Barriers to Entry

Why do we care if people do not participate?

 * Burnout of the major contributors: Succession planning; the more casual participants, the more active, dedicated participants, less work for existing top contributors.
 * We want new leadership
 * More people, mopre diverse people means more ideas for solutions
 * Authors/editors do not represent the readers

What's keeping others from getting involved?

 * the community is already too big - can't get a feel for the community
 * no drive to share
 * affraid of getting sucked in
 * lack of feedback
 * confusion between wikis wikipedia
 * the name "wiki"; branding
 * wanting permission (feeling the need for permission)
 * not wanting to step on toes
 * needing to be convinced of the wiki way
 * unpaid work
 * unpaid vs paid work conflict
 * stopping their contributions when they don't get the recognition they expect
 * users are children
 * confusion with other software (ex: facebook, twitter)
 * privacy, safety, security concerns
 * good improvements to software are not always used
 * licensing, (c) of content (both understanding the (c) on otehr's content, and how their work will be (c)'ed).
 * too many shock levels

Possible paths towards a solution

 * On some sites, people can become "top contributor" quickly, so reward is not long in coming
 * Talk to users about the 90%-9%-1% categories of users, "which one are you? which to you want to be?"
 * Use the "related changes" feature to improve the sense of community
 * Show the activity stream, so users can see that the site is alive, that others are doing edits, too, that they're not alone
 * "Step" people in - instead of dumping all of wiki at them at once, sneak them in, one step at a time
 * Leave bad/inaccurate information on the site, to trigger people's reflex to fix it
 * Use a name such as "peer production" instead of wiki
 * Make it easier to navigate the copyright issue: for example, wikiHow takes you to a collection of Creative Commons images
 * Use a reputation system (ties in with friday's session on open companies)
 * A "community supported nagging system" - encourage users who've contributed just a little to contribute more or keep their contributions fresh.

What's in it for the author/editor?

 * Instigate great things ("Someone will run with my idea!")
 * Learning new things (technology, writing skills; access to training such as wikiHow's writing coach)
 * Not mentioned specifically during the talk, but you learn a lot about X by writing about it, and by the edits others will make, too)
 * Feeling useful
 * Inspiration to write
 * Use existing skills
 * New experiences
 * Being heard
 * Support, feedback, motivation from the community
 * Making the world a better place (like picking up litter; gardening/growing food for the mind)
 * Paying back, paying forward
 * Shared memory, global mind
 * Connectedness, belonging, breaking the loneliness

How we can take potential contributors through the "shock steps" by having them take baby steps

 * Get them to realize the wiki is useful and important
 * Make the wiki the only place to get information ("The party? yeah, it's on the wiki")
 * When getting requests for some information, answer with, "hey, I'll go make a wiki page about that".
 * Include credit for the idea to who brought it ("Mark suggested I write this page")
 * Send link to the page (email "we changed the location of the party - see wiki" with link)
 * Invite comments
 * But make it so the comments aren't archived; possibly anonymous, so the potential contributor doesn't feel their comment is a "big commitment")
 * Invite them to fix a small, specific mistake (a date, spelling)
 * Encourage them to add, rather than edit, with new content, or new angles/
 * Give them permission (over and over).
 * But in the end, it's much easier to evaluate someone's contribution once they've made it, so possibly, go towards more of a "why don't you do it, and I'll let you know"
 * Practice page (calling it "sandbox" may work for some users, but it's probably not obvious to many that it means practice page)
 * Unpublished "suggested changes", so they can make their change, but the changes don't go live until someone else looks at them
 * Encourage them to work on their personal user/"about me" page
 * Get them to look at the Recent Changes to "feel the community"
 * Recommend that look at the "articles requested"/red link lists/stubs. The "not perfect" article they may write (or they're afraid they would write) is better than no article at all, and there are no toes to trample.
 * Get them to request articles
 * Make sure their contribution is recognised, appreciated, etc. Add to their work so they know they're not working in a a vaccum, and so they can see that it's okay when someone edits "your" article
 * Use the reputation system ("like", new article boost, etc)

Attendees

 * Add your name to this list
 * Windy
 * Nancyd