Official announcements and happiness!
Do you want to influence the direction of IMZY?
This is not a trick question, but more of an invitation dialog and constructive suggestion--so I better apologize in advance for the tone of my writing, eh? (Sorry, that's just my natural register.)
The time-limit option is interesting, but I couldn't even decide whether or not I should use it this time... On one hand, I think this is a permanent topic, but on the other hand, I think the topic will get beaten to death soon enough (and if not, then it wasn't worth discussing). Therefore I'm leaving it open for now, but perhaps such a poll question should be part of member's profile? How active or passive a user are you? (I'm already thinking of the problem in terms of a new poll...)




I don't understand the question...?
Don't the users on every website have an impact on the overall sites existence? If ownership doesn't listen to it's users, the website won't exist very long - that's kinda business 101 imo.
Can you clarify what you mean?
Yes, I can, but maybe you'll live to regret the question... ;-)
I think you are right, but I'm thinking in more concrete terms with a financial model that would help IMZY (and us) do it in a concrete way. Not sure this is the best way to introduce the idea but also not sure about going into an entire series of polls...
Should IMZY implement features on speculation, or based on concrete support from people who want those features? I think the "concrete support" could be instantiated with "charity shares" purchased by wannabe donors for each feature.
How should IMZY handle it's ongoing costs? With a secret budget, or based on concrete support from people who want to benefit from whatever service or feature that is incurring the costs? Again, I think "concrete support" could be handled with "charity shares" purchased by donors who could also choose to be listed as supporters of that feature in a "donor" tab in the help or documentation section.
Much more to follow, but let me look over some of the other comments...
Haha - there is a 'concrete support' option - top of the page, right hand side - click "$ TIP".
I also think the conversation on monetization is too early (for us users to worry about anyway - and for the platform overall). I know they have plans for monetization that I'm sure will role out over time - but again, I don't think WE the users need to worry about that right now.
IF they were floundering and needed support from the community to survive, I am sure they would ask - but they are new and building. The product needs to be delivered before the money conversation needs to happen.
Threads in this community are largely about telling Imzy what we like, what we don't, what we'd like to see, what we wouldn't like to see, what needs fixing etc. I'd wager, now, more than ever, your voice is being heard because it IS such a small group (beta test).
That said - I DO like your post in the sense that it's encouraging people to think (even if some of the topics are a tiny bit premature haha.)
I feel like you and I would get along well - lots of interesting discussions. Do you run any communities?
Excellent and thoughtful reply, but my time is limited today and I'm liable to be too brief as I respond to your broad thoughts.
The $TIP idea is not bad, but I find most small donor models kind of disrespectful. If I were a big donor then they would tell me how my large donation was used, but then you fall into the big donor trap. What happens when a big donor is wrong? My suggestion of a charity share brokerage is a kind of compromise where you would pick the projects that you wanted to support.
I suspect that right now they are running on seed capital. Lots to be said, but I think the best recent example of why this is not good might be Ello, which certainly appears to have flashed in the pan.
I do NOT want to run a community. Rather I would prefer to join dynamic communities that reflected my current needs and interests. The feature that I would like to support to make that possible would be a kind of dynamic search capability. IMZY would be using the words (and even sentences) in my draft comment to define the location of my ideas in a high-dimension space of concepts, and would call my attention to the most similar discussions or communities.
This is already possible with well known techniques, though my pie-in-the-sky extension would help me merge my draft into the prior discussion. For example, if I were writing a question about the best mobile phone service in Japan, it would try to link me to related information, with a bias towards the latest information, and I could modify my comments to reflect what is special about my situation or why I disagree (or agree) with the information that is already there. I would not join a community that was focused on that topic, but would naturally drift into it for the period of my shopping, and drift out after I bought a new smartphone--but I might drift back in again if later on I wanted to say something about good or bad experiences with the phone.
[Content deleted by author]
Accepting your claim to be a master of the IMZY universe, of course I (had better) agree that your intentions are good and honorable and all that jazz. My question is whether or not you can achieve your ambitions and my point is that the money matters. Seems to be time for the more concrete form of the suggestion...
However, first a word from our sponsor. Just joking, but I have no idea what your economic model is or who is paying the bills, and intrusive ads often take over websites. I am perhaps excessively hopeful you can avoid that fate.
How do you know what the members of the system want? Can you concretely measure their wants? Can you prove you are satisfying them?
One way to answer these questions might be with a "charity share brokerage" that members could use to concretely express what they want. IMZY would define each new feature in terms of a new-feature project, and if enough members want to buy shares, then the brokerage will release the money and the feature will get implemented. If too few members are willing to support that feature, then nothing happens and the member can look for a different project to fund.
I think the charity share brokerage itself should be funded by earning a commission for the funded projects. They would earn their share on the front and back ends of the project. On the front end, the brokerage would make sure the proposals are complete, with a realistic budget and schedule, that all the key resources (including humans) are available, that nothing is forgotten (such as sufficient testing), and that there are clear success criteria. For a new-feature project, that mostly means a clear explanation of what the feature is going to do. On the back end, the brokerage would test the results and report to the donors how well the project has succeeded. In the IMZY situation, I think that should even include some kind of audit of the code, even if it's just an informal walk-through of the code with another programmer.
Lots more details I could offer, but that seems to be enough for this format at this time... Except I did want to mention that I think the basic share price should be kept small, perhaps $10. I think it might even be a good idea to limit purchases, so each donor can only buy one share in each project. If you really love a feature, you'd need to recruit other people to like it, too.
Why isn't there a "No, my opinions and ideas are as good as anyone else" option?
I think that we should all jut post our opinions and ideas without trying to influence the direction of Imzy, let the direction be a result of the diverse topics and opinions we talk about instead of trying to force a direction based on our opinions and ideas.
Another excellent and thoughtful response.
To your opening question, there are two light-side responses: (1) Can't cover every option, but I tried to be open, and (2) I disagree with your premise, but I think @ZachBussey said it better in his earlier comment. (The @ sign didn't link the reference...)
On the heavy side, the system is going to evolve one way or the other. Usually the money drives the evolution, and I think the google has become the best example. The google started with the slogan of "Don't be evil" and evolved to "All your attention are belong to us." Other examples include Amazon and Facebook, where following the money has gotten ugly.
While it would be great if IMZY becomes a wonderful system for as many people, other outcomes are possible. Can IMZY avoid such a bad fate?
Peeking ahead, I think the next part of the response most belongs to _Messiahsez, who may be one of our hosts... (The underscore before his name didn't seem to work either.)
This is the big problem and the answer is no, all sites somehow end up dying or becoming evil. I hope the way Imzy payments work help keep the site alive while not allowing ad companies to dominate the narrative.
Actually, there is one advertising model I would be interested in, even to the point of donating to add such an option to IMZY. (Heck, I might even be willing to invest in it...)
I would be willing to let a trusted intermediary auction off a SMALL amount of my time for ads related to goods and services that I currently want to buy. The intermediary would have a strongly vested interest in protecting my privacy (to protect their fraction of the proceeds of the auctions) while I would have a strongly vested interest in telling them the truth about what I want to and can afford to buy (because that would increase the bid prices of the auctions and increase the fraction I receive). The legitimate companies would have a strongly vested interest in reaching truly qualified customers, and they would be able to assess the track record of the intermediary in linking them to those customers. Win-win-win.
Right now push-driven advertising is best measured on the scale from aggressive to hostile. Or maybe the better scale is misleading to totally false. Doesn't matter. I'm sick of it and do NOT want any more--but the advertisers want INFINITELY more, and even if they had 100% of your time and attention, they would only want to shift to selling more profitable crap. It's a bottomless hole.
Time, time, time. Got to move along...
That may work but only for a small number of users, it won't work for me or other people who don't live anywhere near a company interested in advertising here and it may not work for users who just don't trust advertisers even if they promise to protect privacy.
There are two features I would really like to see.
-Option for a dark theme, I don't like looking at white on white on white. It hurts my eyes
-Adjust the feed to be centre of the screen, and have the other stuff off to the side. Right now the side bar and the Feed together are centred, but it just makes the feed feel off.
Of course. I want my opinion to count, but at the same time, I do want the admins to ignore ideas that don't improve the community. If my ideas are bad, don't implement them.
Aye, there's the rub. I absolutely agree that feeping creaturitis is a grave threat. Not sure if it's an adequate response, but...
If one one want to pay for a feature's costs, then it is only nature that it should be shut down. Attempts to use that feature could either produce a link to a replacement feature that is hopefully better, an explanation of why the feature has been disabled, or an ongoing-cost project to re-enable the feature.
I want imzy to be the 'new reddit' so to speak but am really struggling with the layout. There needs to be a highly condensed view *option, if you want any die hard reddit users to set up here. On my macbook pro it only takes 2 article posts to cover my entire screen. When I browse reddit it's around 7 articles per screen. It's also easier on the eyes to scan posts on reddit and take in info. I'm not saying get rid of the current format but for those who do not wish to see giant banners etc (and scroll to death) I highly recommend a toggle to go into a very condensed view.
Just want to comment that I wish you could explain Reddit to me, though it is probably something that should branch to a new topic... I have tried Reddit and disliked it quite a bit. It seemed quite cliquish, even close-minded, and that's even though I remember seeing a number of things about being friendly to newcomers.
Probably a personal problem, but I just don't seem to be a newcomer. Wherever I go, there I am, and people who see me there seem to think I'm part of wherever. "No, I'm sorry, but I don't work in this store" or "No, I'm sorry, I might look like I live around here but it's my first visit." Perhaps worst if someone comes up in some strange language and I can't even say "Why do you think I would speak that language, whatever it is?" (Actually, it happens less these days, but that might be another age discrimination thing or maybe I just look less "friendly" and "localized" than I used to.)
I want to change my answer from 1 to 4... However, now I can't even see the other comments, and one of the comments has disappeared, too.
Yeah, I'm new around here, so you can dismiss this as part of my learning process, but...
It would be nice if there were some better websites, and I'd even want to help make them better. I think that comes down to two things: How much influence (or power?) I have, and how the website is evolving.
Have to run how, so let me close with the key questions: What are the drivers for change here? How are they linked to the economic models paying for the website's continued existence? Are they really open to radical new ideas for new models?
Had a long comment. Apparently too long; preview truncated it and deleted several paragraphs. I cut it back in length. Still wouldn't post. Went to look for help; forgot to open in new tab; lost post.
Shrug.
Short version: Imzy's to-do list is too long to be asking for community direction yet.
It did post! ... Five times. Because I scrolled down but didn't see it. I deleted the extras.
"Fix buggy and non-intuitive posting interface" should be top priority for Imzy's survival.
Aha. So that's why IMZY notified me of 7 new comments in this thread and I look forward to finding your longer comment below. I do have a not-so-short reply for your short summary version:
First, I absolutely agree that prioritization and sequencing are crucial. Most obviously, some features depend upon the existence of other features.
Second, I absolutely agree with the dangers of pandering too much to fads and user demands, but I think that can be controlled. The main choke-point or control-point (assuming something like my suggestion is implemented) is in terms of the projects that are offered for funding at any particular time, and a secondary control is the scheduling in the project proposals.
(Delaying the start time actually allows for an interesting viral wrinkle: You could allow extra donors to reduce the price of the charity shares funding that project. For example, a project that needed 1,000 donors at $10 each, could get those donors and be committed, but they could allow up to 3,000 donors while driving the per-share price down to $3.33. (I think I did the math correctly.) Since IMZY would already be holding the money, there is no problem, but the early donors would wind up with more money for other projects, and IMZY would know that this a really good project that lots of people want.)
Okay, that's the first part, but I'm going to branch back to a comment I don't remember seeing before branching down to your new long comment.
So, I'm the only no-ish vote so far; hmm.
On the one hand, every website that lasts takes feedback from its participants and they influence its activities and often its structure. I will enjoy being part of that. On the other, I have limited interest in being a social networking beta tester; my time is too limited to funnel a lot of energy into a site that (1) doesn't have features I need to communicate and (2) may not last. (Not saying Imzy is one of those; just pointing out that I don't have the resources to push hard to be here.)
I already have too many sites to participate in, and that's without having Facebook account at all. I have to keep track of info-finding, formatting methods, and community standards at reddit, tumblr, dreamwidth, AO3, twitter, steam, email groups, and various more focused and individual blog sites already - if Imzy's going to join that list, it's not going to be because I poured many hours and thousands of words into explaining what keeps me present and at least somewhat active at those sites.
My efforts and input aren't going to make Imzy long-term viable. I'm happy to throw in a few comments where I notice a need for change, but mostly I expect to either accept what's here, find a coping method (I installed Stylish so I could use a different skin, or move on.
If I can't find a workaround for features I want that aren't here, I don't post the related content here. I don't mind waiting, but I'm not saving things to post later.
I don't want Imzy to poll its currently tiny pack of active users for features they want; I want Imzy to look over other community/social websites and note what are standard features and how Imzy can be innovative in their approach. Asking for the community to shape Imzy at this point is premature - at most, we can help prioritize existing plans.
As I've mentioned, lack of line break ability annoys me and substantially curtails my use of Imzy. If those get implemented somehow, I'm not going to feel like "I helped shape Imzy;" I'm going to feel like "Imzy added a formatting feature that is standard at every major social network site on the internet."
Other features Imzy needs:
I have no idea how tips work; those will need the right invoice/archive abilities for people who need to report them for tax purposes. They'll also need some kind of method for dealing with hacked accounts and scams. (It doesn't matter if Imzy isn't liable if Account A promises artwork in exchange for a $50 tip, and doesn't provide it. If Imzy gets known as a site that allows people to get ripped off, the tip feature is not going to be useful.)
Imzy is too early in beta to be asking for the community to give it direction. The to-do list is not short; when those are done or nearing completion, it might be time to check with the community (if they haven't already developed another long to-do list) for future plans, but if Imzy is already seriously asking "what should we do next?" (rather than "hm, is there anything really crucial that we missed?") then it doesn't have the internal support structure it needs to survive.
Okay, I have looked over your long and thoughtful comment, and mostly I agree with what you are saying, but I'm mostly going to dismiss it by describing you as a kind of passive user, while I am advocating for a kind of balanced active user, where the targeted donations can be regarded as a concrete metric of "weight" accumulating behind an idea.
On one hand, this thread (and poll) was intended as an open invitation for other ideas, but on the other hand, I definitely do have an axe to grind. I don't want to run amok waving my axe, but I'm going to try to give you a short description. Maybe you can use it on Reddit or you know some other website that could take it and run with it? (Let me say that I think the basic idea is sort of valuable, but the value I would like to receive would be credit for originality and possibly for persistence (in the face of hatred of crazy new ideas), but I'm not holding my breath.)
What I would like to participate in would be a system that is largely a member-guided system based on what members are willing to pay for. The payments can be regarded as two types: Development of new features and paying for the ongoing operating costs of existing features. The features should be designed with that interlock in mind. Even if a lot of people are willing to pay for a substantial development project, if the ongoing costs of keeping the feature operating are too high, that is going to be a problem. The general idea would be to focus on supporting those features that people want to pay for.
By the way, my perception is that the IMZY people are facing a decision point. Do they want to listen more to the members, or less? So far it looks like less--but I think that is another symptom of their financial model.
They have venture capital funding and venture capitalists are LIARS. There are a very few exceptions of big donors, but in general the VCs who claim they are going to let you do what you want are still thinking about getting their big profits and maximizing their returns, and that usually means kicking out the founders with the original visions as soon as they see how to monetize the visions.
I like the idea of "features will be implemented if we get paid for them," with the caveat that some features will either be too hard to code, or against the core purposes of the site. (We don't want to allow advertisers to pay for a feature where they can put a picture-ad in every post, even if it's codeable, no matter how much they want to pay for that.)
I don't disagree with that approach at all; I just think it's not likely to get much traction, because the majority of users who sign up for (another) free networking site aren't going to have money to put into it. Also, it would require that Imzy is ready to hire extra devs/contractors to implement popular/well-paid features; that takes infrastructure development on their part.
Not impossible - good idea - I just don't see it as immediately likely.
I agree that VC funding is not a good sign and would love to have something that shifted that to community-supported funding.
Your main new issue is actually "project management", and I agree that it is quite difficult. That is why I think the projects under consideration have to be prepared quite carefully.
My suggested (initial) guideline would be that every proposal has to include a clear schedule, budget, and success criteria. The schedule has to be realistic and can't forget such things as adequate testing for software. The budget has to consider such things as the availability of resources, including the right people who are willing to do the work for the promised payments and possible incentive payments, for example to the best testers (measured by bugs found or length of time the software is used). However, I think the success criteria are most important in making sure the project does something. All of the donors should be able to look at the final results and compare them to the success criteria, and if the project met all of the criteria, they should feel proper satisfaction for helping it happen. (Perhaps even be motivated to donate some more, if their charity share account is empty.)