locked Re: A review of Groups.io



This is fantastic, thank you so much for your review! One quick question: you mention lack of public groups as a weakness. Are you referring to groups where non-members can post to, or are you referring to something else?

I am intrigued by your idea of being able to share interesting discussions. Were you thinking that it'd be just within a group, or would this be a feed of interesting discussions taking place over many groups? 


On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 6:14 AM, <walkraft@...> wrote:
Hi Mark, 

I really like your service, so I just wrote up a review.


In terms of suggestions:

Discovery mechanisms are key to enabling groups to form. Featured groups could be useful during the initial growth period since searching is less likely to be useful. Tags aren’t needed right now, but they will become vital once this site reaches a certain size.

Integrations have been a huge missed opportunity for other products such as Google Groups and Facebook Groups. There are so many tools such as calendars, wikis, polls and photo albums that would benefit from being shared as a group. An API would unleash innumerable collaborative possibilities.

Google groups, Reddit and StackOverflow allow you to star messages and threads. This helps you find that perfect answer that you saw at 2am five months ago, but which you need now. 
Member profiles would bring people in a group together by allowing them to get to know each other better. It would also cut down on drama by making them feel more like real people. Furthermore, this could provide a useful discovery mechanism for finding other groups.

It’d be nice if users had a feed for sharing the most interesting discussions that they’d seen recently. This could eventually provide an even better distribution method than groups themselves.

Join main@beta.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.