Groups - Too many groups with just one member!

[Elyse Orecchio]

Hi everyone. We have a zillion groups on here with just one member. Many of you are creating groups to ask a simple question like "What do I do when my dog is aggressive?" A question like that can and should be asked in the main dog group. The idea is for different threads (discussions) to be started within groups.

I can understand the confusion, and I'm sorry if it wasn't clear in the beginning what groups are for! Can you please delete your group if it has one or two members and is not meant to be an actual group?

I'm afraid I will have to start deleting them myself in the interest of cleaning up the cluttered group listings, but before I do that I want to give you guys the heads up. Let me know if you do NOT want your group deleted.

And of course, we LOVE that you participate in groups and are taking advantage of this feature, so thanks! We just want to make it even better...
Thanks!!
-Elyse

[Susan Sadeghian]

vladimir if I want to leave a comment but really dont want to join that particular group I leave the comment for the person who started the group on his or her comment wall or if I am not sure about joining a group.

[Vladimir]

Well, I understand that, but I feel that "comments" to a particular member are more personal, (even though they can be read if someone opens that member's page), but more to the point, it removes my comment from the general discussion, which is where I want it to be on a "discussion board." We all make comments as part of a discussion/debate-- I don't necessarily want them buried on someone's personal page. When I am pontificating on the dangers of a dry diet, for example, I want to shout-- I want everyone to hear!!

[Dave]

The thing to do is have sub topics under "My Discussions" Anything related to the core group could be submitted to the moderater of that board for posting as a sub topic before startng another group. That would keep related topics grouped together.

[Ace]

Maybe it's because you have too many groups

[Dave]

Thats the point, alot of the groups can be combined if the topic is basiclly the same. Anybody can start a group but if there's 10 or 15 others on the same topic it will be tough to build up a member base. I would rather use the search engine than browse through them, some people don't use the search, they just start a group.

[Hope]

I think its a good idea to do a group "clean out". when I was borwsing through the different groups I found that people were asking the same questions all the time but there was so many discussions and groups that they may not even know their question has been answered somewhere else. And I've also seen alot of groups that seem like a good idea but don't seem to be very active. I think by clearing out all the inactive groups, members will be more willing to join other ones and participate --- which in turn will make things more interesting.

[Vladimir]

Except that maybe, some of them are "inactive," for the very reason you mention, that no one has "found" them. So as you say, it's more than someone not realizing their question has been answered, it may be that a member might not even provide a worthy and useful contribution to a discussion, since it isn't easily discoverable! I liked the "old" format, where you could just access the "dog" or "cat" forum, and in nice small type (remember, dozens of discussions were viewable without scrolling through "pages") you could view all the topics and dive in wherever you might be interested.

[Vladimir]

The problem is, simply put, a misunderstanding of the forum itself. Groups are being created simply to start a discussion, or ask a question, which as stated above, should more appropriately be put under a general group already in existence. It would be pretty easy, to establish the basic 'groups,' as was done in the old forum. The problem now is, with so many members "starting groups" inappropriately, you can't even comment on an issue (which may be interesting, or, to which you may have useful input to offer), you can't post a comment without "joining the group," which just perpetuates the problem. But just deleting them all is not a good solution. They need to be moved.

[Angie]

I agree with you on this. I am still trying to look through all the groups and find that I have to go back and start all over the next day instead of where I left off because new groups have ben started. However, I would also like to say that if any of these groups are going to be deleted or merged can the people who are in the groups be redirected to the appropraite group where they should have been in the first place? I am new to the aspca, and still have my swimminglegs on so to speak so prt of the reason for some of these groups may very well be out of confusion.

[Marco Carneiro]

I know this is off topic, but i cant figure out how to start a new discussion but does anyone know when the orientation classes for NYC volunteers will start in 2008? I want to help and very intrested in volunteering my time!

marco

[lelectra]

How about creating sub headings, say under dogsville, there'd be "behavior," as a heading, or "health," so there'd be some kind of reference but people could then initiate particular discussions under the umbrella of those topics.

[Grant]

Thanks for your concern, I would not like my groups deleted :)