4
$\begingroup$

Unlike the Area 51 proposal which had clear phases and progress bars etc. I don't see any kind of markers in the Beta site.

Are there pre-defined criteria in place? The Beta invitation email is pretty vague about what criteria go into promoting the Beta into a full-fledged site and how long the Beta phase lasts for (3-4 weeks vs a few months, both are mentioned in the email).

Knowing the criteria will help organise community efforts.

$\endgroup$
4
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ As this wasn't the main question I'll just put it as a comment, but I think it is also normal for the Beta stage to take a few years even. $\endgroup$
    – selene
    Jun 27 at 21:24
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Related: How can you help Bioacoustics make it from Private to Public Beta? $\endgroup$
    – Noil
    Jun 27 at 22:41
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ The "beta stage" you're referring to, @selene, that can take a few years, is the public beta stage, not the private beta stage — and this site is currently in the latter. The private beta stage takes up to ~4 weeks, after which the site either makes it into public beta, or it doesn't and any new attempts at it will need to go through the Area 51 process from the start again. $\endgroup$
    – JNat StaffMod
    Jun 29 at 10:44
  • $\begingroup$ @JNat thanks for clarifying! $\endgroup$
    – selene
    Jun 29 at 16:40

2 Answers 2

7
$\begingroup$

Some of the main stuff you should be focusing on at this stage of the site is listed on this Meta post I made last week.

Additionally, one of the main things y'all should be focusing on is simply asking and answering questions — as it stands, it doesn't look like you're poised for success, in terms of sheer high-quality question volume. There are some metrics the Community Team uses to assess whether a site will be successful or not, but those aren't put front-and-center like the rest of the Area 51 process (as you mentioned) because the main focus here should be to create good content, and not to reach a specific goalpost.

Obviously, that means that there's always a judgment call from the Community Team as to whether a site makes it to public beta or not, because we need to balance quantitative criteria such as high-quality question numbers and qualitative criteria such as whether there is a core community working on doing curation tasks (such as maintaining tag wikis, editing and closing posts, etc.) and having the discussions that are important for defining community standards for how these tasks should be undertaken. We do this because the alternative makes the process more easily rigged, because folks could simply aim to have X questions with Y answers and a score of Z, instead of focusing on the actual quality of the content, and establishing a core community in the site.

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

You can refer back to the area51 page for the proposal here: https://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/126698/bioacoustics and it gives a nice summary of how we are doing and what benchmarks are good, or what we would need to improve.

It isn't super easy to refind that page so I have it bookmarked, but you can access it by going to area51.stackexchange.com, using the search bar to search for "bioacoustics" and clicking the Bioacoustics page in the search results.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .