Supporting Former Users of Reddit on Dreamwidth

>> Concerning Tumblr, there's also the fact that it isn't even built around the idea of community, as it is mostly individual blogs scattered about. <<

I agree, that's a problem.

Twitter wasn't designed for community either. Its emphasis was heavily on broadcast from one person to an audience, rather than on two-way interaction. But a lot of people found that very useful.

>> Some might be topic-focused, but most seem not to be and serve as individual venues for individual people to amalgamate every single one of their interests in one place -- which would be perfectly alright if they were just a teeny tiny bit more invested in tagging... <<

Yeah, that's frustrating. At least Twitter excelled at hashtags.

>> I recall a time when there were some "centralising" blogs that would collect, say, fandom info and "redistribute" it as a way to keep people more or less close, but the last time I saw something similar still working was perhaps a decade ago.<<

Sometimes people come up with workarounds to accomplish things that a venue isn't really designed for. It's better than nothing, but nowhere near as good as having something actually build for it.

>> They might be around somewhere still, of course, somewhere not connected to my current interests, but even so it's a model that seems to have fallen out of use <<

That's disappointing.

One thing I miss is intro meta. Used to be as soon as a new canon dropped, someone posted a guide to it -- a list of titles, where to find them, characters, major themes, etc. -- and other folks would make ship manifestos promoting certain pairings. Whoever got there in the earliest days could have a huge influence on how the fandom developed. And I rarely see that anymore. It's sad, because that was a major way of attracting new fans to a canon, and also attracting consumers of that canon into wider fandom.

>> meanwhile, you have somewhere like DW that has communities as an essential feature baked into the site experience. <<

That's true, and beyond that, it has a lot of gather-type communities. There are comms for posting reviews, recs, fanfic, then the calendar and promo comms themselves. It gives people lots of places to go where they can stuff they like with a high signal-to-noise ratio. However, a majority of the communities that have survived are the structured ones. There are fewer "lounge" type communities just about hanging out with like-minded friends.

One thing I did on my blog that some folks have copied -- and this started years ago when someone lamented that online friendships don't cover all the same bases as facetime ones -- is a rotating series of posts for social connections: Good News, Hard Things, and Cuddle Party.

Another good tool for defining both personal blogs and communities is recurring posts in general. They can be on any topic, but they give readers a set of expectations about what to find where and when. So I've got a Monday Update in my personal blog, and I do month-end or month-beginning posts in communities. My topical ones are currently Hobbies and Philosophical Questions. Random things appear as needed, like Today's Cooking. One of the best things people can do when establishing a new blog or community is pick a few recurring posts based on their theme or main interests. People are more likely to subscribe if they can tell at a glance that you post regularly about something they like.

>> Re: community schedules, yes. I haven't been involved with mod activities, but it makes absolute sense that something smaller would be more "permissive" in terms of what sort of content could be posted, whereas bigger ones, with a busier user base, would follow a slightly stricter scheme. <<

I can sympathize with a busy community reminding people to stay on topic or use a template, but when someone posts to a small community that hasn't had activity in months and they get pecked because it isn't exactly what people wanted, that's a sign the community is circling the drain.

>> I imagine people might at first think it strange to "fit themselves in", <<

It depends on the people and the context. Something like using a template may take a bit of practice, but it makes the reading process a lot more efficient because you know right where to look for your desired information without having to scan the whole post. But communities with a huge list of do's and don'ts are really hard to deal with, especially if you visit a lot of communities and have to keep the parameters straight. On the third hoof, one thing that's really helpful is giving people a list of accepted or recommended post types (with or without a schedule). So for instance, birdfeeding has a list of topics and issues on the profile page plus a "Types of Posts" entry. At least with that sort of reference, people can look and see if the preferred interactions in the community are things they like or not.

>> but in the long run it proves to be beneficial for all, a little like politeness <<

It's exactly like etiquette, pro and con. When done responsibly, it lubricates social interactions, so things run smoothly. But a lot of people just use it as a stick to beat each other. I really don't like that, and I won't join or recommend a community that seems prone to negative interactions -- unless it's a rantcomm or other thing dedicated to such for people who like that sort of thing. Compare with dress codes. There used to be just a few, they were simple, and you could easily look up a checklist for exactly what to wear. Now there are dozens of different options, and even most of the older ones have more variation, which makes the whole damn concept useless for anything other than picking on people, unless you specify not only a dress code but a particular book or website with its instructions for everyone to use the same one.

>> there are people who deplore those "ready-made" phrases we use when we're making someone else's acquaintance, but those little coded interactions actually help us either go beyond the initial phase of meeting someone as things develop or they allow us to keep them at a distance if we choose not to pursue a deeper relationship. Structure!<<

Some greetings are neutral because they have no other meaning, like "Hello." But "good morning" can be grating if your day sucks, and "How are you?" is a pit trap because some people are not "fine" and that leads to either lying about it (which can cause problems) or breaking the script to say so (which can cause different problems). Too much rote interaction leads to isolation, too. It's useful to have a few standard exchanges (e.g. please and thank you) but it works best with neutral terms. And that's before getting into the mud wrestling of holiday greetings.

Small talk is different. It's theoretically intended to bring people closer by initiating a conversation, but when most folks hate it, then it has the opposite effect. And it's everywhere. For extroverts it delays getting to the good part of soaking up social energy, unless they can fill their bucket from the ambient. For introverts it might as well be a brick wall -- they will literally never get through it before running out of energy and needing solitude. So it would be good to have alternatives, but those are rare in the mainstream.

However, it's possible for context to create a completely spontaneous yet robustly consistent frame of conversation. The best party I ever attended was a shack in the woods hosting a meeting of our local nature group. And every conversation started exactly the same: "Hi, my name is X, my yard or other nature site is like so, and I am interested in these things. You?" If we liked the same things, or one person wanted to listen to the other trilling about an unfamiliar passion, it went into deeper conversation. Otherwise we nodded and split to look for different partners. And it was awesome; we loved it.

Online, I think of intro posts like that, and friending memes work similarly. They give you a framework to introduce yourself and your interests, or look at other people's, so you can find folks you'd enjoy talking with. And they work precisely because they include solid information about interests, whereas small talk and rote exchanges are designed to exclude anything personal.

So one thing I look for in an online venue is how well it supports those exchanges. Does the profile page make it easy to share details you want people to know and omit or at least hide those you don't want public? Is the post size big enough to support a good introduction, or are people left with nothing but your feed to judge you by? Is there some sort of private message function for sensitive exchanges, or is it all out there in public?

>> I'll merge two of your comments into one concerning a) platform design for this or that end, and b) what users actually end up using. Because yes, the tendency is less "what do I want to DO here?" and more "WHO do I know is on here?" and I guess that sours the experience a bit. <<

It really does. I've largely been left in the backwaters because other people have moved on to services I can't or don't want to use. Most of the newer stuff doesn't even appeal to me, before considering whether it is usable or how obnoxious user agreements have gotten. I'm left looking for folks I can interact with in the few remaining venues I can use. And it's even worse in person, where the places I used to find like-minded folks have been so coopted by the mainstream that it's not worth going anymore. :/ So I can understand the problems people are having with interaction, when so many of the currently popular sites really aren't designed for human contact.

>> Even if it's nice to be around people we already know, sometimes things are just not designed for our enjoyment even if it is for theirs and we hold back from participating in something because that's just not the way we would prefer to participate to begin with -- even if we would do it under different conditions... <<

Sadly so.

>> Thank you for bringing that diagram to my attention, I found it fascinating. Indeed, it might not cover all the bases, but it suggests a clearer view of how things work and people interact. If nothing else, it's more food for thought, haha, and I always appreciate that.<<

Yay!

I just like looking at how things work, different ways of viewing the structure and dynamics. I found that diagram really useful.

>> And as for what interests me, I'm still figuring out how much of it I want over here. I'll do some digging in the links you provided as I'm sure to find some cool things, but I'm still thinking of how and why I'm *here*, what sorts of things I want to read and what sorts of things I want to create.<<

Those are good questions. You might look at "types of blogs" material because even if a list is incomplete, it can spark ideas for other things. You can even take a topic and plug it into the Interests bar on DW to find communities and personal blogs about it.

https://www.wix.com/blog/types-of-blogs

https://www.locationrebel.com/why-you-should-start-a-blog/

As for what you want to create, there's a spectrum of approach:

* Write something that few or no other bloggers are covering, like a rare heritage language. Your audience may be small, but they will likely be devoted and you will have little or no competition.

* Write about a hugely popular topic, like food. Competition may be high, but the potential pool of audience members is enormous.

* Combine the two, writing about some common things and some scarce things. I have readers who follow me because they like my poetry, my recipes, my nature talk, and my science -- where I'll boost uncommon topics like exoplanets and quantum physics.