Ken Smith wrote a post with the question (my version): how many people posting on a subject does it take to provide a good weekly overview of the newest posts on the topic? Now, I think the version of the question he posted on Twitter is slightly different: "How many people who write about your topic do you have to read before you're likely to hear about most any new development?". I am going to address both of these questions, then ask one of my own...#
My guess on the original question is five to seven people. I think that people who read blogs/websites on a specific topic follow at least this many blogs/websites to get a full overview of what is happening on the topic, and probably more than seven. On the second question, I think the number goes up (say 15-20) if you want to hear about "any new development". Of course, people who use feed readers can have hundreds of sources (my reading list is 143 feeds, but not all of those feeds have new posts every day, and not all of them are on the same topic). #
Some examples: the Election Law Blog created by Rick Hasen at UC-Irvine Law School has 15 contributors besides Hasen. One of their posting methods has been to have contributors take responsibility for one or more days of daily news coverage. All of them have had individual posts on topics within election law. The Daily Kos news site appears to have a staff of over 30 contributors (although this is now more of a professional site). A subscription site I follow uses a group seven people to post content, so that falls within the 5-7 range I gave as my early answer.#
I think that the real question Ken is asking was really asked in his post "It's actually a web" - how many people does it take to sustain a useful conversation for a long time? I think that the answer is "at least two". Derek Sivers, in his post "First Follower: Leadership Lessons From A Dancing Guy", analyzes a video of a guy dancing at an open air concert, how he gets his first follower, and then how the dance party grows within a few minutes to include a majority of the attendees (also see TED talk link). The role of the first follower is key - it legitimizes the one who went first.#
So Ken - I am trying to follow you in the topic of "organizing information for use" - it looks like we have a conversation going - take a look at Derek Sivers' post - over to you...#
Ken Smith wrote a post with the question (my version): how many people posting on a subject does it take to provide a good weekly overview of the newest posts on the topic? Now, I think the version of the question he posted on Twitter is slightly different: "How many people who write about your topic do you have to read before you're likely to hear about most any new development?". I am going to address both of these questions, then ask one of my own...#
My guess on the original question is five to seven people. I think that people who read blogs/websites on a specific topic follow at least this many blogs/websites to get a full overview of what is happening on the topic, and probably more than seven. On the second question, I think the number goes up (say 15-20) if you want to hear about "any new development". Of course, people who use feed readers can have hundreds of sources (my reading list is 143 feeds, but not all of those feeds have new posts every day, and not all of them are on the same topic). #
Some examples: the Election Law Blog created by Rick Hasen at UC-Irvine Law School has 15 contributors besides Hasen. One of their posting methods has been to have contributors take responsibility for one or more days of daily news coverage. All of them have had individual posts on topics within election law. The Daily Kos news site appears to have a staff of over 30 contributors (although this is now more of a professional site). A subscription site I follow uses a group seven people to post content, so that falls within the 5-7 range I gave as my early answer.#
I think that the real question Ken is asking was really asked in his post "It's actually a web" - how many people does it take to sustain a useful conversation for a long time? I think that the answer is "at least two". Derek Sivers, in his post "First Follower: Leadership Lessons From A Dancing Guy", analyzes a video of a guy dancing at an open air concert, how he gets his first follower, and then how the dance party grows within a few minutes to include a majority of the attendees (also see TED talk link). The role of the first follower is key - it legitimizes the one who went first.#
So Ken - I am trying to follow you in the topic of "organizing information for use" - it looks like we have a conversation going - take a look at Derek Sivers' post - over to you...#
Last update: Saturday April 2, 2022; 11:18 PM EDT.