So I made some observations and hopefully, this should mean something.
@TechCabal had a ‘0 Reply’ post titled ‘Uber in Lagos says you can pay with your debit cards again’ and a user (@Eftee) had a post titled ‘Uber says Cards are back, is this true?’. Both post created within the same hour.
One Post already answered a Question, while the other Post asked a Question already answered. A moderator could have found a way to marry the two related post.
NB: The primary reason @Eftee created the topic was to inquire the following: ‘Anyone know if this is true?’ and @lordbanks went all in to instigate the post. Turns out he’s taking advice about being more engaged with most post. Well-done. I’m not criticizing the act, I’m just wondering if it would have been cool to simply kill the post by @Eftee and have all discussions aligned under the @TechCabal Post. (In a way of moderating the content).
I remember how I unconsciously created related post on Radar when I newly joined Radar, and @xolubi bashed me. I learnt to always use the Radar’s Search Feature before creating a post. Multiple post one one ‘Theme’ reduces engagement.
Of course, engagement as a term is rather vague but it means what it means: and has always meant from the user engagement perspective to “strengthen the emotional, psychological or physical investment a user has in Radar“. What better way to do that?.
We probably all look at engagement as getting others to act. In the end it is. But to me, that action isn’t just clicking or reading alone. That’s the measurable stuff. Engagement is also about providing experiences and answers to questions and needs, still the primary task of content. When you solve someone’s questions or simply deliver what they expect and need across their journey on Radar, you also engage them as they get what they want.
Just like @onyeka mentioned; [quote=“onyeka, post:34, topic:4902”]
If the people posting in here didn’t care, this topic wouldn’t have ‘37’ replies.
[/quote] 