A community for leaders on the Imzy platform.
Possibility to collapse/combine Communities?
Fragmentation is a bit of a problem with some communities, where user-bases and content can end up spread across multiple small communities, which both limits engagement and interaction. For a platform as young as Imzy, I find that to be one of the biggest obstacles.
So I'd like to propose a bit of functionality to potentially make it better.
This goes beyond just collapsing and combining communities, but that's where the idea stems from.
It's likely a truckload of work to pull off but the idea is simple: The capability to collapse 2 different communities, with consent from the leaders of both, into a single community.
What would actually be combined vs need recreated is open for discussion but here's what I'd like to see:
Combined
Leaders
Users (with an opt in the next time they visit, as their consent is important)
Existing posts (without tags?)
Tags?
Plugins
Recreated
Rules
Page Themes & Artwork
Tags?
etc.
Of course, to make it all work, the devs would have to be on board, and I don't know if they are, and they certainly aren't obligated to be. But it's something I'd like to suggest as a feature request.
Alternately, as a bit of low-hanging fruit, the capability to turn a community into a pointer directly to another community (check out /Switch vs /NintendoSwitch, ideally one would simply redirect to the other). Of course, that approach would likely require a limit on how many pointers could exist to a single community and how many can be created by a single user to prevent sub-Imzy squatting. The functionality to request a community that's being used as a pointer to turn it into an actual community would be ideal as well (what if there are actual switch enthusiasts out there who want a community to discuss light switches, and multi-phase switches, etc.?).
Anyway, bit of a ramble based on a discussion I had with a community member this morning.




This is a great idea-- though profile collisions would be a big issue on the back end, probably.
Yeah, that's why I think there would have to be an opt-in and possibly profile selection, though if they've used 2 different profiles across 2 communities being merged, and they don't want to be directly associated between the 2 (which is likely a corner case), they might need the option to orphan one of the profiles.
or perhaps anonymize whichever secondary profile isn't included rather than fully orphan? Is that possible? So that once the user gets the notification that Apples is merging with Oranges to create Mismatched Fruit, the user has the options to:
1) Leave entirely
2) Keep profile A active, but anonymize content from B (and C and D...however many)
3) Remain entirely anonymous
Something else?
What do you mean by orphan? If I've been going by "cat" and "dog" and choose to use "dog" in the new comm, the fact that "cat" isn't posting anymore doesn't give away that it was me. Unless you think past posts should be changed to have been written by my new handle?
By orphan, I mean that cat would no longer be tied to your account. Cat's posts would still exist and a profile would still exist, but too would no longer be able to post as cat.
I like the idea of a Merge Communities.
Most of the communities I'm in are dead or dying but are all similar realms/topics. It'd be cool to have the option, but I get that this is a big undertaking.
Maybe instead of "merging" (I read it as "two or more communities equally form one new official community entirely separate from the original comms) perhaps "adopting" a community as a child? I guess the function would be mostly the same, but the idea would be this:
Apples Community 'adopts' Oranges Community: Apples: Keeps original member base, rules, settings, leaders, content, etc. Pretty much nothing changes except accepting new leaders and letting Oranges move in.
Oranges: No longer accepts new members or content, help desk shuts down (permanently, not just a moderated setting), notifies members of the move, does all the dirty work, is pulled from the public community list (i.e. no longer searchable as an interest) but remains in database and accessible to Apples users.
Both Leaders from each have access to Oranges, all Apples members (new, adopted, and original) can access Oranges' content, but no one can further participate in Oranges' original content.
In a really long way I guess I'm suggesting memorializing it the way FB does for decedents. Often I find that it's just easier on places like LJ or Tumblr to go back to an entire blog, even if it's no longer active (not "deactivated") to find stuff rather than re-organize and re-archive it.
If that makes any sense...
another take on this: supercommunities?
communities can have a communal feed and cross-joining, to increase activity--but are still seperate under the hood.
Oh, i like that! It allows for people to join the super community and participating in everything, while also allowing tag-like filtering of topics by selecting the specific topic community itself.
I like the idea of doing something about how small and fragmented comms tend to be, but I'm not sure I like adding users "to a new comm without their consent", so to speak. That said, I could completely change the rules of my comm now, essentially making it a different comm, and that's allowed too. If the username can be handled, I'm tentatively in favour!
That's why it would have to be an explicit opt in similar to how profiles are selected/set up now