Active comms? And, is growth a problem? (maybe not)
Monday, April 26th, 2010 04:13 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
charmianLast entry had a lot of comments, and the results of the poll surprised me. [BTW, if you found that poll interesting, you may be interested in this poll. holyschist is interested in your responses.) A clear majority (~60% at present) of the poll results cited a 'dearth of active comms' as the major factor impeding DW growth (among those who believed there was a growth issue). I was actually surprised by this stat. I expected the other options to be more popular.
So then, I ask a followup question (to those of you who checked that option last post, or who believe there is one, even if they did not cite that as the major factor):
On the results in general
Actually, I was surprised more people didn't say invite codes. I was also surprised more people didn't say lack of original content.
There were a significant amount of 'other reason' responses: Can't read locked LJ friends-list entries from DW, the commenting form/openID commenting, perception that DW is a clone (vs. a fork), lack of BNFs/popular users, user inertia.
Some responses questioned whether growth was slow, or if there was a problem with it at all, recalling their experiences with early LJ.
Is there a 'Growth Issue' at all?
To start out with, the question over whether DW has a growth 'issue' or 'problem' is very subjective, although the perception definitely exists.yvi noted that around this time last year DW had ~2,500 daily posts, while now it has ~4000. Others also said that they thought DW was growing at a healthy rate.
Based on solely anecdotal evidence, I've seen people going 'yeah, I joined DW, but it never really took off so I went back to LJ,' or 'I'd like to join, DW, but there aren't enough people,' so the size/growth issue exists in the minds of some people. The idea of network effects suggests that the more people who join a network, the more valuable it becomes, so what these responses seem to be suggesting is that DW is not yet large enough (or not large enough in the right areas) to convince these people to come over.
The issue of growth is also subjective in the sense that 'there is a dearth of active comms/posting/w/e' in practice is equal 'dearth of active comms/posters/etc which I am interested in' So, even though on DW, there may be an active... macrame community, if you have no interest in macrame, but love snowboarding and winter sports, no matter how massive the macrame community and related comms are, it doesn't really matter. Growth probably doesn't occur evenly among parts of the service as well, so whether you are perceiving growth on your d-roll depends on who is on your d-roll.
There's also the fact that DW is only a year old, and some note that they find it comparable to LJ at the same age. I have no idea what LJ was back in 2000, so I'll take their word for it. While this may be true, in terms of the perceptions of the users, it may not be especially relevant, as many of them weren't using LJ in 2000. It may be that many people are not used to being early adopters of a social media service, and since they didn't join LJ at that stage, 2002 LJ is not their point of reference.
holyschist made an interesting point here: "Where people are seeing it as not-active is, I think, because they want their entire LJ friendslist and all their favorite LJ comms to move/replicate here. And I don't think that's realistic." People who perceive a 'slowness' or 'lack' of growth, or a 'dearth of comms or original content,' may feel that way because they expect DW to be a replacement for their current LJ usage.
That reminded me of back in the day, I asked my LJ flist what would cause them to move to another social media service (this was IIRC before DW had started up), and the biggest answer was not any specific feature or policy, but 'if my friends and fandoms all moved.' However unrealistic, I suspect this is what many people desire to happen (I may be wrong), especially
those who began to use LJ in a group, as part of a migration. Accurately or not, many people think of what happened as 'we were all using y!groups/pitas.com/MLs/usenet, and then some of us started to use LJ, and then there was a tipping point and then everyone was on LJ and the old place became a ghost town.' (again, with the caveat that this is a narrative which might not actually be what happened) So people may be expecting what happened in the shift to LJ to repeat itself, indeed, wishing for it, even.
However, perhaps the reality is that making the shift will perhaps be most successful for those who are looking for a 'fresh start' and 'meeting new folks/finding new interests.'
Lastly, an interesting point was brought up by various people about 'comm-centric users' and 'journal-centric users,' whichholyschist's poll has some questions about. (see link at top of entry). Perhaps users who interact mostly on personal journals, both their own and others, feel less bothered about a lack of comms (should they perceive one).
holyschist is interested in your responses.) A clear majority (~60% at present) of the poll results cited a 'dearth of active comms' as the major factor impeding DW growth (among those who believed there was a growth issue). I was actually surprised by this stat. I expected the other options to be more popular. So then, I ask a followup question (to those of you who checked that option last post, or who believe there is one, even if they did not cite that as the major factor):
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 40
If you believe that there is a dearth/lack of active comms on DW, what do you think is the major reason?
View Answers
Moderators who lack social capital (moderator is not high profile enough to attract an initial core group)
2 (5.0%)
Comm duplication (i.e. identical or very similar comm already flourishing on LJ)
29 (72.5%)
DW users less interested in using comms
3 (7.5%)
Moderators don't promote comms enough
1 (2.5%)
Can't crosspost to other services with comms
0 (0.0%)
More difficult to import comms
3 (7.5%)
Some other reason which I will explain in comments
2 (5.0%)
On the results in general
Actually, I was surprised more people didn't say invite codes. I was also surprised more people didn't say lack of original content.
There were a significant amount of 'other reason' responses: Can't read locked LJ friends-list entries from DW, the commenting form/openID commenting, perception that DW is a clone (vs. a fork), lack of BNFs/popular users, user inertia.
Some responses questioned whether growth was slow, or if there was a problem with it at all, recalling their experiences with early LJ.
Is there a 'Growth Issue' at all?
To start out with, the question over whether DW has a growth 'issue' or 'problem' is very subjective, although the perception definitely exists.
yvi noted that around this time last year DW had ~2,500 daily posts, while now it has ~4000. Others also said that they thought DW was growing at a healthy rate. Based on solely anecdotal evidence, I've seen people going 'yeah, I joined DW, but it never really took off so I went back to LJ,' or 'I'd like to join, DW, but there aren't enough people,' so the size/growth issue exists in the minds of some people. The idea of network effects suggests that the more people who join a network, the more valuable it becomes, so what these responses seem to be suggesting is that DW is not yet large enough (or not large enough in the right areas) to convince these people to come over.
The issue of growth is also subjective in the sense that 'there is a dearth of active comms/posting/w/e' in practice is equal 'dearth of active comms/posters/etc which I am interested in' So, even though on DW, there may be an active... macrame community, if you have no interest in macrame, but love snowboarding and winter sports, no matter how massive the macrame community and related comms are, it doesn't really matter. Growth probably doesn't occur evenly among parts of the service as well, so whether you are perceiving growth on your d-roll depends on who is on your d-roll.
There's also the fact that DW is only a year old, and some note that they find it comparable to LJ at the same age. I have no idea what LJ was back in 2000, so I'll take their word for it. While this may be true, in terms of the perceptions of the users, it may not be especially relevant, as many of them weren't using LJ in 2000. It may be that many people are not used to being early adopters of a social media service, and since they didn't join LJ at that stage, 2002 LJ is not their point of reference.
holyschist made an interesting point here: "Where people are seeing it as not-active is, I think, because they want their entire LJ friendslist and all their favorite LJ comms to move/replicate here. And I don't think that's realistic." People who perceive a 'slowness' or 'lack' of growth, or a 'dearth of comms or original content,' may feel that way because they expect DW to be a replacement for their current LJ usage. That reminded me of back in the day, I asked my LJ flist what would cause them to move to another social media service (this was IIRC before DW had started up), and the biggest answer was not any specific feature or policy, but 'if my friends and fandoms all moved.' However unrealistic, I suspect this is what many people desire to happen (I may be wrong), especially
those who began to use LJ in a group, as part of a migration. Accurately or not, many people think of what happened as 'we were all using y!groups/pitas.com/MLs/usenet, and then some of us started to use LJ, and then there was a tipping point and then everyone was on LJ and the old place became a ghost town.' (again, with the caveat that this is a narrative which might not actually be what happened) So people may be expecting what happened in the shift to LJ to repeat itself, indeed, wishing for it, even.
However, perhaps the reality is that making the shift will perhaps be most successful for those who are looking for a 'fresh start' and 'meeting new folks/finding new interests.'
Lastly, an interesting point was brought up by various people about 'comm-centric users' and 'journal-centric users,' which
holyschist's poll has some questions about. (see link at top of entry). Perhaps users who interact mostly on personal journals, both their own and others, feel less bothered about a lack of comms (should they perceive one). 
