21
Running with The Wolves as Nature Intended
Nature doesn’t like large groups. Overcrowding leads to harsh living conditions, as creatures fight for survival. They eat all the food and starve their neighbor. They snap at others and guard their own closely. Stress reigns. Each animal seeks only its survival.
Soon, death occurs. The numbers are cut harshly, the groups become small and the natural balance is restored. Only the strongest survive.
And those that do remain guard themselves well. Herds and packs live together, but they snarl and fight off any intruder. Deer tangle antlers. Wolves snap viciously. Rabbits bite and scratch. Mice fight to the death.
No, large groups don’t fare well in the wild.
People aren’t meant to live in large groups either. Even the biggest cities have their sections and suburbs, as people seek to find smaller groups they relate to the most rather than toss themselves amongst thousands of strangers and hope for the best.
We mind our own, guard our friends and defend our blood. People are just as wild as the animals from which we stole land.
When Michael Martine of Remarkablogger recently posted about a theory of running in packs to ensure better survival, he was right. Relationships can be leveraged in a mutually beneficial arrangement, even when it involves just a few good friends working together.
Every blog has a community, and within that community are different levels of relationships.
Some people are ever lurkers, never speaking up. Some visit once and are noticed. Some drop by more regularly and are recognized after a few visits. Some people come by daily and are part of the regular crowd. Some go even further, developing closer relationships.
We naturally gravitate towards people we like. We develop cliques formed of people we prefer most.
By learning more about the people that draw closer to your inner circles, you find ways that they can help you – and you them, in return. The strategy works, too. The closest friends and peers, the ones in the two inner circles – this group forms the pack, the strong that care for each other and help each other out.
Then something happened. Michael’s strategy, despite already being in place in many communities without the people even being aware, caught on like wildfire. People loved the idea of being in a pack, and they began seeking others.
They seek too much.
Chris Garret posted an invitation to join his blogging pack. Anyone – anyone at all – could drop a website link and Twitter link in the forum thread. The idea was that complete strangers would suddenly feel brethren love and Stumble and Digg each other’s posts, add blogs to their feed reader and follow each other on Twitter.
This pack isn’t a natural one. It’s a gamed pack, one that smashes complete strangers into a group where no one knows each other. There is no relationship as a foundation. There is nothing to hold the pack together.
My link is in the thread that totaled over 11 pages of links less than a week after it was posted (and it’s increasing all the time). I don’t know many of the bloggers there. I have no particular motivation to visit stranger’s blogs. I have no reason to follow them on Twitter.
Who are these people? Why should I be pack with them? The promise of a mutually beneficial arrangement is shaky at best – what is the mutual benefit of trying to form a pack with the whole blogosphere? This is not what Michael proposed and encouraged.
It would take me weeks to visit every blog to determine its value. It would take me hours to filter out the crap on Twitter. I might get an increase in traffic, certainly – but I would much rather earn my traffic and community honestly.
Certainly, some people will get to know each other and form relationships, possibly even a pack. Some people will spend days sifting through hundreds of blogs and filtering out the crap on Twitter to form a clique of new friends.
But the pack is unnatural. It is beyond sustainable proportions. It’s a myth. It can’t last, because nature decrees that the world isn’t built that way.
Nature doesn’t like large groups.
As it stands, Michael’s beautiful theory has been blown out of the water, exploded into unnatural, unmanageable proportions. That makes me sad, and I find myself disgusted that the wonderful idea was turned into yet another way to game the system. It’s become a cheap and fast, “I’ll do you if you do me.”
There are no tricks, people. Relationships can’t be forced. They occur when they will, where they will. When groups become to large, satellite groups break off and form smaller, isolated gatherings of manageable proportions.
Naturally, the overcrowded situation will peter out and break off. People will realize that some put in the effort and some don’t. They’ll be used for what they can give and get nothing in return. They’ll find themselves filtering out strangers from follow lists and feed readers.
And they’ll return to what nature intended: Small, strong packs formed on strong, mutually beneficial relationships.
Help spread the word!
Welcome to our community. Kick back, put your feet up and join the discussion.
82 Responses - Leave your comments too!
Go ahead. Leave a Comment!
-
-
-
James is reading:
-
-
Taylor is reading:
-
-
Social Hookups
-
This is going to be a very busy day for me so I won’t have time to reply to any comments here after I post this until much later. I consider Chris a friend (more than a stranger, since we met at SOBCon and had some great discussions) and wouldn’t characterize his effort as harshly as you did, James. And I didn’t want to pop anybody’s bubble when they were all so thrilled about the idea. It just didn’t seem right, so I didn’t say anything. Maybe I should have. All I said that it wasn’t what I intended and left it at that. People aren’t often good at picking up on subtlety.
But you’re right, of course. What’s happening on the forum is more like a herd of sheep, not a pack of wolves. And it goes to show that leaders of the pack will always be far and few between and most people would much rather be followers.
It’s still possible to form a blogging pack as I intended by manually skimming over the entries and choosing those whose work and style resonates with you.
Michael Martine | Remarkablogger’s last blog post..How Social Media Helps Grow Your Blog
@ James: you know, I saw the mention of this forum in my reader the other day. Since I am a curious person I did go and have a look. But then, I never even heard of that forum before, let alone knowing half of the people who put their hands up.
I thought, what the…why would I want to immerse myself into a pack of strangers, spending valuable time to game a system that doesn’t want to be gamed at all. I always give from my heart. When i vote for somebody’s post and subscribe to their feed I don’t do it, because somebody said I should because they did me too.
That to me is wrong. What is wrong by giving without expecting anything in return? I feel that you guys and Michael and all the regulars here have done this and that is what really counts.
Plus, keeping up with the guys I know here and there is hard enough as it is. After all, my primary focus online is to make money with what I do – not spend hours trawling the net voting for him and her and that one over there, just because they did the same for me. Heck, I don’t even know who votes for me. All I know is those guys whom I respect for what they do and that is why I hang out on their blogs.
Monika Mundell’s last blog post..A Thought Or Two On Drifting
For the record, I like Chris very much. I don’t know him well, but we are acquaintances and run in the same circles. This isn’t a personal attack against Chris in the least – I don’t do that.
@ Michael – I am harsh, yes, but I feel that there are times to say, “This isn’t right,” and there are times to offer a smile. I do take a stand when I feel I should.
What Chris did wasn’t wrong; it just wasn’t very smart. What people are trying to do isn’t wrong; it’s just really thoughtlessly attempted and shouldn’t be encouraged.
@ Monika – That’s it exactly. You have no relationship or motivation to give and care – and that’s perfectly normal. (and thank you for the kind words).
I like the spirit of what Chris tried to do, but I’m pretty much on the same page here. A pack has to be organic.
I’m thoroughly disappointed with how big the AB pack became. If it had stayed at 30 or so bloggers, I think it could have been manageable, and that those key relationships would have formed in time. Now, it’s just silly.
Bob Younce at the Writing Journey’s last blog post..What is Your Dream?
Bit of trivia about me – wolves are my totem animal, so of course I gravitated to your post.
I humbly disagree with your take on this, James. While networking and building a pack is of second nature to seasoned bloggers/site builders, taking that first step to actually get out there amid a group of like-minded bloggers can be difficult for newbies and shy individuals alike. I think Chris’ attempt gives such individuals a great ‘first start’ in blog networking.
Blogging (ideally) never ends, relationships always evolve…there’s always a chance that folks who start with Chris’ pack get more and more comfortable and eventually join/create other packs that travel in different circles. In other words, by joining one welcoming pack (even one of strangers), they learn how to grow as a social networker and gain confidence to branch out further.
My 2 sense,
Barbara
Barbara Ling’s last blog post..21 Days to a more profitable blog – Day 2! Enhance your blog to compel word-of-mouth
I’m not sure that you being a professional writer, which I very much respect btw, not saying anything about writers, but. Aren’t you classifying people a little here?
What is twitter if it is not a bunch of maybe strangers once forming relationships? Many people like to look at others blogs (in all stages of writing, with a variety of voices, looking for something new or that they may connect with).
Are you looking at this from the professional perspective and not as a casual reader? I may not know all the details and if their is something I’m missing then I’m speaking out of turn.
Not everyone has 100 RSS feeds, when it’s put out on twitter, that’s a very particular audience, that does read a lot of feeds.
However, in any other area, with a litle refinement, it’s not a bad idea. Chris is great & I hate to see his name splashed around like this.
Quit being so HARSH! I’m going back to read more and then may even recomment.
Vicky H’s last blog post..Who Taught My Kid That Four-Letter Word?
James,
Amen.
Kelly’s last blog post..Making Money Online or Off, Vanish
@ Vicki – I’m confused… Why should I single out writers? I’m discussing people in general, not anyone in particular, so I think I haven’t classified anyone, but if I have, please let me know. That wasn’t my intention.
As for Twitter, those who use it don’t generally communicate with everyone. There is a huge group of users, each with their own small group of people that they follow and talk with.
Large groups can’t survive and it’s futile, as I mentioned in my post and as Barbara backed up. From a professional perspective or casual reader, it makes no difference. This is human nature and nothing more – large = unmanageable.
The *idea* wasn’t bad – but it became all twisted, blown out of proportion and completely useless. Why wasn’t some thought put into it? Why wasn’t it built for better survival and not just a big fishtank? Why are people buying this so easily to think that all these pages of strangers are suddenly going to become their best buddy?
It makes no sense. And when people are being foolish, I tend to give them a wake-up call.
@ Barbara – Yes, I mentioned in my post that smaller groups may form out of the bigger groups. That is possible and probably likely. But the big group cannot survive or sustain itself and people MUST select individuals out of the uber-pack… which goes against the suggested “everyone here help each other out”.
So we really don’t disagree at all.
@ Bob – Ayup. That’s the right of it.
I thought it was a great idea at the start, and I am using the OPML to find new blogs to read, but adding hundreds of new Twitter followers isn’t really practical as it cuts down on seeing updates from the people I am already interested in. I think natural wastage may slim the pack down again, and maybe it will work as originally intended.
Sharon Hurley Hall’s last blog post..Freelance Does Not Mean Free
James,
I thought it was a neat idea, and then went to check it out and said…
“Wow. This is busy.”
I still think it is a neat idea, yet for me, coming from a large company with no agility whatsoever, I thought of this essay:
http://www.paulgraham.com/boss.html
I’m not saying no one can gain from it, just in my own experience I agree with Paul Graham’s ideas. The best groups I’ve ever worked with were 5-8 people, and tended to have come together naturally.
Brett Legree’s last blog post..the forever people.
@ Bob: I like what you said about organic. I wholeheartedly agree with organic. As it happens I also belong to a pack of wolves from many moons ago with one of the well known marketers online. The funny thing is, where in the beginning it was all cool and such, it has since fizzled out – at least for me.
Most of these people were strangers to me and are strangers to me still. It doesn’t mean they are wrong and I’m right, but what I’m trying to say is that we tend to gravitate toward one another through natural progression = organic
through our common beliefs, likes, interests and what not.
That is why a huge pack of wolves can never work and while it is possible to make friends who are like minded, I prefer the natural, hence organic approach to it all.
Monika Mundell’s last blog post..A Thought Or Two On Drifting
I have to confess I’m naturally resistant to groups, though I do like to be sociable and make friendships and connections… organically. I also have a resistance to the whole concept of pack, which is why I backed off when I saw the thing floated last week, and opened Michael’s post.
To be honest I never got as far as exploring what his original beautiful idea was, because the picture of the wolves was enough to put me off.
Plus I like others have more than enough trouble keeping up with the blogs and people on twitter and flickr friends that I do.
That being said, it might work for some people who are setting out and want to get to know others… so I’m not sure I’d call it in such pejorative terms – just not something that would work for me.
Joanna
Joanna Young’s last blog post..VoiceThread Conversation On Writing With Purpose
@Monika – are you talking about the Team Marketing Ning? If so then, yeah, it certainly did waste away.
@James – I signed up with the Blogging Pack to see what would happen. Pure curiosity on my part. I didn’t take the extra step of ensuring that I added everyone on Twitter, so I didn’t do it wholeheartedly. Over time, I do think you’ll be proven correct concerning the natural formation and potential longevity of “organically grown” packs. However, I don’t think that any endeavour of this type could ever form a lasting pack unless people take the extra step of reaching out to other people in the pack. Most won’t bother to do that because the pack has too many varied interests to appeal to every single member, or even a majority thereof.
As I’ve written this, I do wonder about creating theme-based or niche-based packs, but in that case, I wonder if these people don’t already congregate together. This would make the whole idea redundant.
Maybe something that takes theme-based packs and arranges exchanges with other packs that are similar (or completely different, who knows?)
In hindsight, it’s a bit easy to criticize Chris G. and others for poor execution, but sometimes you don’t learn without trying something and reviewing the results. That’s why I look at it as an experiment, a curiosity, and I’m monitoring the results. And if I get a few more subscribers on an ongoing basis, that’s great, too.
Mark Dykeman’s last blog post..Popular blog post ideas for lazy peeps
Like Bob, I agree with the spirit of what Chris was trying to do. He wanted to help give exposure to bloggers a little further down the chain.
Of course, there’s no quick route to success or connections. You have to build up relationships over time, even online.
That said, I did find some interesting new sites n the AB. As Michael notes, a manual skim over the list is key.
If I were to design this experiment, I’d add a few qualifiers:
1. Audition – Provide links to your best two posts.
2. Categorize – Two tags that describe your site.
3. Taste – Provide two links to posts other than your own that you love.
4. Community – Show two examples of top quality comments you’ve left on other sites that are not just “You really gave me a kick in the pants/shot to the gut/pat on the head/trip to the laundromat”
Why two in each qualifier? Two shows a commitment to being a good citizen and friend. Also, after thinking about it, any more than two would be a pain to check on.
I realize this sort of qualification doesn’t match up with the fundamental characteristics of the pack mentality. It’s more like a club…
Jamie Grove – How Not To Write’s last blog post..How I Spent 6 Years Writing For A Room
Well, I think the idea IS bad. I think it’s disgusting, frankly. I don’t see how you can look at this and not see it as a blatant attempt at gaming the system.
I have zero respect for anyone who would involve themselves in anything like this. James is being polite, as always, but I’m not going to be: blog packs are wrong, wrong, wrong. Not just inorganic, but immoral.
This brings me back to why I dropped all references to Digg, Stumble, etc. on my pages. Too many amoral people involved for me to want to have any part of it.
Tony Lawrence’s last blog post..iPhone Open Application Development by Anthony Lawrence
Brett,
Paul Graham is my new hero. That’s the second time in a week someone has recommended his essays to me. He’s a genius.
James,
Amen wasn’t much to write, but you got it all so right. If it doesn’t happen organically, it just won’t hold together, not with me anyway. Maybe it might work for others, but I suspect “check in with the pack” then becomes one more blog chore, as does “give shout-out to reciprocate.” Size is a factor. So is sincerity.
I am a big fan of Chris’ writing, and I’ve already objected to this idea gently at MM’s blog.
Sometimes we wreck the thing we love with too much attention focused on it. I think Chris meant to say, word-of-mouth rocks, let’s make it happen. The problem is, MAKE it happen doesn’t go with sincere WoM.
If I write that the discussion at X blog was spectacular and you should check it out, it’s purely because I mean it, not to say thanks or to garner that writer’s affections in return.
Engineered WoM is a hot topic in “real” life, too. Ick. All we can do is engineer the best experience possible (for readers, shoppers, friends…). Do that, and you’ll lead a pack of devotees without wrecking the thing you love.
Regards,
Kelly
Kelly’s last blog post..Inspiration Points: Making Money Online or Off, Vanish
150. That’s Dunbar’s number. Used centrally in the Tipping point, it is the number of relationships ( peers and friends) our little human cortex can effectively sustain. You can read a recap about it on Wikipedia if you like.
I avoid large groups. Prefer one to one. Know that small packs are always more effective and agile. Unless you temporarily need that mob to storm Frankenstein’s castle. Just watch out for the torches.
Chris opened a blogger’s co-operative. His intent is task oriented, commercial and democratic. Michael is talking about something more subtle, something organic and selective.
My question is always this. If we are about our own USP, why would you try to identify yourself with a massive group?
Janice C Cartier’s last blog post..Organising Chaos
I was thinking about this more while getting ready to go to the gym.
Quite a while back someone who had been advertising on my blog sent me a nice email saying how successful that had been for him. He had some great things to say, so I wrote back with a proposition: let me use some of what you said and I’ll give you some free advertising. So we did that.
Suppose instead I had written to him first saying “Hey, if you are willing to say some nice things about how useful your ads here have been, I’ll give you some free ads!”
That would be pretty underhanded, wouldn’t it? I’d be paying him to fool other people into paying me. That would suck, but if you were looking at the page where I used the quotes, it would look the same to you. One is real, one is fake – and it’s fake even if he genuinely felt that way but had never said so until I made the offer!
That’s the difference between honest, organic “packs” and the kind of crap Chris did.
Tony Lawrence’s last blog post..Jungle Disk – no geeks needed by Anthony Lawrence
@janice
“My question is always this. If we are about our own USP, why would you try to identify yourself with a massive group?”
Because they aren’t trying to own their own USP. They are just trying to be “popular”. They have the cart in front of the horse..
Tony Lawrence’s last blog post..Jungle Disk – no geeks needed by Anthony Lawrence
@ Tony-
“They are just trying to be “popular.â€
Groan, then yuck…that, to me, is built in obsolescence unless they are packing sustaining talent too.
Janice C Cartier’s last blog post..Organising Chaos
Was the intention to keep all the feeds forever?
Was the intention for every person in the pack to read every RSS post?
Was then the intention that every person, who read every post, would then sphinn or digg all of them?
It would stay that way forever?
It would never change?
First, I think when Chris created it, I think he had some beginner bloggers in mind. Maybe these bloggers are so new they never sphinn or sphunn. Maybe they would like a way to meet other bloggers, network. Maybe that’s why it was on a forum
Second, I don’t see why the expectation is that you have to use it exactly as is? If I download some code free (say Open Source) and it doesn’t do exactly what I (personally) would like to see it do, I don’t write the original author of the code and expect them to adjust the code for my needs. It is what it is. If I don’t want to use it I don’t have to and if I do want to use it, I have to figure out how to make it work with what I want to do with it. I see it that way. He put something together, he offered it to others, others opted in, others downloaded the OPML, put in their RSS reader (and… if it’s not perfect then isn’t it the user’s job to decide).
If 200 opted in, and 100 love it, is it a success or a failure?
What measurement did you use measure success?
@janice
“Groan, then yuck…that, to me, is built in obsolescence unless they are packing sustaining talent too”
Well, isn’t that it? Aren’t the people who do this kind of thing (and there have been SO many!) trying to find a shortcut to success?
OK, admittedly success isn’t necessarily going to come from “sustaining talent”. If you build it, they may not come. There are probably thousands of actors, writers whatever who are every bit as good as the famous few we all know, but they just never were in the right place at the right time. Same for web sites: some very deserving people are going to be forever unsung, so I can’t put too much blame on those who try to push the process a little bit.
But for me, this kind of stuff just goes too far. I find it very ugly, and it disturbs me.
Oh, and Vickie: it’s fine that you think Chris is great. I’m not a fan myself, but obviously a lot of people do enjoy his blog and get value from it. That doesn’t mean he can’t make a mistake. That doesn’t make him a bad person or devalue anything else he does. It just means he made a mistake. We all make mistakes, right?
Tony Lawrence’s last blog post..Jungle Disk – no geeks needed by Anthony Lawrence
What measurement did you use or measure it’s success?
What would have been the scenario if it was a success?
@ Vicki – I appreciate your comments, but I think that you’re missing the point of the post.
1 – I am not critiquing Chris himself nor attacking him personally. I also think he’s quite able to appreciate constructive criticism and put forth his thoughts. I understand that you feel very close to him, and that’s great, but it’s best to remain calm and take the situation for what it is.
2 – What the post discusses is the potential failure of a large concept, nothing more. I am pointing out the pitfalls of the concept and the downfalls and cons, because people have a large tendency to follow blindly and expect miracle results. I am trying to get people to THINK further than acting. Do you feel that thinking on future consequences of an action is a bad idea?
3 – As I mentioned in my post, Chris put no obligations on anyone to participate in a full-out reciprocal arrangement. There were no rules, there were only suggestions. What my post points out is that the suggestions and the concept have faults that show the idea won’t succeed as it may have been intended.
4 – Chris didn’t say beginners or experienced bloggers. And I didn’t say that the concept wouldn’t work for *some* people who were willing to invest the time and effort into such a massive undertaking. Also, many experienced bloggers visit forums – forums are not a newbie thing.
5 – No one said that anyone had to use the concept exactly as is. See my point 3 above. The problem is that people generally DO expect things to work out exactly as they, personally, expect them to and then get upset when they don’t. This is what I want to avoid – that people don’t get upset.
6 – The post wasn’t about measuring success in the least. It’s far too early to measure success. However, nature and human psychology being what it is, the correlation that will most likely occur points to low rates of success based on the number of people that became involved. And the result of that is that people will generally shun the whole concept as a failure, when it could have been successful on a smaller scale and on a more organic foundation.
I hope I’ve helped clarify some points for you, but if not, please feel free to ask more questions.
How can you say it is a failure? If you define it as failure, then you must have an idea what you would have considered a success? (If it had been done differently)
That’s what I want to know. What (in your mind) would it have looked like?
This is a very good point James. Artificially created systems have a way of falling apart by themselves. There is a natural limit at which each species is at its strongest as a group.
Vitor – The Fractal Forest’s last blog post..Don’t let ?it? stop you
@ Vicki – I have the feeling that you haven’t read Michael’s post, the original post that inspired this whole affair. What Michael proposed – mutually beneficial organic relationships between peers – would succeed, based on the laws of nature, human behavior, psychology and business.
The concept is to form packs – a group of peers who can benefit you and whom you can benefit – and tap into the relationship aspect to improve both your and their business.
Success, to me, is having integrity, believing in people, respecting relationships and being a genuine helpful person because you WANT to and know that it is the right thing to do.
Failure, to me, is creating false expectations to a mass of people with suggested promises that won’t live up to people’s hopes.
Can I bluntly, in my Canadian/Quebecer fashion, ask what upsets you so much? There’s something off about this and I can’t quite put my finger on it. The hostility seems a little much considering the thought-out responses and the posts in question…
Well, I do know Chris from both @SOBCon and I have had several Skype consulting sessions with him. I have also read quite a bit of the problogger book.
The point is, is seems like you are measuring success against Michael’s origional idea.
If I had a blogging site, like Chris and I had an audience of say 20% beginners, 50 % moderate, and 30% expert readers come to my site. Maybe the idea and it’s execution were meant for the 20% beginners and half 25% moderate. If this was true, then it would be considered a success by the users, no?
I have to agree with Tony. Nothing personal against Chris, but I really didn’t care for the way that all went down. It reminded me of some religions. Once upon a time, someone had a beautiful idea, it was pure and simple. Some people “got” it and stayed true. Others may have started with good intentions, but it got a little warped in translation by the masses. The ones who followed this second group warped it more. These people only saw what was on the surface and didn’t bother to dig deeper. It became a cult following instead of a shot at true enlightenment.
Okay, maybe that was a little out there, but I haven’t had coffee yet.
@ Vicki – Success is subjective to every individual’s perceptions based on their needs, values, beliefs, goals, thought pattern, etc etc etc.
I’m not measuring anyone’s potential success – please get that straight. I’d also ask you to go back and read the post with a calm and open mind so that you can see exactly what I’m saying.
Large groups don’t survive. Period. I didn’t make up the rules of nature, Vicki, so please don’t get angry with me about that. That’s the way the world is.
I am not measuring success by Michael’s idea, either. I am saying that Michael’s idea has a much better chance of success because it follows the rules of nature.
Continually restating what I’ve stated in the post isn’t helping anyone, nor is pulling out fictional stats and theorizing about philosophies.
I think that you feel I’ve slammed your friend and that’s the reason you’re angry.
@vickie:
I’m not quite sure where James stands on this, but I don’t care if it is successful – it’s WRONG. It’s artificial, it’s forced (no, not that the participants are forced into certain actions, but that the concept itself is forced).
If my goal is to get money, am I successful if I do so by fooling you? Go back to my advertising example above – am I successful if I get people to lie about their success for my future gain? No, it’s just plain wrong.
I understand you like Chris a lot. Nevertheless, Chris made a big mistake with this. Again, that doesn’t make him a bad person. He’ll probably wake up and realize this is wrong.. and if he doesn’t, oh well.. that still wouldn’t mean that he hasn’t brought value in other ways.
Your heroes don’t have to be perfect.
Tony Lawrence’s last blog post..Jungle Disk – no geeks needed by Anthony Lawrence
I don’t believe it is not a success. I believe a group of people will get great benefit from the pack and it will be quite a few. There are individuals, in Chris’ audience and in that AB Pack that will not find it a failure, it will help them.
That’s my point. It will be a success.
Well, I’m a bit out of the loop, so I haven’t seen any of these posts you’re talking about, James. Still, the idea of forcing a community seems wrong to me. The best thing about organic communities is that a bunch of people with similar interests end up gravitating toward each other. The people who stay around feel as though they belong – simple. If you stop by and you’re not feeling the love, you can leave.
I don’t think that the idea of community needs to be rocket science. If you provide a decent environment at your blog, it’ll just happen. I’m not saying that a person doesn’t need to work AT ALL to gain a community, I’m just saying that it seems a little wonky to force a natural process. It’s like growing plants from seeds – you’re not going to have a fruiting apple tree over night. You can’t instantly have a fruitful community – nature doesn’t work like that.
RLD: taekwondo happiness’s last blog post..Whoops!
It kind of reminds me of that 1,000 Bloggers thing a couple years back…or was it 10,000 bloggers? Regardless, it totally backfired and it really did a whole lot of nothing. I’m not saying their idea is useless…I didn’t choose to participate and therefore don’t know much about how it’s going. However, I do agree James that relationships can’t be forced, especially when it involves large groups of people from many different backgrounds, interests, etc. Great post.
Diane’s last blog post..Why I’ve Realized I Hate Blogging
“I have to agree with Tony.”
Ooops. Someone agreeing with me is so unusual that it always causes me to recheck my position. Of course it is Harry, well known for contrarian thinking himself, so maybe I’m still OK..
People make mistakes. Boy have I made some doozies! If you wanted to take the time to dig through my website, you’d find me recommending a few things that I definitely don’t recommend now. We grow, we change. I think Chris will probably realize that his intentions were good but the plan was bad.
Michael Martine, on the other hand, was talking about something entirely different. I regularly read a number of blogs (including this one) because I enjoy them. Every now and then I may put a link to something I have read, but because I read those blogs more regularly, the chance of them getting a link is higher. That’s organic linking due to an organic pack – exactly what James and Michael are talking about.
Tony Lawrence’s last blog post..Jungle Disk – no geeks needed by Anthony Lawrence
I found Michael’s post interesting b/c I’d been discussing the idea with someone else a few weeks before. This works best organically, in ways that are complimentary and not quid pro quo.
I agree with the fact that Chris is a good guy, but this AB Blogging Pack was just not an effective interpretation of the concept.
Dave Navarro’s last blog post..Interview with International Man of Mystery Lodewijk van den Broek
By the way, if y’all skipped by the link Brett gave in his comment above, scroll back and click on it. It’s good reading – not directly related to this, but definitely tangential – thanks, Brett.
Tony Lawrence’s last blog post..Jungle Disk – no geeks needed by Anthony Lawrence
“Ooops. Someone agreeing with me is so unusual that it always causes me to recheck my position.”
@Tony I have to agree with you (two times in one thread). Harry’s comment made me click back in to see what I was missing.
@Vicky I wonder how many of these folks would have found each other if they’d just hung around on Twitter and other places? I know that when I imported the first OPML (haven’t bothered with revs 2 or 3) I had already subscribed to at least 30% of the feeds. In Twitterdom, I might have added less than 50% (either because I had them or they were following 20,000 people).
I can’t really say that I think the AB was immoral. This is the Internet after all and that’s sort of a pot-kettle-black thing. However, it does seem like there is room for improvement.
Jamie Grove – How Not To Write’s last blog post..6 Things Not to Do When Your Story Is Rejected
“But for me, this kind of stuff just goes too far. I find it very ugly, and it disturbs me.’
It is an inelegant solution. And yes, an attempt at a quick fix. The very idea of social media walks a fine line between commercial and personal. We are not different creatures just because it is a virtual venue. Affronts will disturb some primal instincts.
Seth Godin did a post not too long ago about making a choice between the pop arena and the passion one. It was a clear choice for me. Easy. And though I have a hard time wrapping my brain around your admission that you are not a visual person, don’t respond to pictures, I can clearly see that you are passionate about your work…tangibly, authoritatively comfortable in your own skin.
I really don’t care about Chris’s effort. Is has very little to do with what makes me tick. But here are three, no four, people whose opinions I do respect saying foul, foul. Do we want to talk real influence against massive non influence?
Janice C Cartier’s last blog post..Organising Chaos
oops. That’s Intended for Tony.
Janice C Cartier’s last blog post..Organising Chaos
James, I agree…the original idea was valuable. Chris’s version, regardless of his good intentions, is warped.
Chad’s last blog post..Stop the Madness and Start Hand-Picking Your Clients
@Kelly,
I agree, Paul Graham is a genius. His latest essay on distraction is quite thought provoking, made me think about my current work habits. But I already knew the answer (damned shiny toys).
@Tony,
Thanks for that, I should have explained a bit that it had more to do with the size of the pack than the origins of the pack.
But more to the origins. The AB pack thing seems to me a bit like college or university, when you may have made friends in your classes who would not have been your friends otherwise, in a different setting.
I know I had a lot of those – people I no longer talk with, because the only thing in common we had was that we were at the same school, and once it was over, there was no “glue”.
And then, there are people who became my friends in the “normal” way. They are still my friends.
Brett Legree’s last blog post..the forever people.
I have used the blogging pack thing to discover new blogs by writers I hadn’t come across before – and I think it works well for that. I have followed a few new people and am trying some of the blogs in my reader. However, those who don’t product quality and aren’t relevant and interesting will be pruned, leaving me to act as I normally would. In other words, when I find something interesting I will link to it, stumble it or whatever, and I will leave the rest alone. Surely others will do the same and will end up with a handful (or a couple of handfuls) of blogs that they read regularly, enjoy and boost when it seems appropriate. I don’t see the Blogging Pack as forcing a relationship, more like making an introduction.
Sharon Hurley Hall’s last blog post..Freelance Does Not Mean Free
@Sharon – after reading the post and the related comments, I think your approach is most similar to my own thoughts. I don’t think the Blogging Pack is a horrible thing, but my expectations are not high for it either. To each their own.
Mark Dykeman’s last blog post..Popular blog post ideas for lazy peeps
@ Sharon – And that’s fine and that’s how it should be – an informed “shopper” with no preconceived notions of immediate fame or glory through instant reciprocation.
But now my question is… is it really worth your time to go through all the blogs out there in this way for the returns it provides?
@ Mark – I don’t think it’s horrible or immoral… I think it’s gaming the system and a waste of time for many people but that it could possibly be okay for some people.
@ Tony – I don’t dare agree with you. I have too much fun arguing with you
I’m enjoying the comments today. Everyone is providing thoughtful ones whether they disagree or not and I appreciate that.
@ James: it doesn’t take up that much time. I am leaving the Twitterverse alone (I am following enough people) and concentrating on the blogs. I set my reader to show the titles, and I only stop if they catch my attention. So there’s not a lot of effort involved and I have made a couple of valuable blog discoveries. It’s true that I might have found them eventually through another source, but who knows? There are so many blogs out there. Part of being social online is checking out new neighbourhoods – and this is one way to do it. I’m not saying it’s the best way; in fact, I don’t know if there *is* a best way, but it’s one way.
Sharon Hurley Hall’s last blog post..Freelance Does Not Mean Free
Ahh, but James, I am agreeing with you. I’m just more ticked off than you are.
I’m not sure why, really. As I said above, I understand that people want to promote themselves and I know that many deserving blogs get little traffic – if this helped them get what they deserve, that’s good, right? And I understand that most people will probably still be discriminating – they won’t be slavish herds scattering their attention to everyone who just happens to be a fellow pack member. So given those probable facts, what’s to get upset about?
I dunno. It just bugs me when people suggest inorganic linking. It’s “cheating” and I don’t like cheating..
Tony Lawrence’s last blog post..Jungle Disk – no geeks needed by Anthony Lawrence
Ah, Tony,
When I first realized I agreed with you this morning, I checked my temperature.
I believe you live to stir the pot, sir. Except that you may take a slightly more robust stance than I like, today I stir alongside you.
The deliberate pack creation strategy is a bit slimy to me. Worse, if I don’t know about the deal someone’s made, then I find out later, I am going to feel that I’ve been taken for a ride. It isn’t transparent, and that can destroy trust in a heartbeat.
I know it’s clicks and links and not dollars for these kickbacks, but that’s still what it smells like to me. Whether it “succeeds” or not.
Until later,
Kelly
Kelly’s last blog post..Inspiration Points: Making Money Online or Off, Vanish
I’m glad you’re talking about this James. It’s been bugging me for awhile. When I saw your post it kind of jelled my thoughts.
I really don’t understand inorganic linking or anything of that nature, but let’s face it, the only thing I see this monster pack being good for would be getting some articles on the Digg front page. Even then, I’m sure people would be discriminating. I know I would. But isn’t this why we have nations systems? So we can work for the common good?
I prefer smaller networks where I can meet like minded inviduals who are trying to accomplish similar goals. As I go on with this venture my energy is becoming more and more concentrated towards specific end. I don’t have time to week through tons of blogs. God! I barely have enough time to work and visit my fellow ecosystem full of bloggers!
You can get more done if you concentrate your energy and don’t spread yourself too thinly. I know who I’m loyal too.
Ellen Wilson’s last blog post..The Devouring Blog
@kelly
No, really, I don’t want to stir the pot. I know it may seem like that sometimes, but I’m really not taking unpopular positions to rile up anyone.. it’s just the way I’m built.
It would be a lot easier for me in general to “go along to get along”, but I just can’t do it. I’d *like* to: for example it would be great if I were a sports fan so I could sit with the guys instead of the women when we go to parties, it would be great if I were religious so that I could express my beliefs without being looked at like I’m a devil worshipper.. oh, there are a lot of reasons why it can be better the think as the majority thinks.
I bring this up because it may explain my deep mistrust and active dislike of crowd mentality. Yes, there is wisdom in crowds, but there’s is also horrific stupidity. Seeing a bunch of rednecks proudly clutching their hearts and screaming “Gawd bless America” at a flag arouses nothing in me but contempt and frankly a lot of fear. Those are NOT the people you want to have an intellectual discussion of patriotism with!
In blogs like this, we get a lot of intelligent people – you don’t see much “crowd mentality” here. However, the more popular a site gets, the more hoi polloi sneaks in, and the more chance of degradation to foolishness.
Maybe that’s why my first reaction to anything involving a group is suspicion. It probably tainted my view of Chris’s AB group. Were I less disgusted by crowd-think, I’d be more even tempered, like James.
So no, I’m not out to stir the pot. I hold my opinions honestly.
Tony Lawrence’s last blog post..Jungle Disk – no geeks needed by Anthony Lawrence
He called me even tempered… (ME? A Quebecer? Even tempered??) I feel all warm fuzzy now and my world is a beautiful place…
@ Ellen – I tend to be the one that zigs when everyone things zags are the best thing and the one that dances when everyone’s sitting down. I also think that every time I write something that may be controversial, I end up drawing out all sorts of people who feel the same but either weren’t sure why, were afraid to say anything or who don’t like being the outcast.
I really liked your post today, too. It was eloquent and I enjoyed reading it.
I know I’m missing responding personally to everyone today, but I’m reading everything and appreciate that you’ve all come to post your thoughts.
I think Janice has it right — we can only handle so many friends and acquaintances, real or cyber.
I don’t think there was anything particularly wrong with Chris’s approach — in theory anyway. It is like many social experiments: they’d be perfect if they didn’t involve humans.
In the natural (human) world, there are pack leaders and there are followers. There are those who hunt their own meat, and there are those who mooch from the kill. There are nurturing types and types that will take advantage of any situation given to them. These people exist no matter what artificial social structure you devise.
This idea also sounds very much too like the whole Themestream pyramid-like groups of the 90s. You write an article, spend the rest of the day reading other people’s articles, and hopefully generate enough money for everyone in the group. But like the 1929 stock market bubble, it burst due to hyper-inflated worth. No substance, no go.
From a marketing perspective, I think smaller, more organic groups are the way to go anyway. It takes longer, but then the results last longer too…
~Graham
Graham Strong’s last blog post..Cutting Out the Noise
James:
I’m 5′ 10. I’m very tall.. compared to my wife and youngest daughter
Tony Lawrence’s last blog post..Jungle Disk – no geeks needed by Anthony Lawrence
I love it. That’s the best quote I’ve heard all day.
Well… this has been interesting.
I thought after a long day of work with no internet connection that I’d come here and have some big thing to say, but I don’t. I guess if nothing else it shows how desperate people are for traffic. Funnel that desire into understanding your audience, writing the best you can for them, and networking in a conscious but natural way, and with time (hopefully not too much) things will go your way.
Michael Martine | Remarkablogger’s last blog post..How Social Media Helps Grow Your Blog
Tony,
I did not mean to imply that your words are not your own fine and fiercely held opinions. I have no doubt of your sincerity.
I’ve done a little crowd mentality posting now and then. GroupThink is a real creativity-killer, on- and off-line.
Intelligent people who agree, or disagree, or howl at the moon, are just dandy.
Until later,
Kelly
Kelly’s last blog post..Inspiration Points: Making Money Online or Off, Vanish
Although behind the commenting curve here, I wanted to express my relief that this was not only addressed but honestly so. Agreeing w/Michael that bloggers are/should be pack animals, I was curious about Chris’ offer.. I saw the thread just before the 1st OPML was posted & immediately tho’t, “WTF?!â€
As my current blog is not my 1st but IS here to stay, I’ve been letting my ‘pack’ develop over time (& more time ~_^). Not all of my supporters are even bloggers so patience wins out as my readers offer quality already & quantity can come in time.
Even sans coffee, Harry hit the cultish behavior right on its sheep-shaped head thus James’ warning, rush not to be wolves lest you prove sheep. An idea grabbed but not ‘gotten’ can lose its intent.
(|_|*cheers*|_|)
“Did you ever stop to think, and forget to start again?†~ Winnie the Pooh
Dorian aka coffeesister |_|)’s last blog post..Found Fridays; finding friendship, drink IN hand
Hm. Some of the comments being tossed around here (“slimy” “disgusting”, “cheating”, “immoral”) suggest a malice behind Chris’ actions that I just don’t think is there.
I think what happened here was not dissimilar from experiences some (many? most?) of us had in high school or college: A friend’s folks or roommate are leaving town for a bit, so they decide to throw a small party for their friends. But then word gets out and the party gets out of control. Before they know it, the house is trashed, stuff’s been stolen, and a nuclear missile is launching from the basement.
That doesn’t mean no one made new friends at the party.
Now if I’d have learned about Chris’ pack later, rather than sooner, I likely wouldn’t have signed one. But I didn’t, so I did. My traffic has shot up, as have my RSS subscriptions. But I hold no illusions about those numbers sticking around. As time passes, a lot of those folks will decide what I have to offer is not for them and they’ll drop me–just as I have dropped a lot of blogs already. No big deal.
In the meantime, I’ve learned of some cool new blogs I didn’t know of before, which is pretty cool.
And it looks like Chris’ idea has turned out not to have been such a good one, or at least not well-executed. So what? In the long run, no big deal.
Matt Tuley, Laptop for Hire’s last blog post..Do you believe in your own service or product?
@James – I appreciate that comment, since I had to rewrite the post from memory after Wordpress ate it. Organically?
@Matt – Good analogy about Chris and the AB pack. I think that’s what happened.
@Michael – “it shows how desperate people are for traffic.” I don’t know if I agree with that summation. The life of a writer is an inherently lonely one, and we like to connect with like minded individuals. And the more like minded individuals you can connect with the easier you can network and get things done. Though I know there are more than writers here that participate on this blog. It doesn’t matter, we still meet others of similar interests and ideas.
You know, the thing about Men with Pens is that this is a community. You can come here and meet people. James and Harry aren’t out to sell us anything. We can express our opinions and get on with the discussion. It takes work, but it’s about relationships. And isn’t that what we’re talking about?
And even if you do want to sell something, you have to connect with people. I learned that a long time ago as a sales person in a clothing store. All people want is someone to listen to them. Everyone is the same. In fact, in many instances it’s more important than talking.
I think Melissa Donovan put it nicely when she said the best blogs are the ones that connect with and interact with their readers. If you can do that you have a community.
Ellen Wilson’s last blog post..The Devouring Blog
>>Michael Martine: This is an excellent quote: “Funnel that desire into understanding your audience, writing the best you can for them, and networking in a conscious but natural way, and with time (hopefully not too much) things will go your way.”
I joined that pack for two reasons:
1. To expose my content to some new folks who might never have looked at it,
2. To be exposed to content that I might never have considered.
Yes, I knew that it would grow to unnatural proportions. Yes, I knew that I might get a bunch of new followers on Twitter that I didn’t want to follow.
But, like Matt Tuley says above, I did get some new readers. Some will stay, some won’t. So what? You can’t join a community by sitting at home. You can’t meet new people if you get out there and, ah, meet new people.
I believe that was the point.
@Stephen Productivity in Context’s last blog post..Making Changes
@Ellen – what you said about the life of a writer and community is perfectly true. It’s also not what I was talking about when I said people were desperate for traffic. If a blogger wants community and camaraderie, she can do the “blog pack thing” the way I had originally intended it as a guided but natural process.
That’s not really what’s happening at the AB forum. What you see there are a lot of new bloggers who have no readers (except for Darren–what the hell was he doing there? That was just silly). They’re thinking of it as a way to get traffic, not grow in a more holistic way by helping others. It’s like they’re adding their URLs into a directory. That doesn’t sound like community to me.
The way I described how a blog pack should operate works for the people involved, and it works both in the short and long term to build community and to foster deeper relationships between the bloggers in the pack. I don’t think many of the people who added their blog to that AB list even wanted that. I think they just wanted more traffic without working for it. I especially think that about bloggers who added themselves to the list after it had already grown beyond a reasonable number. Over the years I’ve seen way too much insane behavior regarding traffic-building to interpret this any differently.
Michael Martine | Remarkablogger’s last blog post..How Social Media Helps Grow Your Blog
@Stephen – I’m glad you liked that quote. No doubt you will benefit from participating and others will benefit from your participation also. That that’s not the point is… uh… not the point.
The criticism is that the AB list is not in the spirit of what I intended, and that it will not provide long term value. Not to speak for James, but that’s the point I took from his post.
I know that people will benefit from participating in the AB list in the short term, but I think any long term benefits will be scarce. People will stop commenting, stop responding to shouts on Digg, and cease to Stumble because the list is too huge and most of the blogs on it will not interest everyone. If my idea of a blog pack is followed the way I described it, a blogger would, over time, get more comments, more readers, more Stumbles–not less. The relationship between the bloggers in the pack would strengthen and deepen, not weaken and be stretched too thin.
Michael Martine | Remarkablogger’s last blog post..How Social Media Helps Grow Your Blog
@Michael It has gotten a bit strange. I logged in to the forum for the second time tonight. 11 pages of responses?
I originally added my site because I thought there was only going to be a handful of people. Chris said it was closing in a few minutes and when I checked I knew half the people so I said what the heck.
Now I feel kinda like a sucker for signing up.
@To-Everyone-Else What’s interesting (or not) is I tweeted about this thread this tonight and Bob graciously retweeted. I was trying to nudge some AB folks to come and give their opinions, but it clearly has not worked.
Sure twitter’s having a fit, but come on. How many AB pack people have come here all day? Most of the comments here are from mwp regulars.
Of course, that’s pretty good company to be in IMHO.
Jamie Grove – How Not To Write’s last blog post..6 Things Not to Do When Your Story Is Rejected
@Jamie – You could call us the original blog pack.
Michael Martine | Remarkablogger’s last blog post..How Social Media Helps Grow Your Blog
@Michael As much time as we spend online we should call ourselves the extra-crispy blog pack… (I think I have a family around here somewhere. Where did they go?)
Jamie Grove – How Not To Write’s last blog post..6 Things Not to Do When Your Story Is Rejected
@ Michael – You know, you talk about this stuff like you’re a blog consultant or someth-… Oh! Wait! You ARE a blogging consultant!
Seriously, though, you’ve got it exactly.
@ Jamie – You’re not the first to notice a lack of AB forum presence speaking up, though I did see some new faces today. We’ve had a couple of people mention it.
On the other hand, I always write with the expectation that no one will comment and am always pleasantly surprised when people do – and when the comments are so well thought-out, pro or con, I’m doubly pleased.
@ Stephen – I have to agree with Michael – the point of the AB Forum thread was not a meet and greet. It was clearly a sign up and Stumble. That is what my protest is about. There’s nothing wrong with a meet and greet, but my values tell me that a “let’s form a group and Stumble, Digg and Twitter” doesn’t sit well. It’s a traffic-driving strategy and a numbers game only.
We like to earn our traffic, Stumbles and Diggs the honest way. That means more to us than anything at all. We got where we are today through hard work, effort and putting into the concept of blogging. We didn’t take shortcuts. We earned our position, and I don’t think it’s right that people try to skip out.
But again – as a meet and greet, it’s a fine idea. If only it had been put forth like that and if only Michael’s wonderful theory had been left meaningful.
Actually – it still is meaningful to me.
I seem to have left that part out. You are correct, it was not used as intended, BUT:
It will winnow itself down into a handful of smaller packs, and in a fairly efficient manner, I would guess.
@Stephen Productivity in Context’s last blog post..Making Changes
“Sign up and Stumble”? Well, yes and no. Even if you are part of a Stumble group, you still have to adhere to the spirit of the game, because your own “rank” as a Stumbler is affected by the things that you Stumble. If you just Stumble crap because someone in your “pack” sent it to you and a bunch of other folks give it a Thumbs Down, you will be penalized.
Having a “shotgun start” doesn’t hurt as long as you continue to play by the rules.
@Stephen Productivity in Context’s last blog post..Making Changes
James, I signed up at the forum too and would like to offer an alternate opinion. I viewed the community like every networking opportunity virtual or live. In a room full of people you can have initial conversations. You will not connect with everyone but you may find a few people that you want to get to know better. I definitely am not one to explore every strategy or follow trends but am up for trying certain things. As a result I have found some blogs and people I may not have found. No matter how you encounter people in the end yes you still have to build relationships naturally. So although the forum has grown to huge sizes, some people will gel and others will not. Chris also says as much in his opening post.
Karen Swim’s last blog post..Three Tactics for Managing Roadblocks On Your Road to Success
Well, I signed on with the pack but haven’t seen any massive (or even mini) rush of Stumbles. It was so big so fast that I just let it be organic. I think I got 3 pages of adding subscriptions & Twitter IDs into the 11-page topic, and then I got tired.
It reminds me that I really think very highly of Dazzlin’ Donna, so I check her out daily in the reader. It spurred me to spend two minutes and comment on Terry Starbucker’s blog. It pointed me to a couple of interesting people I hadn’t known before. For me, it’s a small reminder to branch out a little and quit hanging out exclusively with my known suspects. I try to get to 1-2 new folks a day. If they’re not too good (and of course, blogs are as subject as anything else to Sturgeon’s Law), I don’t go back.
I don’t see it as evil and I never saw it as a miracle. It’s sort of like going to a really noisy singles bar. Probably sort of pointless, but you never know when someone cute will walk through the door.
Sonia Simone’s last blog post..5 Recipes for Success (and 1 for Tomatoes)
Karen is so smart, that’s just what it’s like. I don’t go to a chamber of commerce meeting assuming I’ll have a conversation with every other attendee.
Sonia Simone’s last blog post..5 Recipes for Success (and 1 for Tomatoes)
It’s interesting that Sonia mentioned a Chamber of Commerce meeting. That made me think of BNI and similar networking groups. Like this, there are two kinds: the true organic kind that consists of people with similar interests (business people in a particular area or with a particular business slant) and the well fertilized, contrived inorganic kind that just throws a bunch of disparate (and maybe desperate too) people together and lets them pitch to each other.
I belong to a small networking group of tech folk. That’s the organic type. I once looked into a regional BNI group. That was more like the other type. Too big, and nothing to really draw the people together. As noted above by more than a few of us, this “AB” thing is too big, too unfocused and also carries the stain of possibly encouraging dishonesty for the sake of personal gain.
It’s a bad idea. Those of you pretending “Oh, I’m only doing it for such and such reason” will eventually understand that. Til then, have fun.
Tony Lawrence’s last blog post..Fixing Large Kerio Mailboxes by Anthony Lawrence
I’m howling at this post, it’s so darned accurate.
RhodesTer’s last blog post..3 things to avoid when composing a RhodesTer blog