by Gnaeus Dionysius Draco on Sat Sep 03, 2005 9:43 pm
Salvete amici,
I apologise for not having been here since mid-August, but then again from the onset I made it clear that I'll not be a figure in the frontlines in this episode. With that said, I'll give my opinion on this matter as briefly as possible.
1. On NR: I think NR is hampered by a few fatal flaws that are already apparent in its whole goal/outlook/basic structure. Creating a state and a religion is difficult enough already, let alone recreating one. It takes years of dedication, professionalism and research to achieve something. Even though NR possesses a handful of dedicated, professional people, to them too, NR is a hobby and not a full-time occupation. Piscinus posted here that they are currently looking at rewriting their Constitution. That would make a good starting point to eradicate the elements in their core that cause NR to fail -- I am momentarily not talking about its members.
2. On what to do with NR: Unless they have considerably improved their level of professionalism and have done away with their clumsiest of historical, linguistic and structural errors, I don't see any major benefit in becoming associated with them. However, don't let this opinion stop anyone from pursuing such an association. I say this without sarcasm, because after all, the happiness and satisfaction of the people here is more important to me than my own opinions with regards to NR.
3. On the AT: I don't have any major problems with the AT, except that it remains a subsidiary, if that can be the accurate word, of NR. By associating ourselves with the AT, we'd first need to reorganise (but that's obvious) and streamline ourselves, and then brush up on all our site content. Right now I cringe at the idea of my old essays being used by people who want to learn about Antiquity. Most of my articles do not conform to any academic standard and some are quite poorly written. This counts for a lot of essays on our site, except Piscinus's. If we could do that (and I am willing to revise my old essays for this), I wouldn't be opposed to getting involved with the AT or even merging with them. The only thing I really wouldn't want is we becoming a subsidiary to AT. Then I'd rather merge.
4. On the declining activity: I've never been blind to the positive fact that for such a small community, we are fairly active. I've been saying for quite some time now that the problem does not primarily lie in our number of members, or maybe not even our number of active members. Our problem has always been to somehow permanently catch new members. Only two examples spring to mind of people who have not left or gone inactive: Tergestus and Coruncanius. The rest left or became only erratically active. Honestly I don't know why this is. Part of it may be, as with NR, our unrealistic ambitions when we founded SVR. Most other online communities I visit either have sharply defined, concrete goals, or very general topics. Antiquity IS a very general topic, but not if you want to build a true community around it. On most other forums, a community is formed all by itself, with old veterans being replaced gradually by newcomers. This isn't happening here, and one of the reasons, next to overburdening ourselves with tasks, goals and visions, is the following thing.
5. On the declining activity, part II: Another cause of the declining activity is the fact that most of the people who helped founding SVR are not natural leaders, teachers or organisers. I'm not saying we should all have been SVR fanatics like some NRi are/were (and in the process turn away serious people and become a magnet for other nut jobs), but the fact is most of SVR's membership are people who enjoy dwelling on the fringe, being solitary thinkers or simply eccentric invididuals. While this is an interesting point that sets us apart from other online communities, it also causes the impression that most of us aren't actively involved in SVR's goals or concrete organisation. The fact that we are all easy-going, lonesome cowboys has also caused another thing, namely that conflict, which is so common on other newsgroups, forums and communities, is close to unexistent.
6. On the declining activity, part III: I've noticed that times when SVR is experiencing peaks in activity, is around 'crises' or problematic phases. This holds true for any online community I know. I don't think SVR should engender crises or purposely create controversial policies to get people involved (it would be like saying the Patriot Act was made to make people aware of politics), but the fact is that many online communities and its membership experience quite some dissent. That makes it interesting for lurkers and prospective members. If, for example, Atticus and I were to get into an extremely fierce debate about the soul, it is likely to attract more new people, new opinions and so on than a question about the godhood of Antinoos. Certainly if we were to talk more about our personal lives in the general forum, about our opinions on current events, sports, celebrities... that would attract more people, or more opinions in any case. But of course, talking about the newest exploits of Paris Hilton is not one of SVR's goals, and quite rightly so. What I'm basically saying is that our own friendship and the absence of major antagonistic elements in SVR's public life have also contributed to the decline in activity.
Those are my opinions on this topic for now.
Optime valete!
Draco
PS: Piscine, I only read your pm now. Unless you have a username for me, I can't find the requested individual.
Gn. Dionysius Draco Invictus