Thoughts for IMPROVING the community
Moderator
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 12,904
Likes: 93
From: Big Box suburb, IL
[QUOTE=Kamron,Mar 31 2010, 11:33 AM] 
One other realization I think we have to make as a community is that for the first time we will naturally be losing instead of gaining potential members.
One other realization I think we have to make as a community is that for the first time we will naturally be losing instead of gaining potential members.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,426
Likes: 5
From: Royal Oak, Michigan
Urmil, I'm not really sure that your two "primary goals" are mutually exclusive, and maybe you didn't even mean them to be so???
My point would be, what's wrong with thinking even more broadly? For example, isn't keeping current participants just as important as attracting new participants (why is that necessarily divided into primary and secondary goals, what's wrong with equal weight)??
My point would be, what's wrong with thinking even more broadly? For example, isn't keeping current participants just as important as attracting new participants (why is that necessarily divided into primary and secondary goals, what's wrong with equal weight)??
Moderator
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 12,904
Likes: 93
From: Big Box suburb, IL
Kamron,
You're right, there's only an assumption that both goals cannot be mutually exclusive. However, there was a point were the community tried to keep active non-owners and new owners mixed into the same culture.
Trying to keep a current culture alive when new owners are coming into a mix is near impossible. Culture of the group changes as the dynamic of the group changes...just by one addition or as few as two subtractions of active posters and meet attendees.
If enough new people start participating, current non-owners aren't going to stick with the change because the interpersonal relationships will change (people will disagree with this, but it's true).
If not enough new people participate, the culture won't change to welcome the newbies...the status quo of keeping the culture for the current community will stay alive, regardless of who still owns the S2000 (even this is fine...as long as it's stated as a goal; but don't be surprised when more and more UMW S2000 owners start showing up on local sites like MWIR.net, S2KCA, or some other homegrown site.
If anyone can come up with a way of maintaining a community culture that encourages new people to join and participate while no one else leaves...your talents are better served at a large Fortune 50 company or a change management consulting company than here at S2Ki.
You're right, there's only an assumption that both goals cannot be mutually exclusive. However, there was a point were the community tried to keep active non-owners and new owners mixed into the same culture.
Trying to keep a current culture alive when new owners are coming into a mix is near impossible. Culture of the group changes as the dynamic of the group changes...just by one addition or as few as two subtractions of active posters and meet attendees.
If enough new people start participating, current non-owners aren't going to stick with the change because the interpersonal relationships will change (people will disagree with this, but it's true).
If not enough new people participate, the culture won't change to welcome the newbies...the status quo of keeping the culture for the current community will stay alive, regardless of who still owns the S2000 (even this is fine...as long as it's stated as a goal; but don't be surprised when more and more UMW S2000 owners start showing up on local sites like MWIR.net, S2KCA, or some other homegrown site.
If anyone can come up with a way of maintaining a community culture that encourages new people to join and participate while no one else leaves...your talents are better served at a large Fortune 50 company or a change management consulting company than here at S2Ki.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 528
Likes: 0
From: Chicago
Based on what I read, I thought I understood the issues, and tried to present ideas to resolve them, but after seeing all these comments about how the forum was conducted in the past, I'm not sure I get it. I see comments about owners vs. past owners/enthusiasts and how to conduct meets, site not being as "fun" as it used to be, lack of dialog (although winter may have contributed to that), and general complaints about threads being locked down prematurely.
Can anyone please elaborate and explain what the issues are exactly first? Is there a UMW mission statement somewhere that captures the goals of this group?
Can anyone please elaborate and explain what the issues are exactly first? Is there a UMW mission statement somewhere that captures the goals of this group?
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,426
Likes: 5
From: Royal Oak, Michigan
Chris, I think that everyone is concerned about the same thing, and it comes down to one word, apathy, lack of interest. Reduced posting, reduced attendance at meets, reduced meets, etc., not to mention voter apathy when it came to selection of past and perhaps future COs.
The confusion exists because there are quite a number of different opinions as to the cause and solution for improvement.
The confusion exists because there are quite a number of different opinions as to the cause and solution for improvement.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,426
Likes: 5
From: Royal Oak, Michigan
Let me clarify my above post, I'm not saying that members/owners around here are apathetic, I'm just saying that to the extent that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, the community has a greater feeling of apathy than perhaps it had in the past.
Former Moderator
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 105,828
Likes: 152
I'm still stuck on the whole official / unofficial piece.... I don't know why there is a need to "label" an event. I think it's being overnalayzed... and far as "asshats" go.... you get those at a local parking lot meet, you get those at Dragon events, Fall Colors, etc... so I don't know if you designate an event official/unofficial based on who organizes, or who is there, or where it's at, etc....
Event is an event.. no? Meeting for dinner and hanging out somewhere to me is a GTG, not some much an event... but again, I'm basing this off Ohio's community experience so I am by no means saying that's the way it should be for UMW...
I'm still learning how things work here... but the insight that everyone is providing is very good and I think there are lots of good ideas...
Moderator
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 12,904
Likes: 93
From: Big Box suburb, IL
Mocky,
In the past "Official" and "unofficial" got thrown around because at one point, we had standing Thursday night meets almost every week; like how the Seattle crew has been doing it.
When I and WSB planned the standing meet, they were meant to be inclusive of all ages and interests (regarding activity).
It was always encouraged that members (and not just CO's) organize meets. So at one of the pinnacle years of the UMW, one or two members organized a few Thursday night bar or bowling alley meets. These were anything but inclusive....we pretty much had all owners at that time with maybe three or four past owners...so that wasn't the issue.
The issue was that minors couldn't come to the standing Thursday night when they were at bars. The nights of bowling alley meets, owners that weren't particularly fond of bowling didn't show...and minors that came would be kicked out after 9 or 10pm (due to age restrictions in a drinking establishment). It seemed at the time that people were content meeting, eating, drinking, and then parking lot pimp for Thursday nights.
The result of it was that Thursday night meets that were UMW "Official" had to be inclusive. Cliques that didn't like having to follow the greater community standards for Thursdays started doing "unofficial" meets....then after that, they did meets planned via PM, phone call, etc.
Some people didn't see the greater good, or the common goal for the community...from my perspective they were more about the "me" and "I" factor; or they got stuck with tunnel vision and saw their clique as the community itself without realizing they were the small percentage of active members. The "me's" and "I's" are apparent in this thread....
One thing the CO's and members in the past used to do well was, for the most part, talk about the "we's" and truly mean 'we, the UMW'.
That was part of the change Charlie and I were trying to cause....instead a clique rallied around and against a common enemy.
In the past "Official" and "unofficial" got thrown around because at one point, we had standing Thursday night meets almost every week; like how the Seattle crew has been doing it.
When I and WSB planned the standing meet, they were meant to be inclusive of all ages and interests (regarding activity).
It was always encouraged that members (and not just CO's) organize meets. So at one of the pinnacle years of the UMW, one or two members organized a few Thursday night bar or bowling alley meets. These were anything but inclusive....we pretty much had all owners at that time with maybe three or four past owners...so that wasn't the issue.
The issue was that minors couldn't come to the standing Thursday night when they were at bars. The nights of bowling alley meets, owners that weren't particularly fond of bowling didn't show...and minors that came would be kicked out after 9 or 10pm (due to age restrictions in a drinking establishment). It seemed at the time that people were content meeting, eating, drinking, and then parking lot pimp for Thursday nights.
The result of it was that Thursday night meets that were UMW "Official" had to be inclusive. Cliques that didn't like having to follow the greater community standards for Thursdays started doing "unofficial" meets....then after that, they did meets planned via PM, phone call, etc.
Some people didn't see the greater good, or the common goal for the community...from my perspective they were more about the "me" and "I" factor; or they got stuck with tunnel vision and saw their clique as the community itself without realizing they were the small percentage of active members. The "me's" and "I's" are apparent in this thread....
One thing the CO's and members in the past used to do well was, for the most part, talk about the "we's" and truly mean 'we, the UMW'.
That was part of the change Charlie and I were trying to cause....instead a clique rallied around and against a common enemy.
Moderator
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 12,904
Likes: 93
From: Big Box suburb, IL
...let me add to the 'official' and 'unofficial' thought as some members have communicated it. It's VERY different than what it originally was used for.
It's a positive change from my standpoint of seeing and experiencing all the change through the 10 years...like I've said before, throw it against a wall and see if it sticks.
It's a positive change from my standpoint of seeing and experiencing all the change through the 10 years...like I've said before, throw it against a wall and see if it sticks.