Behind the WoX

The purpose of this blog is to provide a platform to discuss WoX sites and raise awareness of issues that exist but seem to be ignored or mismanaged by those in charge of solving them. By making issues public we can add pressure on the leadership to listen to us, as users and community members, and make the changes we feel are needed in order to make WoX the best it can be.

If you have concerns or criticism regarding a WoX site it's always best to take it to a site leader and/or mugwump first. There is no need to point out their oversights or mistakes in public without first giving them a chance to fix it. As leaders they can, and should, expect to be questioned and criticised for their actions at times, but they still deserve a fair chance to learn about the issue and adress it before being publicly attacked for what could be a simple mistake. I will assume that attempts have been made before resorting to this blog.

If the issue remains after you've raised it with the people in charge and nothing seems to happen, that is when you can submit your concerns to the blog. (If it's an issue that is clearly not a mistake but something done on purpose and it should be obvious that it will have negative consequences, I'd say it's fair game to criticise though...)

_ _ _

KEEP IN MIND

§ This blog is a place for thoughts, opinions and feelings. Opinions, thoughts and feelings are subjective and aren't necessarily correct, factual or representative of the bigger picture. A person might be incorrect or misleading in what they express but that doesn't mean their opinions/thoughts/feelings are wrong or invalid. § One person's experience or interpretation of something can differ from another person's. Again: it might not be entirely accurate and correct, but that doesn't mean it's wrong or invalid. § Being offended or upset by something doesn't necessarily mean it was done in ill intent or aimed to insult or offend you personally. Objective, fair and constructive criticism is not an insult or offense.

(click "keep reading" for instructions, rules and information about submissions)

Through your page, I became aware that WorldofSupernaturals is closing down, which is extremely sad. I had not been actively associated with the site since 2022, but learning that people in positions equivalent to MoM and HM were removed under unclear circumstances is genuinely disappointing.

I agree with your point that we need to think about how to help these smaller communities survive and thrive. Many of these sites were once among the larger and more influential communities when the WoX concept was taking shape. I have been part of several older sites over the years, and unfortunately many of them have now shut down.

Moving to my question: I have noticed that one site appears to be thriving despite having a relatively small membership because the MoM seems to run many alternate accounts. I completely understand the value of alts for exploring different storylines and keeping plots active. In smaller communities, staff members and long-time players often carry a great deal of the site's activity, and there is nothing inherently wrong with that.

However, should there also be a conversation about how site health is measured? If a significant portion of a site's activity is generated by the MoM, staff members, and their alts, then the site may appear more active than its actual member base would suggest. At the end of the day, if much of the activity comes from a small core group, is that fundamentally different from the concerns that have historically been raised about sites with low user counts?

I am not suggesting that such a site is dead or inactive. Clearly, activity is still taking place. My question is whether there is a meaningful difference between a genuinely broad and active community and a site whose activity is largely sustained by a handful of dedicated people.

What particularly interests me is consistency. Some sites were previously closed on the grounds that they did not have enough active users to remain sustainable. If that was the standard used to determine a site's future, should the same principle not also apply when assessing sites whose activity is heavily driven by staff members and their alts?

The site I am referring to is WoUA. I am not making a direct accusation of favoritism. However, I have noticed that this site's MoM appears to receive considerable public praise and support from one of the Mugwumps. There may be perfectly valid reasons for that, including the MoM's professionalism, commitment, and work on behalf of the community.

At the same time, from an outside perspective, it can be difficult to understand how the standards applied to some sites compare to the standards applied here. When a site with a small number of active users is considered unsustainable, but another site with activity heavily concentrated among staff and their alts is viewed more favorably, it naturally raises questions about how those decisions are being evaluated.

I would therefore be interested in hearing your thoughts on how sustainability is measured, how active users are weighed against active characters, and what factors distinguish sites that are allowed to continue from those that are ultimately closed. Understanding that distinction would help clarify whether the same standards are being applied consistently across the board.

[disclaimer: the text above is a submission sent in by an anonymous contributor, and they are expressing their personal thoughts, feelings and opinions. For now I will just post it, but I might respond with my thoughts in the future / fish]

I have been thinking about posting something to this blog for a while and what is happening on WoS has given me the final push. First of all, I want to say beforehand that this is not meant to make anyone feel called out. So if I offend anyone, I am deeply sorry.

I want to talk about two things:

1. Site closures

2. Big Green/MoM and Big Blue/HM pressure

1st topic: site closures

I feel like whenever a site loses a leader, it is not the lack of people applying but rather the lack of trust from the MUGWUMPS in hiring. There is people who love the site and yet they are not deemed trustworthy. And that is okay of course, but a lot of the times there's a bit of friend politics going on. You haven't been in the system yet as management? You are generally not that liked? You usually do not stand a chance. No matter how good you are. And that is frustrating to me.

2nd topic: Big Green/MoM and Big Blue/HM pressure

Has anybody ever noticed that most people who become Green or Blue on site usually don't want to associate with the site anymore after they leave? Of course, IRL happens and at some point people just grow out of it maybe. But I notice specifically that it's the site leaders that get hurt. They get fired over having IRL responsibilities, friendships end because of the pressure. I have seen so many get hurt. I wish I could just do something. I wish I could go to a MUGWUMP and talk, but when trying they won't say anything because of confidentiality.

People just don't get to have an IRL anymore when becoming site leaders. Having responsibilities is one thing, giving up IRL is another. There's a big difference.

Conclusion:

I feel like on WoX you just need to work hard to survive. The work ethic is unbalanced and when IRL comes into view there is not much understanding. It hurts people and I wish something could be done about it.

If anyone has advice on what to do about this, let me know!

Love and hearts from the Anon Axelotl

P.US Anon says (part 2 - AI in topics) We also have an AI problem where they allow AI in topics but not in homework, and so there are people who put effort into homework and then there are people who spam topics with 1000 words to get 7 points per reply. This is also not okay in my opinion because it literally breaks TOS when it involves handing writing over to another site without one's consent. I have stopped RPing entirely in topics because my replies are being fed to bots to generate a reply to my own response so that another person can get points for my effort. If I wanted to talk to a bot, then I would use CA.I where I can at least consent to having my writing being taken and used to train bots, and yet that is what happens when you input a prompt to AI, it also trains at the same time. I would rather have my writing not stolen and used so that another user can profit from my writing.

I was under the impression that generative AI was entirely banned from all parts of all WoX sites, but maybe that's just me preferring to think of WoX as a community that values and encourages human creativity and skill, and firmly stands against the evil of generative AI. If that's not the case, I'll be very disappointed.

It's easy to make rules against using genAI, but those rules are not easy to enforce. And some of those 1k+ words topic posts might very well be written by users who wouldn't touch gen AI with a 12ft long stick. It's impossible to tell for certain if a digital text is written by AI or not - even AI itself can't tell the difference, it can only recognise certain indicators and indicators are not evidence. And AI keeps learning too, it's probably learning to avoid the indicators to make the result look less AI.

Rules are pretty useless if they can't be enforced, and we don't want to punish the wrong people by accident. Besides, threats don't do much either to people who don't care. And people who use genAI often don't care about the ethics, or they probably wouldn't be using genAI for creative writing in the first place.

Maybe what we need is positive reinforcement and encouragement? Encouraging users to use their own words, and rewarding them for it with good feedback and support. Oftentimes the carrot is more effective than the stick.

I really wish for genAI users to know and understand that there is real joy and satisfaction in putting together a sentence that flows perfectly, a paragraph that makes you feel something, descriptions that help you picture a scene as if you're actually there. It can be frustrating when you don't get it right, and it takes practise and effort, but that's what makes it feel so good when you get it right. You don't get that joy and satisfaction by watching a bot do it for you. You might get a similar result, but you'll never feel the pride of sharing something that you made with your own skill.

_ _ _

In mid May, a very long submission about WoP US landed in my inbox. It addresses multiple issues so in order to give each issue its own fair chance of discussion I've decided to split it into multiple posts.

P.US Anon says (part 1 - grading) I have had my homework stolen repetitively on P. US by multiple individuals. [/] Not to mention that the moment I made a new account and applied for the classes there were almost 200 things to grade. The grading is a problem, and it gets solved with "Grading Comps" that still leave stuff spilling over well into the new year. Users are discouraged from grading because there is too much and it is overwhelming. [/]  I would rather not have my homework stolen so someone else can slightly modify it and get points, and I would rather be on a site where I feel welcome. [/] Only ONE AT does their job and ended up grading for all the other ATs in their subjects.

Stealing homework?! Sounds like the thieves are missing the whole point of the site, which is creative writing. There will always be users like that unfortunately, it's hard to avoid when the site is marketed as a Harry Potter RPG and people assume it's an interactive video game, completely missing the fact that it's about creative writing. On one hand, some of those users end up staying and falling in love with creative writing and that's a win for the site (and the world at large, if you ask me). On the other hand, it brings in a lot of users who don't see the fun in writing and acts disrespectfully, not out of malice but because they can't really relate to the people who write for fun. Except those who do act out of malice, maybe because they're disappointed that it's not the free video game they were expecting.

The grading sounds like a bad situation that is tricky to fix, but should definitely be looked at. It's probably time to look outside the box and think of other solutions than just competitions and encouragement. I don't know how WoP US has set up their ATs but maybe some teambuilding and encouragement within the AT team could help increase their activity a bit.

First step is probably to figure out why users are doing homework but not grading. Part of it is explained by grading being locked to level 3, but there might be other factors as well.

I honestly can't remember the exact May Disasters in the years since 2023 but there seems to be a pattern with big bad things happening in May as I recall joking about it year after year. If I had the time and the brainspace I'd look it up but for now you'll have to do with a very vague "several years in a row, big bad things happened in May".

This year the drama is on World of Supernatural. The site leaders were fired for reasons I'm not sure of, multiple members of staff quit in solidarity and now the site is closing on May 31 because for some reason, no one wanted to step up and take over the leadership after the previous leaders were fired and multiple staff members left with them. There are definitely some similarities with the Great Firing in May 2023, albeit on a smaller scale.

_ _ _

Another sus thing that's going on is that some sites that were closed down in the last 5 years have suddenly made posts on social media that they're looking for people to revive the sites. Which sounds like a good thing, at least at first glance, but if you scratch the surface you'll find a long list of questions, uncertainty and doubt. The sites closed because they failed, and the reasons for the failures are many and complex. It's not just the site leaders and their management that is to blame for a site's failure (sometimes they are not to blame at all), it's also on the mugwump in charge of supporting the site.

Unless all of those factors of failure has been addressed and solved, reopening the sites will just lead to another failure and closing. And the closing of World of Supernaturals indicates that the upper management (mugwumps & site owner) still hasn't quite figured out how to keep the smaller sites alive and afloat, much less safe and thriving.

I took some time off, lacked the motivation to pick things up and things seemed pretty stable for a while (at least from what I could see from my fish bowl) there so I figured "yay, retirement!". Apologies for not doing the euologies for the sites that have been closed down in my absence, but feel free to submit your own.

Alas, it seems stuff hit the fan and my fish bowl got wobbled, waking me from my slumber. I had almost forgotten about the tradition of May Disasters on WoX. Are we still doing that? Apparently.

The top leadership at WoO US is so frustrating. They say they want feedback and that they'll listen to you but the moment anything negative is said, they just brush it off. I’d love to share the screenshots to show how bad it is, but unfortunately, the rules don’t allow it. Now, I get that not every single suggestion needs to be acted on, but leaders should at least listen to feedback and acknowledge it. It's insane that someone takes the time to write a whole analysis on an issue, with reasons and examples, and then gets told that nothing will change, without any explanation or even a proper response. Just straight-up dismissal. Honestly, I feel a bit better knowing that I’m not the only one who’s noticed this. I’ve heard the same complaints from [others]. [/] The people at the top are so out of touch that they can’t communicate properly, don’t see their own flaws and won’t take responsibility for anything. It’s very disappointing when people who are supposed to be good at managing or handling power just prove they’re not up to the job. Sorry for being so blunt, but I’m just fed up with pretending everything’s fine. (A more positive note? The leadership at WoL is great!) [disclaimer: the text above is a submission sent in a while ago by an anonymous contributor, and they are expressing their personal feelings and opinions. minor edits have been made, see the pinned post on the blog. the text below is my response.]

I can't really judge the situation on this one as I'm rarely on WoO, but it does seem to be a recurring problem across sites that people who provide feedback don't feel heard and/or won't get a proper response.

Like anon says, not all suggestions and feedback need or can be acted on, but if someone has taken the time to provide their thoughts and ideas the least you can do as a leader is to take the time to write a response. If possible, explain why the suggestions can't be implemented or why things are the way they are.

But if you're gonna use AI to generate that response for you, maybe think again and settle for a simple "thank you for your feedback" - if you're not willing to take the time to put together a proper response, at least be honest about it.

Don't dismiss users and their concerns. That's how you lose your community.

Recently, there has been a rule change in one of the WoX sites (I will not reveal which one because I know that the high staff is doing the best that they can given the circumstances and that would not be fair to them). According to that rule change, Grad Staff is now (1) discouraged to write and grade homework and (2) forbidden from participating in Catastrophes.

It seems like Dan doesn't realise how much that serves to undermine his communities, rather than make them stronger, and for a great number of reasons. I'll go over all of them, one by one, and then propose solutions.

(1) For the average student, discouraging Grad Staff participation is horrible - if anything, Grad Staff should be encouraged to produce gradings and/or creative content when possible! More gradings mean faster turnaround times, meaning that queues are smaller and students are happier, not to mention that Grad Staff is hired exactly because they do great work. This means that their feedback, on average, is also excellent. As for homework, I know that users enjoy reading a nicely-written story, and many of them actually have a blast when getting to know how their instructors became the person who they are today.

Telling Grad Staff that they should not interact as much with the site makes the community less rich. We have fewer gradings, fewer stories, fewer opportunities for engagement. We lose part of the spark that could connect students to instructors.

(2) For the staff member themselves, this feels extremely alienating. In spite of the fact that they do not have any advantage over non-Grad Staff, they are still treated differently, even though we all work hard to manage teams or write lessons that everyone can enjoy. This hurts emotionally and, logically, also incentivises them to just drop their positions.

I say that because this is the predicament I'm currently at. The high staff at that site knows I'm not someone who likes managing alt accounts, and I'm thinking about dropping the job altogether. I haven't yet because they have been amazing and I feel a deep sense of loyalty towards the two main roles of that site, but if it were any other WoX I'd have dropped the role as if it were a hot potato.

(3) This is an important one: restricting Grad Staff opportunities does NOT entail greater accessibility to members! Chances are that if they want to engage with the site, they will either drop the position (like I am thinking about doing) OR create an alt to do what they can't. The end result is the same, though - the person is occupying the same position on the Points Board, only with a different role and/or name.

Wanting to include new users is excellent, but that cannot come at the cost of the people who have stuck with you for long, who have done a lot of work to create that community. This means that more nuanced policies are required - policies that don't just shun an entire group just because they are qualified hard workers. Rather, it is much more effective to rework the system so members feel like they are getting recognition in a way that is not exclusionary. Here are two proposals on how that could be achieved:

(1) Grad Staff point boards could be separate from the regular user point board. This would make it so Grad Staff can still interact with the website in full capacity, without decreasing the access opportunities for the regular user. If done right, this would actually increase user engagement: if Grad Staff is getting points on a different account, the regular users (that are not alts of staff member) will have a more competitive chance because staff's efforts are focused somewhere else. This has been done at WoO US, so we know it's technically possible.

(2) Prizes could, and should, be awarded to students that are not members of Grad Staff. That is totally fine! If prizes are also separated in multiple tiers, not only will that increase access to rewards (which come at no extra cost or effort to the website) but also it creates a more vibrant and satisfied community in which people are happy to interact.

I have to be very honest: from the technical side of things, being Grad Staff is a pretty thankless job because of Dan's policies - because of what we get in return from our work in comparison to everything that we miss out on. The only reason that I find myself drawn to these roles is because I love to see users enjoying themselves and having the chance to explore their creativity, but this constant feeling of alienation makes me question, more and more, whether this is worth it.

If not for the students, I know I'd have quit all my roles already.

[disclaimer: the text above is a submission sent in by an anonymous contributor, and they are expressing their personal feelings and opinions. the text below is my response.]

This one's long enough with me adding to it, but I would like to add this: for catastrophes, I'd encourage grad staff (and experienced users) to hold back for a few seconds and give other users a fair chance at solving them. Encourage, not force it. It can feel unfair for newer users when old users solve catastrophes before they've even had the chance to finish reading it, so giving everyone a fair (or at least fair-er) chance at it could make a difference and give a nice boost to new users.

Before I begin I would like to stress how much I love WoX. I also harbour no ill feelings towards Dan or any of the management or staff, they are humans behind the screens after all who work very hard behind the scenes to help keep the sites running. However, myself and a few other users feel the current ban system as it is is very unfair, due to the only ban being a permaban, and if it all it takes to get banned is to merely continue RPing with someone who tends to stray too close to rule break territory, then it at the very least needs to be reviewed. The reason for this post is due to reports from users who’ve been perma IP banned (which under the current ban system is the only ban). [The situation involves three users, A, B and C. User A probably deserved the ban, but B and C were banned for merely participating in the topics where user A acted problematically.] I ask you this: is a permaban fair for those who engage with users who break rules one too many times, despite the fact that they follow rules as best as they can? Is a temp ban not more fitting for those who are willing to learn from their mistakes yet still get told the bans are final? Or are the perma bans more than reasonable no matter how small or big the crime? Let me also know me know your thoughts on whether the current banning system is fair for everyone.

disclaimer: this submission included the story of the specific event mentioned, but I have opted to replace it with a brief summary (text in italics and brackets) to focus on the question at hand. I only have the information provided in the submission, and there could be more to the story and information that I'm currently missing. Full submission with story included may be posted separately if requested.

_ _ _

To the best of my knowledge (and I confirmed this with people in the know) the ban system works like this: there is the option to ban individual accounts, and the option to ban a specific IP adress, which simply prevents access to the site when using the banned IP. Both types of bans can be undone/removed/cancelled and login with the account/IP will work as normal again.

Neither one is entirely foolproof: one banned account doesn't stop you from creating a new account on the same site (even with the same IP), and one banned IP adress doesn't stop you from using a different IP adress to access the site with a new or non-banned account. With IP bans it's standard practise to ban all individual accounts connected to that IP, but that is done manually by site leaders. Please don't abuse this extra piece of information.

Standard practise is to only ban accounts when A) it's a confirmed troll and B) other measures have been tried but failed in terms of changing the player's behaviour. IP bans are only to be used when absolutely necessary, such as banned players creating new accounts to such an extent that banning them individually won't solve anything. In extreme cases, specifically when users hop from one site to the next when banned, they might be IP-banned from all WoX sites. Basically: banning is a tool to use when the other options of enforcing the rules just won't do the trick. At least that's how it was back in my day and on the sites I was active on, it could differ from site to site, but it should be the rule for all WoX sites.

The current ban system and standard practise, with warnings and multiple chances before a ban is even considered (trolls being an exception), is in my opinion as fair as it can get. Not perfect, but as fair as it gets.

Based on the information provided, the standard and fair way to handle this would be the following: if person A doesn't change their ways after 2 warnings from the site leader, banning the account would be in order. I'd allow them a second chance on a new account, and if the issues remain I'd declare that any account belonging to the player shall be banned from the site if identified. For person B and C a simple reminder and communication in DMs should've been enough. Had they been responsible for enough other problems to warrant a ban, the regular procedure would've been followed.

How this escalated to IP bans I can't even imagine. Either there's a lot more to the story that warrants the actions taken, or the admin in question has acted wrongly. And that's the restrained version of my conclusion, my immediate reaction contained a number of expletives that I probably shouldn't repeat in public. One explanation could be that it happened during the short period of time a while back when the option to ban accounts was broken and IP-bans was the only choice, but if that's the case it should've been reverted once the bug was solved. It also doesn't explain why person B and C were banned too.

[*] not an actual quote, I'm paraphrasing

A looong time ago I got a submission about unintentional racism across WoX. At least I would identify it as unintentional, because it doesn't seem like intentional or ill intended racism to me. It's a sensitive and tricky subject so I'm gonna leave the submission hidden under the "continue reading" at the end of this post and try to stick to constructive points.

(there's a reason I've been putting this one off for months - this is tricky stuff to write about and I don't think I'm the best suited person to do so, but it deserves to be posted so here we go...)

Society in general doesn't really teach us how to approach other cultures beyond scratching the surface. It's generally accepted that you don't need to know more than what you can see from the outside, and while there is progress about acknowledging cultural appropriation and what's appropriate and not it's still something that is easily shrugged off as unimportant. So what if a child dresses in a cheap costume kimono with geisha makeup and walks around mimicking the sound of Japanese, it doesn't hurt the Japanese in any way, does it? And so what if an American teenage K-pop fan surrounds themselves with random bits and pieces of Korean culture and mimic the mannerisms and language, it's harmless fangirling that celebrates the culture, right?

Except it's more complicated than that.

WoX is an international community with people from all over the world, including the cultures that are foreign to the majority of us. Someone using another culture and language for their character without fully understanding and respecting it can rub people off the wrong way, Anon in the submission below is an example of that. There's no problem if it's done right with research and respect, but it can be a problem if you're just picking and mixing certain elements based more on aesthetics than accurate representation.

To pick and mix different aspects from different cultures is common in fiction, and that's fine as long as it's fictional and done with respect. But you cannot take that pick-and-mix fictional culture and treat it as if it's a representation of an existing culture. If you want to represent a culture that exists, you don't get to add your own ideas - you need to stay true to the culture, as best you can.

We need to provide the guidance and resources to do it right and rather than discourage those who unknowingly did wrong, we need to encourage them to learn more and work towards better ways.

O o O o O

TW: racism, unintentional ignorance. If you feel guilty of the problem raised, it might be an upsetting read and I don't blame anyone for skipping it. That said, I highly encourage you to read and take Anon's words into consideration if you're in a good position to do so. Disclaimer: I'm an outside observer, not an expert! I fit neatly into Western society and cultural norms (for the most part) and my experience with racism and cultural clashes is almost exclusively as an observer.

_ _ _

I could be wrong, but I think the number of active accounts counts all the accounts who have logged in on the site within the last month or so, while the number of people online only shows how many accounts are logged in at the moment. So the numbers should be correct!

One thing to keep in mind is that many users/players have multiple accounts. So 1000 accounts doesn't equal 1000 individual players, since many players have more than one. But most players are not logged in on more than one at any time (although that can be done).

WARNING: very rough estimates and lazy math coming up! Math is not my thing, so I'm keeping it simple with rounded numbers and guesstimates based on what I know of other players. Wanna provide the proper math for me? Comments are open!

If we make a rough estimate that the average number of accounts per player is 3, the total number of players across 1000 accounts is actually closer to 330. We can approximate that maybe half of these accounts are only logged in a handful of times a week or less. Out of the 115 users who log in more or less daily, only a percentage will be online at any one time. So depending on the time of day and how active the site users are, the number of accounts logged in at a specific time can be anywhere from 5 to 50 (or more! or less...)

worldofolympians.com is one of the biggest sites across WoX, and an average of 30 users online at the same time is not bad.

And should you continue? YES!

Keep your head on straight and remember that it's not perfect and all sites have their issues, but if the issues aren't affecting you directly and you find joy in being on a site then go for it! If that joy is sullied by the issues that exist, you can always leave when it does (or step up and see if you can help fix them).

You might've noticed it's been very quiet here for the last half year or so, and to those who have made submissions I'm sorry I haven't posted them. There are a couple I've been meaning to post but I just haven't been in the right headspace to tackle it.

I'm gonna try to check the inbox a bit more regularly, and I would love to hear your thoughts on how WoX is doing and what we can do to support and help each other out in order to keep our sites afloat.

Has anyone tried out some cool social media strategy or tricks that worked great? Share them! Tips and tricks on how to keep lessons interesting and varied with different kinds of assignments? I'm sure there are teachers out there who would find that very helpful. Helpful content with tips and tricks has been requested and the more who contribute the better!

I have not been active and therefore I've missed a lot of fixes, only hearing of them through other people who don't always have the complete information to share. I was waiting for a changelog post for a reliable update to make a blog post about all the helpful improvements I've heard about but that never happened... which is disappointing because I was looking forward to positive things to post about and practise some positive reinforcement. And good things need to be shared and celebrated, both big and small.

There is a new feedback forum, which is nice to see. I'm not sure it's a great idea to make separate feedback forums for WoP, WoO and "the rest" but I see the point. Some feedback is only relevant to certain sites and having it all in one place would require a tagging/filter system. I have more thoughts, but let's leave it at that for now.

So use the new feedback forums! This blog is still here, but it should be more of a last resort for when you feel like there's nowhere else to go.

For all WoX sites: www.feedback.worldofjademountain.com (the url is a bit misleading, but it's the one all WoX sites link to so...)

For all WoPotter sites: www.feedback.worldofpotter.eu

For all WoOlympians sites: www.feedback.worldofolympians.com

PS! Anyone wanna catch me up on the fixes and improvements that somehow never made it to the changelog?

There is a lot of work that needs to be done in order to make the site blog feature worth the time and effort it takes to regularly create content for them, and most of that work is work that we as a community cannot do. I could go into details but the people who can make the difference already know what needs to be done, or at least I would assume they do. And there are many people within WoX that are far better qualified than me to explain why the current setup doesn't work.

So I'm gonna focus on the things that we as a community CAN do to optimise the site blogs. It's not gonna solve all the problems and magically improve SEO and site visitors overnight but it's small steps in the right direction and it could pay off in the long run. Worth a try, right?

_ _ _

ONE: every blog needs a purpose The overall purpose of the site blog feature (at least in my understanding, but I could be wrong) is to showcase the site to "outsiders" who don't have accounts and can't access all the actual site content, motivating them to create an account to discover more. It's a part of the site that we can link to from our social medias to show what we do and have to offer, and hopefully make non-users join as new users.

Example: make blog posts about site activities, show the world what your site has to offer. Combine with testimonies and examples from users, such as "I love reading homework from this one person who always makes their character make terrible dad jokes at the end of their RP!" to entice new users to join and experience it for themselves.

Wanna read the other four points? Click "keep reading" below!