AWF Newsletter - thoughts?

[Jon]

Also I agree with ebs #12 post, wherein they made the implication that attributing value or worth to threads solely according to # of posts might not be the way to go.

The documentation has no mention for how it determines what is popular. And there are no options to change how it decides.

 

[Isaac]

Perhaps it is by design. Let's say someone hasn't been to the site in a while and they see 30 notifications. Am I correct in thinking they would have to go to each notification page to remove them under your suggested system?

Yes. That would be the most useful function of the red arrow IMO. Meaning the "Unread red #" would remain "unread red" as long as things are actually unread.

The way it is now is the other extreme. The instant you click the Notification - without actually reading any posts - the red # is gone forever.

Now the burden of those 30 notifications is substantial - you have to manaully count, visually, down to 30, to know you're caught up.
Actually the higher the number of unread items, the harder this makes it. I feel this is why I miss stuff. I have to try to remember "ok, a few minute ago the red # said 5. I clicked it once and read one item. Then I refreshed the site and it said 2. 5+2=7, but I read one thing, so really 6. Now I must count down 6 things before it turns read again and I have to recalibrate"

 

[Jon]

Ok, I have a different view. For me it is more convenient to click the notifications bell and see the list. Then it clears. It is by design to work that way. Maybe others here have a workflow that will help you achieve the same goal without using the notifications #?

Do you follow threads or something? If you explain how you use the notifications, maybe others can chip in with solutions.

 

[Isaac]

Yes, I can see people could have varying personal approaches to this, maybe just the way each person's brain works.

I will admit that there is an entire 'other' approach, that is to just go to Forums and see which ones are in bold print. Go through them one by one.
The downside is, that includes "any new unread" posts, even if they would not qualify for the red notification as per one's settings, but at least I can eyeball through them and any titles I recognize, I know I still need to click on them.

I just think it would be more powerful for the red notification # to keep up with all that for me - but perhaps I am asking a bit too much in the first place.

Either way it's not a true complaint, I think AWF is pretty nifty just as it is

 

[Jon]

Do you ever click the What's New button?

What's new

Then you don't have to go to each forum section, but instead just look at that list.

 

[pbaldy]

I think it's a great idea, maybe some members could write an article for the periodical...?

Thank you for volunteering!

 

[NauticalGent]

Thank you for volunteering!

"Access For Dummies, From a Dummy"...it could work!

 

[sonic8]

It is auto selected so not sure of the criteria. Maybe it is number of views, or number of replies within a certain period.

That would only be some sort of "click bait booster", primarily promoting threads with misleading subjects and/or high-volume + low-value discussions. I would absolutely NOT be interested in this.

I currently cannot imagine how to create a compelling newsletter without the effort of hand-curating the content.

 

[ebs17]

The idea I had was to increase engagement of those who are not one of the regulars.

In other words: The traffic from occasional visitors and thus the attractiveness of the forum and the loyalty to the forum should be increased. Regular visitors are present anyway.

So what would interest and motivate an occasional or one-time visitor who subscribes to the newsletter to visit the forum again?

 

[Jon]

So what would interest and motivate an occasional or one-time visitor who subscribes to the newsletter to visit the forum again?

Reminding them of the forum might help. I've subscribed to an occasional newsletter from other forums and ended up visiting as a result. They just went off my radar until I was prompted again.

 

[Gasman]

Reminding them of the forum might help. I've subscribed to an occasional newsletter from other forums and ended up visiting as a result. They just went off my radar until I was prompted again.

We have had people pop by recently, that joined ages ago, have only a few posts in total, and are only back again now, as they need our help again? They will again disappear when their problem is solved.

So, I believe we will only see those people when they need help. Very few if any, give anything back?

 

[NauticalGent]

I agree with Sonic8's words as far as content, but I also agree with Jon's words about a cyber "nudge". If the newsletter had some good content:
1. Most popular topics/threads with or without the non-Access threads
2. Hailing new members since last newsletter
3. A "how-to" from a featured AWF member as the author.
4. Links to AWF member's sites/YouTube channels

But this would require, and Phil has said, a significant amount of hand-curating. I would suggest a monthly periodicity and a small but viable and willing staff to put it together.

Edit: I know who I would recommend as a true "Dream Team" for this product!

 

[pbaldy]

I know who I would recommend as a true "Dream Team" for this product!

Kudos to you for volunteering once again!

 

[NauticalGent]

Kudos to you for volunteering once again!

Actually Paul, I had YOU pegged as one of the members!

 

[pbaldy]

Actually Paul, I had YOU pegged as one of the members!

Reminds me of the phrase "if nominated I will not run, if elected I will not serve".

I'm the least verbose of everybody here, a poor choice for newsletter writer.

 

[NauticalGent]

Reminds me of the phrase "if nominated I will not run, if elected I will not serve".

I'm the least verbose of everybody here, a poor choice for newsletter writer.

Being verbose is not a trait for writing a newsletter and it is the reason I would appoint you as one of the editors/contributors. If Jon asks, I will provide a complete list of prospects...

 

[Isaac]

as a verbose person I specifically agree with what NG said. inability to be succinct is actually a notable handicap, is what i've noticed anyway.

 

[isladogs]

Agreed!

 

[Isaac]

Then, there are also those who think they are succinct by simply being of few words, but that's not what succinct means.
I have had colleagues like that. Their extremely short responses require constant effort from others to elicit their meaning and ultimately, they spend more time explaining and fixing than they would have spent by just creating a long, but complete, starting point. Balance...