W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webplatform@w3.org > April 2015

Re: Webplatform Facebook Group

From: Russell <sgtpooki@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2015 23:24:55 +0000
Message-ID: <CADDMQ18atKqZaDR1vbcOSr6jcC8uRnOJDPuRoD8P73-CruVnjg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, abhimanyu0003 <abhimanyu@japanaddicts.org>, Ann-Katrin Travelling <aktravelling@hotmail.com>
Cc: Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>, "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>
I'll volunteer to help out. I just left the dupe group and put in a request
to join the webplatform.org group.

On Sat, Apr 18, 2015, 2:11 PM Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote:

> Hi, Abhimanyu, all–
>
> I'm also going to be gone next week, so forgive my silence for a bit.
>
> I think it's unrealistic to simply set up a Facebook page and expect
> activity on it. We've had several people sign up, but there's been no
> direction on when or why to use that Facebook group vs this mailing
> list, or any other forum.
>
> Merely having a Facebook group isn't magic; it has to be part of a
> strategy, and a concerted effort; this was a large part of my original
> reservations about the idea.
>
> So, generally, what do we want to do on the Facebook group, on G+, on
> Twitter, or on any social media? Concretely, let's focus on Facebook on
> this thread, for now.
>
> Abhimanyu made a suggestion on the FB page the we start WebSundays:
> "Next Sunday: 19th April. Let's make it count. Earmark what pages you'll
> be working on and set an hour or more aside for just WebPlatform and
> nothing else".
>
> This is a good idea, and it's concrete. I think it should be spread more
> widely, not just on FB; maybe a blog post and tweet as well (and
> certainly this list!), maybe with a bit more advance notice (I'm
> personally busy the next 2 Sundays).
>
> We can play it by ear, but let's keep our expectations realistic and
> come up with a loose gameplan.
>
>
> BTW, in addition to having the conversation split, as PhistucK warns,
> it's more effort to help drive conversations and community; Abhimanyu
> has stepped up to help guide the Facebook group, but it will probably
> take more than one person. Any volunteers?
>
> Regards–
> –Doug
>
>
> On 4/18/15 7:19 AM, abhimanyu0003 wrote:
> > Okay so we now have a Facebook group (if we want, we can gave a G+
> > community later). First, we need to make this one active. But I see no
> > headways. Ofc, it'll take time, but come on, let's show some initiative,
> > everybody :D
> >
> > We just have to get it started and once it picks up, I'll start
> > publicising it. Let's get some good discussions and technical questions
> > in there.
> >
> > Here's the link, if someone needs it right now:
> > https://www.facebook.com/groups/webplatform.org/
> >
> > There's nothing else happening in the mailing list, otherwise we could
> > port the discussion to the group. But let's not get disappointed and
> > start fresh discussions. Everything starts small and we don't need
> > top-notch discussions or serious matters right now. Just easygoing stuff
> > posted once a while and people commenting/liking it. That's all I need.
> >
> > Btw, I'll be offline for a few days. I'll be back by Thursday I think,
> > and I expect good activity by then, so that I can begin publicising.
> >
> > Good luck everyone!
> >
> > ---
> > </Abhimanyu>
> >
> >
> > ---- On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 16:37:22 +0530 *Ann-Katrin Travelling
> > <aktravelling@hotmail.com>* wrote ----
> >
> >     I tend to disagree. In my circles it tends to be the other way
> >     around, actually, Facebook is dying down more and more, and mainly
> >     consists of people posting links and cute baby pictures, while the
> >     forums I am part of on Google Plus are quite active.
> >
> >     My personal experience, based on my interests, and my circles is
> >     that food and healthy living discussions are very animated on
> Facebook
> >     Technical discussions and photo discussions, especially around
> >     techniques etc are very active on G+.
> >
> >     I agree with the suggestion to have both;
> >     Some users prefer Facebook, and refuse Google+
> >     Other users prefer Google+ and refuse Facebook.
> >     Other users distinguish between what they do on different social
> >     networks, and use FB for private matters and discussions and Google+
> >     for public or professional.
> >
> >     We need to offer the alternatives. But yes, there will also be some
> >     discussions that are on one rather than the other platform, I
> >     personally think that is OK.
> >
> >     Ann-Katrin
> >
> >
> >
> >      > Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 10:48:11 +0200
> >      > From: jirka@kosek.cz <mailto:jirka@kosek.cz>
> >      > To: schepers@w3.org <mailto:schepers@w3.org>; sgtpooki@gmail.com
> >     <mailto:sgtpooki@gmail.com>; abhimanyu@japanaddicts.org
> >     <mailto:abhimanyu@japanaddicts.org>; public-webplatform@w3.org
> >     <mailto:public-webplatform@w3.org>
> >      > Subject: Re: Webplatform Facebook Group
> >      >
> >      > On 17.4.2015 5:24, Doug Schepers wrote:
> >      > > I tend agree with you that G+ might be a better place to get
> >      > > high-quality contributions,
> >      >
> >      > G+? G+ is dead place. If you want get some traction Facebook is
> >     way to
> >      > go (not that I like it, but this is fact).
> >      >
> >      > Jirka
> >      >
> >      > --
> >      > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> >      > Jirka Kosek e-mail: jirka@kosek.cz <mailto:jirka@kosek.cz>
> >     http://xmlguru.cz
> >      > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> >      > Professional XML and Web consulting and training services
> >      > DocBook/DITA customization, custom XSLT/XSL-FO document processing
> >      > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> >      > OASIS DocBook TC member, W3C Invited Expert, ISO JTC1/SC34 rep.
> >      > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> >      > Bringing you XML Prague conference http://xmlprague.cz
> >      > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> >      >
> >
> >
> >
>
Received on Monday, 20 April 2015 06:17:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 20 April 2015 06:17:41 UTC