1,496
edits
User:Martind: Difference between revisions
From London Hackspace Wiki
no edit summary
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 75: | Line 75: | ||
* [http://runningahackerspace.tumblr.com/ Running a Hackerspace Tumblr] | * [http://runningahackerspace.tumblr.com/ Running a Hackerspace Tumblr] | ||
* etc. | * etc. | ||
== Managing Growth == | |||
(This section is still new, will be refined over time.) | |||
A great discussion of Wikipedia's struggle to deal with growth and simultaneously retain new users: "[http://www-users.cs.umn.edu/~halfak/publications/The_Rise_and_Decline/ The Rise and Decline of an Open Collaboration Community: How Wikipedia's reaction to sudden popularity is causing its decline]". The similarities to LHS growth patterns are striking. | |||
Summary: | |||
* automated reversion tools help reduce spam, but users employing them on newcomers' edits don't often explain why edits are reverted, which alienates new people | |||
** LHS: the "rule hammer" may get applied to newcomers' transgressions too quickly without always explaining well what just happened | |||
* there's a great barrier to entry when formulating policy changes, hard for newcomers to engage, and newcomer considerations are consequently not included well | |||
So I'm thinking... | |||
* maybe there should be a cost to rule hammer use: don't moderate without explaining | |||
* re newcomer representation for policy changes: | |||
** we could consider proxies (people who frequently engage with newcomers and can empathise) | |||
** or even panels (invited groups of newcomers) when discussing policy changes | |||
** of course that's hard to reconcile with our very informal approach to policy-making | |||
** I also still think there's great value in building safe teaching spaces to learn the culture; pledge drives and social nights work well I think, and I'm still hoping the Hack the Space Day will become more popular | |||
== Spc Mgmt == | == Spc Mgmt == | ||
