Keys to success
Repeatedly expressed thoughts about the success of web 2.0. I will bring in these reasonings and the mite. So, from what - in my opinion - is the success of the project? From 5 simple points: nationalities, the rules of one button, the national moderator, zero investment and autopilot project.
1. "People" ideas: the wider the coverage, the higher the interest. Analogy: how often do we buy televisions? Every few years. And the products? Daily. Moral: projects aimed at a narrow audience can have success. But from the point of view of becoming massive and earning money on them, both direct (money from users) and indirect (advertising revenue) methods, they are of very little interest.
')
2. The rule of one button. A special case: all these links are “login” and “registration” in a static menu. Why are they? Let the whole structure (menu) be open even for those who are not authorized on the site (at the same time we demonstrate all the possibilities). Another thing is that when trying to open content - to issue the same form of authorization. And in the same place - the link to registration if it is not present.
The congestion of the menu, scattered across the width and height of the blocks, only sprays attention, distracts. And push visitors away from the site. The fewer controls, the tighter they are grouped, the better. Ideally, there should be one hefty button from which, when pressed (or another event), all necessary and unnecessary menus would grow. In other words, the design should be simple, pleasant and understandable.
A good example is odnoklassniki.ru: at the entrance to the site you are taken by the nostrils and, not allowing you to step either to the right or to the left, they follow a strictly marked path. "I studied in ..." and no options for empty thoughts. The result - more than 2 million registrations in just one year.
3. Popular moderator: this idea has already been implemented on Habré. A good method: eliminates the "moderators on wages" from unnecessary work. The higher the rating of the “national moderator”, which is determined by the majority of users ’votes (or friend-policy, as in LJ), the more rights are there.
It is extremely useful when moderating key databases, such as geographical names, names of objects (enterprises, schools, shops, etc.), the same tags, and so on.
4. Instead of investment - the initiative. Experience shows that other people's money is squandered by the moment: temptation is great. In addition, interest in promoting the project with its founders is running out with the budget. To avoid this, projects should be raised more and more: with money and shock work, while spending money only on the “independent costs” of the project itself, but not on salaries.
It is very, very difficult, but extremely effective: no one will waste time (everyone needs money), and everyone will be interested in the final result (commercial; again, everyone needs money).
5. Independent swimming project. This is achieved through a clear focus of the project (a clear definition of the category; whether it is medicine, the study of the flight of butterflies, otherwise): too wide coverage, like with blogs, can be crowned and fail. Because in public blogs, these are already established connections (try to drag one of them from a technical point of view, LJ to another place), and not a mechanism, therefore it is difficult to persuade that there is better there.
Networks with a narrower specialization (but still “popular”) are more advantageous in this respect: one thing - just writing in the spirit of “woke up, put on sneakers, saw myself in the mirror, was horrified.” The other is a kind of “useful” content that creates not so much quantity as quality. The more “correct” users the project has, the higher its usefulness, and, as a result, the expressed interest, with all that follows.
Something like this.
1. "People" ideas: the wider the coverage, the higher the interest. Analogy: how often do we buy televisions? Every few years. And the products? Daily. Moral: projects aimed at a narrow audience can have success. But from the point of view of becoming massive and earning money on them, both direct (money from users) and indirect (advertising revenue) methods, they are of very little interest.
')
2. The rule of one button. A special case: all these links are “login” and “registration” in a static menu. Why are they? Let the whole structure (menu) be open even for those who are not authorized on the site (at the same time we demonstrate all the possibilities). Another thing is that when trying to open content - to issue the same form of authorization. And in the same place - the link to registration if it is not present.
The congestion of the menu, scattered across the width and height of the blocks, only sprays attention, distracts. And push visitors away from the site. The fewer controls, the tighter they are grouped, the better. Ideally, there should be one hefty button from which, when pressed (or another event), all necessary and unnecessary menus would grow. In other words, the design should be simple, pleasant and understandable.
A good example is odnoklassniki.ru: at the entrance to the site you are taken by the nostrils and, not allowing you to step either to the right or to the left, they follow a strictly marked path. "I studied in ..." and no options for empty thoughts. The result - more than 2 million registrations in just one year.
3. Popular moderator: this idea has already been implemented on Habré. A good method: eliminates the "moderators on wages" from unnecessary work. The higher the rating of the “national moderator”, which is determined by the majority of users ’votes (or friend-policy, as in LJ), the more rights are there.
It is extremely useful when moderating key databases, such as geographical names, names of objects (enterprises, schools, shops, etc.), the same tags, and so on.
4. Instead of investment - the initiative. Experience shows that other people's money is squandered by the moment: temptation is great. In addition, interest in promoting the project with its founders is running out with the budget. To avoid this, projects should be raised more and more: with money and shock work, while spending money only on the “independent costs” of the project itself, but not on salaries.
It is very, very difficult, but extremely effective: no one will waste time (everyone needs money), and everyone will be interested in the final result (commercial; again, everyone needs money).
5. Independent swimming project. This is achieved through a clear focus of the project (a clear definition of the category; whether it is medicine, the study of the flight of butterflies, otherwise): too wide coverage, like with blogs, can be crowned and fail. Because in public blogs, these are already established connections (try to drag one of them from a technical point of view, LJ to another place), and not a mechanism, therefore it is difficult to persuade that there is better there.
Networks with a narrower specialization (but still “popular”) are more advantageous in this respect: one thing - just writing in the spirit of “woke up, put on sneakers, saw myself in the mirror, was horrified.” The other is a kind of “useful” content that creates not so much quantity as quality. The more “correct” users the project has, the higher its usefulness, and, as a result, the expressed interest, with all that follows.
Something like this.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/8570/
All Articles