How Can We Make A2K More "Inviting" to People?

PRINCIPLES OF REINFORCEMENT
There are three basic principles of this theory. These are the Rules of Consequences. The three Rules describe the logical outcomes which typically occur after consequences.

Consequences which give Rewards increase a behavior.

Consequences which give Punishments decrease a behavior.

Consequences which give neither Rewards nor Punishments extinguish a behavior.

These Rules provide an excellent blueprint for influence. If you want to increase a behavior (make it more frequent, more intense, more likely), then when the behavior is shown, provide a Consequence of Reward.

If you want to decrease a behavior (make it less frequent, less intense, less likely), then when the behavior is shown, provide a Consequence of Punishment.

Finally, if you want a behavior to extinguish (disappear, fall out of the behavioral repertoire), then when the behavior is shown, then provide no Consequence (ignore the behavior).

Amigo wrote:

Alot of new studies have come out on these internet communities and they are very interesting.

Do you mean online?


If so, do you have any cites, please?


I'd be interested.

Amigo wrote:

Alot of new studies have come out on these internet communities and they are very interesting.

Do you mean online?


If so, do you have any cites, please?


I'd be interested.

Perhaps the last few posts have given a glimmering of a worthwhile marketing strategy for A2K. To wit, we could become known as a forum in which any given topic will segue into sexuality. Think about it.

....my buddy talked about the studies to me alot. It was on NPR.

He said (the study) that people in these online communities will form a gang and that when a stranger comes in with a different opinion other members in that community will fell compelled to attack that "stranger" and then the community attacks altogether then the stranger leaves and the community becomes atype of cult.

The stranger goes out into the real world still effected by the attacks by the online community and actually withdraws from the actual community.

There is a strange phenomenon I have experienced about virtual versus real interactions. If I go to a party where most of the people are strangers, I may not be able to participate in whatever conversations are going on. Thus, I may actually experience less interaction when people are physically present than when I am online.

About "speaking up", I think that one needs to use judgment. In some cases, a pointed comment can often stop an increasing conflagration. With others, especially those members who like to go off half cocked, ignoring them, IMO, is the best defense. To respond to them merely encourages the behavior.

[...] As for myself, I weary quickly of people. I am probably happiest when I am either alone or with Mr. P. although I do enjoy the company of others.................in small doses. What I find so nice about an internet forum like A2K is that I can say my piece, and simply walk away when the mood strikes me, without worrying about offending anyone.

Chumly wrote:

I feel in some tangle / intangible way A2K has both lost some spice and also become harsher.

Maybe it's because of Timber's passing plus Frank's leaving plus Doc's disappearance.

Timber's passing was a great loss to us all. He was of invaluble assistance to me over the years with his great knowledge of computers, which he shared freely with members. He was the sort of guy who had many members clamoring around his threads.

Frank was someone who tended to have large groups of people gathering around him. Although many people did not agree with him, and he did tend to get a bit nasty at times, for better or for worse, he put fire into the site. And that fire translated into a lot of people responding, even if only to argue with him.

Chumly, I think that you are right about A2K losing some of its "spice". Over the years, we have a number of people, who have come and gone, who have raised the hackles of members. Even so, those folks, to a great extent, brought the rest of us together, if only to disagree. That irritation gave life to the site, and it resulted in many more postings.

Personally, I think that what A2K could use right now are a couple of intelligent and knowledgeable firebrands, who could mix things up a bit.

If anyone has the temerity to disagree; meet me at the Tavern on the Green, Central Park and I will drink you under the table!

I think that some members tend to personalize what other people say, and go on a personal attack when someone is in great disagreement with them. I say, attack the idea, not abuse the person.

At this point in time, I think that we need to set out a big "WELCOME" mat at A2K. We want people to know that we are open minded, generous of spirit, and accepting of new people with new ideas. [..]

My point is, IMO, if we want this forum to flourish, and not languish, we need to put on our best smiles and trot out the lemonade and cookies.

Frank was someone who tended to have large groups of people gathering around him. Although many people did not agree with him, and he did tend to get a bit nasty at times, for better or for worse, he put fire into the site. And that fire translated into a lot of people responding, even if only to argue with him.

Chumly, I think that you are right about A2K losing some of its "spice". Over the years, we have a number of people, who have come and gone, who have raised the hackles of members. Even so, those folks, to a great extent, brought the rest of us together, if only to disagree. That irritation gave life to the site, and it resulted in many more postings.