Is There a Reason for Groups on NT?
Perhaps there are groups that are of interest to certain members of NT, but are they really worth the effort to maintain? Most of the groups on NT have a membership of around 10% or less of the general membership at large which denotes a definite lack of interest in the specific topics. A case in point, and the reason I have written this article, is that the Classic Cinema group which I founded shows four posted articles (all of which were posted by me) but only one of them bears one single comment, and that comment was written by me. As for the "like" designation, only I have triggered it in all cases. The word "group" is defined in the context of NT as being a collection of people with a common interest, but as I see it that interest does not seem to be manifest. There is no purpose for a "group" if that group in reality only consists of one person.
A solution is to post articles both to the specific group AND to the general forum, but why the extra effort to post twice. It's a waste of time to post to the group if nobody makes the effort to exercise their professed interest in the group. Maybe it's all because of the election, which seems to be the topic of choice these days not just on NT, but everywhere else. However, I see no reason for maintaining a group called "Classic Cinema" so if I can find a way to delete it, I will do so. 
Tags
Who is online
431 visitors
That is the problem with groups on Newstalkers for sure. The articles dont find their way to the front page, and so they get lost. So, unless you have a group with active membership, I see no reason for a groups existence.
You are correct Robert!
Peter,(BTW you had me on your name today, LOL!)
Groups on NT function no differently as groups elsewhere. Unless you have a very active membership, the article do get lost. I am trying something new. I will be featuring open groups on the front board, showing what articles are now currently running. If you look now, you will see the photography group, has it's articles on the front board. I'd like some feedback on this.
But you are all right, if you don't seem to have an active membership, then you might want to rethink your group.
That would be a good idea. One difference is that elsewhere like NV for example, you can post to multiple venues (or could pre-nations anyway, lol). Therefore, if you posted an article, you could choose to post the article to any group you were a member of as well as choosing to post to all of newsvine as well. So, I could post an article to any or all of my groups depending on where I wanted the article to be received, and could also post it to Newsvine in general, allowing it to appear on the front page. That one distinction is what, in my opinion, makes groups ineffectual here unless the group exists for a specific function, such as the woman group or the grepolis group for example, where the specific nature of the group makes it a valid entity for its members.
It is my opinion that groups is the one area in which our site fails to capture its full potential.
John,
I know that people participate in talking about movies or music. They have been among some of our most popular articles when I see them running on the main board. The bigger question is if the groups will produce the same amount of attention.
Some folks are glad to see articles on the board, that are non-political. That is why we don't hide any article on the front board as not news. An article will do well by what the membership decide.
BTW, we do have groups that are very active. When creating a group, you have to be your own promoter. You can't think that if you create it, they will come, and come again.
Buzz,
Why not post to the TAB "ENTERTAINMENT"? That way your article HEADLINE appears on the FRONT PAGE as soon as you post a REPLY after creating and saving the article by clicking on "ADD DISCUSSION". Somehow make your headline indicate that "Classic Cinema" is the underlying theme of any given article.
Although it's not the same as posting to a group per se, at least theoretically, those who might be "subject" inclined will be alerted and hopefully, join in.
Even if one takes the trouble to post an article both to the specific group and the general forum, the comments made on the one on the general forum do not show up on the one posted to the specific group.
I'll try that next time, A.Mac, thanks.
Actually, that is very interesting. But that would make for a very activepoliticalgroup and only fluff on the front page.
Double posting would result in something like NV has and stuff that is posted in the same article in an NV group,never shows up on the main page article...which is pretty much like what we have here.
The feeds do help showcase the groups, but I can't have feeds for each group.
If there are suggestions on how to max the groups on the site, please put it out there.
It would be bound to be particularly active these days. After tomorrow
I suppose if I did a headline on News and Politics like "Both Obama and Romney are Bums, Vote for Clint Eastwood" followed by a classic movie story about Clint Eastwood, or "Humphrey Bogart Would be a Better American President", it would get some attention. lol
Hey Buzz, don't laugh! Mal wrote an article about that here:
To which I wrote this:
I went back to NV and read both of your
I think I know why when I add a reply it cuts off the last part. It happened to me a few times now, once earlier on a comment I made above. I think I must click "Add Reply" too quickly. My computer is old and cranky so I guess it needs a moment to do what I ask. The comment should have read:
I went back to NV and read both of your links, and enjoyed both of them. I added a comment to yours.
Oh good Buzz. I will check it out.