one another. The Presbyterians had just made a commitment to come online as PRESBYNET on the NETI system, out of Ann Arbor, Michigan. We Presbyterians were there in force at Camcon I. We were meeting the Canadians for the first time face-to-face. It did not take long before it became clear that the development of independent denominational systems left a lot to be desired.

 We had already experienced the ability to be in touch with one another, across denominational lines on UNISON. The previous summer, the Support Agency of the Presbyterian Church (USA) had conducted a telecommunications experiment on Compuserve. When the Presbyterian system shut down at the end of the experimental summer, many of the Presbyterians migrated to a system called UNISON.

 It was there we met the broader ecumenical community, many of whom were already well established on UNISON. This experience showed us how rich it an ecumenical exchange could be. The growth of new groups quickly raised the suggestion that we organize ourselves as an ecumenical coalition.

THE FORMATION OF ECUNET, INC.

I credit, David Lochhead, for suggesting that we organize ourselves under the title, ECUNET. That was a phrase that grew as we began using it on the UNISON system.

 Later that year (1986), the UNISON system became involved in an ownership issue. This caused a great deal of concern over the future of Ecunet, Inc. on Unison, and a group was delegated to explore potential new homes. The "scouts" eventually recommended a move to a system based out of Hartford, Connecticut, using the same "Participate" software we had worked with on UNISON. The system is known as NWI for Networking World Industries.

 The move to the new system gave us another opportunity. We agreed to reorganize and come online with an "ECUNET format" rather than move over as a happenstance collection of meetings.

 We asked David Lochhead to be our "Gatekeeper" and sent our ideas for new networks and new discussions to him. He laid out a format that includes an Ecunet greeting when you call NWI. As the system is now arranged each group is able to have its own identity. Our intention is to greet each new user with an Ecunet and Denominational greeting. If you sign on as a Disciple you will be greeted by a Disciple welcome, a Presbyterian on Ecunet's "Pnet" is channelled into the Presbyterian area. There is a layout of denominational intentionality.

 We see ourselves as a coalition of networks, not necessarily nor only a coalition of the networks which are on NWI. Our plans are to bridge the various networks, with Ecunet as a bridge between denominations and networks.

ECUNET, INC at CAMCON II

It was an exciting evening last night, one year after the first CAMCON meeting. A group of "Ecunetters" met here at the second CAMCON conference in Atlanta, Georgia. On April 1, 1987 we completed the incorporating process. The lawyer who has been retained to incorporate us will also apply for our section 3-501c non-profit status.

 ECUNET is designed to be a non-profit charitable corporation created for the purposes of encouraging an ecumenical online telecommunications religious community, while constantly encouraging other religious communities to come online.

 We anticipate fund raising as part of its objectives. This will be necessary to deal with the issue of online costs as well as the costs of hardware for smaller groups, and church bodies that cannot afford the kind of investments that a larger denomination or a larger church can make.

 We propose Ecunet as a coalition of networks. At the present we have the following members; the United Church of Canada, the United Church of Christ (UCChrist), the Christian Church (Disciples), and as of last month we have the CircuitWriter (United Methodist), the unofficial Presbynet and Mennonet (The Mennonite Church). More groups are joining Ecunet each week.

 We anticipate approaching the networks which are on UNISON, NETI's PRESBYNET, as well as the grassroots conferences on the Fidonet.

Fidonet

Let me say something about FIDONET. There are a number of church related Fidos BBS Systems across the country. These systems (Fido, Opus, TBBS, and some RBBS systems) operate on private computers with a connection through an automated computer mail slot.

Fidos around the world are in touch with one another - regularly through the international network set up by IFNA (International FidoNet Association). The software is free, and the system keeps phone costs low. We will have a Fido version of Ecunet in the near future. (Actually this branch of ECUNET opened as a national Fidonet Echo in August of 1987).

Ecunet not limited to one system

The Board of Directors of Ecunet are now meeting on NWI. They are actively engaged in the process of completing our bylaws. With the current concept any group wishing to join would not have to move from a current network on which they are meeting. Instead, they would be requested to appoint a delegate that would join the network the Board of Directors uses for its meetings (presently that is NWI).

 We will have to rely heavily on a "porting" concept between the networks on different systems. "Porting" refers to the process in which someone down-loads a block of files from one system and places it on another. I, for example, port Sermonshop from Presbynet and post it on NWI/ECUNET and vice versa. This will permit inter-network communications. For example, one can be on a religious discussion on Delphi or the University of Washington and still be in touch with what is going on on the other networks in the religious community.

 Another service we might offer is pulling together an overall directory of the existing religious networks.

 We just discovered at Camcon, when you made your comments, Sue, that the exegetical helps are:

 Sermonshop on Ecunet, Presbynet and Fidonet, Lectionary, is it on Envoy as well as NWI?

 Laird: not on Envoy.

 Sharp: OK the Global Sermon notes which are put out by the Disciples is on NWI and Presbynet, and the United Methodist's board on the University of Washington network.

 That means there are four different areas you can call, and five to six different lectionary helps being posted every week for pastors to tie into. It will be neat when we can get a "porter", someone's who job will be to download them all and post them, that you can call any one of those systems and find all the exegetical notes for the week. And not have to pay all the costs of being on five or six different systems.

 Those are the kind of advantages we see with ecumenical cooperation which Ecunet sees itself as doing. We are in an embryonic stage we are growing daily as individuals open up areas; not just sermon exegesis, Church News, religious news, pastoral helps, etc. The list just goes on for more than four pages of listings of all the subjects that are on there. Is that a good review then?

General Questions

Bill Lowe (General Synod, Anglican Church of Canada): This question will show my ignorance. Participate, is the software that has to be common to Ecunet?

 Hodges: That is what the system provides. You can use any software and any computer. The modem is the "Pentecost Machine" and does the simultaneous translation for you. [Laughter]

 Sharp: When you are downloading from one system, the person doing that, the porting, also has to do some easy to do editing on his/her own machine at home, then can upload to the other system. The official Presbynet uses a software called eForum (c) - NWI uses a software called, "Participate" - Fidonet uses its own software as well.

 Every week I download files from Presbynet and upload them over on Fido and over on NWI without any difficulty. They look strange, we know they didn't come off their own system but everything is there. They read some "bumper stuff" at the beginning and the end, if I don't have time to cut them off, otherwise it doesn't hurt us, I put them up there anyway.

 Laird: We can't really describe Participate software here, but you can experience it right here in two locations, either NWI, the booth right here, (just say, "Show me Participate, how it works", and do a little) or UNISON - both of them use the same software, which is called, Participate (c). And what I wished we could have described for you is that any individual can start a conference with Participate.

 So you say, "What is it that they are doing?" it is not "they", it is "us". I started a Conference called "Celebration" this morning (a number of us are using our computers her over our hotel telephones). I also sent a message to our Toronto office; "We are all here and enjoying ourselves."

 Sharp: Did you get a message from me this morning?

 Laird: I got a message from Jack, yes. How flexible this is would take some describing. You can make it individual to one person, to two, to ten. You can also make it "read-only" to some people. You can send notes and get your acknowledgement back when they have read it. You can send a note as "Urgent" and it will go to the top of the mailbox. An infinite variety of flexibility involved in the Participate software.

 That was a major factor for us going first to UNISON and then NWI as the Participate software. Which is also in other locations.

 Topliffe: Gordon, if anyone is curious I am also carrying with me the online manual of information on Participate.

 Laird: Who really wants to know more about Participate? Perhaps we can match you with people who could answer that for you. Or is it good enough to just send you to the NWI or UNISON booths? Really ask them penetrating questions.

 Question: I am with the RLDS Church, which is not the "Mormon Church" but is the Reorganized Latter Day Saint Church, I make the distinction not for theological reasons but so that you will understand that we are talking about 1/4 of a million rather than 7 or 8 million

 Laird: I didn't understand that!

 Comment: We are about to establish a Bulletin Board system and other online connections with our regional offices. What would we do - where would we go to begin discussions about the possibility of buying into this?

 What we have in mind is strictly denominational, but we recognize there are other possibilities there. We're just in the beginning stage of doing that and it would be an ideal time to do that in the startup stages. Where do we go, with whom do we talk?

 Laird: Jack [ Sharp] is the Secretary of Ecunet, Curtis Ackley is First Vice-President, and I'm the Treasurer. All we are lacking is David Lochhead, as President, to make up a quorum. So start with Jack and he can lead you to everyone else you need to know.

 Hodges: You can also go to Sherwin Levinson, the NWI Manager, and you say, "We want to talk about a RLDS separate, private, confidential messaging system that our offices can use - that would guarantee that our communication is our communication only. We also want to have access to all this other intriguing stuff that is going on with these other religious groups." ... but [it] will not compromise the kind of stuff your religious group needs to do individually. but will make it possible for you to interact or not interact as your individual persons chose with the other groups that are engaged in values searches. We would love to have RLDS as part of Ecunet Shop. They would add a great dimension.

 Laird: I realize we are about 5 minutes overtime. Some of us will stay around and answer personal questions.

 Before you go, let me just highlight the major questions we did not answer [referring to Susan, who was taking notes]

 Flexibility of the system: that's Participate Blinking files: an individual matter, you can "blink" some from here if you ask David Lochhead.

 Cost effectiveness: as I say is not an easy, "Yes, No", question. I come from the Accounting field myself, before Ministry and would be happy to talk to anyone about cost effectiveness. I just don't think it is where the conversation should start. I think we should be talking communication first and we have to deal with costs but I think we have to start with communications.

 Question: I asked that particular question because I consult with a group of Bishops and that is a very important question. And tied in with that is, "What is the imperative. What is it that we can't do by another means? What do I absolutely have to have at this moment which can only be provided by this medium?" And the answer is, I think, not very much.

 Laird: I really want to talk to you, because I think the way your question is framed the answer is, "No!", they don't need this. So you could get that off your back and just go to another meeting.

However, if you start framing the question: What is the Church for, and what is communication about, what is the Gospel and how it relates, then you come at that question in a different way. You have a department of Communications. What are they for? And how cost-effective are they? What is your newsletter for?

So cost effectiveness is a big question and we have to ask it in all parts of the Church, not just in the new areas. So it might be better to say, how cost effective is this compared to--

 Hodges: Or, instead of "What essential do I need that I have to have that I cannot get it from another source?" to which the answer is "Not much" if you phrase it "What can I get very reasonably which I could not get by other means?", the answer is "Considerable". Interactivity with strange and wondrous persons that you would not ordinarily be in contact with as you, together, try to figure out how to make it through the night.

 Laird: Or how to get the Church to make it through the night.

Topliffe: We [the Disciples] very haphazardly and very bureaucratically there happened to be some [computers] in our office and there was the need to move some press releases - then we started to discover some other things in which we can give some pragmatic answers - we are still struggling like you and others with the right connections - we are discovering that the leaders guide which we need is being worked on by someone somewhere else and to have a back and forth [part of sentence missing] - and when you are trying to keep track of your staff who are travelling all over the country and you can never get them on the phone because they are in meetings like this - and we start putting messages up to each other, knowing that somebody in the office is checking at least twice a day - sending and receiving messages - all of a sudden we are able to start being in better communication. Those are just two very quick examples discovered by accident.

 Laird: You should ask Jim McDonnell, who was here, at the back of the room, the one who has come from London, about the survey about the relationship between Bishops and pastoral Rectors in England and their feelings about the messages which are already coming on their desks. There are very interesting, quite surprising conclusions.

 Couch: Yes, I was just going to add the belief that this medium is going to help up to redefine how we see Communication. In our Church, as an outsider now I can say this: everybody is interested in communicating down. You know the General Agencies want to communicate to the Regional offices, the Regional Offices want to communicate to the Churches. None of them are interested in receiving those messages, by and large.

 Our whole concept of how we communicate I think is going to shift because it is going to go this way [Sue uses her hands to indicate 'from bottom up'] instead of that way [indicating with her hands,' top down'], it will then focus us in on what it is we want to communicate about - who wants to communicate with whom about what - and to me the greatest beauty is this kind of communication [Sue illustrates by joining her hands horizontally] - is its Surprise.

 We have forgotten a lot about that in the Church is Surprise -the lovely, wonderful feeling you get when you say "Ahah!" - that is just what I mean, it happens to turn up in a net work somewhere that you happen to be in somewhere. You are wondering at the time - this is how the Spirit works for me - this is how Spirit translates in this medium - is just what I might be looking for -and I am wandering around in there - what am I doing this for? And I will say, "Ah, there it is!"

 Hodges: And it is by a Canadian! [laughter]

 Couch: that is how the Lord breaks into my life in strange ways these days.

 Comment: If you talk to the "echelons" they say, well we want to know what the local Church is thinking. Psychologically they are terrified to know what the local church is thinking. They don't want to know because they are off in their own little thing. What if the local church wants something else, that will set them back 10 years. The problem becomes not only the psychology, not only of the hardware, but the psychology of maybe really having to communicate.

 Topliffe: I just want to pick up something that Sue's hands communicate something to me. Because part of the potential beauty of this is that on one end of the spectrum is the sense of "sending it down" - on the other end of the spectrum there is the sense of sending it out and nobody wanting to receive it. I would suggest that Sue's description is a little more accurate than either of the two. That is the opportunity of them coming together [Neil uses Sue's horizontal hand-clasping motion] because while there are a lot of heavy feelings with legitimate reasons that we are sending it up and no one wants it that is almost as wrong as saying there is this that is being send down and nobody wants to do anything with it.

 Laird: Gene Schneider is part of the higher echelons of his Church.

 Schneider: Forget the Deputy Director business, what I want to say is the involvement of the United Church of Christ, in this whole computer family did not come from me, or any of the other echelon tops within the denomination - it came from pastors in local Churches. I learned all of this stuff from Curt Ackley and Donel McLellan, the pastor out on the west coast. It did not come from the top-down but from the bottom - up in which these pastors were saying; "This is something we really need!" in order to communicate with each other. The very things that Sue identified: the breaking through of the Holy Spirit.

 Laird: I want my short speech: "How denominations deal with enthusiasts". I think your denomination [indicating Gene Schneider of UC-Christ] dealt with the Curt Ackley's of your denomination very well. You co-opted them. [laughter] Houston may have a different understanding of how his denomination dealt with enthusiasts like him.

Our denomination worked along side by side. Whether they coopted us or we forced them to co-opt us I don't know. But there was some kind of this [using Sue clasped hand motion] going on - still is - that is why we are supported by a national budget and we had our "boss" sitting back in row 3 here and has been here at this conference and [the national office] is supportive of us - David Lochhead, myself and others.

 Comment: Sitting here as a Lutheran and thinking about Martin Luther at the time when moveable type was around and people were saying, "What's wrong with having the Bible's chained up in the Monasteries". What would he be doing now? I imagine him sitting here with a "Transponder" sitting on his knee - that's only one way - it sounds facetious - but when you think of the implications of the moveable type in his time...

 Sharp: I've seen a picture of that. The Ecumenical Institute in Baltimore in their publicity for their computer conference last year - had a wood carving of Luther sitting at a table - they had it modified so Luther was sitting in front of a little computer terminal. [laughter]

 Laird: and one of the softwares which Houston loves is called "TischRede" - TableTalk. Thank you for the participation of the panel and I think we had two-way communication.
 
 

The End