Making the Usergroups more managable!

[Hitasura]

Okay guys, we got another question we'd like to hear your opinions on! The list of usergroups is getting quite long and I expect it's just going to continue to grow. Those of you who have joined a lot of usergroups will have noticed this the most, I'm sure. XD

In any case, we're considering dividing the groups up into separate forums based on the type of group it is.

- OT & Location Groups
- Doll Types (such as ones dedicated to skintones, gender, size, etc)
- Doll Concepts (writing/art, character types, RP, etc)

So let us know if you guys think this would be something worthwhile to do! Or if you think this idea sucks and have a better possibility to improve it we'd love to hear that as well! ^^

Thanks everyone! :D

[Seiko]

I just wanted to push the 'these all suck' button XD

Anyway, I think that idea is fine. Unless you can do something about the overall situation of usergroups in general. ^^

[Hitasura]

I just wanted to push the 'these all suck' button XD

Anyway, I think that idea is fine. Unless you can do something about the overall situation of usergroups in general. ^^

Ahahahaa, bad Seiko, skewing the poll results! XDD Though do explain the overall situation you speak of so that I might be enlightened on which you speak! ;)

[sylvan leaf ~ Jaime]

I'm not sure if the current situation warrants dividing the groups up, yet. Perhaps, in the future this would be a wonderful idea when there are many more, and very active, groups. Mostly what concerns me, is that many of the groups are just starting, and haven't had much activity. Perhaps dividing them may disperse them to far and possible members would be unwilling to seek out each group in each section.

~Jaime

[Taco]

I think I would hold off seperating the groups for now. I can understand the reasoning (and at somepoint it might have to happen anyway). However, having too many subdivisions can also make things clunky to browse through (that's the problem I'm having with DoA right now--so many subforums with subforums). I realize that this wouldn't be that many divisions, but I think it's easier to scan down one list of groups for new posts than to have to jump around to different sections.

[Seiko]

Ahahahaa, bad Seiko, skewing the poll results! XDD Though do explain the overall situation you speak of so that I might be enlightened on which you speak! ;)

I honestly feel the idea of a "user group" is a little bit unclear and that the amount of usergroups going on at the moment are more due to the fact people are trying to make "group" or "fan" collectives and while there's definitely more than 15 people interested, the topics involved in some usergroups are very hard to come across to make the usergroup interactive and exciting as an interactive situation. I feel like a lot of usergroups are now being petitioned and made more for a "fanlisting" type of situation to be put in a profile to express the types of interests that a user has.

Which is totally fine, but I think with the fact that e're having one subforum after another being made for these please, it can get a little bit cluttered. And I know that I don't have to add usergroups I'm not interested in, but I'm talking about usergroups I've joined/been interested in and just kind of notice they float with very few threads - or they're not very unique threads (aka, I can jump to another user group and find almost the exact same time there).


It would be really good - in my opinion - if there was a way to crack down on the way user groups are being handled/created and maybe even make something for the people that just want to ban together to list their interests in their profile and find other people who like what they like too. I don't know what or how that would be fair to everyone, but maybe an evaluation of what could be possibly talked about in the user group if it's made and how much possibility for being "original" it has versus overlapping with other similar types of usergroups already created).

[Rhian]

Which is totally fine, but I think with the fact that e're having one subforum after another being made for these please, it can get a little bit cluttered. And I know that I don't have to add usergroups I'm not interested in, but I'm talking about usergroups I've joined/been interested in and just kind of notice they float with very few threads - or they're not very unique threads (aka, I can jump to another user group and find almost the exact same time there).
I think that after a while (I'm thinking months, not weeks) we'll be checking in on the usergroups to see which really warrant a sub-forum of their own, and which could be merged with others. At this early stage it's hard to tell.

Perhaps we should increase the number of petitioners required to create a usergroup? We've already brought it up to 20 for interest-based groups, but should it go even higher?

[zalem]

Actually, it was already bumped up from 15 to 20 for interest groups but I think you might want to consider making it higher. I think people are getting a bit enthusiastic about the idea of making a user group but not really thinking about whether there will be enough to actually generate activity. Sometimes some of these groups could be merged together. Or maybe it's something that could be a single thread in the open discussion forum or in another usergroup like the mini/Large/Larger dolls user groups. So you're getting a ton of user groups and some of them are not all that active or only have one really active thread.

[Seiko]

I think that after a while (I'm thinking months, not weeks) we'll be checking in on the usergroups to see which really warrant a sub-forum of their own, and which could be merged with others. At this early stage it's hard to tell.

Perhaps we should increase the number of petitioners required to create a usergroup? We've already brought it up to 20 for interest-based groups, but should it go even higher?

Unfortunately, I don't think it's lack of interest in the topic or the user group itself. I'm sure plenty of people like the actual idea or are fans of the intended topic being petitioned. But when it gets created people are either not motivated to post about the topic, find it hard to think of good things to post about the topic, and then it's just sitting there.

I have examples that I feel fit, personally, but I really don't want to point anyone fingers at any usergroups because I don't know how group leaders will take it (or even other members) and I don't want to cause a hassle because I'm not trying to downgrade any particular usergroups. Again, it's not that these usergroups are bad ideas! But I think not everyone is on the same page as to what a "usergroup" should actually be.

And I feel that if it keeps going like this, the mods are going to have a nice mess of trying to keep up and organizing.

Also, a lot more usergroups sometimes can hurt other usergroups, if too many narrowly specific ones show up.

I just think a lot of usergroups that will be made - and quite a few that are already made - would make better "fanlists" or "interests" topics where everyone could join the "interest" and then you could look up other people with your interest (like LJ) rather than warranting a whole subforum for virtually no discussion. It's supposed to be a community, so I am all for people expressing their interests and banding together in some way as a "community" within this community, but I don't feel usergroups is the way to go about a lot of these interests and an alternative method would better suit the forum. And I have no idea how you'd go about this as mods, because I'm sure this would be a lot of work, I'm just generally stating where i'm coming from and an example of what I think might ideally be a better setup for some things (not that it's necessarily probable !)

[Rhian]

Unfortunately, I don't think it's lack of interest in the topic or the user group itself. I'm sure plenty of people like the actual idea or are fans of the intended topic being petitioned. But when it gets created people are either not motivated to post about the topic, find it hard to think of good things to post about the topic, and then it's just sitting there.

I have examples that I feel fit, personally, but I really don't want to point anyone fingers at any usergroups because I don't know how group leaders will take it (or even other members) and I don't want to cause a hassle because I'm not trying to downgrade any particular usergroups. I just think that if it keeps going like this, the mods are going to have a nice mess of trying to keep up and organizing.

Also, a lot more usergroups sometimes can hurt other usergroups, if too many narrowly specific ones show up.

I just think a lot of usergroups that will be made - and quite a few that are already made - would make better "fanlists" or "interests" topics where everyone could join the "interest" and then you could look up other people with your interest (like LJ) rather than warranting a whole subforum for virtually no discussion. It's supposed to be a community, so I am all for people expressing their interests and banding together in some way as a "community" within this community, but I don't feel usergroups is the way to go about a lot of these interests and an alternative method would better suit the forum.
Feel free to name them - when it comes down to it, we're not going to take away the space to discuss topics... it just might end up being a slightly smaller space, so no one need be offended. :)

I do agree that some of the threads in the current usergroups, as they stand right now, would be just as good within a larger forum.

It sounds like it would be a good move to a) bump up the required petitioners (it won't solve the no-posts-in-usergroup problem but it should ensure that people really want the usergroups) and b) to have an internal review after a month or two months, to see which usergroups aren't being used. Those usergroups would then be merged with others. (Obviously option b is not something we'd want to do often - it could become confusing for everyone.)

Maybe we should have a limit on how many new usergroups are created per month, to try and forestall the rush to create them? I don't know, just throwing an idea out there. :)

Keep the thoughts coming, ladies! (And gents.) This is really useful to us. :)

[zalem]

That might be an idea....close the petitioning process for usergroups and only open it periodically (like say every 2-3months). And when it is open limit it to a certain number. Or limit the amount that can be created in one month as you suggested. The number should be really small.

[Taco]

It sounds like it would be a good move to a) bump up the required petitioners (it won't solve the no-posts-in-usergroup problem but it should ensure that people really want the usergroups) and b) to have an internal review after a month or two months, to see which usergroups aren't being used. Those usergroups would then be merged with others. (Obviously option b is not something we'd want to do often - it could become confusing for everyone.)



I like the idea of having a usergroup review every so often--it's probably inevitable that as time goes on some user groups will remain fairly active, while others die off, and it would be a good way to keep dead groups from cluttering things up. I would lean towards having a review after two months or more rather than one, though, so that there's ample time for new groups to really get started. Of course the question remains, how active is active enough?

[Wotan]

I do think there needs to be increased control over the usergroup creation process, and I like the suggestions that have been made so far. Increase the number of petitioners required to make a group, and the periodic review/creation periods. Something more like 50 required to create a group? You want a large enough sampling to generate new content, and 15-20 may not be large enough to get people to post frequently enough to justify another group. I'll agree with Taco's point about giving a group time to start, though.

One benefit of having a limited number of groups being created during the application period would be that it would allow the forum users to generate ideas for the needed groups, and work out which groups would be the best additions. The idea I have for a group today may not seem like such a great idea a couple of weeks from now, or it might fit together with a larger group.

If you've got too many usergroups, it becomes harder to find what you want or where you want to put a post. I've seen it before plenty of times-- "I didn't know where this thread belonged, so I posted it here," and it inevitably ends up in the wrong place. Confusing for the users, and more work for the mods and admins. Also, I think people go a little overboard with some of the options available. Just because you can add a poll to your thread or create a new usergroup doesn't mean you need to.

[hobbywhelmed]

I think the OT topics should have their own section, as should location/regional. They have a natural distinction from most other topics.

But it is true, some of the groups being formed sound good initially, but only 1 or 2 topics have been started in them, that probably could just as well fit as threads in a more inclusive group, unless the future shows other threads being started in them and being participated in. Maybe if a group hasn't generated more than 4 or 5 active threads after a couple of months, it might be well to review whether or not it can fit into another group.

[soliloquies]

I don't think they need splitting up yet, but there does need to be a limit on their creation (every month/couple of months) as some of them are just not moving.

Maybe the group leaders can help by making some posts to get the groups active. And maybe people are reluctant to create threads that are covered by other forums - and that limits the number of topics.

[StephG]

I admit I'm confused by the whole Usergroup thing... I'll have to go do some reading, to find out what they are.

[nikita]

I admit I'm confused by the whole Usergroup thing... I'll have to go do some reading, to find out what they are.

Usergroups are basically subforums of interest you can join at your convenience. Instead of subjecting everyone to numerous subforums of general interest, we have set it up for people to petition to have a specific interest group (subforum) created which others can join.

[monkeytailz]

Usergroups are basically subforums of interest you can join at your convenience. Instead of subjecting everyone to numerous subforums of general interest, we have set it up for people to petition to have a specific interest group (subforum) created which others can join.

Ah, OK, I was confused by "usergroups", too.

[zalem]

There are tons a usergroups! :) You can join them by going to you user cp panel (you know the same place you go to edit your profile) and clicking on the "Group Memberships" link.

or click here:
http://abjds.com/forum/profile.php?do=editusergroups

After you join you'll be able to see the groups you've joined in the "Your Usergroups" subforum.

[Bel]

I know I've joined a couple successful petitions for group creation knowing full well that I'd likely be a browser/fan rather than a contributor. Maybe a lot of us did, thereby launching user groups that were going to be dead in the water from the start?

Hrm. Maybe the petitions can be polls, with questions geared to guage levels of interest - people who are excited to actively participate, people who would like to browse the group once it was open? And once the active participant count reaches the number needed, then it could open?

That doesn't seem like *quite* the right approach, but it's all I can think of right now!

[ShadowLink]

I agree with most of what has been said so far ^^

- dividing the groups in the future will be a better choice than right now.
- increasing the number of petitioners required to create a usergroup and or close the petitioning process for usergroups and only open it periodically.
- usergroup review every so often to see which usergroups aren't being used and or decide on merging.

I personally like the user groups because it gives me a choice to go read what interests me ~ But right now I think most groups are too new to have much activity and I don't like to be repetitive when posting.