I just finished reading an article called "Active lurkers - the hidden asset in online communities." Here's an excerpt:
"Most communities have 90% of users who are lurkers – people who may consume things from the community, but who don’t contribute...While it is inevitable that larger communities will end up with 1% of their members being very active users who provide enough value for the 9% of somewhat active users, who together provide
enough value for the 90% of lurkers, the largest form of participation in online communities happens to be active lurking, which according to an MIT research study can make up 40-50% of your community membership."
And it struck me that I hate the term "lurkers."
The word makes it sound like you are engaging in some kind of criminal activity.
content without commenting or contributing to the conversation.
Why? I think it offers a level of respect and appreciation.
Now I also believe that every member brings immense knowledge, and I'd love for more members of this
community to share their insight and information.
That's what makes a social network so extraordinary - the diversity of people and the varied perspectives. Toward that end, I heard Chris Dorobek of Federal News Radio once say:
It's also true that sometimes you just want to read what smart people are saying as it informs your opinions and, ultimately, accomplishes GovLoop's mission of "connecting government to improve government."
So what do you think? Do you like the term?
Maybe this question will even bring out the lurkers...um, I mean, readers. 🙂