forums

You can’t control communities – but you should inspire them

June 10, 2008 By Dan Thornton

I went to an interesting discussion group today – unfortunately I arrived late, so I’m not sure how much I can disclose, and I also missed all the introductions.

But there were a range of people in positions of authority for digital products, services and communities from a range of institutions, both commercial and governmental.

And what I can talk about is the fact that we’re still debating whether brand owners should be prepared to relinquish control of what is created, published and discussed on their digital products.

Here’s something shocking:

You can’t, and you don’t control ‘your’ community. Never have. Never will.

The reason is that ‘your’ community isn’t just the people you moderate on your forum, or the people creating content that you can edit and publish. ‘Your’ community is spread far and wide, and comprises of everyone who has any type of interaction with your brand, product or service. At it’s most tenuous, it’s seeing someone in branded clothing, and your opinion of them informing your opinion about that brand – and discussing that offline, on forums, on Instant Messaging services, and where-ever your conversations are.

Now try and convince me that you’re able to moderate and control everything someone does, everywhere they go? (Obviously I will accept arguments by Chinese Government officials…)

You should look to inspire communities:

This isn’t a new concept. The ideals of inspirational figures have been remembered and followed long after the names of those who tried to control/persecute/murder them. Pick whichever example is most relevant, from Jesus, through Gandhi and Martin Luther King.

If you want a certain type of content produced, or certain types of interaction, you need to plan to inspire your community to predominantly produce it. Whether it’s seeding a community with the right content, rewarding it (with fame or fortune), or simply being a part of the community in the manner which you would like to see, there are plenty of ways to do it – but don’t expect everyone to follow the example.

The only time I can ever advocate control and moderation is in the face of legal issues or persecution of individuals or groups. But this has to be accompanied by free and open explanation of the reasons for your actions. If not, the best case will be an annoyed user. At worst, you could see a forum revolt. Just look at the example of Sony HD DVD codes on Digg.com.

When to be social?

August 16, 2007 By Dan Thornton

I’ve been debating part of the new Disposable Media website with a colleague, and it seems to be a topic that will apply to any new website/social app.

Is it worth having a forum? And how do you stop it staying empty?

My feeling is that it’s always worth having a forum. Although they have been supplanted by social networks when it comes to publicity, they are still immensely popular, easy to set set-up and use, and drive a different sort of interaction than many social networking sites. It’s a place for visitors to browse, hang out, and even if 95% of your audience are unlikely to contribute, you can bet a significant proportion will still pop in to have a look.

Getting it populated is trickier. I’m listing ideas below, but feel free to add more in the comments, or contact mcndant at hotmail dot com if you’re shy.

1. Encourage, help and bribe staff to post often. Being able to interact with the people running a forum/website is critical. It means you can judge what your most vocal audience think, and then respond. It also gives you a chance to explain why things may take a long time, get feedback on new changes, and improve things.

2. Keep it simple and grow. It’s pointless starting 200 seperate forums with 1 post in each, when you could have one vibrant forum. You can always split out into categories later, so why force restrictions from the start? And monitor which bits get a decent level of interest. Most cities grew from villages and towns, and weren’t just invented overnight. The same applies to forums.

3. Treat it with respect, and allow users to make it home. Think of the forum like a village. Your job is to provide the gas, water and bricks for building. It’s not to restrict your users. Let them upload avatars and signatures (Images as well if you have the bandwith). Make changes to the navigation to let them craft the way it looks and feels. If you show you’re ready to listening to your forum users, they’ll be far more likely to listen when you have something to share.

4. Rule with a light hand and consistent rules. Noone wants a telling off from a moderator, but the way it’s delivered will make a big difference. And having clear, straight-forward rules which apply equally to all makes life a lot easier for everyone. Noone likes it when the rules can change on them. The flipside is that the best forums all have some form of moderation by owners or users to stop the worst excesses of offensive posting and spamming.

5. Don’t make it different for the sake of it: The majority of forums are based on one or two of the most popular free forum software providers. Which means people know and understand the way those forums work immediately. Throw something different in their face and they’ll have to figure out how it works, before they figure out how to make the most of it.

Those are some obvious, but often missed observations. But really this is just to get the ball rolling, so please do add your thoughts and suggestions. Either comment below, or email mcndant at hotmail dot com.

Alternatively, you can now join The Way of the Web on Facebook.

Are users really that expert?

May 8, 2007 By Dan Thornton

I’ve been toying with an idea for a while, and replying on another blog (Rocky Agrawal’s reDesign)reminded me to post.

In years gone by media, advertisers and consumers relied on experts to guide choices. (Think a man in a white coat proclaiming the strength of a particular washing powder

Now everyone is proclaiming the age of the user and peer expert. The bloke just like you who happens to be an expert in a particular subject, and on a forum or wiki of similar experts, can offer better advice than ever before.

If anyone can explain why it has to be one, or the other, and not both combined, please feel free? The traditional ‘expert’ is perceived to be answering off the top of their head, and therefore prone to mistakes and bias. Meanwhile the user is supposed to be fair, impartial, and able to reach a valuable conclusion.

Flaws:
1. Any real expert will not only have an idea of the answer, but more importantly will have a good idea of the best places to research an answer. More often than not, they’ll confer with trusted colleagues anyway, and then present back results.

2. It presumes every question will be adequately resolved in a forum thread or Wiki entry, and won’t meander forever, with no definitive answer.

3. If you’ve got time to involve yourself in a forum, and learn who is expert, who is trusted, and who is out for mischief etc, you’re fine. If you haven’t got time to do all this, you’re stuck. You have to sit around until the majority decide. And even then, majorities can be quite stupid sometimes. Meanwhile an expert in the field could have pointed you to the answer, other experts, and references.

One thing the the new www.motorcyclenews.com site from my employers at Emap does well is to present professional and user content side-by-side, and mix user forum posts with experts from the motorcycling industry. Being able to combine all forms of knowledge will always be more valuable than selecting just one.