Bluesky and Community – Keeping The Social Skies Clear

 
The Chains of The Past

People who have not been in “social media” for more than 30 years often think that anti-social behavior online is relatively new, sparked by /some event/. This is simply not true.

In 2011 I wrote about problem users on social media. I had already been a community manager for 20 years at that point. In OnlineCommunities 103: Problem Users and the Problems They Cause, I explicitly discuss how certain behaviors are common, regardless of the platform.

Social media is…people. People behave in certain ways. Look back to broadsheets in the 18^th century, you see the same kind of pundits railing against social progress and being dismissive and insulting as you do now in the opinion sections of major media outlets. Human nature does not change, only the technology does.

For Bluesky, specifically, this means that many users are coming to the platform from X. Even before it became X, Twitter had always been a bit of a problem child. In 2008 when I joined, it was a curiosity, an IRC channel grown up to be a website. It was messy. It confused people who were not used to asynchronous chat. The majority of users were people like myself – curious about new platforms and their potential for communication, community and, inevitably, marketing.

Changes in moderation and management came with increasing user numbers.  Moderation got better, then worse, then better, then much worse. By the time Twitter devolved into X, it had become the technological equivalent of a hissy fit with flailing arms. People used to the behaviors that were normal on X – sarcastic, bad faith rebuttals, mean-spirited insults, veiled threats in top posts – sometimes find it hard to let go of that.

Because I began my career in online communities when we had no tools at all for moderation, not so much as ‘mute,’ I find it easy to simply ignore people whose unregulated behavior is unhealthy or unpleasant. This is a skill I have developed. Folks joining Bluesky from X, Meta and other platforms that don’t require respectful behavior, often drag their behaviors from platform to platform, like a set of increasingly heavy chains.

Bluesky is a relatively new platform. It has yet to be sold to advertisers or private equity. For many users, this is the first time they have joined a social platform at the beginning of it’s life cycle, when there is still a chance at equity, safety and delight as the platform grows.

The problem, however, is people. So how can Bluesky avoid some of the common lifecycle issues of other platforms?

 

Community Building Tools


Starter Packs:

I have been effusive in my praise of Starter Packs. These are curated lists of up to 150 accounts that can be themed however a user likes. Other users can follow all the accounts on a list with a single click. (You can search for Starter Packs to follow on this unofficial search: https://blueskydirectory.com/starter-packs/all)

Building communities is hard. I’ve written (on this very blog (!) in 2012 Creating an Amazing Social Network on Twitter WithoutSpamming the Universe, a step-by-step guide to how to build your community on a Twitter that did not yet have (and honestly, never has had,) a functioning curation algorithm. Starter Packs on Bluesky short-cut this process. Follow a source you respect, follow the people they respect – with one click. Or one account at a time…

 

Feeds:

…or not at all, with a Feed. When someone curates a Feed on Bluesky, you can scroll through posts that fit the Feed’s criteria without needing to follow any of the users. Of course you can follow from the feed or through an account directly, but Feeds allow you to see folks’ art and writing and news and commentary without having to also see their posts about topics you aren’t interested in.

Speaking of “topics you aren’t interested in,” let’s take a look at some of Bluesky’s useful moderation tools.

You can search for Feeds to follow directly on Bluesky: https://bsky.app/feeds

 

 

Moderation Tools

Moderation on Bluesky comes in several forms, several designed to help you curate your feed pre-emptively.

 
Muted Words & Tags

Ragebait relies on you having key words, concepts and topics that instantly set your blood pressure to overdrive.

For instance, you may dislike a topic – and by “dislike” I mean that you loathe it and wish it did not exist and would burn in fire. With Muted Words & Tags, you can cut down the likelihood that you will see that term (and any synonyms or related terms you add) in your feed. This is an imperfect solution. I cannot find all posts that imply the thing, use conceptual language about the thing, or do not mention the thing when they post pictures. If this seems complicated, it is. Human communication is very complicated. ^_^

As an example, let’s say you try to block something very common – cat pictures.
You can mute common words: cat, kitty, kitten in posts and tags. But if a person you follow posts cat pictures with text like “Look at this fine fellow” those will not be caught. You will see fewer cat pictures, but they will not be eliminated.

Block Lists

Block Lists are another imperfect solution, but can be very useful. Before you subscribe to a block list check the entries, so you know you are muting or blocking people you actually want to mute and block. Yes, this requires you to actually look at some unpleasant stuff for a moment of due diligence. I caution you on block lists because, predictably, bad faith actors are copying lists and regurgitating them in ways design to confuse.  How does that work? Let’s say you created a list of your favorite writers. I despise those writers, so I copy your feed and create a block list of them, encouraging people to not follow. Or I might create a block list of you and your friends and name it something bad, “Puppy kickers who suck,” to encourage people to pre-emptively block you. Why would I do that? Because, as we remember, people are the problem.

When you click on a Block List, you will see a link to “Subscribe” in the top right. If you click that, you’ll see a choice to Mute or Block everyone on the list.

Important Note: Blocked accounts are public on Bluesky. https://docs.bsky.app/blog/block-implementation.

Muting and Blocking Individual Accounts and Posts

Muting and blocking at an account level is easy as clicking an account as on any other platform and clicking the ellipsis on the top right.

Additionally, you can Mute a Thread or Mute Tags and Words in a thread or Hide Post for You – all of these by clicking the ellipsis at the bottom right of a post.

Said something you don’t want to deal with? You can Hide Reply for or Hide Reply For Everyone by clicking the bottom right ellipsis on your reply.

 

By selectively using all of these tools, you can curate your feed on Bluesky up front and as you follow people to create an experience that works for you. 

Reporting and Community Standards

In addition to the tools on Bluesky that help community-building and functional moderation that allow you to curate your feed,  we have Community Standards, that shape best pratices.

The main Community Standard on Bluesky is: Do Not Engage With Trolls. Full stop. Don’t reply, don’t screencap and top post  nasty stuff (we’ll get to that in a bit). Just mute, block, report and ignore. Starve trolls of air and attention.

After X, many people find it almost impossible to just not, because the culture there was based around mass harassment campaigns who decided that being blocked was a “win”.

Bluesky moderation is, at the time of writing, aggressive about blocking accounts that harass, or align themselves with groups that engage in bias and harassment. When you see a post or account that is harassing, disparaging, performing harassment regalia or symbols or any other passive form of aggressive bias, prejudice or hatred – click that ellipsis and Report Post or Report Account.

Earlier I said, "don’t screencap and top post nasty stuff." On X ragebait economics makes it profitable to find something anger-inducing, screencap it, then same something snarky or passively threatening and let hordes of followers mob some person. The behavior is sometime used by famously unpleasant folks to drive harassment campaigns of often completely innocent people. On Bluesky that behavior is not appropriate, obvious and should be reported immediately. But there is also another Community Standard: Do Not Subject Your Followers To Crap from X. We left there, please don't bring it with you.Don't dig up terrible people for us to be angry about. Bluesky is about building communities and keeping them safe - that includes your own followers!

Another important Community Standard on Bluesky is that the platform is Active Accessibility. This issue deserves a whole post of its own, you can start with Veroniiiica’s Post about BlueSky Accessibility Features For Low Vision. In account settings, there is an Accessibility tab on which you can Require Alt Text Before Posting to remind you to do so or Display Larger Alt Text Badges.  

The Community Standard on Blue Sky is to include Alt Text with images. Images that are added without alt text are often not shared by community members and may not be seen by some users. This was not decided as a policy, nor was there a decision by any one human or group. It is simply a generally agreed-upon community standard.  The Bluesky community has generally agreed that active accessibility accommodation is the right way to post on Bluesky.
 

Because Social Media is people, the problem with social media is also people. Lucky for us, the joy of social media is also people! Bluesky understands that and, at this moment in its lifecycle gives us tools and standards to help us build the communities we want and need. It's up to us to leave the chins of the past where they belong and take flight.


Find Erica on Bluesky at okazu.bsky.social

How to Leave A Social Platform: The Dos and Dont’s of Saying “Goodbye”

It’s easy enough to join a new social platform. Fill out the registration form — or just sign in through another platform, such as Twitter or Facebook. Perhaps click a verification link in an email. Maybe a friend introduces you, shows you around. That first date is easy. It feels comfortable to spend time together.

You’re enjoy your time with this new platform. You’ve developed a new peer group, you share good times — you laugh at new in-jokes. It’s all fun for a while…but eventually the thrill is gone and feels more like a chore to check in.

You can’t help it — you feel like the platform let you down. You were such good friends, but now this friend is still complaining about the same stuff, full of the same questions over and over and it’s annoying you. You stop coming by so often — and when you do, it’s often to tell folks how much less often you’ll be dropping in.

You wake up one day and think — “I’m done here. It’s time to move on.” But…how does one go about leaving a social platform? It’s easy to join, shouldn’t it be easy to leave too?

It should be — but it isn’t. A community is more than just a place to chat with other people. When you joined, you only had yourself to answer to. When you leave, it’s going to affect others.If you’ve been granted any cognitive authority, your absence will create ripples. If you have real authority on the platform, those ripples will be bigger. Either way, the ripples will subside, but for a while it’ll be hard on you and on the community.

What to Do When You Are Leaving A Platform
Take a Break — As you would with any relationship, you’ve been spending a lot of time together with your new platform. Being attached at the hips takes a lot of work and it cuts you off from other relationships. After a while, you might just need some time off . Separate yourself from the drama for perspective. Take yourself offline for a bit, quietly, and see if you miss the community. If find yourself saving items to share or stories to tell to your community — come back. You don’t need to apologize to the community, we’re all human.

Update Your Profile — If you intend on leaving your account active, write a note on your profile with links where you can be found while you’re away. People who want to will be able to find you. You might be surprised how much of your community follows along.

Let People You Care About Know You’re Leaving — You’ve made real friends and your absence will be noted. Do you have a blog, a forum, a thread or a group? If there are any warrens on the site (or offsite, but related such “Platform Users” group on a different platform) where people expect you to be, value your contribution or desire your company, let folks know where your contributions will be (if that is of interest) or where they can find you (if you want them to be able to do so.) Knowing who your real friends are makes any kind of breakup easier.

What Not To Do When Leaving A Platform
Come Back Repeatedly To See If Anyone Noticed — This is called a “Flounce.” Flounces are commonly enacted by people who never really quite fit in in the first place. When you walk out the door of a community, there is nothing at all that will kill your credibility faster than looking over your shoulder to see if anyone is watching you. “I’m really leaving this time!”

Complain About How Things Have Changed — Yes, things change. Old users get worn out or just move on, some new users don’t get the Sitegeist (the general culture and etiquette of a site. ) You change, too — the topic/format just doesn't interest you any more. It’s perfectly natural that your relationship with the platform will change and it’s really okay for you to simply move on.

How to Leave a Social Platform
Leave — Walk away. Say your goodbyes, delete your account, move on with your life. Maintain your dignity.

That platform will move on as well and, after a short period of grieving, you’ll remember the good times, you’ll grow from the experience and you’ll find a new relationship.

How It All Went Wrong, A Social Media Love Story

You used to come home and find her so sexy, waiting by the door, her seductress self available for your every whim. Now, you find her to be work. Your experience on Social isn't giving you the same thrill it previously did. What changed?

Do you remember what she wore the first day you joined? She was gloriously nude, a blank page to be written on, then read. She took a little effort, needed a little pursuing, but it was worth it. Part of what made Social so exciting was the thrill of the chase - the hunt for followers and re-posts. Teasing her until she gave up those important things to you was a total rush.

She knows your likes and dislikes now, and anticipates your needs, brings you comfortable topics and people...but the thrill is gone. What changed? 

You changed. 

You're not trying any more. You're tired when you check your feed, disengaged when you read statuses. Your posts are memes and jokes. You're muting people - you don't listen to Social anymore. 

You're bored with Social and are treating her badly. She's as interesting as ever to those of us who spend a little time paying attention to and taking care of her.

Social is not a thrill ride, she's not a hussy, here for a roll in the hay, so long, see ya. Social is a fine lady with a salon full of fascinating people and objet, worth every moment you spend to cultivate her company. Don't blame her if you're not fun anymore. 

Originally posted on Quora

How to Handle The Mundane in Online Community's Customer Support

You've got your Online Community up and running and it's going well...until the complaints start pouring in. You've got FAQs up for how to get login assistance and what to do if a password won't work..but what on earth are you supposed to do when two people just don'e seem to get along? Or how do you handle complaints that a poster's question aren't getting answers...or that someone else is being mean to them?

As anyone who has worked in customer support can tell you - the bulk of customer support is telling people answers to questions that have clear answers already written and functioning as playground supervisors.

So how do you handle the mundane in online community customer support?

First, craft rules that state plainly and simply what types of conflicts the site administration is willing to become involved in. These will have to take into account the ages of the user base, the purpose for which the site was created and miscellany abuses of the system that can occur.

Secondly, give your admins tools to make and enforce rulings, and support for those decisions. When someone on the frontline identifies an abusive personality, telling them they "have to work around them, because they are a sponsor" is the worst possible thing for the community.

Thirdly, provide a clear and concise method for complaints. "If someone is abusing/offending you on our site, do this:"  Then follow up. Quickly. Don't dither. Investigate the claims, make a decision, communicate it. Make sure that admins are audited themselves, so their bad decisions don't ruin the site. (This has happened at many of the communities I've been part of.)

Give users block/ignore/mute tools to users so they can control what and who they see. (I don't know why sites so often forget this. When a person is a troll, but a user can still see their comments, it's like a continuing slap to the face.)

Actually investigate issues. Don't write them off as "mundane complaints." It's annoying, yes, and you feel like a kindergarten teacher, yes. That's site adminning and moderation. If you have something else that needs your time, hire an admin to do the dirty work. Make the process transparent. There may well be a very irksome person serially taunting and just being a jerk. Get rid of them....quickly.  Because:

Make unpopular decisions. Be the grown-up. "You - you - to opposite corners!" It's annoying, but what on earth do you think humans are? ^_^ We're annoying. If a teacher doesn't make the bad kid leave the room, it will ruin playtime for all the other kids,

With every new wave of subscribers, you'll need to circle to the top of the list. You can never be perfect, or be everything to everyone, but with clear guidelines, and support tools, you'll be able to handle things more consistently than if you just toss your moderation out to the wolves with "block" and no rules. 

Attack of the Serial Commenters (How to Manage Fans Who Don't *Get* The Rules)

Comments, likes, upvotes, shares - these are all signs that someone is engaged with your community. You use these marks of engagement to measure how well you are connecting with your audience and which members are converting their loyalty or interest into action.

So when you notice that a member of your community always comments on every post, it doesn't seem like it's a problem. Comments are *good*. Then you notice that this person comments on everything whether they have something to say or not. You're reluctant to tell them to stop, because People Talking About This is good, right? You can always pull the conversation back on track if it starts to slide or correct mistakes. This is your job as community manager.

Then one day, you notice that more than 15 minutes of your day is spent managing this one person. They've hijacked so many conversations you start to doubt that anything they've posted has value. And you start to doubt your own ability to manage your community - after all this person is a *fan.* So what if they keep mentioning this other site, or get annoyed with you for correcting them? And why do they annoy you so much anyway?

You have just met the Serial Commenter.

Serial Commenters come in several forms:

New fans who discover your community and spend the next week reading, liking/voting and commenting on everything you've posted for the last month, or in a particular topic.

Old fans who believe that "LOL" is a valuable comment on every single post.

Time-outs who seek to cull favor by adding content, whether or not it is relevant, helpful or legal. These often become the hardest to deal with, those people who simply Need to Stop Posting for a bit, but won't.

Serial Commenters are extremely difficult to deal with. They are often highly, deeply and passionately engaged, but cannot manage to play by the rules. They never take kindly to being gently warned. And more often than not, they have no self-awareness of what you mean when you ask them to stop.

So how do you deal with a Serial Commenter?

First, Time-Out: This is an incredibly important step. Give yourself a Time Out. Take a few days to decide if the comments are harmless, if they might add value to someone who isn't you, or if they stimulate productive conversation in the comments. If any of these are true, bite your lip and ignore whatever it is that rubs you the wrong way. They may simply be new and excited. Give them time to calm down. This person is not a problem.

Second, Etiquette Reminder: Some people are not used to community rules. They may have been hanging out somewhere with less rules, or simply never been socialized. Do your best to surface unwritten rules somewhere. Write down in plain words what you expect of community members. I keep my rules relatively simple, but my expectations high.

Do not be coy, if a Serial Commenter is breaking an unwritten rule, write it out. Some people are not subtle. Don't be rude, but be blunt.

Third, Warning: By the time you have gotten to this stage, you should have already given all the gentle guidance you have to give. At this point you are merely handing the SC rope with with they can hang themselves.  Warnings should be simple. If you choose to enforce a Time-Out for your SC, state the time period, expectations upon their return and the factors you will weigh against them.

Fourth and Final, Escort Them Out the Door: At this point, you have decided that their absence will free the community up. No one need talk around them, explain things to them or help them with a seemingly un-ending list of confusions and problems. Time and energy can be spent on fun things again.

Do not second guess yourself.  Whether it is your personal or professional community you have every right to control it. As we all must sometimes remember, every site/platform/network online is owned by *somebody.* It is a privilege, not a right to post on these. Sometimes we must remind someone of this.

Serial Commenters are not always a problem, but be ready for those that become one with a fair, actionable plan. You owe it to your community.

The 4 Pillars of A Healthy Online Community

Whether we're reaching out to a specialized subject community or to a broad social network, we're looking to our contacts online for information, suggestion and recommendation all the time.

More of our lives is spent online in the communities we join and build, and more of our time is spent handling the issues that arise in these spaces. Communities exist on investing sites, shopping sites, health sites and entertainment sites. There is hardly anywhere online one can go where a community is not at least part of the equation.

The question then is - how do we build healthy online communities?


Defining Community vs Network

For the purposes of this article, I want to define how I am using the word "community" vs. "network." 

A "network" in this context is the web of contacts, acquaintances, friends and colleagues we acquire over time. These may be circumstantial - professional colleagues, coworkers, etc.;  or social - friends, relatives, acquaintances. Networks may be organic and/or intentional.

Communities are, for the purposes of this article, always intentional. A professional community may be an association, a personal community may be a group focused on a hobby or interest. Networks can grow without our specific intent to do so (a friend introducing us to another friend for example) but we seek out community with intention.

Groups on Facebook, subReddits, hashtags on Twitter and other smaller pockets of interest on larger platforms can function as communities, as well as focused lists, forums, sites and even whole social networks.

Online Communities are, therefore, groups of people we intentionally seek out in order to...what? 

People seek out community to gain/share/impart information.

The guy who tells you about this lunch on Twitter - he's imparting information. Not very relevant or targeted information, admittedly, but hey, there may be someone out there who cares that Taco Tuesday at the Taco Stand is outstanding. It might be noise to you, but it's signal to the guy who shared it.

So when we seek out community, we have the intention of finding folks who will share info that is more signal than noise - i.e., stuff we care about. This may be information of relevance to us professionally or personally, but the point is, we look for a "community" where this kind of information will be shared.  

When we join a community, we are all initially consumers of information. We might read FAQs, ask a few folks for their thoughts, read what is being said. We join to gain information.  We join as "consumers" of information. Over time, some people find themselves with the right experience or temperament to share or impart information. These people contribute information. (Contribution is sometimes rewarded with badges of achievement or rank.) Generally speaking, even new people can see that there is an upper class of users. These may be called senior members, power users (or the star-chamber cabal, depending on the level of resentment harbored by non-power users) and they will have both cognitive authority and be the object of resentment on even a healthy community.

Building a Healthy Community

Every community want to be a healthy community. Like our own bodies, there's a certain amount of health one can establish as a solid base on which to build. For a community, these include good moderation, inclusive policies, scalable architecture and a soupcon of humor when dealing with other humans. I.e., the hardware, the software and the humanware should be as flexible and scalable as possible.

On this base are Four Pillars that support the Community.

       Contributor                                             Contributor

Top-Down Communication	Peer Communication
Peer Communication	Bottom-Up Communication

        Consumer                                              Consumer

Consumers come into a community with a desire to know, learn or share.

Let's create a fictitious community called Labville, where high school students can discuss scientific experiments with other students and get prompts from older students and teachers.

Adam joins Labville first as a Consumer. He reads posts by Barb and Charlie, both students who have done the same experiment he's working on now. Adam asks a few questions, but mostly reads. He is a consumer involved in Bottom-up Communication. Once he's learned that Daniella is doing the same experiments and has similar ideas as he does, he starts to talk to her as a peer. Adam and Daniella are joined in their "Experiment Y" discussion by Eugene and Frieda. A peer group is forming between them and they generally don't reach outside of it unless they need help from Barb and Charlie. The groups now engages regularly in Peer-to-Peer Communication.

George arrives and he's...a problem. For whatever reason, he's taken a disliking to Adam and snipes constantly at his work. Whether Adam asks a question, replies to someone else  - and even though he generally avoids conversations where George is active - George goes out of his way to be rude to and about Adam.

Barb and Charlie, as Contributors, will try to hold the conversations on topic and maybe Harriet, a Labville Moderator, will step in.

These Contributors will shape the conversation through Top-Down Communication.  Because Labville is not a hobbyist community, but is focused around asymmetric relationships (people who know and people who want to know) Contributors contribute by answering questions, positing thought-provoking questions of their own and guiding and focusing conversation. Top-Down Communication serves to keep conversation moving forward, or restarts it after it stalls. One of the goals of Top-Down is to inspire Peer-to-Peer Conversation among Consumers by helping them over humps in their learning

George has been behaving, but after a few months, he's started up again. Barb and Charlie have both moved on as Contributors (as a natural part of the Community Lifecycle,) but Ike and Justine are now very active Contributors. As Moderator, Harriet needs a private place to warn them about George and ask them to let her know if there are issues. The Contributors need a space for Peer-to-Peer Communication of their own, to foster best community practices, share critical operating information, training materials and provide a space for them to discuss the Consumers who might serve the community well as Contributors or even Moderators.

Peer-to-Peer Communication at both Consumer and Contributor levels fosters teamwork (and cliques.) Top-Down Communication provides a steady hand at the rudder and Bottom-Up Communication means there's opportunities for Consumers to learn and grow in the community.

These four pillars, standing on a foundation of good community practices, will be stable enough and strong enough to support a healthy, sustainable community for a long lifecycle.

Community Lifecycle: How to Prevent Evaporative Cooling from Eroding an Online Community

Evaporative Cooling, a termed coined by Eliezer Yudowsky, is the natural loss of user base on a community, tare if you will. Time, crises and change will contribute to Evaporative Cooling. It can't be prevented, but it can be slowed and managed. In response to a question on Quora, I detailed a few steps to identifying, managing and modulating Evaporative Cooling on an online community.

How to Prevent Evaporative Cooling from Eroding an Online Community

1. Acknowledge Community Lifecycle

2. Passion At The Top to Ignite Passion at the Bottom

3. Reward Users With Rewards, Not Rank

4. Architectural Flexibility = Good, Managerial Flexibility  = Better 

****

1. Acknowledge Community Lifecycle

There is no way to "prevent" Evaporative Cooling (EC) in an online community completely. 

Your active user base will ebb and flow over time. Incremental growth may or may never lead to an explosion of popularity, but tare will exist with every new generation that joins the community, because people's priorities change and technology changes over time. What is a passionate interest now could become a vague interest later. Technology will change and no matter how innovative a community architecture is right now, at some point it will be old-school or obsolete. Not updating the technology means you'll lose people - updating the technology means you'll lose people. Keeping the group small and intimate means you'll lose people. Opening the community up means you'll lose people.

The key to keeping a community alive has a lot to do with keeping the currently engaged users engaged. In part, this can be achieved by...


2. Passion At The Top to Ignite Passion at the Bottom

I'm speaking here as owner and moderator of 4 concurrent communities, all based around an interest - not a hobby even, merely an interest. Of course people come and go in this interest space and in the more than ten years I've been running these communities, the thing that sustains me - and the communities - is that we all still enjoy the topic. My passion for it communicates to some degree in everything I do on these communities. My communities give warm welcomes to other fans, who find their enthusiasm rewarded.

In communities I haven't run, but have had the pleasure of moderating for, when the passion at the top cools, the community congeals almost instantly. Community builders that choose moderators so they can play with the architecture, cede control to people who don't have their vision or their passion. Moderation becomes a "thing to be done" not a "thing that keeps our community thriving." (1) (See point 3 for more on this.)

To slow one's own EC, one must acknowledge the limits of one's own passion - and energy. Like any community leader, I go through phases of burnout, or if there is simply less to talk about, I let the conversation ebb. Ebb tide is not an irreversible trend on a community, a blog or even in a conversation. When I've been blogging with frequency and intensity, I often take a few days off to let the audience - and myself - have a break. When I come back to it, my readership jumps. The same is true with a community. Short breaks in news/updates allow for a more relaxed approach when one returns - time for chat, personal opinion and other less quantifiable discussions that make up a community. Or a pattern of small news/chit-chat can be excited by big news or broader topics. 

The more passion a leader brings to the community, the more passion the community will generate.


3. Reward Users With Reward, not Rank (2)

I cannot stress enough how critical this point is.

It's time for a story. Two, in fact. In both cases, I was a Admin-level member after rising through the ranks by just being a good contributor and relatively unflappable.

The story is very similar in both cases. In the first case, there was a member of the group who offered to take charge of one of the committees. She was a horrible leader; selfish, mean and lazy. Everything she touched withered and died. She was so bad, that even the people above her left because she was loud and intractable and it just wasn't worth the energy. When the person above her left, invariably she would be given that position. No one at the executive level would be the bad guy and tell her to get lost (in part because this was a volunteer community, in part because of who was chosen to lead.) She rose through the ranks, more quickly as time went on, because the higher she got, the more people had to work with her and more would leave.

Ultimately, in the first case, the person took over the community and - no surprise at all - within a year the community was dead.

In the second case, a top user was rewarded with rank, because she was online so often. The community owners relied on this person for feedback but there were no checks and balances to her intel or actions. Her misinformation was the only information the owners received and like idiots, they relied on that. The problem was that the reason she was online so often was that she was conducting a cyber-affair with another user (who was a major contributor of money, which translated to rank on the community.) The two of them formed a block that abused, harassed and destroyed other users they felt were a threat.

In the first case, rather than dealing with the problem, that person was given power. In the second, the community owners used hours logged as a metric for valuable contributor. In both cases, the community owners set the community up for massive EC as the community members were disengaged and occasionally, active persecuted, by people who unsuited to hold any power at all.

In both cases, I pointed out the fallacies behind the appointment, but The Powers That Be chose to pretend nothing was wrong. I did not stick around long.

How can this problem be rectified? Understand that the #1 value good contributors are making is not their presence, not the hours they log, not their experience. Good contributors contribute good content. Rewarding them by giving them management tasks which will suck away their energy and desire to contribute is the perfect recipe for EC. It's the Peter Principle, online community style.

When I created a reward program for one of my communities, I focused on rewards that reinforced the "team" aspect of user support. Rather than adding on burdensome responsibility, they are rewarded for what they already do, the way they already do it. Time is not an issue. Amount of money spent is not really a major factor. Power is taken out of the equation entirely. The point of a reward is to make someone feel rewarded. (3)

By using Rank as a Reward, you disincentivize your top users to use. Their time on the site becomes unpaid work, their voice becomes the Voice of Authority, so it's harder for them to kick back and have fun. Many sites give rank without power or tools to maintaiin order- a veritable death spiral for online community moderation. Additionally, training for Moderators is poor or non-existent on many communities. The end result is that your best users are too frustrated and tired to contribute. 

There is no faster was to kill a community than by using Rank as a Reward for contribution. It is the major EC generator.



4. Architectural Flexibility = Good, Managerial Flexibility  = Better

In the article quoted, the focus is more on the technology than the people. It is absolutely a benefit to be able to adapt to the times. Adding social sharing and alternate means of communication, providing spaces for digression and dissension (warrens) and open fora for conversation are a fantastic way to slow down EC.

Even better is management that acknowledges mission/scope drift and is as transparent as possible (4) when changes are made or have to happen. "We're adding a new feature because we want to try it out" is something that community builders can (and should) say. Users may or may not try the new feature out - this, and what they have to say about it when they do use it, is valuable feedback. When a new control has to be rolled out, the best way to explain that is to say just that. "We had to do this because...." Engaged users will understand. Don't be coy, "Hey we made new changes that will take away something you liked because we did." Are there so many cases of something that a new rule was warranted? Say that and say it plainly.

Users believe they ought to have some say in a community by virtue of their time and engagement. Management has to make decisions based on the greater good and the bottom line. But surely there's a way to bring these two things together? Harness the insight of new users, casual users and heavy users in regards to community change  - and publish these findings so people can feel as if they were represented, heard and understood. In the volatile start-up world more=better, so it's understandable that changes will be rapid and constant. Can you think of any community anywhere, online or off, that likes change? People get used to what they get used to and they adapt very quickly, but they do not realize this. Every change, no matter how ultimately important, will increase EC...unless you include the community in that change.

It's easy for engineers to tinker with architecture, it's far more important for community managers to tinker with community engagement.


5. Conclusion.

While Evaporative Cooling is a fact of online community life and cannot be prevented or avoided, it can be slowed and managed. Understanding which aspects of community life are the most vulnerable to EC, establishing a rhythm to harness the ebb and flow of community life, maintaining engagement, rewarding contribution, providing tools for moderation and flexibility in management can decrease EC over the long-term. 

More reading:

1. Perils and Pitfalls of Online Community Management by Erica Friedman on 'Splaining: The Bloarg

2.Moderation: Policing, Curation and Shoveling Behind Elephants by Erica Friedman on 'Splaining: The Bloarg

3. When a Reward Program Feels Like a Slap

4The Myth of Transparency in a Community by Erica Friedman on 'Splaining: The Bloarg

Erica Friedman has been managing online communities since the olden days of BBS. She was a moderator on Usenet, and has owned, adminned or moderated about 2 dozen communities online. She currently own and runs 4 communities.

Moderation: Policing, Curation and Shoveling Behind Elephants

A new tenant moves into a community, notices that the grass has been trimmed, the kids are playing in the street without fear of being run over, and every Friday, there's a BBQ for the residents.

How does that happen? Well, resident fees are high enough to pay for regular maintenance, people obey the posted rules and they all chip in for the weekly affair with money, time, or supplies.

That sounds idyllic, but in reality it's just as likely for new residents to chafe at the rules, and work harder to find ways around paying the fees, and be annoyed by the constant clipping of the grass.

In online communities the secret ingredient to a peaceful life is almost always good moderation.

***

Good moderation looks awfully like the secret police to those members of communities who just can't manage to follow rules. Transparency in moderation always sounds good but involving the entire community in moderation only produces good policy when the community is small and there is a consensus of purpose. Once the community grows larger than the founders it's almost impossible to maintain that consensus.

Moderators, like the police, have an unpleasant job and no one likes them for doing it. They have to be parents, expressing disappointment at bad behavior, reprimanding when the behavior escalates and, ultimately punishing when it becomes untenable.

***

In a library, collection librarians are tasked with managing the size and content of the collection. They know the space limitations, budget constraints and what their community needs from them. This is not an abstract concept - a library filled with classic literature, when the community around it needs employment resources is a terrible mismatch. The gap would harm the library as much as the community.

Moderators, like librarians, have to have awareness of what the community wants from the community. If the majority of the community likce having a nice library, as unpopular a decision as it is, Moderators will have to remove Playboy magazine from the shelves. This may mean keeping tabs on "joke answers" or memes as answers because, while they entertain, they lessen the overall quality of the community. Not surprisingly, while the community wants a nice community, if they are the one posting the joke answer, it still hurts to get slapped.

***

And then there's times of crisis. On online communities, crisis looks like nothing at all to people who are not involved, the end times to people who are and the inevitable "this community sucks now" to people on the sidelines.

To Moderators, who have to escort anti-social, perpetually angry/dissatisfied or microaggressive members off the community and, to the best of their ability, clean up the mess afterwards - all while taking heat from people who don't really know the details - it looks exactly like the parade does from behind the elephants.

***

Moderators are unloved by nearly everyone, but essential to the functioning of a healthy community. Because Moderators are human, it's smart for a community Owner not to give them unlimited personal power, and require a certain amount of checks and balances from them before drastic measures are taken.

But if you've ever wondered how an online community can keep the lawns trimmed and hold a Friday BBQ, that's a good time to reach out and thank the Moderators.

Online Communities: Entropy Increases..Are You Seeing The Cracks?

This is a post I wrote on and about the online platform Quora, on which I am active and frankly I'd like to see succeed. Since the day this post was originally made Quora has instituted some important changed which address the issues in this article. In that case, it is rendered thankfully moot. Nonetheless, I believe this information has value in an of itself. While the post specifically related to Quora, the point I want make here is that Entropy Increases on Communities, as it does everywhere else. Watching MySpace flailing to regain relevance pains me, not because My Space is inherently bad, but because it's over. It had its time, it was really popular and now it's done.  But  could it have managed to retain relevance longer? How is it that Facebook is managing to do so, where MySpace never could? Read this and join me again at the end:

This winter marked my 2nd anniversary here on Quora. My second year was filled with some amazing things - answers being reproduced over at Huffington Post and Forbes, being named Top Writer. I've connected with amazing people here and really have enjoyed all my time on Quora.

I'm not leaving or anything, but when I (and all of you) come up on that moment, here will be the reasons why:

1) Taking away our sovereignty over our own content.

Several Quora community members have said this plainly and - for whatever reason - Quora is not listening.

If Quora makes it impossible to share the content we create on Quora, then we will create it somewhere else.

I don't know how to say this more plainly. Quora is going to see good writers take their content away from the platform, not because we don't love Quora but because we love creating good content. And we want people to read it. I wrote something great this week, but I have not shared it on Twitter or Facebook because those of my friends who might very well appreciate it cannot see or read or share it themselves unless they are sign up to Quora. Do you sign up to every site just to read a paragraph or two of good content? I don't. I wouldn't ask my friends to, either.

2) The upvote-to-view algorithm ignores the 80/20 rule of all online communities

Ariel Williams wrote an amazing post today: How promotion can reduce an answer ranking... With an actual case example.

How much more/better can it be said that requiring votes to views is punishing the best writers? Good heavens, have none of you ever lurked on a community before? Plenty of people read, think and lurk and VERY FEW comment or engage. You're requiring the best writers to prove, then prove again and again that they are worthy. And you're handicapping them by making it easier for people to see their content here on Quora, which penalizes them.

Here are the first major cracks in Quora. Do nothing if you wish, but entropy increases.

Here is my point for today  - No community fails without warning. Breaches of security, privacy, sovereignty and trust do not happen in a vacuum. Your users will first whine, then complain, then create petitions/boards attempting to notify you that changes are unwanted and unwelcome. Then, when enough of them are fed up, the exodus begins. The drain is slow at first, and it's easy to label those who leave with negative terms. But when top users  are telling you there are problems and you as community manager/owner are not listening...what do you expect will happen?

On MySpace, users were thrown under the bus for advertisers. The layout became loud and cluttered with ads that did not provide additional value for users. The main reason why Facebook is not yet already fading into obscurity is that they have so far failed to create a functional platform for advertisers. When they do, people (other than those who ran to Google+ to get away from their mothers) will find somewhere else to post their cat pictures.

Whether you run a hobby community or a product community, Entropy Increases, but not invisibly. Cracks appear in walls, voice are raised in protest. When you fail to notice the issues or address them it's not the user base you have to blame.

The Myth of Transparency - Why We Don't Really Have a Say

Every few months, it makes the news again - another change in Privacy rules on Facebook , a new agreement at Twitter, Google pulls its access from another platform, a shakeup in management, key employees leaving.... Each time this happens it causes an outbreak of prodding, poking and, in many cases, intrusive questions to dig out the "why" of what happened and all the dirty laundry.

Gossip-mongers, paparazzi, we have words for people like this in the entertainment industry and in everyday life. And yet, in an online communities there seems to be a presumption by the community that they have a right to know why decisions are made and who profits from them.

Clearly this is not the case. All of the leading networking platforms are privately-owned firms and while some of them are publicly traded, none are owned by the users. The privately owned networks have limited legal need to report even so much as executive leadership changes. Publicly traded companies must report changes...but they still have no requirements around explaining the whys and wherefores. Nor is there any moral obligation to explain personal choices by the staff about their own lives.

So why do we demand explanations?  Let me illustrate with a parable, as I so often do.

I am active in an incredibly niche industry. To say that everyone knows everyone else comes very close to the truth. A few years ago a major player in the industry landscape, having pulled itself out of two major business setbacks, packed it in quite suddenly, just as it was doing really well again.

People went ballistic. They raged and ranted about this company, how it had never been well-run, or
that it was a joke. Specifically, the President came under major dissection. He's been higgeldy-piggedly about his business objectives, running the company like a hobby, inconsistent, etc. (In reality, the market had radically altered several times over a decade, and he had merely been attempting to find workable business models, but that was never once acknowledged.)

Recently, that company has made some moves to return as a player in the field. There were positive
and negative reactions, but the weirdest and most inexplicable reaction I encountered was from members of that industry press. Two journalists told me that they were going to contact the people involved and demand details of their contracts. I boggled. Then I asked, "By what right do you demand this knowledge? It's none of your business."

The argument was loud.

A week later one of them contacted me privately to admit that I saved him from embarrassing himself
badly and ruining his credibility.

We use the products. We engage with the communities. Of course we feel as if we have a claim on those companies, but in reality, we have none. Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn owe us...nothing. We use their sites for free and in return they sell our data to advertisers. Equally we owe these platforms nothing; no loyalty, no praise. By what right do we demand transparency from these platforms? Because we answer questions and talk with other people?

The Myth is that by participating on a community, we have some kind of ownership of that community. In reality, we have only our own content to leverage. Anything that we have created to make the community a better place is ours, and with some foresight, we'll have made it as portable and flexible as possible. If that content is customized for that site, well then, it's gone.

Change in any community comes with emotional cost, and each time it feels like upheaval but, we are owed no transparency from any platform on which we willingly engage that we do not own. Perhaps some platforms will be more transparent than others, but we have no right to demand answers to questions that are none of our business.

So go ahead and ask your questions, but don't be surprised when no one tells you "why".

Facebook's Social Media Makeover - The Good and the Bad and the Not So Ugly

How often do you redecorate your living room? Once a decade? Maybe a little more? The reasons why you don't are self-evident - makeovers cost money, they are a pain, they take up time.

It's not hard to imagine, although we are not those people, that there are people who constantly tweak and move their furniture to give the room a new look, to keep it fresh and exciting.

Now imagine if those people were your parents. Every time you drop by, they seem to have moved stuff around. Sometimes you like the changes better than others, but it does make things hard to find - and it unsetttles you. This is the real problem of course - it's not that you don't like the new furniture, it's just that these are your parents and they aren't supposed to change!

Welcome to Facebook, the comfy chair of Social Media. Facebook is Social Media your Mom can use. You smile at it, you use it, but you don't respect it because, well, your Mom can use it. Even so, when Facebook switches the furniture around, it's unsettling.

Today we'll cover a very few points of some good and bad things Facebook did with their site switcheroo and the one or two things that are most up for debate as "that goddamn" feature.

The BAD

1) They changed our settings, again.

This is tantamount to your parents changing the lock, leaving the new key under the mat with a note that they've given a bunch of other people the keys, too, so if you're in the shower and hear noise, it's probably just one of those other people.  Wait, what?

Facebook has an appalling habit of "helping" you with your notifications and privacy settings. This time they turned all notifications OFF, except the ones that they turned ON.

How to Handle This: Don't wait for Facebook to change - make it a habit of visiting your Notifications, Privacy and App settings every three months. Clean out Apps you don't know, don't use, don't want. Make sure the Privacy is set the way you want it, that you can share with the people you want. Turn off or on notifications. Do this as a regular course of matter, so you remain in as much control of your account as possible.


2) They rolled all the changes out all at once.

Go back to the your parent's house metaphor. When they get a new chair, it's a nice change. If they had the entire house stripped and redecorated, it would be jarring. And, yes, the Facebook makeover was jarring.

How to Handle This: Don't Panic. Take a look at the popups and read them, so you know what you're looking at. Find a Social Media person on Facebook such as myself, (yes, I know I don't have an account name, all the sensible versions of my name were taken and I would just rather have a random character set that EricaFriedman1897. That sounds horribly AOL to me) or Christine Pilch who can talk you through fixing and changing settings.


The last and worst Bad thing is an ongoing problem with Facebook.

3) They made changes to our accounts without our permission.


Facebook does this continually and for me, it's the single biggest problem with Facebook security and privacy. I did not want to make Lists, so they made them for me! Um, no, see, I did not want to make any Lists. (See Below for more Lists comments.)

How to Handle This: Tell Facebook. We all must make it clear that, while we understand change is inevitable, we would very much prefer to be asked if we want a new feature, rather than having it thrust upon us. Some parents never change their living rooms, ever. And that's really all right. Our Mom's Facebook and ours don't have to look the same.


The Good

Now for the one really Good thing they did.

1) The biggest and best new thing they did was force Business Pages to let people post on their Wall, even if they have not "Liked" the page. There truly was nothing more galling than having to "like" a page before telling them they suck.


The (Not-So) Ugly

This leaves us with some of the new features, which are liked and disliked in equal measure.

Lists

Lists are an attempt to be more like Google+. This is misguided thinking. Facebook's market is you and your Mom. Not immersed Social Media users who are going to have a number of profiles on sites around the Internet. For most Facebook users, sharing with friends and family is one and the same.

I also call into question the premise that Segmentation = Privacy. Keeping your Friends in separate rooms is not the same thing as Privacy.

Worse, they did a terrible job of it. (^_^); My Family List had my wife's niece on it, but not my wife. Or any of my immediate family.

How to Handle This: Luckily Lists are easily removable. Scroll to the left of the List name until you see the pencil icon. Click "Hide." (I find, however, that my Lists have reappeared this AM, despite removing them yesterday. That could be very annoying.) Once Lists were removed, I found my Feed returning to a format I was more comfortable with.


The Update Ticker

I like this, although this wins as the number one "Turn this damn thing off!" that I see in comments. In the right sidebar, the top now is a ticker of comments by friends or on friends' posts.

How to Handle This: Lifehacker has posted an article on how to kill the Update ticker.

Scrolling Top Toolbar

A colleague of mine and long-time friend, Bonnie Wasilewski, pointed out the neat new feature of the top Toolbar scrolling down the page with you. Now you don't have to scroll back to the top to see notifications or get back to your home. I hadn't even noticed this, until she pointed it out, but dang! it's useful!

How to Handle This: Use it. No matter where you are on the site, you'll see what's going on in your world, without having to jump up and down the page.


Subscribe Button

For those of us with public lives, this is a welcome feature. Now people can read our posts, without us having to "Friend" them.

You can read status updates, see links and feel part of the life of your favorite celebrities and thinkiner, without having the right to communicate with them. Think of Subscribe like reading a newspaper in your home used to be. You get to read, but there's no real way to comment in real-time.

How to Handle This: Each post you make can be marked Friends, Public or Custom. You default to Friends, but if you don't mind your Subscribers reading something, mark it Public.


Conclusion 

The biggest problem in all these changes is Facebook's misunderstanding of their audience. In their desperate attempt to stay relevant and cutting edge, they are losing people from both edges of their usage curve.

People who wanted Google+-like features are already on Google+. I see many comments to the effect that people are "done" with Facebook and can be found exclusively at G+ now. (This is an issue I want to write about at length later, because in Social Media, you can't take your ball and go home.)

On the other end of the curve, are Mom and Pop users who really only wanted to see their kids and grandkids and share some pictures. The new changes will alienate and confuse these people, and over-complicate the site needlessly for them.

In the end, when the kerfuffle has settled, and everyone has gotten used to the Good, Bad and Ugly of the new format, Facebook will change it all around again. (Update: Facebook has already announced more changes to come, starting off with Facebook Timelines. Stay tuned!)

This is what happens when Facebook changes its layout - The Oatmeal