http://gigaom.com/2005/09/08/inherent-truths-and-value-of-community/
A good read about what the oft-abused "web 2.0" might actually be at its heart, how lock-in is changing, and why users own the service more than the corporation enabling it.
Its about money, honey. And I've got got time. User-centricity has a whole new meaning, and all else will follow. Be good, enable, soft-police.
Along the same lines:
http://www.siggibecker.de/blog/interview-transcript-with-wikipedia-founder-jimmy-wales/
Why restaurants don't build caged enclosures for patrons with knives (tho specially designed steak-knives are fine!) and why community services mustn't do so either.
Can you always "crack" what it takes to build a community ?
- its value - what does the mostly inactive user get out of it ? There are always more silent members than active ones.
- Sense of ownership of the forum, and trust implications vis-a-vis the platform ?
- natural community interactions - even aiding/mimicking real-world ones ?
- goodies, candies, social currency.
- outlet for expression and feedback from peers
- effusive enthusiasm and belief in the community
- especially on the part of the platform creators
- presence of like-minded folks - recursive problem
- advertising/messaging
Finally, the exact same set of circumstances and strategy may not work twice. So create the tools, get involved, advertise, and pray that between your users and your service, there's Ms Serendipity.
Update :3 very popular, successful and useful communities I belong to:
Team BHPBajajPulsar yahoogroupBikeNomads yahoogroup
.jpg)
