Doug, Before we get into details please note that you have smaller group 30% size of flexcoders members count posting 5% of the flexcoders message count - but people do not flee as the traffic does not force them, they get occasional emails and they have chance to follow up.
Flexcomponents is a bad example of a "community" site - it was set up for 3rd party components developers, and as far as I know most of components for Flex are either OS free ones consolidated elsewhere or proprietary supported on the respected sites. I am looking at FlexComponents as advertising board for new stuff, but it does not seem appropriate to ask there questions on the particular framework or component. So the association with Adobe/Flex is not playing real role there. Personally, after posting few messages there and getting responses via private email I switched to that mode myself . You usually just email/call 3rd party developer to find out about interesting aspects or particular applicability/availability of the developers for subcontracting in their field of specialty. Sincerely, Anatole Tartakovsky On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 6:22 PM, Doug McCune <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > OK, I eat my words in terms of message growth then :) Touche. Thanks for > those stats. I'd actually be interested in getting access to the raw data > dump for the entire list to run some analysis, but that's getting off topic. > > Just one point, which has already been brought up, but now that we're > looking at #s, here are the #s for flexcomponents (note also that this > doesn't discount for cross-posts to flexcoders as well, which I assume are a > large portion too): > > Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec > 2008 159<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/3300> > 153 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/3459> > 88<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/3612> > 59 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/3700> > 45<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/3759> > 39 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/3804> > > > > > > 2007 190<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/1087> > 234 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/1277> > 442<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/1511> > 149 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/1953> > 168<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/2102> > 260 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/2270> > 103<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/2530> > 183 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/2633> > 96<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/2816> > 119 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/2912> > 129<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/3031> > 140 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/3160> > 2006 > > > > > > 297 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/1> > 68<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/298> > 211 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/366> > 89<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/577> > 184 <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/666> > 237<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcomponents/messages/850> > I'm not saying that if you split the group all the small groups will follow > that fate, but as everyone has mentioned, flexcomponents was specifically > made to try to keep custom component development out of the main flexcoders > mailing list, and I don't think anyone will argue that that has worked. > > Doug > > > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 3:15 PM, Anatole Tartakovsky < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Doug, >> As far as I know, I am the only one in the NY office who did not >> unsubscribe from the group. Looks at the stats ( provided by Tim) or just go >> to the group page. Also, the number of users if I remember it correctly has >> been in 9K for at least 6 month - meaning you have the same number of >> people in and OUT - obviously you need to ask Matt if he has more detailed >> stats on unsubscribes count. >> Regards, >> Anatole >> >> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 5:35 PM, Doug McCune <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >>> Actually, this is worth going back to, because your initial email said >>> that the group was "stagnant" and has plateaued with the number of new users >>> and questions. Except your reason for bringing it up is that the traffic has >>> gotten too much for you to read every message. So clearly the level of >>> traffic isn't stagnant. Unless what you're saying is that about 6 months ago >>> the traffic reached a critical level where you couldn't deal with the >>> traffic but then it stopped growing. >>> >>> So I guess I'm saying I question the claim that this list is "stagnant". >>> Almost 10,000 members and an average of 100 messages a day. Are you saying >>> that these stats have been the same for the past 6 months? And even if that >>> is true (although I'd like to see numbers before I accept that) then I don't >>> even necessarily think that this indicates that there's a problem. There's a >>> simple fact that a ton of questions have already been accurately answered by >>> this list. I would hope that the archived knowledge of the list serves to >>> answer more and more questions that newcomers have, meaning they don't need >>> to post the questions over and over. >>> >>> What is the real problem? I haven't heard anyone say that the traffic on >>> this single list has stopped them from asking any questions (although I'm >>> open to the possibility that this is true, and just hasn't been voiced). And >>> largely I think that the number of people answering questions has remained >>> high and the response times are still good. I have heard that the traffic >>> level has stopped people from reading the questions that others ask (I >>> certainly skim and sometimes skip entire days). I'd argue that a combination >>> of self-moderated subject tagging, as well as more aggressive pointing >>> repeat questions to cached answered (and then tagging the entire thread as a >>> repeat) will largely solve this problem. >>> >>> So do you have numbers that indicate the stagnation you are worried >>> about? >>> >>> Doug >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 1:28 PM, Anatole Tartakovsky < >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>> Matt, >>>> Let us review the goal - in the original post I explained that single >>>> group causes stagnation. If you agree with the numbers and reasoning >>>> behind >>>> it, let us look at the proposition in that light. IMHO, the mentioned >>>> measures while staying within the same single group would probably extend >>>> the number of users by 20-30% byhoping to reduce number of posted messages >>>> by the same percentage - but it is hardly the goal we are trying to achieve >>>> here. >>>> >>>> Realistically Adobe should be looking for place public pace to >>>> exchange ideas and networking as well as getting trivial help. The >>>> product and community are just too big for one group. Let us split it up >>>> and let each subgroup speak their own language. I would gladly moderate >>>> standalone enterprise/j2ee/best practices track. But looking few times a >>>> day >>>> @ the whole stream to fish out what might be related to the topic and >>>> having >>>> some messages falling through the cracks might be not the recommended "best >>>> practices" solution. >>>> >>>> Sincerely, >>>> Anatole >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 1:48 PM, Matt Chotin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hey folks, let's calm down a little here, K? >>>>> >>>>> Alright, based on what I've been seeing people say, here's my >>>>> suggestion. >>>>> >>>>> 1) Let's get an FAQ going that can be edited by moderators or members >>>>> of the community. This will be about common problems that folks run into. >>>>> One suggestion of course from me would be that we use the Cookbook for >>>>> "how-to" type questions. But for things that don't seem like they're >>>>> cookbook appropriate, we can put them in the FAQ. I like the idea of doing >>>>> it in Buzzword, though Buzzword docs won't come up in Google. Long-term I >>>>> think the right place might be in whatever we set up in the Adobe >>>>> Developer >>>>> Center. But for now how about we just allocate a page off of the >>>>> opensource >>>>> wiki. We can pick some moderators who can edit the page and I will get >>>>> them >>>>> added so they can take care of it. We can also add the link to the FAQ to >>>>> the bottom of every email. >>>>> >>>>> 2) Some folks suggested that you either mark in the body or in the >>>>> subject something that indicates what you're talking about. Seems >>>>> reasonable. We could use some of the topics that were being suggested. >>>>> [UX], >>>>> [Enterprise], [Data Services] [Announce], etc. We don't need to limit >>>>> this, >>>>> but by following a convention of placing the general area of discussion, >>>>> folks will know if they're going to be capable of getting involved in the >>>>> thread. The more people follow this convention, the more efficient it will >>>>> become. >>>>> >>>>> 3) We can get aggressive on the moderation. Rather than just scanning >>>>> for spam, moderators can actually look at the posts by new users and >>>>> decide >>>>> if they meet the general criteria for asking a question. If they don't, >>>>> the >>>>> moderator can reject the post and point the user to the forum FAQ which >>>>> has >>>>> posting guidelines. >>>>> >>>>> 4) We can update the flexcoders FAQ (which is actually linked at the >>>>> bottom of every single post) to include the updated posting guidelines and >>>>> remove the common questions section so that the forum FAQ is only about >>>>> forum etiquette and the coding FAQ is about the actual problems. >>>>> >>>>> If this sounds OK then what we need are the two kinds of moderators: >>>>> >>>>> 1. moderators for the forum itself who are willing to really look at >>>>> all posts that are in moderation and analyze whether they should be passed >>>>> through. If it is a poorly formed question, the post should be rejected >>>>> with >>>>> a pointer to the forum FAQ. >>>>> 2. moderators for the FAQ who can pay attention to common questions and >>>>> update the FAQ as appropriate. >>>>> >>>>> If we're all on board, send those moderators to me and we can get >>>>> things set up. And folks can start following the tagging convention >>>>> instantly in the meantime. >>>>> >>>>> Matt >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > >
