Member Avatar for MktgRob

I was looking through some old posts in one of my linkedin groups and I saw one where the question was asked as to whether or not the groups should keep accepting new members. The premise was that the group was big (10,000+ members) and they were accepting 30 new members per day. The suggestion was that membership could only be maintained by each member by continually participating in discussions. Understandably, some newer members were concerned that they would be cut out of the group.

Is it ever right to limit membership totals to an online community like Linkedin groups or even DaniWeb Forums? And if so, how easy would it be to setup membership requirements for groups where there may be broad interest and large numbers of qualified potential members?

  • 2 Contributors
  • 2 Replies
  • 118 Views
  • 2 Days Discussion Span
  • Latest Post Latest Post by MktgRob

Dani AI

Generated

Both and have highlighted the same tradeoff: growth gives reach but can erode value if the group cannot preserve relevance, discoverability, and moderation quality. Size alone is not the problem — the symptoms that follow it are. Before imposing a hard cap, decide whether the goal is reach, tight curation, or a hybrid, and measure the health signals that follow from that choice.

Practical signals that say "act now": sustained drops in the proportion of active members, a growing moderation backlog, repeated low-quality or off-topic threads, and members reporting they cannot find useful content. Practical fixes that scale better than a blanket limit:

  • split broad communities into focused subgroups or topic channels so newcomers land where they fit;
  • add staged privileges (new members have basic access; active contributors unlock posting or invite rights);
  • improve onboarding and pinned guidance so newcomers know norms and find high-quality threads quickly;
  • automate low-level moderation (spam/duplicate detection) and free moderators to handle judgment calls;
  • rotate and staff moderation to match growth, and publish transparent rules and an appeal process.

Legal and governance notes: apply membership rules uniformly, document decisions, and treat exclusions on the basis of protected characteristics with extreme caution — consult counsel if the group is tied to an employer, institution, or public-facing organization. A low-friction operational path is a temporary, data-driven pause (audit engagement and moderation metrics, pilot a gating model for 30 days, then reopen) rather than a permanent, opaque gate. This preserves member trust while restoring quality.

Recommended Answers

All 2 Replies

Member Avatar for InsightsDigital

Is it ever right to limit membership totals to an online community like Linkedin groups or even DaniWeb Forums? And if so, how easy would it be to setup membership requirements for groups where there may be broad interest and large numbers of qualified potential members?

Back in the 1990's, I have seen some online groups with limits. Results:
1. It lured some members into thinking it is an "exclusive" club
2. It turned off some potential members
3. It could explain why we dont see this trend anymore?

So is it right to limit membership? It depends. An approach to this is not to set a particular number but rather to require that every member should be approved first. Thus, if the potential member does not satisfy the membership requirements or can't even write a one sentence on why they want to join the group, then they will not be accepted.

Edited by Reverend Jim because: Fixed formatting
Member Avatar for MktgRob

Is it ever right to limit membership totals to an online community like Linkedin groups or even DaniWeb Forums? And if so, how easy would it be to setup membership requirements for groups where there may be broad interest and large numbers of qualified potential members?

Back in the 1990's, I have seen some online groups with limits. Results:
1. It lured some members into thinking it is an "exclusive" club
2. It turned off some potential members
3. It could explain why we don't see this trend anymore

So is it right to limit membership? It depends. An approach to this is not to set a particular number but rather to require that every member should be approved first. Thus, if the potential member does not satisfy the membership requirements or can't even write a one sentence on why they want to join the group, then they will not be accepted.[/QUOTE]

I agree totally with what you are saying. What worries me, especially in this day and age where litigation and 'forced fairness' are common place, is that you will eventually find someone who will try to force their way into a group by means of the courts. I know this sound slightly paranoid but I just read a news item where a christian student prayer group at a New England university was banned from the campus because they discriminated against non-christians. There was another post on this forum, if I recall correctly, that asked about the legalities of a certain activity and I think that limiting membership to an online community by establishing requirements could lead to problems unless all contingincies are taken into consideration.

Edited by Reverend Jim because: Fixed formatting
Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.