StayLDS.com

For the reasons you mention MM, I prefer smaller units/groups to larger ones.

I was assigned to a small branch for a number of years and really enjoyed that time. After the assignment was over, I moved back into my regular ward of over 250 people attending sacrament meeting. It's easier to be invisible or taken for granted in large wards.

I stopped attending priesthood altogether right around the time they dissolved the ward high priests group. My experience was opposite of what I've often seen reported by others. I found the high priests group more nuanced and the conversations more open, vulnerable, and stimulating. I found elder's quorum to be more concerned with policing orthodoxy and saying the most correct things.

Once the quorums combined, good discussions went away and I no longer felt the desire to attend.

nibbler wrote: ↑03 Nov 2024, 14:55 I stopped attending priesthood altogether right around the time they dissolved the ward high priests group. My experience was opposite of what I've often seen reported by others. I found the high priests group more nuanced and the conversations more open, vulnerable, and stimulating. I found elder's quorum to be more concerned with policing orthodoxy and saying the most correct things.

I would agree with that assessment and my experience was similar.

nibbler wrote: ↑03 Nov 2024, 14:55 For the reasons you mention MM, I prefer smaller units/groups to larger ones.

I was assigned to a small branch for a number of years and really enjoyed that time. After the assignment was over, I moved back into my regular ward of over 250 people attending sacrament meeting. It's easier to be invisible or taken for granted in large wards.

There are advantages and disadvantages to both. Sometimes I want to be lost in the crowd. In theory, smaller units mean more work because there are fewer people to do the work. It also means leadership tends to rotate among a select very few.

My very small ward is somewhat unique. We have shrunken significantly over the years, and also aged. Our EQP is in his early 70s, and the vast majority of the group are ordained high priests. Our quorum is probably different than the average quorum, and therefore our discussions are likely more high priest like. That doesn't change the fact that I have no desire to be part of it.

DarkJedi wrote: ↑04 Nov 2024, 07:01 There are advantages and disadvantages to both. Sometimes I want to be lost in the crowd. In theory, smaller units mean more work because there are fewer people to do the work. It also means leadership tends to rotate among a select very few.

There is that. Every once in a blue moon the stars would align and someone would end up giving a SM talk, the SS lesson, and the PH lesson all on the same Sunday. Of course the other disadvantage with a small group is that after a while you've pretty much heard every insight and every story from everyone. Larger groups make for more diversity... as much diversity as can be expressed in church at any rate.

Going back to my comment:

nibbler wrote: ↑03 Nov 2024, 14:55 Once the quorums combined, good discussions went away and I no longer felt the desire to attend.

What I don't know is whether the discussions suffered as a result of people clamming up because the group was larger or because of the generational differences. I suspect the discussions suffered because everyone assumed someone else in the group would speak up but then no one did. The bystander effect.

Our quorum often did the thing where people spilt into groups but that rarely worked to get a good discussion going.

nibbler wrote: ↑04 Nov 2024, 09:48 Our quorum often did the thing where people spilt into groups but that rarely worked to get a good discussion going.

I could usually get a good discussion in small groups going in RS. I was usually paranoid that my heretical outlook would "be on display", so I over-prepared materials, got my mom to vet my lesson plans (to protect my belief disguise/the sisters from my doubts), and my mom usually came to my Zoom RS classes.

I think that "guy culture" uses a lot more gestures and non-verbal communications to communicate guy-to-guy. Which would put the standard "facilitated conversation" structure at odds with "guy culture" in EQ/HP & combined meetings. I think this disconnect could be "prepared around" - but I don't think that the disconnect is discussed for what it is or what it does as a communication/connection blocker in real-time, so the awareness of the problem isn't there to solve the problem:)
NOTE: I am a language forward female who aggressively uses language to channel personal authority. The HP's usually loved or tolerated me - there was no middle ground, and it leaned toward "tolerance". Guys in their 40's were usually cool with me (or tolerated me) - there were more guys my age who liked talking to me then there were guys 10-20 years older than me who talked to me. Guys about 10 years younger than me usually avoided me. Young guys (like the missionaries) usually liked me for my forthrightness or were disconnected to me by age more then gender. But most people ignored me at church parties anyways:)