Comments on: Learning From I-Neighbors http://goodspeedupdate.com/2009/2628 Rob Goodspeed's blog Sat, 06 Mar 2010 05:30:34 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Rob Goodspeed http://goodspeedupdate.com/2009/2628/comment-page-1#comment-481921 Rob Goodspeed Thu, 28 May 2009 13:31:46 +0000 http://goodspeedupdate.com/?p=2628#comment-481921 Hi Keith, Thanks for your comment. I apologize, I should have reached out to you to ask for some more updated information. However, I have been a member and occasional user of the site for four years in a number of different neighborhoods so was writing based on that experience also. I'm excited to hear about the new iteration planned, and look forward to it. I wrote about the site because I think it is an interesting project and wanted to provoke some conversation about it. I'm sorry if that didn't come through in the article. Hi Keith, Thanks for your comment. I apologize, I should have reached out to you to ask for some more updated information. However, I have been a member and occasional user of the site for four years in a number of different neighborhoods so was writing based on that experience also.

I’m excited to hear about the new iteration planned, and look forward to it. I wrote about the site because I think it is an interesting project and wanted to provoke some conversation about it. I’m sorry if that didn’t come through in the article.

]]> By: Keith Hampton http://goodspeedupdate.com/2009/2628/comment-page-1#comment-481897 Keith Hampton Thu, 28 May 2009 12:49:16 +0000 http://goodspeedupdate.com/?p=2628#comment-481897 Too bad you did not decide to include some reporting in your blog. If you had contacted me, I would have been happy to give you a few facts: 1) The site is run out of the University of Pennsylvania, not MIT. 2) The data you cite is extremely old, and based on the beta version of the site, and about a year of test data, not the version of the site you used... 5 years down the road. 3) 89% of new users join a neighborhood. 4) Our neighborhoods are designed to overlap on geographic areas of just a few hundred homes, we host hundreds of neighborhoods with hundreds of members. 4) The site is not about social networking across neighborhoods, it is about building ties within neighborhoods. 5) We do not try to compete with corporate sites. If someone can build a better neighborhood focused resource that attracts our user base, and supports local social capital, we will be happy to get out of the way - it is about building community not clicks. 6) We are not Facebook (do not try to be, we only have 60,000 users) but we do have thousands of new users each month, and much more than one successful neighborhood group. 7) The example you chose above is not representative. You choose a university? To talk about a site that supports small, geographic neighborhoods? We are not Yahoo Groups. But we did create your example neighborhood to test the site. 8) After a decade of testing various neighborhood based applications to support local social interaction (starting in 1998), we have repeatedly found that neighborhood email lists build the highest number of new neighborhood ties (compared to many web apps that we have tested). The current site does not do a good job of driving site traffic... because we focus on the lists. 9) However, times change, and a new version of the site will be released within the next month. The new site will eliminate email lists, replaced with discussion forums that offer email notification, and a much stronger focus on encouraging interaction on site between neighbors. Too bad you did not decide to include some reporting in your blog. If you had contacted me, I would have been happy to give you a few facts:
1) The site is run out of the University of Pennsylvania, not MIT.
2) The data you cite is extremely old, and based on the beta version of the site, and about a year of test data, not the version of the site you used… 5 years down the road.
3) 89% of new users join a neighborhood.
4) Our neighborhoods are designed to overlap on geographic areas of just a few hundred homes, we host hundreds of neighborhoods with hundreds of members.
4) The site is not about social networking across neighborhoods, it is about building ties within neighborhoods.
5) We do not try to compete with corporate sites. If someone can build a better neighborhood focused resource that attracts our user base, and supports local social capital, we will be happy to get out of the way – it is about building community not clicks.
6) We are not Facebook (do not try to be, we only have 60,000 users) but we do have thousands of new users each month, and much more than one successful neighborhood group.
7) The example you chose above is not representative. You choose a university? To talk about a site that supports small, geographic neighborhoods? We are not Yahoo Groups. But we did create your example neighborhood to test the site.
8) After a decade of testing various neighborhood based applications to support local social interaction (starting in 1998), we have repeatedly found that neighborhood email lists build the highest number of new neighborhood ties (compared to many web apps that we have tested). The current site does not do a good job of driving site traffic… because we focus on the lists.
9) However, times change, and a new version of the site will be released within the next month. The new site will eliminate email lists, replaced with discussion forums that offer email notification, and a much stronger focus on encouraging interaction on site between neighbors.

]]>