Social networking is all the hype now but what about its flaws?

User submissions or not

[webjourneyman]

The problems I see in getting contributions vs. being the sole author are:

Lower quality of articles, having to compromise ones vision, not being able to claim authorship, leaving one self vulnerable to lawsuits in case of copyright infringements.

More complex coding, having to spend more time on editing and rewieving rather than creating content, answering emails, weeding out spam etc. In other words more "paperwork" at the expense of creativity.

Besides from that I have some qualms about having others do the work for me so to speak if I intend to make money of the site.

What is your take on this?

[rogerd]

Those people "doing the work for you" have to derive some benefit for themselves. Perhaps it's a chance to interact with like-minded individuals, or an opporunity to express their views to a larger group... Simply enabling people to post content doesn't mean anyone (other than spammers) will bother.

[webjourneyman]

Its actually a relief to hear this, I was torturing myself that I would be missing out of hugenormus growth potentual if I did not make the site so that users could contribute. And that would have ment that I had to postpone starting again while I learned enough php and similar to do it. Thanks!

[rogerd]

Well, adding community features CAN produce high rates of content growth and traffic growth. The trick is to create an environment where your visitors will want to participate and will derive some satisfaction from doing so.