The answer (IMO) is to open another channel and announce it so people can migrate. And start using more the other channels, using each time FB/X a little less, until (almost) everyone has left FB/X.
You’re forgetting the (often) free labor used to make changes like this are limited.
I, for example, did not get paid for the 20 hrs/week I was putting into the organization, as I was also a board member, their IT person, and for a couple of periods, board president…
That’s beginning to wane. The fewer major posters there are, the fewer people will look to the site for information. And the fewer people on there looking for info…etc.
Its that social inertia, and I get it.
I ran a neighborhood group’s social media, and even after FB turned openly shitty, I had to stay on there, because thats where people are.
I mean, I could have pushed the org to drop them, but then we would have lost the eyeballs of thousands of neighbor’s we’re trying to work FOR.
Same deal with Twitter, they’ve just gotten to the point where most NPOs lose less by leaving than they would by staying.
The answer (IMO) is to open another channel and announce it so people can migrate. And start using more the other channels, using each time FB/X a little less, until (almost) everyone has left FB/X.
You’re forgetting the (often) free labor used to make changes like this are limited.
I, for example, did not get paid for the 20 hrs/week I was putting into the organization, as I was also a board member, their IT person, and for a couple of periods, board president…
Its a cost/benefit analysis.
That’s beginning to wane. The fewer major posters there are, the fewer people will look to the site for information. And the fewer people on there looking for info…etc.
Yep, it’s viable now for many orgs…