Skip to main content
replaced http://meta.fitness.stackexchange.com/ with https://fitness.meta.stackexchange.com/
Source Link

There's been some discussiondiscussion of scopescope lately. Looking at the lousy number of questions and middling user numbers) it occurs to me that we're not really arguing about questions or scope. It's that promoting the sitepromoting the site (and getting great Q&A) can't get started without a clear idea of the user base.

What's the consensus on who our user base is? And--as a separate but interwoven question--what do we want it to be?

There's been some discussion of scope lately. Looking at the lousy number of questions and middling user numbers) it occurs to me that we're not really arguing about questions or scope. It's that promoting the site (and getting great Q&A) can't get started without a clear idea of the user base.

What's the consensus on who our user base is? And--as a separate but interwoven question--what do we want it to be?

There's been some discussion of scope lately. Looking at the lousy number of questions and middling user numbers) it occurs to me that we're not really arguing about questions or scope. It's that promoting the site (and getting great Q&A) can't get started without a clear idea of the user base.

What's the consensus on who our user base is? And--as a separate but interwoven question--what do we want it to be?

Tweeted twitter.com/#!/StackFitness/status/111601018101444608
Source Link
Dave Liepmann
  • 25.3k
  • 13
  • 13

What is our intended user base?

There's been some discussion of scope lately. Looking at the lousy number of questions and middling user numbers) it occurs to me that we're not really arguing about questions or scope. It's that promoting the site (and getting great Q&A) can't get started without a clear idea of the user base.

What's the consensus on who our user base is? And--as a separate but interwoven question--what do we want it to be?