Groups

[Reptar]

Why not just kick the inactive members? I personally think emotional support is a fantastic group, and it just needs more dedicated members.

Wait, Emotional Support is active right now? With how many members?

[GamingCave]

Getting groups active would be great for the forum!

[Robust]

I'd prefer them not to be sold right now, but have them towards a topic. Then later if you wish for them to be paid, then ask for a fee to continue the groups. I think for now it'd be better there are leaders who focus in areas and work on it, and not purchase one and keep it lying around as an investment. Of course this is probably still your business, but if there are groups lying around considered as investments in the hands of someone who is financially able to buy it instead of someone who can actually contribute with the group, I'd just find that unfortunate.

[Clark]

Why not just kick the inactive members? I personally think emotional support is a fantastic group, and it just needs more dedicated members.

Wait, Emotional Support is active right now? With how many members?

No. So remove the members who aren't active and replace them with new members. I just don't see the need for a new group.

[Diabolic]

I think that would be best, a lot of the groups need new active leaders. Who actively browse SF, because, it's one of the reasons SF is dying.

[Aura]

I'd prefer them not to be sold right now, but have them towards a topic. Then later if you wish for them to be paid, then ask for a fee to continue the groups. I think for now it'd be better there are leaders who focus in areas and work on it, and not purchase one and keep it lying around as an investment. Of course this is probably still your business, but if there are groups lying around considered as investments in the hands of someone who is financially able to buy it instead of someone who can actually contribute with the group, I'd just find that unfortunate.

I don't think SF should have any "paid" groups at all. That forum is destined to support the users and groups should be "gifted" or "lent" to members who shows extreme dedication and usefulness to the forum and it's users, in order to gather more members like them and create a support service around SF.

[Robust]

I'd prefer them not to be sold right now, but have them towards a topic. Then later if you wish for them to be paid, then ask for a fee to continue the groups. I think for now it'd be better there are leaders who focus in areas and work on it, and not purchase one and keep it lying around as an investment. Of course this is probably still your business, but if there are groups lying around considered as investments in the hands of someone who is financially able to buy it instead of someone who can actually contribute with the group, I'd just find that unfortunate.

I don't think SF should have any "paid" groups at all. That forum is destined to support the users and groups should be "gifted" or "lent" to members who shows extreme dedication and usefulness to the forum and it's users, in order to gather more members like them and create a support service around SF.

I'd agree with you in terms of quality, yeah, but at the end of the day this costs money, and that money has to be made from somewhere, and then some. For the foreseeable future anyway, free groups given to members who are deemed suitable to run it appropriately. I'd quite like a technology news group, for example, that bring together articles on technology a week or so. Another example could be members focusing in a specific section, such as computing and assisting there, as they have members most knowledgeable in those sections.

[Omniscient]

All groups are being deleted.

[Aura]

All groups are being deleted.

Any ideas yet on how group creations/attributions will work or it's not a priority ?

[Omniscient]

All groups are being deleted.

Any ideas yet on how group creations/attributions will work or it's not a priority ?

I have no set ideas yet on that.