Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
cldisme

Starting a New Category according to cldisme

Recommended Posts

Since we are starting with a clean slate on this forum platform, I decided I will bring this one item over because I think it is important.

 

Right now, the How To Create a Category page tells viewers to just find 2 other Premium Members, write a description of your idea, vote on it as a group, send it to Peer Review, and once approved start submitting waymarks.

 

There is not a lot of discussion about how to make the category solid and viable. So here are my suggestions to creating a strong category.

 

RESEARCH similar existing categories. Is your idea really all that unique? It is a good way to avoid getting NAY votes on Duplication.

 

RESEARCH the groups. Again, is your idea really all that unique? Was this attempted before? If your category search turned up empty and there was another group that tried in the past, why did they fail? A message to the Leader couldn't hurt to find out the pitfalls they encountered.

 

RESEARCH existing waymarks. Has your idea actually been waymarked elsewhere? Again this will expose if there is duplication, but also show if there is a void you can fill. It could also indicate if the idea could fulfill the Interesting/Informative critierian. Just because you can assign coordinates to it does not mean that it is worthy of being waymarked.

 

RESEARCH existing waymarkers. Once you have looked at the existing categories and waymarks of a similar nature, you might notice a pattern of waymarkers that keep showing up. These are the waymarkers you need to invite to be officers. They are active and presumably interested in the idea. They should be able to help you create a strong description.

 

RESEARCH your concept outside of the Waymarking website. The Prevalence and Global criteria seem to be forgotten a lot when a new category is submitted to Peer Review. Being able to provide information as to how many of these sites are available and where to find them goes a long way in my book. My vote might still be NAY because it isn't Prevalent nor Global, but at least I am making an informed choice.

 

RESEARCH the forums (including and especially the now archived old ones). Basically the same as the Group search. Past attempts may be a good indicator of success or failure, but it also allows the current idea to be vetted with the current group of Peer Review voters. I know my big campaign is regarding what can someone learn, do or experience as a visitor to a waymark? It is a big factor in my descision-making process under the Interesting/Informative critierian.

Share this post


Link to post

Excellent idea. The only thing I can think to add would be the advice to post and visit a number of waymarks before you decide to start a new category.

Share this post


Link to post

This is all good sound advice.

 

But what happens if you've done the research, found a niche, attracted some group members, written up a description, sent it out for a vote, and your group members don't send back their votes? I'm not getting any feedback of any kind.

 

(Is the vote software broken, I ask myself? That would explain why I'm not even getting Nay votes.)

 

Would it make a difference if I trolled for more members, and replaced the (voting) leadership with members who are perhaps more likely to respond?

 

sagefemme

Share this post


Link to post

This is all good sound advice.

 

But what happens if you've done the research, found a niche, attracted some group members, written up a description, sent it out for a vote, and your group members don't send back their votes? I'm not getting any feedback of any kind.

 

(Is the vote software broken, I ask myself? That would explain why I'm not even getting Nay votes.)

 

Would it make a difference if I trolled for more members, and replaced the (voting) leadership with members who are perhaps more likely to respond?

 

sagefemme

 

Are you voting too? You also need to vote for the group too.

Share this post


Link to post

If your group members aren't responding to a category vote, can you rely on them to respond to waymarks waiting to be reviewed? Just something to think about.

Share this post


Link to post

This is all good sound advice.

 

But what happens if you've done the research, found a niche, attracted some group members, written up a description, sent it out for a vote, and your group members don't send back their votes? I'm not getting any feedback of any kind.

 

(Is the vote software broken, I ask myself? That would explain why I'm not even getting Nay votes.)

 

Would it make a difference if I trolled for more members, and replaced the (voting) leadership with members who are perhaps more likely to respond?

 

sagefemme

 

Looking at DougK's list of waymarkers with 500 or more waymarks may help keep things on the right path. And BruceS' blog that has the list with approvers another good list of officers. (Silverquill has his hands full...he might seek you if there is a good category idea that generates waymarks worth a read.)

 

Routing through their profile pages will help identify their web pages with this info.

 

KE

Edited by wildwoodke

Share this post


Link to post

This is all good sound advice.

 

But what happens if you've done the research, found a niche, attracted some group members, written up a description, sent it out for a vote, and your group members don't send back their votes? I'm not getting any feedback of any kind.

 

(Is the vote software broken, I ask myself? That would explain why I'm not even getting Nay votes.)

 

Would it make a difference if I trolled for more members, and replaced the (voting) leadership with members who are perhaps more likely to respond?

 

sagefemme

 

You really won't get any Nay votes if you send a category to group vote. If it fails before the expiration then someone voted Nay, if it fails at the end the voting period then someone (or more) did not vote. It only takes one vote in the officer vote to have it fail. Unfortunately there is no place for them to put a comment if they vote no. It is always best to discuss the category through email with your officers before putting up vote. Also I have found it good to communicate with your group before putting it up for vote to insure they are all available to vote, putting your category up for officer vote just as one of your officers goes out of town for a few days will lead to frustration.

 

When first starting a category it is usually better to keep the number of officers fairly small just to keep things moving along and less chance one will not be available. Once the category is up and going add more.

Edited by BruceS
spelling

Share this post


Link to post

 

Are you voting too? You also need to vote for the group too.

 

Yes, I'm casting my vote right after I set submit the poll/vote/whatever, so I believe the polls have gone out properly. I can see my own action, but I don't get a tally at the end of the three days, nor any other feedback about whether other members have cast votes.

 

You don't think there is anything wrong on the system side do you? Just human error/inattention?

 

sagefemme

Share this post


Link to post

 

Are you voting too? You also need to vote for the group too.

 

Yes, I'm casting my vote right after I set submit the poll/vote/whatever, so I believe the polls have gone out properly. I can see my own action, but I don't get a tally at the end of the three days, nor any other feedback about whether other members have cast votes.

 

You don't think there is anything wrong on the system side do you? Just human error/inattention?

 

sagefemme

You will not get a tally, you will only get whether it passed or not.

Share this post


Link to post

Hi folks, thanks for the interest in my question. I put the call for vote out one more time, and this time it PASSED!

 

Now I have a question for cldisme... in order to pass, did ALL my officers need to vote, or just a majority?

 

Does anyone else think it would be worthwhile make a suggestion to Groundspeak Programmers about providing more information to the category leader about the vote outcome? The process clearly states that any "No" vote ends the process, but wouldn't (took action/didn't take action) feedback be helpful to the leader so he/she knows who to focus his/her attention on?

 

sagefemme

Share this post


Link to post

Now I have a question for cldisme... in order to pass, did ALL my officers need to vote, or just a majority?

 

Does anyone else think it would be worthwhile make a suggestion to Groundspeak Programmers about providing more information to the category leader about the vote outcome? The process clearly states that any "No" vote ends the process, but wouldn't (took action/didn't take action) feedback be helpful to the leader so he/she knows who to focus his/her attention on?

 

You do not need to direct your questions to me. I am not the end-all-be-all authority, but I just happen to know the answer to your questions.

 

For your officer vote, everyone voted YES.

 

As for letting you know how the vote went, yes that would be helpful if someone voted NO. Since everyone vote YES, then they should be happy with how the category looks at this time.

 

If there is a NO vote, then it is incumbent upon the decenting voter(s) to let the Leader know why - typically via a private message. You as the Leader can send a Group Message begging, pleading, whimpering for a response, but you cannot extract the reason on your own.

 

In Peer Review, you get ALL the votes and comments - whether you like it or not. Fortunately or unfortunatly, there are usually less than 100 voters for each Peer Review vote.

Share this post


Link to post

Hooray! It made it! I see that it is in peer review. How many need to say 'Yeah' there? I'm still a little unsure of the process, myself.

 

I'm wondering why only three days are given? Votes for waymarks in a category some times take months to get resolved. Not that I want to make it open indefinitely. A week might give a little more time for people to open their emails and then vote.

Share this post


Link to post

When I create a new category, I initially limit my officers to the minimum of two. This makes it a whole lot easier to streamline the process. I try to get two people I have either worked with or know are dependable from past history, activity and interest.

 

I generally have a pretty good idea of where I want to go with the category idea, so I'll write a rough draft, post the idea to the forums, then give the category link to the two officers and ask them to check it out and give any final suggestions. Only when I'm pretty sure we are all in agreement will I send it for that final officer vote, since that locks the category and it can't be edited until AFTER peer review. I send each of them a reminder note that the vote has been called. There should be no surprises at this point. And, yes, it does require 100% Yea votes, including the group leader. Usually they all vote within a day, and it can then be sent to peer review.

 

All of the voting operations need some work, and this is no exception. If the vote fails, there is not notice given, and that's a definite lack.

 

After peer review I may add a few more officers depending on the need and expected volume.

Share this post


Link to post

While there is no official position on it what most have found to be the best approach is what Silverquill suggests. Have one leader and promote only two officers. Use that thru the entire category creation until it passes peer review. After that is a good time to recruit more hands.

Share this post


Link to post

I prefer to start with 4 others and myself for a total of 5. It is not too large for the initial creation and not too small for inevitalble group votes early on.

Share this post


Link to post

Having done the RESEARCH, RESEARCH part, you might want to stop for a moment and CONSIDER:

 

CONSIDER making your category a broader concept to make it more inclusive and more global, (Global and Prevalence criteria) not applicable in every case and you may instead want to ...

 

CONSIDER making your category a narrower concept to rule out mundane and uninteresting submissions (Interesting and Informative, and Prevalence criteria)

 

CONSIDER the kind of submissions that you might get, but don't actually want. How can you write the rules to be clear, simple, but also to rule out "junk" submissions.

 

CONSIDER what it would be like to submit one of these waymarks. Would you know what to do based on the category description and submission rules? Are the rules too fussy? Does your description clearly describe what's required?

Share this post


Link to post

Having done the RESEARCH, RESEARCH part, you might want to stop for a moment and CONSIDER:

 

EXCELLENT considerations!

 

With the shrinking field for new Waymarking categories, I think one needs a really GOOD reason to add another! I think there are certainly many good category ideas out there; they just take more work - research and consideration - than they did before.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

×
×
  • Create New...