commit: fb200d8 - #595 (2014-04-14 00:44:57 -0400)
Anytime you create a scoring system that entices people to do things the right way in order to be scored higher (think capitalism, or on a lesser scale and perhaps more relatable, Google.)
Think about it, that's exactly what some of us do as internet marketers. Google learned as they grew. They changed up their algorithm, added different variables, etc. And we're starting to see more and more of where it's headed. They're encouraging us to post relevant content on relatable sites, and that's what will help with rankings (and more importantly drive organic traffic.)
Now on a lesser scale, think inbound.org. It's purpose is to encourage people to post awesome content they find, and the more awesome content they find, the higher karma they get. Which really is just a trust scale. Will you find posers that are just trying to get karma (build rankings, get more money, etc.)? of course. But those are the glitches that inbound.org will learn as they grow.
Do I really feel like inbound.org is the be all end all for awesome articles online that help internet marketers learn? No. But I think they've established pretty well that they're trying to help their respective community grow.
Well said! That's exactly what I was trying to get across in my response on the "what's wrong" thread, but I think you've explained it better here.
I guess it really all comes down to what you use inbound.org for. If you pop in every few days to check out new, crowdsourced content, then it's doing a pretty good job. If you're looking to interact with other like-minded individuals and discuss different topics related to inbound marketing and the like, then I think inbound has a long ways to go. In fact, the mere fact that a new topic was created to continue the discussion that was happening in theother post illustrates that discussions are not happening the way that they should be.
Overall, I don't think it's a binary "inbound is good" versus "inbound is bad" situation, but rather some aspects which work for people and some which can be improved. As you mention, article curation through voting is working pretty well right now, so maybe some time can be devoted to improving the discussion side of things (such as moving comment upvote arrows to the same place as article upvotes, prioritizing/organizing comments in the tree based on upvotes, and possibly weighting comment votes to facilitate discussion and thought provoking contributions).
I agree with that. It's continually evolving. And I was even thinking that if you could monitor (and display) how many people are checking their own karma score, than it may show who is contributing for a strictly karma purpose, and who actually wants to participate in synergy content (something I just made up, and kind of like.) That's at least one way you might be able to do it. But I understand that may be a complicated process.
Those are all excellent ideas Jeff. Ed/Jon/Ben - worth a look!
Pulled it as a quote into Basecamp :)
I really appreciate Harper's POV now a lot more than I did when I posted the other thread, which I approached pretty much solely from my perspective, but came across as all compassing (fatal error). Rand summed it up really well in that thread too.
I think Jeff really hits home what Inbound is all about - it's how we all use it. I, personally, am more inclined to visit due to that interaction, while getting a flavour for one or two things I may have missed.
I do feel that maybe separating comments and submissions incentives, as mentioned here by Jeff and a few others in the other thread, might be a good idea - will sort of cater two both ends of the spectrum as it were.
Can it be that you forgot a part of your first sentence: "Anytime you create a scoring system that entices people to do things the right way in order to be scored higher"? because I don't seem to get it.
Yeah, I guess I cut off a complete sentence there, didn't I? Whoops. I essentially finished that first sentence with the rest of the post. Let me know if anything else confuses you.
Personally I don't see any major issues with inbound.
I pop in once every few days, pick up a couple of good posts, upvote a few, maybe leave a comment (not often) then leave. I'm more than happy with it.
Yeah - I'm not here all the time, but every time I visit, I find useful stuff, and when I find useful stuff, I submit it (though someone's almost always submitted it first, which makes me feel very confident that the good stuff is making its way here).
i dig the new, collective-community post option - alternative to discussions that may otherwise be impeded by twitter's structure or other resistance/reluctance (me included) to use G+ more or at all.
I do too. I'd like it separate from the articles though.
i think less people would partake if it was separate - just a guess
In all honesty, after seeing how well your discussion on technical marketers was picked up, it encouraged me to make my community post as well.
It's a really terrific feature - if more or none incentives are thrown at the facility to encourage it won't matter to me: I'll always keep an eye out for them and look forward to them immensely.
As an SEO, Inbound is one of the tabs I open every morning when I get into the office and keep open throughout the day; not because every submission is gold, but because it is an aggregate of people who are not only familiar with the industry but are interested in sharing knowledge from sources other than their own website or blog. Staying up on everything happening in the industry is near impossible, and believing that following only the well known sites (i.e, Search Engine Land, SEOmoz, etc...) is naive in nature. I have added at least a dozen new sites to my reader that I would never have found had it not been for this site. Sure, people have gamed the system, and will continue to do so, but at this point it is apparent which users on here contribute quality content on a daily basis. Gaining credibility within a community for providing educational, thought-provoking and real use-case material is a fantastic idea and is the driver behind why the site has grown and will continue to do so. Who cares if no one is conversing directly on the site, it is providing value for those who use it in the capacity that it was designed to serve.
Just my 2 cents...
I went ahead and flagged this for you ;D
For a starter like me I am using inbound to find articles that will help me learn new internet marketing skills and in the other way I am sharing some article that I read to contribute to this community.