Comments on: Linkedin SaaS group update http://www.justinpirie.com/2009/11/linkedin-saas-group-update/ Actionable Insight for a cloudy world Wed, 21 Dec 2011 09:34:00 -0800 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1 By: MichaelDunham http://www.justinpirie.com/2009/11/linkedin-saas-group-update/comment-page-1/#comment-29 MichaelDunham Tue, 03 Nov 2009 21:17:12 +0000 http://www.justinpirie.com/?p=23#comment-29 Interesting - for me I guess value in a group "should be" the ability to share information, ideas, best practices with my peers. Unfortunately it has never worked out that way for long as you point out. And frankly, the overhead involved in keeping the "noise" down is just too much most of the time. So - groups, forums, etc - eventually devolve to become noisy and you either ignore them or drop off. <br><br>I have to admit the addition of lists has been one of the greatest things Twitter has done. I think of it as a filter system where I can quickly check information from sources "I" trust and want to hear from and "I" selected. It isn't that I don't value what may come from other sources in my follower pool. It is a way to focus on a limited subset and participate with them separately. Think of it like bookmarking or RSS subscriptions. It is a personal choice of what I need/want to be able to access efficiently. <br><br>I think subgroups "could" work this way to some extent, but still they lack some of the simple features that make the Twitter lists so valuable. I don't have to repost anything for my tweets to be in the stream on the lists I appear on. I don't have to do anything to appear on a list other than contribute value to the list owner. <<period>>.<br><br>Without a lot more moderation than anyone has time for - I don't know how that simple idea coulld be translated to LinkedIn in its existing form. So, we're left with a "community culture" that needs to guide things and honestly - culture is a hard thing to cultivate. All I can imagine is that we keep posting things about the culture and promoting it. It won't end with this article I'm sure. Interesting – for me I guess value in a group “should be” the ability to share information, ideas, best practices with my peers. Unfortunately it has never worked out that way for long as you point out. And frankly, the overhead involved in keeping the “noise” down is just too much most of the time. So – groups, forums, etc – eventually devolve to become noisy and you either ignore them or drop off.

I have to admit the addition of lists has been one of the greatest things Twitter has done. I think of it as a filter system where I can quickly check information from sources “I” trust and want to hear from and “I” selected. It isn't that I don't value what may come from other sources in my follower pool. It is a way to focus on a limited subset and participate with them separately. Think of it like bookmarking or RSS subscriptions. It is a personal choice of what I need/want to be able to access efficiently.

I think subgroups “could” work this way to some extent, but still they lack some of the simple features that make the Twitter lists so valuable. I don't have to repost anything for my tweets to be in the stream on the lists I appear on. I don't have to do anything to appear on a list other than contribute value to the list owner. <<period>>.

Without a lot more moderation than anyone has time for – I don't know how that simple idea coulld be translated to LinkedIn in its existing form. So, we're left with a “community culture” that needs to guide things and honestly – culture is a hard thing to cultivate. All I can imagine is that we keep posting things about the culture and promoting it. It won't end with this article I'm sure.

]]> By: MichaelDunham http://www.justinpirie.com/2009/11/linkedin-saas-group-update/comment-page-1/#comment-3 MichaelDunham Tue, 03 Nov 2009 14:17:12 +0000 http://www.justinpirie.com/?p=23#comment-3 Interesting - for me I guess value in a group "should be" the ability to share information, ideas, best practices with my peers. Unfortunately it has never worked out that way for long as you point out. And frankly, the overhead involved in keeping the "noise" down is just too much most of the time. So - groups, forums, etc - eventually devolve to become noisy and you either ignore them or drop off. <br><br>I have to admit the addition of lists has been one of the greatest things Twitter has done. I think of it as a filter system where I can quickly check information from sources "I" trust and want to hear from and "I" selected. It isn't that I don't value what may come from other sources in my follower pool. It is a way to focus on a limited subset and participate with them separately. <br><br>I think subgroups "could" work this way to some extent, but still they lack some of the simple features that make the Twitter lists so valuable. I don't have to repost anything for my tweets to be in the stream on the lists I appear on. I don't have to do anything to appear on a list other than contribute value to the list owner. <<period>>.<br><br>Without a lot more moderation than anyone has time for - I don't know how that simple idea coulld be translated to LinkedIn in its existing form. So, we're left with a "community culture" that needs to guide things and honestly - culture is a hard thing to cultivate. All I can imagine is that we keep posting things about the culture and promoting it. It won't end with this article I'm sure. Interesting – for me I guess value in a group “should be” the ability to share information, ideas, best practices with my peers. Unfortunately it has never worked out that way for long as you point out. And frankly, the overhead involved in keeping the “noise” down is just too much most of the time. So – groups, forums, etc – eventually devolve to become noisy and you either ignore them or drop off.

I have to admit the addition of lists has been one of the greatest things Twitter has done. I think of it as a filter system where I can quickly check information from sources “I” trust and want to hear from and “I” selected. It isn't that I don't value what may come from other sources in my follower pool. It is a way to focus on a limited subset and participate with them separately.

I think subgroups “could” work this way to some extent, but still they lack some of the simple features that make the Twitter lists so valuable. I don't have to repost anything for my tweets to be in the stream on the lists I appear on. I don't have to do anything to appear on a list other than contribute value to the list owner. <<period>>.

Without a lot more moderation than anyone has time for – I don't know how that simple idea coulld be translated to LinkedIn in its existing form. So, we're left with a “community culture” that needs to guide things and honestly – culture is a hard thing to cultivate. All I can imagine is that we keep posting things about the culture and promoting it. It won't end with this article I'm sure.

]]>