Interview: Bulgari Launches Mobile App For Interactive Campaign
07/28/2010 – 4:38 pm | Comments

For the debut of the latest collection of B.zero1 jewels, Bulgari launched an interactive web campaign in May dedicated to the bestselling collection.
The heart of the digital campaign consists of an experiential website built around …

Read the full story »
Social Media

comprehensive social media, social network, social shopping and social influence articles

Mobile

mobile applications, location-based marketing & geo-social networks

Luxury Marketing

online luxury marketing practices, strategies and news.

Metrics & ROI

articles on measurement, analytics metric tools and establishing ROI

Video

the best videos online, video marketing articles and case studies

Home » Community Management

Community Management: Moderating Democratically

Submitted by Maria Ogneva on 09/04/2009 – 1:02 amComments

Post by Maria Ogneva, Director of Community

This post was inspired by the discussion I participated in on this PBS Mediashift blogpost.

One of the commenters brought up an interesting position (albeit a bit strongly worded), which I hadn’t seen discussed that much in community management blogs, and that’s the emergence of socialware that allows for a more democratic system. This got me thinking about the delicate balance that each community manager must strike between moderating the community, while empowering the community to exhibit its own leadership and a democratic system of attaching value (as well as taking away points) to certain activities and contributions. This system would ideally be partly automated and partly voted on by other users. Communities like Digg, Kirtsy, StumbleUpon and many others allow for such a democratic system through which community members can decide on the most valuable content. Over time, most communities should aim to take on some of these features.

There’s definitely a merit in the community manager giving the community room to breathe; there’s a danger in over-moderating – it’s stifling. Community participation tools are getting better and better. In addition to evaluating content, now comments can be also valued. Commenting platforms like Echo, IntenseDebate and Disqus allow to evaluate each individual comment, allowing the commenter to accumulate points, which are basically an indication of how valuable the community finds that person. The quality and quantity of your contributions allows you to garner more respect and recognition from the community, not to mention that using these systems allows you to collect and collate your contribution from all over the Internet. I think stuff like this makes community participation fairer and more democratic. Ideally, a community (through blend of own features and external features like Disqus), would be able to reward dedication, participation, leadership and non-destructive dialogue.

However, without human interference (which ideally should be minimal, unless there’s a conflict), any such system can be easily gamed.  If a community manager looks at him / herself as a steward / evangelist of community vs. a policeman / enforcer, I think it would help strike a balance between enabling lively, yet organized chaos.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Popularity: 1% [?]

blog comments powered by Disqus