Advertisement

comparison

topic posted Tue, May 18, 2010 - 10:03 PM by 
Share/Save/Bookmark
I was just curious how the larger tribes may have been during what I had experienced as a dead time around tribe.

I wondered if you all were seeing significant reduction in members, new members, posts etc?

Also I wondered if you have noticed it being easier to get larger tribes talking again if things do slow down?
posted by:
Advertisement
  • Re: comparison

    Tue, May 18, 2010 - 10:54 PM
    The Mac OS X tribe definitely slowed in membership gain, but seems to be moving a little bit again, now that the system is mostly functional. Discussion isn't quite as chatty as it was, but it's not dead. The tribe has always been a bit of up-and-down, syncing especially with Apple's announcements and rumors. But there was more troubleshooting help being sought before; perhaps folks have come to rely on other solutions as a result of server unpredictability last year?

    The Audio Engineering tribe, OTOH, has never recovered from the crappy service issues. Membership slowed to a halt, essentially, and very little chatter occurs anymore. Most chatter at this point is due to someone finding an old thread on Google and coming in to stir up shit. But it seems to only succeed for a day or so. Then dead silence for a while.
    • Re: comparison

      Wed, May 19, 2010 - 5:38 PM
      I think one of the questions I'm looking at as I begin trying to encourage a wake up of some of tribe is how often is a bit of activity successful in getting people back into posting?

      I wonder if computer people and engineer people are more or less likely to put up with outages or come back if there seems to be some stability?
      • Re: comparison

        Sat, May 22, 2010 - 11:44 AM
        In one tribe, I actually spent some time "writing" a message to PM to any orange light I saw on within a certain time frame (like within a week). The message simply said something to the effect of, "Hi! I hope this note finds you well. Just wanted to tell you that the <name> tribe is still active and we're adding new content all the time. Come on in, the water's fine..."

        Or something like that. Then the trick is to keep peppering the tribe with new conversation seeds.
        • Re: comparison

          Sat, May 22, 2010 - 9:05 PM
          how did that work out?

          I definitely am working on peppering. I wonder how much more effective that would be with some PMs. Though with a huge tribe that seems like such a huge job.

          did you write to people who had been active or just anyone with a light on?
          • Re: comparison

            Sat, May 22, 2010 - 9:15 PM
            I wrote to both. It did temporarily drive more traffic. This was back when tribe was a little more buggy than it is now, so continuing technical difficulties didn't help matters much.
            • Re: comparison

              Sat, May 22, 2010 - 9:16 PM
              But I think the very nature of tribe does call for some sort of similar grassroots "reaching out" to people to encourage interactions. With tribe, it is very much the personal connections that keep people coming back.
              • Re: comparison

                Sat, May 22, 2010 - 10:28 PM
                Very true.

                I think I just hate being the sales person or putting people in a position to feel awkward about not wanting to post or check out a tribe or whatever. It's more my style to post somewhere and welcome people. But I know that may not be the right or most effective way.

Recent topics in "Big Tribe Moderators"

Topic Author Replies Last Post
I shouldn't be surprised... Mickey 4 June 14, 2011
Moderator FAQ thread at Tribe Moderators Tribe 2 July 16, 2010
Roll Call 47 April 18, 2010
New tribe stance 2 February 11, 2009
FAQ tribe 9 March 15, 2008