On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 10:46:58PM -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote:
Sorry for breaking the thread and top posting w my awful mobile client....
Do we have stats showing any difference in traffic to community vs user oriented content?
I'd argue planet.fpo is the contributor version.... and magazine is the user version. I liked Paul's idea of having the default on the front page being user focused content instead of all. An idea is that the contributor focused stuff could get posted to planet via fedora mags rss feed which links back to fedoramag, but not promoted as the user content is.
This is a good idea to consider, also. And +1000 to the Planet point you made. I talked about Planet in another post from a different POV (content is kind of a firehose without grouping or audience definition) but I think we may be in agreement.
I think youre going to get a better site overall by making a choice rather than straddling the two audiences. There is such a dearth of Fedora user-focused content in general I really think better to make fedoramag for them since they need it. You could better serve contributors with some curation on planet.fpo (display planet.fpo curated by default?) or by getting individuals already listed on planet to make more better posts. (And the hubs, when they are ready :) )
+1 here too.
Re underground silo.... what kinds of critical contributor content are you most concerned about? would planet.fpo not serve that content well?
If the concern is that planet posts are fleeting, could we stand up another wp - very informal - for the contrib focused stuff... but no front end, brand identity, or anything, just an rss feed to be slurped into planet but the posts / comments / stats would be stored in the wp?
This is an interesting idea; does it mean that we would route *only* contributor-focused articles to Planet? I actually think that could be smart to improve Planet relevance/coherence.