I agree with every statement on here except the asking women out part. These days just one ask can get a man labeled creepy and have consequences to his social and professional life. Its just not worth it to initiate with women at all unless you are a 6ft 6figure 6pack. The modern equivalent of tall dark and handsome. Women still want tall but they want money more than dark these days.
The few rare exceptions need to take the initiative themselves. Good Men my age and younger for the most part have quit the dating game because the negative consequences of a bad attempt far outweigh the positive possibilities. The only men still playing are the ones who either are the 666 and thus have a harem of women to choose from or they already have a criminal record that has destroyed their job opportunities so what's another accusation?
My last relationship I was lucky enough that she chose me and initiated in a way that was unmistakably obvious. Unfortunately, cancer ruined it. That was a first and probably the last based on simple statistics of expected lifespan.
well, i checked the 6ft part, but when i asked out my now wife, i was damn near broke and had a dad bod going being over 220 lbs. So lets not group all women in the same category my brother.
I didnt label all women. I said the risk is too great. A man can have his life ruined for just one wrong approach. Even if its only 1 out of 1000 women. That one woman can and will ruin your life because she didnt want to be approached. The only safe move is not to approach. Social media and 3rd wave feminism means that women have to make the first move. The fact that you were lucky doesnt change the risk assessment in the modern dating market. It is simply not safe or wise to approach a woman even once.
I have my own thoughts on this, but I dont want to detract from the original thread of contacting prospective masons and conflating it to getting a successful date. I am happy to pick up on messenger later if you want, but for now, lets clear up the emeth chat :)
I would say you nailed it. Contact anyone who contacts you, and do it using the same media they used, because it's a fair bet that this is their perfered contact method. It may have absolutely nothing to do with their "being to shy to talk on the phone."
For many years, during working hours, reaching me by telephone was a really challenging endevour. First there was the fact that if I was anywhere other than the office, I probably couldn't have my personal phone with me, due to security regulations at the time. Then there's the fact that I probably couldn't hear the damn thing ring, over the sounds around me (a shipyard is a very noisy place.) Oh, and my work cell still couldn't be reached if I was inside a submarine or a Carrier, steel hulls make really good Fariday cages.
Even in less extreme cases, work often hates employees taking personal calls, and during that "Eight hours dedicated to our usual vocation" Work must take precidence, this is how we put bread on the table.
I would say that if you are ANYWHERE near a military base, and there's even a possibility that your contact is military, reply, give it a week, reply again, then give it SIX MONTHS, and try one more time. Why the Six month piece? (and I might even say a year, instead) Suprise deployments are the reality of military life. Inability to respond is too. Perspective canidate Dumbjohn may have dropped an inquiry, then three days later been told, "Pack your shit, we fly out in twelve hours. Don't even think about taking any Personal electronics!" Or, if he is in my old line of work, "take all the personal electronics you want, it's not going to be usable through the steel hull and 500 foot of water, but hey it's still your book and video collection."
We should respond to a possible candidate, and offer him a Petition (and explain what info he will need to write into it)! We can also mention that if the Petition is accepted, a Committee would interview him. Then we can report his response (and continued interest hopefully)?
Giving a petition at the first meeting to a candidate is serious mistake in my opinion. The 6 step program is well designed to ensure we get quality seekers petitioning for our lodges. A petition is the last step in that process.
My lodge had given out 2 petitions to a couple of guys who showed up exactly 1 time. Petition fee attached, 3 master masons who never meet them before signed the petitions. 1.5 years later, after no contact from them despite following up with calls, texts and emails, even going to their address listed, we finally held a vote on the petitions to clear up the books and mailed back their petition fee's.
I strongly agree. I think that we need to know a man before we give him a petition.
My feeling is this:
Any man who becomes a member of my Lodge will end up spending time with my granddaughters. One who is now nine, and one who is two. If I can't trust a man with those granddaughters I can't allow him to be a member of my Lodge. Flowing from that, if I don't know him at all, I can't in good conscience place a white ball for him in the box.
We have the Six Step Program adopted in Washington. However, that doesn't start if you don't connect with the seeker. I used to sell cars. So follow up to me is very important. When i get a lead either from Grand Lodge or on our own, i make sure to follow up within 24 hours. I will send an email and then call. If i don't get an answer, ill send a text. I typically wait 1 week if i hadn't heard anything then try again. Then i move it to 30 days. If at 30 days i still don't hear anything, ill put it for 30 days out again. That's 4 attempts (but the 1st attempt had 3 different ways). If they cant respond within 2.5 months, they were not serious about learning more. If i get contact, then i follow up based on the flow of the conversation and the seekers availability.
I had told a military class that my dad was a Mason, so a student asked if I was interested? He told me he was a Master of a Lodge if I was interested? I replied I went to my son's Boy Scout meeting Monday evenings, Army Reserve Duty Tuesday evening, and Church Chancel Choir practice Wednesday evening. So the only evening I had open was Thursday. The next day, a retired NYARNG LTC knocked on my Office door, and asked if I wanted a Petition for a Thursday evening Masonic Lodge? Hmmm ..
results may certainly vary, but overall, i think that the 6 step process that was adopted by Grand Lodge of WA is very effective. Can you go through the entire 6 steps and find it didn't work, sure. Can someone walk in without knowing anyone and join immediately be be a fit, sure. But I don't understand how any mason could willingly sign a petition to recommend someone that they don't know and say this is a good person who deserves to join our craft.
I’m in WB Mike’s camp on this one. “I don't understand how any mason could willingly sign a petition to recommend someone that they don't know and say this is a good person who deserves to join our craft.” Even when I joined when I was 21, most of the active Brothers in Tenino Lodge had known me for at least 5 years, some since I was a kid. So they weren’t signing the petition of a stranger. Nowadays, I’m more selective. If I don’t know the inquirer and they petition, I won’t sign it, but I might (actually likely) volunteer for the petitioner’s investigating committee so I can get to know the petitioner better, also to ask the tough questions.
There was a case in my Centralia Lodge where a petitioner showed up once to a meeting, and that Petitioner’s ballot was rejected. To this day, I cannot picture in mind what he looked like. I never talked with him, or even had a chance to introduce myself. My guess is that many others didn’t, either, which could have led to the ballot going the way it did. It angered a handful of brothers, who said we rejected a good man who would have been an asset to the Lodge. Hey! Maybe so. But if we don’t know him, there’s a breakdown in the process. Good news is that he could petition again, and his associates can do the process better and give this man a better shot of being elected into our Lodge. And who knows? He might very well become a valuable member of our Lodge if he were elected. But that depends on him.
I have, in the past, voted for a man to receive the Degrees whom I haven't met. In those cases, for various reasons, I'd not been to Lodge for awhile, so not having met him was my fault. In those cases, it seemed to me that I needed to trust the judgement of my Brothers.
But, if I am attending every meeting of my Lodge, and doing so for a long period of time, and a ballot comes up for a man whom I've never met, well, that would be a cube for sure.
As I've aged, I've tried to limit my nights out for meetings to one or two a week, but as a younger guy my evening schedule looked a lot more like yours.
Someone, or a group of people, who really have a heart for this can make a huge difference I think. My Lodge is lucky to have such a Brother, he's always keen to give tours of our Temple, host meet and greet events, and all the rest. It truly does make a big difference.
We had a professional sign made for the front door of our downtown lodge with the website and QR code which sends them to information describing the Craft and has a sign up sheet which is immediately shared with the officers of the lodge.
In New York, we instituted a program for tracking potential candidates, and we just could never untangle the accountability part. People still went uncontacted, and some became Masons and were never noted in the system. The lesson is that the best system in the world doesn't work if people won't use it -- and it's never a substitute for doing the actual work in general.
BTW, your thing about contacting people in like medium is spot on! We need to be comfortable with how OTHER people communicate.
I've seen it a million times in technology circles. The existence of the system is treated as the solution, not its use. We mentally "outsource" the activity to it.
It's like buying exercise equipment to feel like we're working toward our goals, and then not really using it.
I think treating each candidate and their level of engagement as a one size fits all approach is a mistake. I think we would do well to get to know each person as an individual and what type of Masonic experience they are seeking if we would like to keep them around and build lasting relationships.
If a relationship is too one sided it doesn't bode well for long generally. Safe Travels and have a Blessed one!
I agree with every statement on here except the asking women out part. These days just one ask can get a man labeled creepy and have consequences to his social and professional life. Its just not worth it to initiate with women at all unless you are a 6ft 6figure 6pack. The modern equivalent of tall dark and handsome. Women still want tall but they want money more than dark these days.
The few rare exceptions need to take the initiative themselves. Good Men my age and younger for the most part have quit the dating game because the negative consequences of a bad attempt far outweigh the positive possibilities. The only men still playing are the ones who either are the 666 and thus have a harem of women to choose from or they already have a criminal record that has destroyed their job opportunities so what's another accusation?
My last relationship I was lucky enough that she chose me and initiated in a way that was unmistakably obvious. Unfortunately, cancer ruined it. That was a first and probably the last based on simple statistics of expected lifespan.
well, i checked the 6ft part, but when i asked out my now wife, i was damn near broke and had a dad bod going being over 220 lbs. So lets not group all women in the same category my brother.
I didnt label all women. I said the risk is too great. A man can have his life ruined for just one wrong approach. Even if its only 1 out of 1000 women. That one woman can and will ruin your life because she didnt want to be approached. The only safe move is not to approach. Social media and 3rd wave feminism means that women have to make the first move. The fact that you were lucky doesnt change the risk assessment in the modern dating market. It is simply not safe or wise to approach a woman even once.
I have my own thoughts on this, but I dont want to detract from the original thread of contacting prospective masons and conflating it to getting a successful date. I am happy to pick up on messenger later if you want, but for now, lets clear up the emeth chat :)
I figure that Melinda picked me because I was short, bald, and fat! 🤠
Nah, just teasing. It was the hats. It has to be the hats that drew her to me.
They are mighty fine hats!
I do often think I was lucky to have come of age in the 1980's. Things were undoubtedly more sane then.
I am very sorry for the loss you experienced.
I would say you nailed it. Contact anyone who contacts you, and do it using the same media they used, because it's a fair bet that this is their perfered contact method. It may have absolutely nothing to do with their "being to shy to talk on the phone."
For many years, during working hours, reaching me by telephone was a really challenging endevour. First there was the fact that if I was anywhere other than the office, I probably couldn't have my personal phone with me, due to security regulations at the time. Then there's the fact that I probably couldn't hear the damn thing ring, over the sounds around me (a shipyard is a very noisy place.) Oh, and my work cell still couldn't be reached if I was inside a submarine or a Carrier, steel hulls make really good Fariday cages.
Even in less extreme cases, work often hates employees taking personal calls, and during that "Eight hours dedicated to our usual vocation" Work must take precidence, this is how we put bread on the table.
I would say that if you are ANYWHERE near a military base, and there's even a possibility that your contact is military, reply, give it a week, reply again, then give it SIX MONTHS, and try one more time. Why the Six month piece? (and I might even say a year, instead) Suprise deployments are the reality of military life. Inability to respond is too. Perspective canidate Dumbjohn may have dropped an inquiry, then three days later been told, "Pack your shit, we fly out in twelve hours. Don't even think about taking any Personal electronics!" Or, if he is in my old line of work, "take all the personal electronics you want, it's not going to be usable through the steel hull and 500 foot of water, but hey it's still your book and video collection."
This is great advice re: inquirers who are in the military. Thank you!
We should respond to a possible candidate, and offer him a Petition (and explain what info he will need to write into it)! We can also mention that if the Petition is accepted, a Committee would interview him. Then we can report his response (and continued interest hopefully)?
Giving a petition at the first meeting to a candidate is serious mistake in my opinion. The 6 step program is well designed to ensure we get quality seekers petitioning for our lodges. A petition is the last step in that process.
My lodge had given out 2 petitions to a couple of guys who showed up exactly 1 time. Petition fee attached, 3 master masons who never meet them before signed the petitions. 1.5 years later, after no contact from them despite following up with calls, texts and emails, even going to their address listed, we finally held a vote on the petitions to clear up the books and mailed back their petition fee's.
I strongly agree. I think that we need to know a man before we give him a petition.
My feeling is this:
Any man who becomes a member of my Lodge will end up spending time with my granddaughters. One who is now nine, and one who is two. If I can't trust a man with those granddaughters I can't allow him to be a member of my Lodge. Flowing from that, if I don't know him at all, I can't in good conscience place a white ball for him in the box.
We have the Six Step Program adopted in Washington. However, that doesn't start if you don't connect with the seeker. I used to sell cars. So follow up to me is very important. When i get a lead either from Grand Lodge or on our own, i make sure to follow up within 24 hours. I will send an email and then call. If i don't get an answer, ill send a text. I typically wait 1 week if i hadn't heard anything then try again. Then i move it to 30 days. If at 30 days i still don't hear anything, ill put it for 30 days out again. That's 4 attempts (but the 1st attempt had 3 different ways). If they cant respond within 2.5 months, they were not serious about learning more. If i get contact, then i follow up based on the flow of the conversation and the seekers availability.
I had told a military class that my dad was a Mason, so a student asked if I was interested? He told me he was a Master of a Lodge if I was interested? I replied I went to my son's Boy Scout meeting Monday evenings, Army Reserve Duty Tuesday evening, and Church Chancel Choir practice Wednesday evening. So the only evening I had open was Thursday. The next day, a retired NYARNG LTC knocked on my Office door, and asked if I wanted a Petition for a Thursday evening Masonic Lodge? Hmmm ..
results may certainly vary, but overall, i think that the 6 step process that was adopted by Grand Lodge of WA is very effective. Can you go through the entire 6 steps and find it didn't work, sure. Can someone walk in without knowing anyone and join immediately be be a fit, sure. But I don't understand how any mason could willingly sign a petition to recommend someone that they don't know and say this is a good person who deserves to join our craft.
I’m in WB Mike’s camp on this one. “I don't understand how any mason could willingly sign a petition to recommend someone that they don't know and say this is a good person who deserves to join our craft.” Even when I joined when I was 21, most of the active Brothers in Tenino Lodge had known me for at least 5 years, some since I was a kid. So they weren’t signing the petition of a stranger. Nowadays, I’m more selective. If I don’t know the inquirer and they petition, I won’t sign it, but I might (actually likely) volunteer for the petitioner’s investigating committee so I can get to know the petitioner better, also to ask the tough questions.
There was a case in my Centralia Lodge where a petitioner showed up once to a meeting, and that Petitioner’s ballot was rejected. To this day, I cannot picture in mind what he looked like. I never talked with him, or even had a chance to introduce myself. My guess is that many others didn’t, either, which could have led to the ballot going the way it did. It angered a handful of brothers, who said we rejected a good man who would have been an asset to the Lodge. Hey! Maybe so. But if we don’t know him, there’s a breakdown in the process. Good news is that he could petition again, and his associates can do the process better and give this man a better shot of being elected into our Lodge. And who knows? He might very well become a valuable member of our Lodge if he were elected. But that depends on him.
I have, in the past, voted for a man to receive the Degrees whom I haven't met. In those cases, for various reasons, I'd not been to Lodge for awhile, so not having met him was my fault. In those cases, it seemed to me that I needed to trust the judgement of my Brothers.
But, if I am attending every meeting of my Lodge, and doing so for a long period of time, and a ballot comes up for a man whom I've never met, well, that would be a cube for sure.
You were mighty busy back then!
As I've aged, I've tried to limit my nights out for meetings to one or two a week, but as a younger guy my evening schedule looked a lot more like yours.
Very similar to my lodges experience. recently we installed a new very proactive recruitment committee and we now have 10 new EAs.
Someone, or a group of people, who really have a heart for this can make a huge difference I think. My Lodge is lucky to have such a Brother, he's always keen to give tours of our Temple, host meet and greet events, and all the rest. It truly does make a big difference.
We had a professional sign made for the front door of our downtown lodge with the website and QR code which sends them to information describing the Craft and has a sign up sheet which is immediately shared with the officers of the lodge.
We've done something similar. Our building is downtown and has a lot of foot traffic, so I think it is effective.
In New York, we instituted a program for tracking potential candidates, and we just could never untangle the accountability part. People still went uncontacted, and some became Masons and were never noted in the system. The lesson is that the best system in the world doesn't work if people won't use it -- and it's never a substitute for doing the actual work in general.
BTW, your thing about contacting people in like medium is spot on! We need to be comfortable with how OTHER people communicate.
Yeah, the tracking program here seems to be ignored by a lot of Lodges. That certainly does work against its effectiveness.
I do worry as well, that as you allude, maybe sometimes working with the system might actually take precedence over actually doing the work.
I've seen it a million times in technology circles. The existence of the system is treated as the solution, not its use. We mentally "outsource" the activity to it.
It's like buying exercise equipment to feel like we're working toward our goals, and then not really using it.
The exercise equipment is a really good analogy I think!
Balance in everything, everything in balance.
I think treating each candidate and their level of engagement as a one size fits all approach is a mistake. I think we would do well to get to know each person as an individual and what type of Masonic experience they are seeking if we would like to keep them around and build lasting relationships.
If a relationship is too one sided it doesn't bode well for long generally. Safe Travels and have a Blessed one!