Joining a group???
Details: I have observed that patrons sign onto Communities where they have to join a group.
I'm a Missionary in Communities. I was Group Leader for 4 groups.
Kentucky 251 members; Georgia 66 members; North Carolina 123 members; South Carolina 59 members.
During my time in the old community, not one of the people in either group ever posted a question to the group or answered a question by another patron.
I would @ a specific group when I found a question in General Topics ( for instance) that could be answered by someone on one of my groups. No answer form the @ed group. I would then do my best to answer the patron. Occasionally I would @ someone I knew in the mission to get help for the patron. :(
No but me posted anything in the 4 groups. I posted things in the groups that I thought might be enticing, but no response.
One of the patrons who asked a question that could have been answered by some member in ie Kentucky, didn't get an answer until I answered. He mentioned that looking at the group without any activity was disheartening and didn't look good for the Community as a whole.
All of this is to say that I wish patrons could establish an account in Communities without having to pick a Group; ands then browse through the groups, asking here and commenting there.
Perhaps the tracking of patrons is linked to their use of a group. Still a patron can go to other groups and comment or ask a question without joining that group, right? I'm not sure of that, as I'm in Communities Mission, and can't test if a patron can do that.
It seems that a wide open Community (with each patron having an account) would be fun and useful.
Groups such as mine could be grouped together.
I don't know. It just seems constricting and restricting, to have patrons belong to a group and never go back after their initial post.
I get it that the algorithms might not be able to be written to accommodate that kind of freedom of movement within the Community, and still keep track of patrons. My son is a systems architect, so I get that.
Maybe someone thinks that "belonging" to a group is satisfying somehow. I don't know.
Anyway, that is my comment and I will try to keep quiet about that now.
Love FamilySearch.org.
Well, I did have another thought.
Perhaps missionaries could be called to a group to answer questions, instead of patrons having to join a group. Sort of like FamilySearch call in system.
I loved my mission in the FamilySearch call in. I served two years. Loved it, loved it. But I got really tired with the hours required, not to mention I always went over the required time, having so much fun.
I will stop here, but you can call me anytime and I will visit with you regarding Family History.
Yours,
Anitra Whittle
Comments
-
I am not currently, and have not been in the past, a member of a Group, as the main purpose of any Group has not been in respect of my main interest.
However, prior to this new Vanilla platform, it was possible to answer questions posted in a Group, even if you were not a Group member. On occasions I did this, and I was able to respond with information that was new, and I assume not known to anyone in the Group.
However with the change to the Vanilla platform, this ability for any one to comment to a group has been taken away which seems to be a very retrograde step,
There has been a previous topic on this matter March 16 [2021], which I commented on
"Posting to groups we are not members of" https://community.familysearch.org/en/discussion/comment/251323#Comment_251323
There was some discussion on this topic, including responses which felt it was no great problem to restrict responses to Group Members. However, my view is that it was A BAD decision.
The FamilySearch response was "This is not a feature that will be available in this community. You will be required to be a member of a group if you desire to post into it." I have yet to see anything from FamilySearch as to the reasons this change in practice was made.
FamilySearch employee Caleb Love said 18 March 2021
“As the FamilySearch website continues to get larger the community will begin to see a larger number of people entering that just need one question answered with no intent on returning. They don't want to have ongoing interaction or receive news, updates, and additional resources around these topics.
Rather than lump these individuals in with the enthusiasts we have created somewhat of a funnel where people who are interested in getting one answer have a place to go, that can also act as a feeder to draw people toward those related groups. Otherwise, you end up with Giant groups with very little participation.
So think of the help center categories as "Transactional Support" vs Groups that arre ongoing interaction, sharing and support”. https://community.familysearch.org/en/discussion/comment/232160/#Comment_232160
On the same topic as Caleb Love's response, FamilySearch employee Mark E Mitchell said "The category is for more general questions the group is better for more specific questions".
From Anitra's comments above, it would appear both that Groups are being set up in situations where there is no actual demand for a Group, (who is doing that?) and that persons are being directed to Groups to have “one off “questions answered, where the Help Center Categories would be the appropriate place.
I do not specifically know how people end up being directed to Groups, but I think what is missing on the Community Main page is a clear description about Help Center Categories and Groups and what is the appropriate place to posts. At the moment the FamilySearch view seems to be that you can post where you want and you will get answered, but this I have noted that the person who replies “officially”definitely varies according to where you post. In addition the current unstructured/ confused structure set up does not encourage input from people in general as they have no way of knowing where there are likely to be posts where they could input their knowledge. Also see the topic "The Community has too many alternative areas for ease of use" https://community.familysearch.org/en/discussion/comment/234434#Comment_234434
On this topic Mark E Mitchell commented on 25 March 2021 " The comments of this organization being confusing are noted and we will look at improving. Please note that these concerns have been noted and are being considered. There are some very complex issues brought up in this thread and all angles have to be considered before action is taken"
No changes of any kind seem to have been made yet, some three weeks later, but I think those who are seeking information are the losers under the existing structure for Communities.
Edit: I have now seen that the same topic has been posted under a different title "Suggest Community membership instead of having to join community and declare a group" https://community.familysearch.org/en/discussion/83856/suggest-community-membership-instead-of-having-to-join-community-and-declare-a-group which had a comment by Paul W.
2
