The Boundless Show: Episode #1
by
Motte Brown
on Jan 26, 2008 at 3:54 PM
  iTunes | FeedBurner/RSS |
These are some of the questions we grapple with in the inaugural episode of The Boundless Show, our weekly audio companion to the Boundless Webzine.
The Boundless team has been working for months finding voices and tweaking formats in order to leverage a growing, on-demand media channel -- podcasting. And we think we've landed on just the right mix.
Our segments include a brief chat session, a roundtable discussion, a look at culture, a personal story, and answers to questions from our readers (and soon, our listeners). All the segments will be hosted by Lisa Anderson, Focus on the Family's director of public and media relations who's been known to speak at national conferences wearing tall boots and a skull T-shirt.
In this first episode, all the music you hear is from Jeff Caylor's latest album, "Okay."
Candice Watters will be joining us each week to provide her valuable insights. She'll also be a regular in the question and answer session. Steve, Ted, and I are consistent contributors to the show's roundtable and will be occasional voices in the other features.
We'll tackle the hard stuff, answer the tough questions and have fun while doing it. Hopefully you'll have fun, too.
The show is available on iTunes. We also have an RSS feed set up for it.
1. Tim H. had the following to say on Jan 26 at 7:38 PM:
Oh Yeah!
2. Kristen had the following to say on Jan 26 at 8:48 PM:
oh my goodness. I'm sorry. I only got through 18 minutes. But I also skipped the first 4 minutes (ish) because you were talking about nothing really. ::sheepish look:: sorry.
BUT being 24 means that I'm working in part-time youth ministry, have a full time job (because I don't get paid for ministry), still going to college and am dating, so I don't have time to listen to a 30min+ podcast.
I'm sure it was excellent, but I couldn't finish it. I really only wanted to listen to the round table discussion. Maybe post it in sections so I can listen to just what I want to, or make it shorter. OR maybe I just heard the term "podcast" and expected it to be 5-10 minutes tops and was REALLY surprised. :)
that could be it.
3. Leah had the following to say on Jan 26 at 9:55 PM:
I'm currently 10 minutes through it (and still listening). Would have been better if the 5 minute discussion on burglary had been 2 minutes long. I got bored of it after that, but hung in there coz I knew there was more coming.
As for the singles group discussion, I'll say upfront I think singles groups aren't a good idea. I've never come across them in any of the churches I or my friends have been associated with. We have young adults groups, and that's a mixture of singles, dating, engaged and married couples. And it's good that way. It means singles are friends with marrieds and marrieds are friends with those dating, etc etc. To restrict a group just to singles, I think, is not a good idea.
I think this is illustrated by the attitudes of the people Lisa was discussing, in her singles group. She said they feel uncomfortable when the topic comes up. Well, of COURSE they do! It's like people are sitting there looking at you going, "Well, hurry up! Ask someone out!" Trust me, there's quite enough opportunity to encourage relationships within a larger young adults group which includes those in a relationship and those who are already married.
In response to the original question, I don't think men are obliged to ask the women in their church/singles group out. And I don't think women are obliged to say yes. Men are obliged to seriously consider all prospects and give them a fair go in his mind (ie. don't just write her off because she's not a brunette, or because you're "not attracted" to her). Women are obliged to consider all their prospects in the same way, especially those who ask them out, but not to necessarily say yes.
4. SHL had the following to say on Jan 26 at 11:41 PM:
Pros
-Great idea
-Interesting and helpful content
-Excellent audio quality
Cons
-Idle (gun) chatter
-Content overload
Suggestions
-Do keep the anecdotal/intro conversation if you want, but keep it to a minimum. It can be interesting, but remember that we’re tuning in to hear the content.
-Pick two or so features to run in each podcast. The roundtable discussion, the Boundless Answer-type segment, the blurb by Steve, the interview with Caylor—they were all good, but perhaps too many different segments for one podcast. It’s a lot to take in. If you are that bursting with content, then put out episodes more often. I’m not worried about length as much keeping the episode focused on a few ideas.
-Keep on featuring Boundless bloggers, and get some of the other Boundless article writers on the show.
-Maybe hold a contest sometime in the future.
I’m excited that you folks at Boundless have started the podcast, and I look forward to hearing future installments.
5. BDB had the following to say on Jan 27 at 12:21 AM:
Interesting. Interesting five minute discussion about home security. In California, if a picture falls, it's probably about a 5 on the earthquake scale.
It was a bit long, and I need to multi-task to keep busy.
Too bad Lisa's picture in the skull t-shirt wasn't included. I guess no guy could ever say he didn't have her number to call her. As director of PR for a huge ministry, it's really easy to find...on a press release.
I got confused once the program got to the part about encountering God at Taco Bell...
6. Matt had the following to say on Jan 27 at 12:36 AM:
Nah, this is really a short podcast. I like alot of podcasts that are closer to an hour long. That means I can listen to a podcast a day to-and-from work.
7. erin had the following to say on Jan 27 at 11:37 AM:
I'm with Matt. Podcasts aren't necessarily short; I listen to several that are over an hour. They're great for driving to work or on a lunch break.
8. NeedACatchyName had the following to say on Jan 27 at 5:48 PM:
Though I'm not sure how on-topic this is, let me just say that I agree with Leah that singles groups are a bad idea. IMO, it's better to have a group that contains both single and married folks for young adults. It prevents singles from being cloistered into one small (and easy to ignore) group, and better integrates everyone into the community of believers. My church has one group for young adults, regardless of marital status, and we don't run into too many problems doing it this way.
However (and I may be stepping on some toes here), in my experience, the biggest complaint you get when integrating the married and singles groups (at least at the young adult level) isn't from the singles, but from the young married couples. The singles are usually fairly open to combining with the married folks, but the young married folks tend to want to have a "young couples" small group so they can discuss the unique struggles of married life, have very newlywed focused Sunday school lessons, go on "couples retreats," and be nicely paired-off at various events. And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with wanting those things. Nor do I think that every single person is open to combining with the "married group" or that every married person doesn't want to combine with the singles class. But it has been my experience that it's harder to convince the married couples to go for this sort of arrangement than the singles.
9. Frank had the following to say on Jan 27 at 5:53 PM:
Can we get a transcript of the thing?
I find reading helps me understand what is going on (both in the actual discussion and in the comments) because I can quickly find the relevant sections. As well, we can read the transcript a lot quicker than listening to the actual audio (each media -- print, audio, ... -- has pros and cons).
10. BDB had the following to say on Jan 27 at 7:48 PM:
I will second the comments by Leah and NeedACatchyName that a young adults (maybe college & career?) group is a lot better for the single people than being shoved off into a corner by themselves. Better for church growth, too.
11. Drew had the following to say on Jan 27 at 9:06 PM:
sounds like a PBS show with better content.
12. John S. had the following to say on Jan 28 at 3:32 AM:
Just a thought - some podcasts have chapter markers built in that allow you to skip to different sections, so that people who don't want to hear the lead-in can skip it. Good stuff though.
13. obewan had the following to say on Jan 28 at 8:09 AM:
Singles groups that are overly controlling need to realize that the people in the group may resent it. The leadership should not in any way attempt to either force or restrict dating. They should instead attempt to provide teaching (at some point) on how to maintain healthy dating relationships.
I have been involved in groups in the past where the leadership attempted to control relationships (for example by separating the men and women at the meetings), and many people grew to resent it and left the group.
As far as obligations, I do not feel that the men in the group owe women anything – and vice versa. The group I am in now has 40 single women and only four are not divorced. I prefer to not struggle with the issue of divorce and remarriage or the baggage that goes along with it. So, I am left with a choice of one never married 43 year old and 3 widows who are a lot older than me. Fortunately, our group is more about fellowship than dating or searching for a mate so the pressure is off.
14. Jeni had the following to say on Jan 28 at 2:24 PM:
I enjoyed the podcast. I even laughed out loud a couple of times. It was interesting and entertaining content. I second the suggestion by John S. regarding the bookmarks - that's a good idea. It was fun to hear discussion on a controversial topic such as dating in singles groups. The topic of conversation did make me think through the implications of being obligated to say "yes".
Great work! I'm looking forward to hearing more controversial topics! ;-)
15. R.Celeste had the following to say on Jan 28 at 11:54 PM:
I thouroughly am disgusted with the experience I have had with "singles groups". What they turn out to be is a group in which there is a ruling elite of "beautiful people" and the everyone else. The guys that I have found there are shallow and immature. If we go back to the lives of men and women of faith and realize that most of them felt a high calling. They attended bible studies (where unlike today they actually studied the bible), they went to prayer meetings or missions meetings. Not so much with an eye on meeting a spouse but on hearing the leading of the spirit. Read: Peter Marshall's bio. Why aren't we being exhorted to go out and serve others in the body (the elderly, kids)?
Sure I could probably find a good husband (i guess) but he is not the best. That is what I want, I want the best husband God can provide. If that means that I have to wait longer, oh well. I am reminded of Mr. Collins from Pride and Prejudice. He had a general idea of what he wants in a wife found Lizzy Bennet said "She'll do" but she turned him down. TWO WEEKS later marries Charlotte lucas who only marries him because she is just as desperate as he is to be married (her reasons are more understandable given the time). True it is just fiction but it speaks truth. No girl wants some guys to say "You are one of 10 girls who match my standard of a wife and I guess I will pick you". Why is he that eager to get married? Often these guys view marriage as a thing to be checked off a list like go to the dentist or fix the car.
16. Novagirl had the following to say on Jan 29 at 4:26 PM:
I loved the podcast and I even liked the idle chatter... it was helpful to get to know your voices. And I loved Lisa, she is so funny.
17. Erin had the following to say on Jan 31 at 12:03 PM:
Yesterday I was learning about Candice’s book and was excited about what I though was the concept of empowering women to pursue and validate the desire to be a wife. I came across the podcast and eagerly listened. There were two points that greatly disappointed me, as I understood them.
1. Why should women have any obligation to accept a date with a man? Yes, we should not rush to conclusions and not consider someone for a reason that is superficial. However, I would not expect a man to ask out every single (in the regards to status) woman. So, why would a woman have to respond with a “yes”. If a woman knows that this is not a relationship that would be fulfilling to either person, than she should not waste their time or create a hope that will not be met. A woman’s opinion is more valid than what you seemed to give credit.
2. The response to the lady’s question about approaching the guy she has had a crush on for 4 years was greatly disappointing. Of course, it would be horrible if she confessed years of keeping tabs! But, it too much assumption to say that he knows she is interested. Both men and women can be very dense. I agree that it is best for a guy to take the lead. Women can take some of the weight off of him by making it known that she would be willing to follow.
Personally, I met a very nice man at a restaurant while I was studying for finals, but we were interrupted before he could initiate another meeting. I completed my finals before Christmas break and realized that I actually had ideal time to spend getting to know somebody and dating. So, rather than wait for some chance crossing of paths, I was (crazy) bold enough to go to his print shop. There was no possible reason for me to invent to “run into him” there. I walked in, shocking him with my presence, and stated I had a really nice time talking with him and it would be nice to do so again. He asked me for my phone number and he called me that night. We talked and he said that he would like to get together that following evening. Our first “date” was to a junior high band recital of a girl in the youth group that he leads and then dinner. After knowing each other for a month, he asked me to be his girlfriend. We are both seeing if this is something we would like to continue “for as long as we both shall live” and if it is that he will be the one to propose. Most likely before he asks, I will let him know that if he were to propose, my response would be “yes”.
My point is: the young lady who has admired a guy should let him know she is interested and would respond positively if he would like to ask her out. Stop playing guessing/manipulating games: don’t pretend to “happen” to read the same book! Let him know she is receptive to him taking the lead. Possibly saying if he would like to have frozen yogurt/coffee together sometime, she would enjoy it. Then let him do the inviting.
18. Mo had the following to say on Jan 31 at 9:15 PM:
I had to stop around 13:52 where someone said, 'The whole point during the 20s is to pair up.'
The whole point - at any age - should be deepening your relationship with Jesus Christ.
It is so incredibly disappointing to see this idol that is made here of relationships and marriage.
Newsflash: Not everyone who wishes to get married ends up getting married. And no, it's not always our fault.
19. Josue Sierra had the following to say on Feb 1 at 10:35 AM:
Hey Boundless team! Great job on the podcast. I'm not single, but for some reason, a lot of singles come to me for advice, so I've kept an interest on the topics.
Feedback: intro segment was a bit long...casual talk is great because it helps me get to know you, but I agree with some previous comments it should be kept shorter...or a lot funnier.
The music was awesome. I would have liked to hear more of it. Would you provide the link to the artist's website or maybe just write his name on the post above so I can look him up. If FOTF has it, I would certainly buy it.
Other than that, great show. Steve's "freak'o'meter" crack was hilarious! This is TOTALY not the sort of thing one would expect from FOTF -- very relevant. I'm looking forward to the next one, and will be recomending it to my sister and cousins.
~ Josue
20. Motte had the following to say on Feb 1 at 11:25 AM:
Josue (and all):
We really appreciate the constructive criticism and kudos we've received. And we've taken it to heart.
We've shortened the chat at the beginning -- which we hope is slightly funnier -- and will be providing the segment times on the podcast blog.
Keep an eye out for our latest podcast this afternoon. Enjoy.
21. Beau had the following to say on Feb 1 at 1:08 PM:
Next step: Video podcast!
Ok, maybe I'm getting ahead of myself.
Really, though, I loved it! I keep checking my iTunes every five minutes. The new one is coming out today, right?
22. -a had the following to say on Feb 3 at 7:53 PM:
-Lisa
Forget buying a gun, here's a option:
Just slap a NRA bumper sticker on your car and call it a day.