Why do you think it’s a better decision to switch strategy to a microblogging platform instead of switching strategy to being as open and as inviting of contribution as possible?
Currently it’s not clear to anyone what Arbital is, what it can do, who it’s for, etc.. It needs to solve a real problem and present itself as solving that clear problem.
The tech we used is now somewhat obsolete. The codebase has accumulated a lot of unnecessary features. Also Google Material UI turned out to be too heavyweight and not as pleasant to design with as I thought initially. (These are all arguments for remaking the platform.)
The blogging platform will be “as open and as inviting of contribution as possible.”
Ok, but when you do create “Arbital 2.0”, the best thing you can do to help it succeed is to have a pre-existing base of users who are interested in using it, especially the smaller number but extremly important “power users” who will be the ones who generate most of your content, and a lot of good content you can move over from your old site.
Anything you can do to encourage people to be more active now at creating content (including comments) and interacting with the site in general probably included your odds of success long-term.
Why do you think it’s a better decision to switch strategy to a microblogging platform instead of switching strategy to being as open and as inviting of contribution as possible?
Currently it’s not clear to anyone what Arbital is, what it can do, who it’s for, etc.. It needs to solve a real problem and present itself as solving that clear problem.
The tech we used is now somewhat obsolete. The codebase has accumulated a lot of unnecessary features. Also Google Material UI turned out to be too heavyweight and not as pleasant to design with as I thought initially. (These are all arguments for remaking the platform.)
The blogging platform will be “as open and as inviting of contribution as possible.”
Ok, but when you do create “Arbital 2.0”, the best thing you can do to help it succeed is to have a pre-existing base of users who are interested in using it, especially the smaller number but extremly important “power users” who will be the ones who generate most of your content, and a lot of good content you can move over from your old site.
Anything you can do to encourage people to be more active now at creating content (including comments) and interacting with the site in general probably included your odds of success long-term.