If you haven't read this announcement from one of the moderators please do!

How committed are we as a group to see this thing push out of private beta, into public beta and finally on to launch?

I know we have a bunch of super analytic people in this group and it would be nice to actually know what we should be doing to meet our goal of getting this thing launched.

What that said, on a per committer basis:

  • How many questions should we ask a day?
  • How many questions should we answer a day?
  • How many tags should we write up wikis for each day?
  • How many meta questions should we ask a day?
  • How many meta questions should we answer a day?
  • How many people are we going to invite a day?
  • How many Tweets, G+ etc. are we going to do a day?

What other questions am I missing here? (please edit and add any other goal items to the above list)

Please keep it simple; maybe whole numbers. Don't go crazy with the math, let's just set a doable goal for everyone and try to stick to it.

It's really up to us to come up with the plan and up to us to launch this site or not. I think we can get it done though, I don't want to have to think about it anymore. I just want to set my goal, go do it everyday and check it off my list. I'd also like to know the majority of others are doing this as well and cheer each other on in the process maybe even keep each other in check, what do you think?

Again, it would be nice to have a goal, which makes sense, for each committer and something to shoot for so we aren't blindly hoping for the best.

I'd like to post this "goal" in a new topic "Are you committed to the goal?" could be the title and ask that everyone commit, via an answer/comment, once we had our goal set and listed out. (maybe this would have to be offsite?)

This of course would be the minimum and people who have more time can contribute more when available to do so.

I know we are all busy with working crazy hours a day and having an internal goal to get this thing moving in the right direction seems to make sense, at least for me and I'm hoping it will make sense for others as well.

We got to beta in record (~) time and if you remember we had simple goals to meet and the momentum kept going strong right into private beta.

I'm not sure how the moderators will feel about this though, I hope they approve.

What do you think?

  • 1
    Agree. If everyone chips in a little bit (as they did with the commitment), we will reach public beta and a full site in no time). Commented Nov 21, 2012 at 0:24
  • 2
    Agree! They want 80 questions at least before the launch, plus all the meta bullshit. (And yes, i think some of it is bullshit.) I can answer questions and write tag wiki answers over the holiday weekend, certainly.
    – adrienne
    Commented Nov 21, 2012 at 5:15

1 Answer 1


I've had a nose through some of the blog posts relating to other beta sites this morning and one thing's clear - voting matters.

It’s only through voting that a class of editors, closers, and moderators can emerge to help run and govern the site. Voting is how site leadership forms.

If you look at the Area 51 proposal we currently have a pretty dismal 11 'avid users'. Those numbers are determined solely by rep, which in turn is generated through votes. If nobody's voting, those numbers aren't going to increase in a hurry. That's really not going to help our case.

Obviously we need a good standard of questions and answers - there's no point upvoting content of no value - but we also need to recognise people's efforts in order for the site to grow.

In terms of specifics, everyone should make an effort to upvote as many high quality questions/answers as possible. Vote 30 times in a day and you even get a badge for your troubles.

  • 3
    I think the problem is everyone knew that 100 people with 200 rep were needed to get into beta so everyone did their bit to upvote others so they could get there, but there's not been any obvious guidelines as to what's required to get out of beta and into public. Reading this thread now is the first I've heard that voting is a key part of that, so it's no doubt that many others are in the dark too.
    – Tyssen
    Commented Nov 21, 2012 at 12:44
  • 4
    I'd like to add that the private(!) beta is only 5 days old - aren't expectations a bit unrealistic? Commented Nov 21, 2012 at 12:57
  • 2
    @erwinheiser Totally agree. How are we supposed to accomplish their rather hefty to-do list in 5 freaking days? Especially when nobody told us their expectations in the first place.
    – kmgdev
    Commented Nov 21, 2012 at 18:04
  • 1
    They are unrealistic and we've done an amazing job to this point. Don't let the jist of my post fool you! I'm just trying to make sure the SE Overloards are happy as apparently they weren't and or are playing games. Either way it's their house so we need to step it up to meet their requirements and trying to commit say 1 of each of the above goals from say 50 of us would totally suffice to push us through to public beta.
    – Natetronn
    Commented Nov 21, 2012 at 18:09
  • 2
    I don't think anyone's suggesting that we were supposed to have met all of the Area 51 guidelines within a week. My impression is that we just got off to a slightly slower start than expected given the initial level of interest. Yesterday's 'not ready' post cited 33 questions and a lack of activity in the Meta forum. A day later we have 50 questions in total and much more activity in the Meta forum, so hopefully we're back on track.
    – Dom Stubbs
    Commented Nov 21, 2012 at 18:21
  • What about all the great quetions in the area51 site? Can we ask them here, or at least transfer them so they can be aswered? Traffic has essentially died there now that we're in beta. Or am I missing something?
    – dbigca
    Commented Nov 21, 2012 at 23:04

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .