My post about Spiritual Curation brought a comment from an old friend that I had first encountered on Ecunet in the 90s.  His response naturally brought a response from me in the comments.  And given the reality that so few people even read comments on blogs,  I felt it appropriate to reproduce my comments here,  with a few word changes , and a new paragraph (in bold)  but you can see the original comments in their place on the above link.  But here is the comment response I posted:

I feel this intense sense of loyalty to the need to keep Ecunet going/ revive its impact or reach.

I consider the things we were talking about on Ecunet re: the Online world in the 90’s is immensely important to the ongoing health of the relationship of church to the Net of today.  There are so many tools,  and such increased ubiquity of connected-ness today that is tis even more important that we ask about what they these tools are not only doing for us,  and can yet do for us in the future,  but also what they are doing TO us.  How are they changing our world and relationships,  both for good and the possibly unintended negative effects?   We also need to be talking about what we would expect the church and related organizations could do to be a training/formation resource for us.  The data possibilities are truly endless.  We have to map our “Social Graph” conceptions and use that to demonstrate to one another how we are connected even more closely than we ever imagined.

I deeply desire a place to bring these things to the table. I have been immensely disappointed in the lack of such conversation in the general "Social Media" -osphere. Even with a lot of church folks "out there" and who see my Twitter stream (and through that, presumably, my blog posts) , I am getting next to nothing of late, when my postings about such things has intensified over the past two-three months. Thus far, there has been only  one exception, and I appreciate knowing there are others out there (and I know there are, beyond that one and me). I have gotten a smattering of "likes" , but at some point, I want some give and take. I’d like to know some of the "why" behind the "like". This is where "like" falls short, but it is a digital , bit indication (ie "on-off") of a person’s interest in a topic. I want to see these "likes" lead more often in to conversations about what is being liked. Those kinds of conversations happened quite a bit on Ecunet in the mid-90s. There is even more reason for them to be happening today.