Is Your Online Community Changing? Navigating Growth, Politics, and Quality Degradation

A recent discussion explored the feeling that a once-focused online community might be experiencing a decline in quality, a phenomenon some users termed "enshittification." The original poster noted an increase in ideological, non-topical content and more superficial comments, sparking a broader conversation about the dynamics of online communities.

Defining the "Decline"

A significant portion of the debate centered on the term "enshittification." Several participants pointed out that Cory Doctorow coined it to describe a specific business model-driven decay where platforms first attract users, then businesses, and finally extract value from both to maximize shareholder profit. They argued this specific definition doesn't directly apply to the community in question, which doesn't operate on that model. Others suggested the term is evolving to mean a more general degradation of quality. The original poster clarified they used it more broadly but also attempted to link it to the strict definition by suggesting that moderation (a service) might be intentionally relaxed on certain engaging (but off-topic) posts to drive site growth.

The Inevitable Evolution of Communities

Many users acknowledged that communities change as they grow. This was likened to an "eternal September" effect or simply "becoming popular." As new members join, their interests might differ from the original cohort, leading to a diversification of topics and, sometimes, a perceived drop in the signal-to-noise ratio for long-time members. One commenter eloquently stated the dilemma: "Either you radically gatekeep your community... and watch it die... or you welcome 'new blood'... and watch the community change around you." This phenomenon isn't unique to online forums but applies to social circles and neighborhoods as well.

For those interested in maintaining community vitality, one user mentioned the Orbit model as a framework for managing new member integration and existing member engagement.

The Politics Question

The increase in "ideological posts" was a major concern. Some argued that in the current global climate, it's difficult for such topics not to intrude, even into tech-focused discussions, citing examples like defending science or discussing events affecting tech-adjacent populations. One perspective offered was that smart people being apolitical can lead to less desirable political outcomes, making engagement, however messy, necessary. A counterpoint was the desire for spaces free from constant political discourse, with a wish expressed for a "pan-political" forum where critical thinking could be applied across perspectives without devolving into echo chambers.

Moderation and User Perception

The role of moderation was highlighted. Some speculated that an increase in low-quality comments might stem from the difficulty of moderating a steadily growing volume of content. Others suggested moderation might be selectively applied to favor engagement, even if it means allowing posts that technically violate community guidelines. The perennial complaint of a forum's decline was also noted, with some referencing an old adage that such feelings are a "semi-noob illusion."

Long-time members reflected on how their own interests might have shifted, contributing to their perception of the forum. The Socratic method was suggested as a tool for better discourse, though with the caveat that many people react defensively to methodical challenges to their views.

Ultimately, while some users still find the community to be the best available or "fine," the discussion underscores the ongoing challenges online platforms face in balancing growth, maintaining focus, and managing the quality of discourse amidst a changing user base and an intrusive external world.