Communities versus Groups?

« Back to Previous Page
2
0

I just noticed a new addition to my feed, that is "communities" that I follow. I follow selected "topics", now...

Please to read the entire article.

Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 8, 2018 12:00 am
1 views
0
Private comment
Apparently Linkedin is planning to create global tags to create "Communities" and segment the feed.
This is not really new since they already tried similar things in the past and it was not working well.

1- If the tags are set only by Linkedin this will be a failure. Since there is no moderation and no way to have a "clean" tag . It will be a new opportunity for spammer.

2- If the tags are set freely by the user it will be hashtag, the same of Twitter. This could be interesting if they let also let users to create lists of people to follow.

But, I will keep using Twitter. To create a good list it takes a lot of time. Linkedin probably will change his mind again and again. Linkedin has already an history of creating problems to his most devoted users. Tags to aggregate personal contacts inside Linkedin was removed in the free plan.

In both the case this new "communities" will be a competitor for groups, so there will be less motivation to build a group and to be in a group
Marked as spam
Posted by Enrico Filippucci (Discussions: 0, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 7, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Yes, Mike Restivo, the same questions popped immediately to my mind upon happening upon the newly introduced "communities" structure -- again introduced without an iota of explanation.

https://www.linkedin.com/feed/follow/?

The structure of these "communities" appears to be eerily close to that of autonomous groups. And it would be appropriate, I believe, for a LinkedIn "Community Manager" such as Sophie Bonnet to explain how Groups will be differentiated from "Communities" and whether or not they will exist in a de facto competition with one another -- which I believe will ultimately be to the detriment of Groups. Cheers!
Marked as spam
Posted by PHIL FRIEDMAN (Discussions: 1, Comments: 18)
Replied on June 7, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
For the record, Mike, LI has already started arbitrarily manipulating involvement in "Communities" -- no doubt in accord with its own agenda, whatever that may be.

I have been using the "Your Communities" and "Hashtags You Follow" boxes that appear on my home page to cull communities that LI has decided I should follow. But LI continues to arbitrarily modify my selections and de-selections without my consent, adding back hashtags I've deleted and adding communities that I've elected not to follow.

Obviously, an autocratic and manipulative leopard cannot change its spots. And although I am, perhaps, reading too much into this, I believe it also belies any genuine interest on the part of LI to re-establish Groups in any reasonably functional (read independent, free of global algorithmically-controlled) form. Good luck to us all!
Marked as spam
Posted by PHIL FRIEDMAN (Discussions: 1, Comments: 18)
Replied on June 7, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
I, as usual fully agree with you PHIL FRIEDMAN, with the allowance that communities' structure and purpose either obvious or not so obvious, and groups' structure can co-exist for different and non competing if not even compatible(?) purposes. I find groups to be THE driver of UX involvement and satisfaction to specialized learning, which adds significant monetizable value to LinkedIn.com, much more than the global sized list of Microsoft OS subscribers only and integration of LinkedIn profiles with Microsoft's CRM alone. use of long form articles coupled with available access by all subscribers who choose to search and add them to their feed. Lack of propagation has killed publishing on LinkedIn for practical purposes and thereby killed the additional source of innovative, disruptive and monetizable added value to LinkedIn ad prospects' sales campaigns' revenue to Linkedin and thus to Microsoft shareholders. I find no comfort in NDAs; appears to hide unwelcome changes.
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 8, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Mike, I agree that "communities" and "Groups" could (could, not will) co-exist in a peaceful, mutually supplemental relationship. But what I see is that the launch of "communities" (which is clearly intended to run on autopilot -- or perhaps artificial unintelligence ) should give pause to those here and in other LIGOMM groups who think that we will ever see Groups restored to their original owner- and manager-run independence and autonomy, which BTW was what made many of the more successful groups so productive in terms of knowledge sharing and engagement.

Many believe that NDAs function as gags to premature sharing of great things to come, but my instinct is that in this case, the NDAs are actually earplugs (or blinders) intended to help LI move forward with what it has already determined the Groups redux will look like... damn the torpedos, full speed ahead. Cheers!
Marked as spam
Posted by PHIL FRIEDMAN (Discussions: 1, Comments: 18)
Replied on June 8, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
I just have my suspicions that groups will be replaced by communities; take them or leave them. Although a possible gain for publishers, without full elective notification to all subscribers who select a given author, even communities will be sub optimal experiences, but much better than nothing for self promotion, even to limited audience like at present. sigh. Groups advocates and creators/managers must investigate other forum software on personal web sites that will approximate groups functionality, even allowing for paid subscriptions too. Just my opinion. There are other collaborative initiatives afoot at present.
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 8, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Yes, again I agree, Mike. The issue of "elective notifications" simply cannot be minimized. Current experience publishing outside of groups is not precisely on point, but it does make a point about why there is pressure building for alternative collaborative initiatives. To wit, I currently have a total of somewhat more than 4,500 followers and 1st order connections on LinkedIn, the majority of whom are colleagues in the marine industry. The last several articles I published in the article (nee Pulse) feed garnered about 50 views or less each (compared to the thousands, sometimes tens of thousands of views I used to rack up). The reason is clearly LI's algorithmic over-ride of my followers self-elections to receive notifications of my postings. (... continued pt. II)
Marked as spam
Posted by PHIL FRIEDMAN (Discussions: 1, Comments: 18)
Replied on June 8, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Mike Restivo -- Pt II.

Contrast this with the fact that, when I post the same kind of professionally-oriented material in the post (Update) feed, I can drive views into the thousands by using tag-blasts to a small portion (maybe a hundred or so) of my followers and 1st order connections.

The implications of this are enormous for people who are serious about using LI for inbound marketing. They are also relevant for LIGOMMs who want to build robust, stable, meaningful groups. What has to be recognized by the "new" groups restructuring team is that it takes a tremendous effort on the part of LIGOMMs to run an effective group of any size... and without independent control being accorded to those LIGOMMs, it just isn't worth that effort and time. And nothing the LI marketeers say can change that. Cheers!
Marked as spam
Posted by PHIL FRIEDMAN (Discussions: 1, Comments: 18)
Replied on June 8, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Exactly!
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 8, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
I just noticed that I cannot edit or "like" my own posts to groups. What is this 1994? Facebook has long form posts and edits everywhere. Sigh
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 8, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
As we contemplate the potential performance of "Communities", Mike and all, you might be interested in the results of an experiment I started yesterday.

I posted a 3-part series of mine on boosting small-business profits as a "collection" on Google+. I then shared the Google+ collection to 1) the LI Update (Post) feed, and 2) separately in the #management Community. In the Update feed, I bypassed Algorithmic choke-down by means of a tag-blast in the comments to about 100 of my 4,500 followers and 1st level connections, whilst in the #management Community, I relied entirely on LI's robo-distribution to the claimed #management following of some 32 million. The results at the end of 24 hours are as follows:

Views in the #management Community - 118
Views in Update (Post) Feed - 1,004

cont... pt II

Marked as spam
Posted by PHIL FRIEDMAN (Discussions: 1, Comments: 18)
Replied on June 8, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Mike Restivo - pt II -

In short, organic distribution via my own network delivered almost TEN TIMES GREATER DISTRIBUTION than the robo-distribution in Communities for the same period of time.

This tells me that Communities will never do what Groups could do if LI restored Groups to the structure and autonomy that they had originally. It also tells me that, for that very reason, LI will never restore Groups to the structure and autonomy that they enjoyed when I first became a group owner. Cheers!
Marked as spam
Posted by PHIL FRIEDMAN (Discussions: 1, Comments: 18)
Replied on June 8, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Excellent work PHIL FRIEDMAN and most discouraging vis a vis communities propagation. When status updates, alias personal/business news releases as I call them get about 10 times or more than that of communities or groups, either human or algo driven, it begs the most fundamental question as to what anti-linking purpose is served by LinkedIn? Ya gotta work hard at being anti social, anti-business, anti-connection. Already in rant mode, sorry for same to the optimists reading, but reading is what almost all members of social media do. It is too easy to be of the understanding that this tech advanced period is a shared experience. It is not. The proverbial 90% members of all social media are readers and have no interest or motivation natively to contact meaningfully with anybody beyond circle of friends beyond social media, especially any kind of promotional contacts from business. For most persons, the social, career, business advantages of social media are left untouched. Cont...
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 9, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
continuing ... that doom and gloom demonstrates the challenges involved in any kind of promotion from job seeking to business and that considerable adaptive and adept skills are required even for relatively small rewards. My experience suggests taking various media platforms as they are and work with and through/around limitations but stop waiting for gate-keepers of any kind to hold back the innate success that all active business and social activists possess and exhibit constantly. To all these I congratulate you all for your extraordinary and always supportive, encouraging and edifying efforts. I try not to leave on a down note. So write once and republish at the risk of duplication of same over several groups, communities, platforms. One person's disturbance is another's promotion to cultivating a warm prospect's subliminal responsiveness. A lot of patience is required among the readers ... there are many others trying to help bro bono, supply goods and services, job seeking.
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 9, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
I thank all members' patience for tolerating my off topic tangents; often it is the implications and their solutions(?) that are more interesting and edifying than assertions of problems and the never ending expectation of solutions to same or at least the restoration to UX of years ago only. Sigh
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 9, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
"communities" will have an advantage over new groups, they will be visible from all Linkedin users and probably on internet. Unfortunately, Spam and fake accounts will be the new normal on Linkedin 's "communities".

It would be much better to have simply a good search tool for post and Groups content.

Twitter is working perfectly with few problems (spam and fake accounts), Linkedin strategy on communities will only maximize the worst side of Twitter.
Marked as spam
Posted by Enrico Filippucci (Discussions: 0, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 9, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
@Enrico Filippuci > “[Communities] ... will be visible from all Linkedin users and probably on internet ... “

Sorry, Enrico, but you have no basis on which to say that, except hope. LI has an established history of preventing that from happening for all but their anointed Influencers. Witness my recent experiment in which a post of mine in #management returned only 153 views against a nominal following of 32 million, but the same post distributed organically to only about 100 of my followers via a tag-blast returned nearly 1,100 views in the first 28 hours.

Views are a matter of numbers. If LI #management was showing my post to all its 32 million members, the view count would have have been in the thousands if not tens of thousands. But they weren’t. Which tells us that LI didn’t distribute to all the users who follow #management. And I am confident LI never will. Cheers!
Marked as spam
Posted by PHIL FRIEDMAN (Discussions: 1, Comments: 18)
Replied on June 9, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
… and that would be because if LI distributed every post to every relevant "following" member, we would each have feeds that we could never keep up with ...
Marked as spam
Posted by Peter Murchland (Discussions: 0, Comments: 28)
Replied on June 9, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
The lack of indented reply structure deprecates any thread. Sigh. Your observation is correct Peter Murchland. Placing messages from anything in feeds that scroll by without practical intervention, save leaning on the "back" selection for an open ended length of time: Wholly unacceptable. Easier is to dynamically create pages of one's followed messages, groups posts and communities posts. Just as one clicks on show all contacts/followers, or show more communities or discover more topics, and so on. This is using the code already available, just change some objects and method calls. An adolescent coder can easily do this. No scrolling more than a few pages which serve as notifications by definition, no need for separate notifications. There is a tension between polite expression and criticisms without solutions. That LinkedIn refuses(?) to use already in place code for multi-purposes is disappointing. Same applies to excuses why groups integration with main apps is years from now.
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 9, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Everyone needs to make sure you get at least a complete weekly export of all your data. None of us have any clue as to the ultimate fate of Linkedin but I know many of us have a lot invested in it (read brer rabbit and the tar-baby) and we need to make sure we don't get caught short or stuck.
Marked as spam
Posted by John Jones (Discussions: 360, Comments: 3031)
Replied on June 11, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Not sure why LI appears to have rebranded #hashtags as communities, makes no sense to me. In case anyone isn't sure how they work, I posted about it: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6410600173319307264
Marked as spam
Posted by John M. (Discussions: 0, Comments: 3)
Replied on June 11, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Hash tagged words are NOT communities just because you say they are. They are simply topics. Is this a nefarious plot by LI to subvert and repurpose groups into topics? I do not think so. This is simply a new and alternative way for people to interact and share information.

We need to give the new person at LI a chance to rebuild the groups functionality of Linkedin. They appear to be trying to do something. I wish them the very best of luck and we need LI to succeed as there is simply no alternative for a professional network. If groups go away, that is ok. We will all adapt. The moral of this continuing story is to not depend on LI for your livelihood. Let it be one of many social media venues that you consume and make your own independent community in wordpress made up of your network from Linkedin. This way you will not get caught short.
Marked as spam
Posted by John Jones (Discussions: 360, Comments: 3031)
Replied on June 13, 2018 8:00 pm
« Back to Previous Page