The orthogonal point is that you should communicate by as few means that give you the largest base.
IRC? To build a community? Seriously? :) On Wednesday, July 13, 2011 1:48:52 PM, Chad Bailey wrote: > On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 6:51 AM, Wade Cox <[email protected]> wrote: >> Increasing the exposure of JaxLug either through Facebook, Twitter, Google+, >> or whatever social medium is currently popular could obviously be left up to >> whoever (already a member of JaxLug) has the time, energy and inclination to >> maintain them. If the maintainer needs help or input from the group then >> they should ask. Limiting the group to using only the tried and true IRC, >> Wiki, or mailing list, allows exposure to only a very small fraction of >> linux users in the market thus limiting the type and number of users that >> you will generally attract. Admittedly Google+ is a new medium, But nearing >> 10 million users at the end of its second week it looks like this time >> Google may have something. > > I don't disagree with having multiple avenues to come to the same > point, my concern is simply spreading the LUG too thin. It already has > a little bit beyond what is truly utilized, and adding more will only > worsen the effect. If we can come up with ways to interconnect all of > these mediums, yet still manage to ensure all users are using the > appropriate method of communication (be it facebook, email, whatever > is chosen... that's a different can of worms) then I'm all for it. The > problem exists when you get the different sub-communities within the > community. This is when you have a few people contributing on > facebook, a few people contributing on the email list, a few people on > XYZ social media site, etc. This gives the appearance of a very small > group, and sometimes can lead to loss of interest among the member > base as a whole. > > This is my only concern, I'm not "old school" and revolting against > the idea of new ways to do things. I'm simply saying I've seen it > before, it's tempting to do, but I've never seen anything good come > from spreading a member base too thin. If we had thousands of members, > then I'd wager we have the members to be able to spread out. It's like > trying to meet at a meeting place the size of Texas. Even if it's > 100,000 people trying to meet, the meeting place is too large to be > able to congregate. Many people would come and not find anyone and > assume that there aren't any others, even though there were plenty. > > I'll stop this ramble here, but I've got plenty more to say should you > not fully understand what I'm saying I'll be glad to clarify. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Archive http://marc.info/?l=jaxlug-list&r=1&w=2 > RSS Feed http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/maillist.xml > Unsubscribe [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- Archive http://marc.info/?l=jaxlug-list&r=1&w=2 RSS Feed http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/maillist.xml Unsubscribe [email protected]
