71 sats \ 2 replies \ @0fje0 19 Dec 2023 \ parent \ on: SN Foundry- A spot for Territory Founders meta
While this may well be true (if only we could measure engagement more easily/accurately?), the cause may not be solely the introduction of territories.
For example, it's quite possible that the novelty of a particular meta takeover would have worn off over time anyway. So moving the topic to its own territory introduces just enough friction for its participants to not bother 'joining' the territory. Which is kinda what happened in my case. (I guess this makes me part of @siggy47's "anti territory contingent", although I only learned about the contingent in this thread, lol.)
I think measuring engagement is always tough as it's not as cut and dry as to how many people interacted. But I think perhaps like mentioned above with the old radio stations analogy... It could be that engagement or at least interaction was much more consolidated, now with a whole territory, the interaction is more spread out.
reply
It's hard to gauge. To your point when I was doing meta takeover I was essentially running a territory within meta but there were no other territories competing for attention at the time.
I think it is just a deluge of content right now as territories pop up and people try to fill them. It will die down, we will have territory attrition. I have already heard from founders saying they won't continue their territories because it doesn't make sense to pay 100k sats a month to make 2k sats back in territory revenue. I expect in some cases multiple territories will combine into one (maybe health, fitness become one, or earth/outdoors become one, etc).
Within a couple months we will see which territories will have staying power and committed founders and which ones don't. I also think a couple months of data will guide k00b on how they move forward with territories, if the home page layout needs to change etc.
reply