# Grand Lodge to ban smart phones?



## Blake Bowden (Feb 25, 2011)

I received an email the other day stating the Grand Lodge is looking to ban smart phones from next years communication. Has anyone else heard of this?

Would you be willing to leave your phone at the door?


----------



## MikeMay (Feb 25, 2011)

Blake Bowden said:


> I received an email the other day stating the Grand Lodge is looking to ban smart phones from next years communication. Has anyone else heard of this?
> 
> Would you be willing to leave your phone at the door?


 
I haven't heard that...yet.  But I leave mine in the car or off anyway, just as I do in church so as not to be distracted or cause a distraction...


----------



## Dave in Waco (Feb 25, 2011)

First I'm hearing of this.  I don't remember them creating that big of a distrubance this year.  They might first try just reminding everyone to set their phones for stun, and enforce a "donation" of $50 if your phone goes off during the communication.


----------



## cemab4y (Feb 25, 2011)

Virginia craft lodges permit you to bring your phone with you. But, if it rings during lodge, you are charged $20 (police, firemen, rescue squad,etc. are exempted). Personally, I prefer to leave my cell phone off, after work, since I am on the phone during work all day.


----------



## Blake Bowden (Feb 25, 2011)

I was told they (GL) didn't like information being posted on sites such as...well ya know.


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam (Feb 25, 2011)

Can you expand on this without getting anyone in hot water?


----------



## Blake Bowden (Feb 25, 2011)

JohnnyFlotsam said:


> Can you expand on this without getting anyone in hot water?


 
For the past two years, we've posted election results of all the resolutions as many of our members cannot attend GL due to scheduling conflicts. I've been told the powers that be do not like this. 

Now before everyone get's miffed @ GL, they have not contacted me directly about this issue. If they did, I would comply with their request.


----------



## MikeMay (Feb 25, 2011)

I wouldn't think that is a problem since the results are sent out by emails anyway...


----------



## Dave in Waco (Feb 25, 2011)

So supposedly they are upset that the outcome of things we are voting are being passed onto people in lodges that we represent at GL?


----------



## Preston DuBose (Feb 25, 2011)

Alternately, they could work WITH you and the GL Web Committee to update the respective sites with accurate information more quickly.


----------



## Dave in Waco (Feb 25, 2011)

GL could always set up a secure site and send out login info to lodges to set up webcasts in lodge rooms during a tiled MM lodge that have internet access.  MM's watching the webcast wouldn't be able to take part in balloting or discussions, but they would get to see the proceedings.  Plus they could webcast the open parts of the communication as well.  I think webcasting the open parts like that could help in showing the general public that we are being open.  I know some would want full access to everything, but they don't get full access to publicly traded company stockholder meetings either.


----------



## Beathard (Feb 25, 2011)

Banning them would only delay the results by a few minutes. The next person out the door could report the results. Or are they planning on banning all exchange of information year round? 8(   Not very enlightened eh?!


----------



## davidterrell80 (Feb 25, 2011)

This saddens me.

You know, in the days our ancient brothers built the great cathedrals, the Craft represented the most advanced engineering and fabrication technology on Earth. 

What happened to teaching people correct principals and then letting them govern themselves? Why, in these enlightened times, must we constantly compel a free person to behave in "acceptable" fashion?

In my years in the chairs, I was raising a disabled child. He's an adult now, in spite of every physicians' expectation. But had this rule been in force, when I was in the chairs, I would not have been able to easily justify going to GL.

Mixed feelings...


----------



## Benton (Feb 25, 2011)

I don't know that I see the point of the ban, unless people are video taping/taking pictures of tyled ceremonies. Otherwise, seems kind of pointless.


----------



## Bill Lins (Feb 26, 2011)

Blake Bowden said:


> Would you be willing to leave your phone at the door?


 
Not a chance. I own & operate a business plus I have a daughter at home with serious medical issues. I must remain available to my family, employees, & customers. I attend Grand Lodge on my own time and at my own expense as a way of serving my Lodge and the Craft. If I decide to keep my phone with me there (on "silent/vibrate", of course) it is my decision & my decision alone.


----------



## jwardl (Feb 28, 2011)

They could always install a cell phone jammer... but I, too, don't see the problem with posting election results as they come available. If they're having a problem with cell phones going off, why not simply make a public announcement before proceedings begin, reminding everyone to turn them off or silence them?

Note that I haven't yet been to an annual communication, so forgive me if this is already done.


----------



## Bill Lins (Feb 28, 2011)

jwardl said:


> They could always install a cell phone jammer...


 
Where are they going to find the money? They're already pleading poverty. If I find out they spent our contributions on something like a jammer, you can bet the farm there'll be a resolution submitted to prohibit its use.


----------



## Benton (Feb 28, 2011)

Yeah, a cell phone jammer is a bit extreme. We're not high schoolers.


----------



## jwardl (Feb 28, 2011)

Wasn't suggesting it brother -- just saying it is an option.


----------



## tomasball (Feb 28, 2011)

Since you haven't had any communication from Grand Lodge on this matter, who is "stating" that this is afoot?


----------



## Blake Bowden (Mar 1, 2011)

tomasball said:


> Since you haven't had any communication from Grand Lodge on this matter, who is "stating" that this is afoot?



For whatever reason, the Grand Lodge has refused to "warm up" to Masons of Texas or similar websites. When the GLofTX started their own Facebook page, they would purposely remove all links to the masonic articles we host. This is why we continue to have our own. Just recently, a Brother contacted RW Guest about this site and was told that "we don't know much about them, but they seem to be anti-grand lodge". I know because I was forwarded the email. 

The information I received comes from a trusted source but I will not divulge who it is. 

I brought this issue public so the powers that be can see just how silly banning cell phones and/or blogging would be.


----------



## tomasball (Mar 1, 2011)

Hmm.  Now that last post has a lot of subtext.  I observe that the Grand Lodge facebook page doesn't have links to much in the way of "articles" other than ones put out by our Committee on Education and Internet Committee.  I had never considered using the GL page to promote my own essays or editorials, and I imagine if I tried to link them, they would take down the links, but I wouldn't consider this a personal attack on me.

Inasmuch as the Grand Lodge consists of several thousand members, does your source say who specifically is looking to do this?  The Grand Trustees as a group?  The Grand Master?  We instantly started speculating about motives...does your source say what this would be intended to accomplish?   With many hundreds (at least) of smart phones out there, I can't see why anyone would assume it had anything to do with this website.  

Since smart phones became popular, I have seen a lot of abuse on the Lodge level...people texting during meetings, taking calls during lodge, even taking pictures of rituals!  I suppose it would also be possible to record or video what was going on, or just sit there watching a movie or playing "angry birds".  If the Grand Lodge leadership wants to make a statement about proper lodge decorum in this way, I think it's probably overdue.  The space within the tiled doors is a sacred space, and there are, and should be, rules for conduct.

As for whether the Grand Secretary thinks this site is "anti-GL", there are plenty of posts on the various topics to make that argument.  If I were a Grand Lodge officer, and I saw your last sentence, I would say to myself..."he wants to use his website to tell the powers that be how to do things??"


----------



## Dave in Waco (Mar 1, 2011)

tomasball said:


> As for whether the Grand Secretary thinks this site is "anti-GL", there are plenty of posts on the various topics to make that argument. If I were a Grand Lodge officer, and I saw your last sentence, I would say to myself..."he wants to use his website to tell the powers that be how to do things??"




And there are probably just as many coming from Administrators and Moderators giving support to GL.  Most of the anti-GL comments come from different groups that are up in arms over something like the GM's Eddict concerning membership in the WS.  They voiced their concerns and were given advice on how to procede in order to have the eddit removed by many people here, but instead their concerns dissolved into them just wanting to bash GL, which we stopped.  

But if I were a GL officer, I would be looking at everything discussed on this site.  It has been a good gauge on how the members of freemasonry feel about different issues, where we see ways to improve freemasonry, what we are wanting out of the freemasonry, and a chance to communicate with members without the trappings of being a Grand Officer.  It's a bit like King Richard walking among his troops to get their honest feelings about the state of things.  

Now by no means is that to say that we think our word is the end all be all of Freemasonry.  I'm just saying that we provide for a good group to discuss issues with to get a reading on and get honest feedback, since sometimes when a person is in charge it can be difficult to get honest feedback on ideas.  We are just a good tempeture gauge, and here getting feedback could be easily done.  But we do strive to be a benefit to Freemasonry here, and we might be a little critical of things GL does, but it's not because we are anti-GL.  It's just an opinion how we think something might have been done better, since we do have the benefit in a lot of cases of hindsight.


----------



## tomasball (Mar 1, 2011)

Blake Bowden said:


> For the past two years, we've posted election results of all the resolutions as many of our members cannot attend GL due to scheduling conflicts. I've been told the powers that be do not like this.



Are you sitting there in the Grand Lodge session sending people emails?  I don't like that either.  Go outside and do it from the library.

---------- Post added at 10:09 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:49 AM ----------




Dave in Waco said:


> It's a bit like King Richard walking among his troops to get their honest feelings about the state of things.



Wasn't that King Henry?

I think there is a general tendency of Masonic practice to lag behind technology lately, and it deserved its own thread, which maybe someone (or I) might start.  But if you go back to the ancient charges, and the original constitutions, and read about proper Masonic etiquette, and deportment when in the presence of the profane (which covers about anything on the internet) we can find a lot of guidance that, to me, seems currently absent.

As for electronic devices in the Grand Lodge Session, or any lodge meeting, I believe that phoning, texting, or connecting to the internet circumvents the tiler at the door, and is therefor improper.  Call me a curmudgeon, but I'm not in favor of the Grand Photographer taking pictures while the GL is tiled.  I don't think wireless mikes are acceptable, if their signal can be picked up outside the room.  Tiling means something...Masonic discipline means something.  We should be even more interested in preserving our traditions in the information age than we were before.


----------



## Blake Bowden (Mar 1, 2011)

tomasball said:


> Hmm.  Now that last post has a lot of subtext.  I observe that the Grand Lodge facebook page doesn't have links to much in the way of "articles" other than ones put out by our Committee on Education and Internet Committee.  I had never considered using the GL page to promote my own essays or editorials, and I imagine if I tried to link them, they would take down the links, but I wouldn't consider this a personal attack on me.



You say promote, I say sharing  At the time they were allowing other facebook users to post links. When I brought this to their attention, it was stopped. I would love if they allowed people such as yourself to share essays and/or editorials. When was the last time the CoE and IC posted one? Try last December. 



tomasball said:


> Inasmuch as the Grand Lodge consists of several thousand members, does your source say who specifically is looking to do this?  The Grand Trustees as a group?  The Grand Master?



I have spoken with M.W. Carnes about the site and he expressed support for it. 



tomasball said:


> As for whether the Grand Secretary thinks this site is "anti-GL", there are plenty of posts on the various topics to make that argument.  If I were a Grand Lodge officer, and I saw your last sentence, I would say to myself..."he wants to use his website to tell the powers that be how to do things??"



So you think it's fair to take a handful of posts out of context and label us and our members as anti-Grand Lodge? Why would I refer dozens, if not hundreds of non-Masons to Lodges under the very jurisdiction some claim we're against? If this site is anti-Grand Lodge, why do we mirror all of the updates from their RSS feeds and post them in the forums? If this site is anti-Grand Lodge why do we link to their website and Lodge locator? 



tomasball said:


> If I were a Grand Lodge officer, and I saw your last sentence, I would say to myself..."he wants to use his website to tell the powers that be how to do things??"



If I were a Grand Lodge officer I would scour these forums looking for feedback, suggestions and opinions posted by fellow Brethren. I've learned more about Freemasonry from the Brethren here than I ever could in Lodge. 

At the end of the day we're all on the same team and that's all that matters. Since I'm the original poster of this thread, I'm going to let it die a slow death..

:001_tongue:


----------

