Saturday, April 26, 2008
Non-theological Question - Traffic
I love the idea of this blog and the conversations it can spur. Any ideas on how to drive more regular traffic to it? I'm not as familiar with blogs. But I'd love to see if we could get more people engaged, especially if we had a few different viewpoints. Is it uncool to send out direct invitations to people to participate in the blog?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
I've been out of town for a few days and just got back to find this post. I think it's great to invite others to jump in to the conversation. I did that myself last week...I sent the info to a scientist friend from JPL to see if he would have any comments to contribute. We'll see (I hope so!) So go ahead and invite! - Monique
I think sometimes the difficulty is not necessarily a lack of traffic, but a personal sense of nothing to add to the conversation. Though I bet the blog is largely unknown, and personal invitation would remedy that, I've found myself reading just about every post, but feeling like I have nothing constructive to add. I'm waiting for a time, such as this!
I sympathize with Brad. Many times I have visited this site, read the posts, and though I enjoyed them, ultimately realized I had nothing to add (with the exception of the recent Evolution discussion). However, I don't want to discount the traffic issue because it seems like there are only six or seven of us actually reading this thing. Even so, in order to increase traffic, we have to get people interested in the site in the first place. I think in order to do this, we should officially associate this blog with our monthly discussion groups. I know that has always been the general idea (simply because everyone who participates here also participates in the group), but we should get the URL to this site "out there". I know we announce the "Theological Discussion Group" in church bulletins. Perhaps along side that announcement we could tell them to obtain more information on this site (we already list the dates, times, and locations of the upcoming discussion groups on this site anyway). We could even try to get a link on GBC's home website. Those who have Facebook accounts could start a "Damascus Encounter" group that would list dates and times of the "face-to-face" discussions, as well as including a link to our "cyber-discussion". In order to really make the site and the group officially linked, why don't we have someone volunteer to recap our monthly "face-to-face" discussions right here on this blog? That would give those who aren't able to attend a medium of participation - a chance to add to the dialogue. I don't know how much of this is practical or even feasible, but these are just some thoughts. What are yours?
Well, one of the reasons I asked the question is because I thought Jake's response to the "Evolution on the Attack" entry was really interesting. It was a very different sort of response than anything I'd seen in either Christian-affiliated or conservative-oriented avenues. I'd love to pull in some others that either don't share our point of view at all within the Christian camp or perhaps even non-Christians who might be pleasantly surprised to see devout Christians wrestling with/through these issues. But initially, I'd be interested if there was someone within our church who could post a reply in disagreement to Jason's comment (which shouldn't be too hard to find, right?).
BTW, since I now have a Facebook page, how do I do that thing that Jake referenced above?
I agree that while I enjoy reading the postings, I find it difficult to add anything intelligent to keep the conversation going. Maybe it's because I am not as educated as I could be on the subject to further the discussion along which might be one reason why others aren't responding? Just a thought. I do think advertising and opening an invitation to participate in the blog is an excellent idea. Maybe we can open the discussion up to other topics as well(keep multiple topics going on) such as the very recent news of the Supreme Court overturning the gay marriage ban? Just more thoughts. Ok, I'll keep quiet now. I know I am new to this so if I am out of line feel free to let me know! Thanks!
:-)
I am sorry, let me clarify that I meant to add without sounding redundant for the following statement listed previously: "Maybe it's because I am not as educated as I could be on the subject to further the discussion along (without sounding redundant)which might be one reason why others aren't responding?" Thanks!
I, for one, don't care how much education someone has (as long as they're not redundant - kidding). I'm thinking about changing my screen name to "I have no college education" (which is true).
What an intelligent screen name that would be!!!! hehehehehe.....
Post a Comment