> I dread to call it a decline: it’s a metamorphosis that reflects the shifting priorities of the members of the community — and naturally makes room for new communities to thrive.
Thanks. There's naturally an assumption that "we have to keep this going forever, so how do we do that?" Your answer, if I may be so bold as to rephrase, is "why? organisms are born, they get old, they die. It's natural and there's nothing wrong with it."
Your closing remarks are most observant - the original community was formed to serve the needs of some group of people early on that were at a compatible stage. As these people change and acquire knowledge their needs change. It’s a bit like packing ever more people into same year of school , where advanced topics are introduced but new people need the basics
I wonder if LLMs provide an opportunity for this arc to evolve in an interesting way. That is, by replacing the FAQ step with something substantially more valuable: an infinitely patient chat partner that "understands" the collective wisdom of the community.
I guess it’s the "natural" life cycle for online communities that are solely based on expertise, and not on socializing, isn’t ? Or did you ever feel there was another way to handle the cycle? As a L&D professional, I must admit that skills and knowledge do have also some kind of life cycle, so I’m not surprised by what you describe. Great pov btw.
Writing FAQ’s seems like a fine thing to do. Some people will read them, even if others won’t. You can quote answers from them as a starting point for a discussion.
Interesting.
Any thoughts on Linkedin/Microsoft role in this ?
> I dread to call it a decline: it’s a metamorphosis that reflects the shifting priorities of the members of the community — and naturally makes room for new communities to thrive.
Thanks. There's naturally an assumption that "we have to keep this going forever, so how do we do that?" Your answer, if I may be so bold as to rephrase, is "why? organisms are born, they get old, they die. It's natural and there's nothing wrong with it."
Your closing remarks are most observant - the original community was formed to serve the needs of some group of people early on that were at a compatible stage. As these people change and acquire knowledge their needs change. It’s a bit like packing ever more people into same year of school , where advanced topics are introduced but new people need the basics
I wonder if LLMs provide an opportunity for this arc to evolve in an interesting way. That is, by replacing the FAQ step with something substantially more valuable: an infinitely patient chat partner that "understands" the collective wisdom of the community.
I guess it’s the "natural" life cycle for online communities that are solely based on expertise, and not on socializing, isn’t ? Or did you ever feel there was another way to handle the cycle? As a L&D professional, I must admit that skills and knowledge do have also some kind of life cycle, so I’m not surprised by what you describe. Great pov btw.
Writing FAQ’s seems like a fine thing to do. Some people will read them, even if others won’t. You can quote answers from them as a starting point for a discussion.