Comments on: One Site http://www.stuartmease.com/uncategorized/one-site/ Providing a bridge for young adults in the Roanoke & New River Valleys of Virginia Thu, 25 Feb 2010 18:37:43 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Andrew http://www.stuartmease.com/uncategorized/one-site/comment-page-1/#comment-232 Andrew Mon, 24 Apr 2006 20:28:07 +0000 http://croakingtoad.com/~stuart/?p=53#comment-232 "Community" sites sponsored by a single institution rarely do well over the long term without a very enlightened board and a light hand. A highly successful community portal that is "owned" by a single institution will often end up being co-opted by the institution itself, which wants to capitalize on the site's success--understandable from the perspective of the institution, but usually not a good thing for community the site is trying to serve.<br><br>If possible, I'd recommend an indpendent site that accepts sponsorship from a variety of interested organizations. That way, sponsors get credit for their help, but the site is able to chart it's own course.<br><br>Of course, there is no free lunch. The advantage of a single sponsor is that you may get better support and continuity than with an all volunteer effort.<br><br>Either approach can work, but it helps to know what the downsides of each one are before you get started.<br><br>Andrew<br>(thirteen years of community portal experience) “Community” sites sponsored by a single institution rarely do well over the long term without a very enlightened board and a light hand. A highly successful community portal that is “owned” by a single institution will often end up being co-opted by the institution itself, which wants to capitalize on the site's success–understandable from the perspective of the institution, but usually not a good thing for community the site is trying to serve.

If possible, I'd recommend an indpendent site that accepts sponsorship from a variety of interested organizations. That way, sponsors get credit for their help, but the site is able to chart it's own course.

Of course, there is no free lunch. The advantage of a single sponsor is that you may get better support and continuity than with an all volunteer effort.

Either approach can work, but it helps to know what the downsides of each one are before you get started.

Andrew
(thirteen years of community portal experience)

]]> By: Andrew http://www.stuartmease.com/uncategorized/one-site/comment-page-1/#comment-45 Andrew Mon, 24 Apr 2006 19:28:07 +0000 http://croakingtoad.com/~stuart/?p=53#comment-45 "Community" sites sponsored by a single institution rarely do well over the long term without a very enlightened board and a light hand. A highly successful community portal that is "owned" by a single institution will often end up being co-opted by the institution itself, which wants to capitalize on the site's success--understandable from the perspective of the institution, but usually not a good thing for community the site is trying to serve. If possible, I'd recommend an indpendent site that accepts sponsorship from a variety of interested organizations. That way, sponsors get credit for their help, but the site is able to chart it's own course. Of course, there is no free lunch. The advantage of a single sponsor is that you may get better support and continuity than with an all volunteer effort. Either approach can work, but it helps to know what the downsides of each one are before you get started. Andrew (thirteen years of community portal experience) “Community” sites sponsored by a single institution rarely do well over the long term without a very enlightened board and a light hand. A highly successful community portal that is “owned” by a single institution will often end up being co-opted by the institution itself, which wants to capitalize on the site’s success–understandable from the perspective of the institution, but usually not a good thing for community the site is trying to serve.

If possible, I’d recommend an indpendent site that accepts sponsorship from a variety of interested organizations. That way, sponsors get credit for their help, but the site is able to chart it’s own course.

Of course, there is no free lunch. The advantage of a single sponsor is that you may get better support and continuity than with an all volunteer effort.

Either approach can work, but it helps to know what the downsides of each one are before you get started.

Andrew
(thirteen years of community portal experience)

]]> By: Rhett Fleitz http://www.stuartmease.com/uncategorized/one-site/comment-page-1/#comment-231 Rhett Fleitz Wed, 19 Apr 2006 17:23:55 +0000 http://croakingtoad.com/~stuart/?p=53#comment-231 I agree with you all on a community based site led/sponsored by the Chamber and/or local jurisdictions.<br><br>The biggest problem I see with that is the fact that once those people get ahold of it, the will forget the very people you are trying to reach out to.<br><br>As with everything in Roanoke City, it seems as though the only ones allowed to speak are the elders. The Times and the City have both spoke of giving the younger crowd a voice, yet it has not happened.<br><br>Let me know if I can help.<br><br>Rhett of <a href="http://RoanokeFire.com">RoanokeFire.com</a> I agree with you all on a community based site led/sponsored by the Chamber and/or local jurisdictions.

The biggest problem I see with that is the fact that once those people get ahold of it, the will forget the very people you are trying to reach out to.

As with everything in Roanoke City, it seems as though the only ones allowed to speak are the elders. The Times and the City have both spoke of giving the younger crowd a voice, yet it has not happened.

Let me know if I can help.

Rhett of RoanokeFire.com

]]> By: Rhett Fleitz http://www.stuartmease.com/uncategorized/one-site/comment-page-1/#comment-44 Rhett Fleitz Wed, 19 Apr 2006 16:23:55 +0000 http://croakingtoad.com/~stuart/?p=53#comment-44 I agree with you all on a community based site led/sponsored by the Chamber and/or local jurisdictions. The biggest problem I see with that is the fact that once those people get ahold of it, the will forget the very people you are trying to reach out to. As with everything in Roanoke City, it seems as though the only ones allowed to speak are the elders. The Times and the City have both spoke of giving the younger crowd a voice, yet it has not happened. Let me know if I can help. Rhett of RoanokeFire.com I agree with you all on a community based site led/sponsored by the Chamber and/or local jurisdictions.

The biggest problem I see with that is the fact that once those people get ahold of it, the will forget the very people you are trying to reach out to.

As with everything in Roanoke City, it seems as though the only ones allowed to speak are the elders. The Times and the City have both spoke of giving the younger crowd a voice, yet it has not happened.

Let me know if I can help.

Rhett of RoanokeFire.com

]]> By: Keith http://www.stuartmease.com/uncategorized/one-site/comment-page-1/#comment-230 Keith Wed, 19 Apr 2006 06:27:27 +0000 http://croakingtoad.com/~stuart/?p=53#comment-230 For the sake of arguement, I'm going to say this as nicely as I can.<br><br>Over the years, the city has betrayed the trust of the youth. It will be a long, hard road to regain that trust. I support any endevour to do so, with the caveat of being a blogger with an active Roanoke-Alumni readership.<br><br>To those who left, Roanoke has always been an attractive area. Someplace they wished they could live the life they went elsewhere to find. The ones whom I have spoken with would love nothing more than to come home again. But the first complaint I hear is that they have no voice, no say in the future of the city. The general view is that over the years the residents of comparable age have been pummled into apathy. Ignored for the vision of retirees with disposeable income, and the ever present and undefineable "children" nearly every forward-looking project is latched onto.<br><br>The lake has taken the big money, and will not give that up. The speculative building of downtown is attractive, but without a supportive community and culture, is useless. The vision of turning the Patrick Henry into a retirement-apartment building horrifies most of this demographic.<br><br>They love to come back and visit, remember the times they had when they were young. But at the end of the visit, the bitterness that drove them out returns.<br><br>I agree that Web 2.0 will display Roanoke in the best light possible - and I still say that someone should reach out to Google (provided they have not reached out themselves) and attempt some form of deal with them.<br><br>Luring the white collar workers is easy, flash some money and affordable housing and they come running. But who then will provide the services the city needs? What of the plumbers, cooks, and warehouse workers? They need a place to live too, and they love Roanoke as much as anyone.<br><br>A website will not be the single source solution for the problem, its going to take a revolution in the way Roanoke exists. Forget Web 2.0, and begin to develop Business 2.0<br><br>Again, Im not looking to come across harsh or judgemental - but there are far larger issues here than just attracting more IT jobs. Retention of those jobs, and the workers who fill them is equally important. Without a community base to support them, the population will always be transient.<br><br>My 2 centavos.<br><br>Keith of Forgotten-Roanoke/Roanoke-Found For the sake of arguement, I'm going to say this as nicely as I can.

Over the years, the city has betrayed the trust of the youth. It will be a long, hard road to regain that trust. I support any endevour to do so, with the caveat of being a blogger with an active Roanoke-Alumni readership.

To those who left, Roanoke has always been an attractive area. Someplace they wished they could live the life they went elsewhere to find. The ones whom I have spoken with would love nothing more than to come home again. But the first complaint I hear is that they have no voice, no say in the future of the city. The general view is that over the years the residents of comparable age have been pummled into apathy. Ignored for the vision of retirees with disposeable income, and the ever present and undefineable “children” nearly every forward-looking project is latched onto.

The lake has taken the big money, and will not give that up. The speculative building of downtown is attractive, but without a supportive community and culture, is useless. The vision of turning the Patrick Henry into a retirement-apartment building horrifies most of this demographic.

They love to come back and visit, remember the times they had when they were young. But at the end of the visit, the bitterness that drove them out returns.

I agree that Web 2.0 will display Roanoke in the best light possible – and I still say that someone should reach out to Google (provided they have not reached out themselves) and attempt some form of deal with them.

Luring the white collar workers is easy, flash some money and affordable housing and they come running. But who then will provide the services the city needs? What of the plumbers, cooks, and warehouse workers? They need a place to live too, and they love Roanoke as much as anyone.

A website will not be the single source solution for the problem, its going to take a revolution in the way Roanoke exists. Forget Web 2.0, and begin to develop Business 2.0

Again, Im not looking to come across harsh or judgemental – but there are far larger issues here than just attracting more IT jobs. Retention of those jobs, and the workers who fill them is equally important. Without a community base to support them, the population will always be transient.

My 2 centavos.

Keith of Forgotten-Roanoke/Roanoke-Found

]]>