On 26/07/17 01:28, Guido Arnold wrote: > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 03:10:59PM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote: >> On 25/07/17 14:56, Max Mehl wrote: >>> # Daniel Pocock [2017-07-25 14:37 +0200]: >>>> What is the value of 1000 new followers though? >>>> >>>> Are people actually switching to free software, or are the followers, >>>> shares and likes more like monopoly money which is never converted into >>>> anything tangible? > ... >>> And yes, just because a user is following us on Twitter this doesn't >>> mean that she'll instantly start using Free Software. But thanks to us, >>> now she may know that FS exists. It's a first step in educating the >>> public which we otherwise couldn't make. > +1 > > Years passed between the moment I heard about FS until I purchased my > first GNU/Linux distribution. If that person I spoke to did surveys > two weeks, six months and a year after we spoke for 3 minutes, he > could have concluded that talking to strangers about FS at parties is > not worth the effort even though he had 100% success at last. > >> I remain concerned about defining the reason we want or need these >> followers and then measuring whether that objective is being met. > We don't need these followers per se, we need to raise awareness. If > we have a few among these followers who can reach a broad audience, > we'll gain. Bear in mind that we feed GNUSocial _anyway_ which is then > mirrored to Diaspora [1] and Twitter (and possibly others). So the > feeding alone comes at no cost. > > I share your desire for measurable outcomes, but getting just halfway > usable data (take my example above) would exceed the effort FSFE > staffers currently spend to maintain the Twitter account. > > If the little time that is spent leads to one or two journalists > interested in the topic and getting aware of FSFE's existence per > year, I'd see it already as a benefit. > > Now on the con side: how do we measure the harm our presence on > Twitter and Facebook causes? How many (potential) supporters turn > their back/stop their donation when they learn that FSFE maintains > these accounts?
Metcalfe's law is a helpful way to measure that. I could also use your own example: maybe there is no harm measured 2 weeks, 6 months or a year after somebody sees FSFE on facebook, but at some point it will bite us. > I acknowledge that there is a harm and know that these people exist. I > know one personally. > > Though I guess metrics are even harder to get [2] than in the case > mentioned above. > > But even if we had resilient numbers, how would we insert them into > the equation? > > Those turning their back to FSFE because of its presence on Twitter > will remain FS advocates regardless, won't they? > > FSFE is a vehicle to promote Free Software. Somewhat like a legal > hack to collect money/resources for the cause of Software Freedom. > > FSFE as an organisation may lose, but the community of Free Software > advocates won't get smaller. > > Best, > > Guido > > > [1] BTW: I don't see GNUSocial and Diaspora as "mass surveillance", > but I'd call them social media. > [2] Let's try. To those who spoke against FSFE's presence on Twitter > in this thread who own a Twitter account: How likely is it that > you compose a tweet on your own versus the likelihood of > retweeting a post from FSFE's account when you see it in your > timeline? > > > > _______________________________________________ > Discussion mailing list > Discussion@lists.fsfe.org > https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
_______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion